Attachment_5_CSP_&_SAC.docx

CONTRACT SURVEILLANCE PLAN (CSP)

FOR

AIM-9X Rocket Motor Ordnance Assessment (OA) Support 4-15-19

1. Purpose

This Contract Surveillance Plan (CSP) is a Government developed and applied document used to make sure systematic quality assurance methods are used in the administration of the planned contract. The intent is to ensure that the contractor performs in accordance with the performance metrics and the Government receives the quality of services called for in the contract.

This contract requirement as defined in the Statement of Work (SOW) is to provide the basic tasking requirements for AIM-9X Rocket Motor Ordnance Assessment (OA) Support.

The SOW also defines the efforts required to provide weapons systems reliability analysis, design adequacy studies and evaluations, test and evaluation support, general engineering, and related documentation for the MK139 Rocket Motor configurations related projects supported at NAWCWD China Lake, California and NSWC IH, Maryland, and attached activities set forth in individual task orders.

2. Authority

Authority for issuance of this CSP is provided by Section E - Inspection and Acceptance, which provides for inspection and acceptance of the services and documentation called for in service contracts, to be executed by the Contracting Officer or a duly authorized representative.

3. Scope

To fully understand the roles and responsibilities of the parties, it is important to first define the distinction in terminology between Quality Management Plan and the Contract Surveillance Plan. The contractor, not the Government, is responsible for management and quality control actions necessary to meet the quality standards set forth by the contract.

The CSP on the other hand, is put in place to provide Government surveillance oversight of the contractor’s efforts to assure that they are timely, effective and are delivering the results specified in the contract and documented in the Quality Management Plan.

4. Government Resources The following definitions for Government resources are applicable to this plan:

Contracting Officer - A person duly appointed with the authority to enter into (Procuring Contracting Officer, (PCO)) or administer (Administrative Contracting Officer, (ACO)) contracts and make related determination and findings on behalf of the Government. The PCO for this contract is 254210D. The ACO will be designated in the resulting contract. Contracting Officers are designated via a written warrant, which sets forth limitations of authority.

Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR) - An individual appointed in writing by the PCO to act as their authorized representative to assist in administering the contract. The COR will be appointed in the resulting contract. The limitations of authority are contained in a written letter of appointment.

Technical Assistant (TA) – The COR designates an individual Technical Assistant to assist in technical oversight of specific efforts under the task order.

5. Responsibilities

The following Government resources shall have responsibility for the implementation of this CSP:

Contracting Officer – The Contracting Officer ensures performance of all necessary actions for effective contracting, ensures compliance with the terms of the contract and safeguards the interests of the United States in the contractual relationship. It is the Contracting Officer that assures the contractor receives impartial, fair and equitable treatment under the contract. The Contracting Officer is ultimately responsible for the final determination of the adequacy of the contractor’s performance.

Assigned PCO: Bryan Gregory Organization or Agency: Naval Air Warfare Center Weapons Division (NAWCWD) 254210D Telephone: 760-939-1891 Email: bryan.v.gregory@navy.mil

Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR) – The COR is responsible for technical surveillance of the contract and assures proper Government oversight of the contractor’s performance. The COR is not empowered to make any contractual commitments or to authorize any changes on the Government’s behalf. Any changes that the contractor deems may affect contract price, terms or conditions shall be referred to the Contracting Officer for action.

Assigned COR/TPOC: Donavan West; Pending Organization or Agency: Naval Air Warfare Center Weapons Division (NAWCWD) 477100D Telephone: 760-939-7836 Email: donavan.west@navy.mil

Technical Assistant – The Government Project Lead is responsible for assisting in technical oversight of specific efforts under the task order. A Government Project Lead cannot, in any manner, alter the scope of the task order, make commitments or authorize any changes on the Government’s behalf.

Assigned TA: Robert Pritchard Organization or Agency: Naval Air Warfare Center Weapons Division (NAWCWD) 477100D Telephone: 760-939-7504 Email: robert.w.pritchard@navy.mil

6. Methods of QA Surveillance

The Surveillance Activity Checklist will be provided to the contractor on a semiannual basis, as feedback on their performance of the services provided under this contract.

8. Documentation

In addition to providing semiannual reports to the Contracting Officer, the COR will maintain a complete Quality Assurance file. The file will contain copies of all reports, evaluations, recommendations, and any actions related to the Government’s performance of the quality assurance function, including the originals of the Quality Assurance Checklists. All such records will be maintained for the life of the contract. The COR shall forward these records to the Contracting Officer semi-annually. The Contracting Officer will retain the records in the contract file to document contractor performance.

9. Enclosures

Enclosure (1) Surveillance Activity Checklist

Enclosure (1)

SUVEILLANCE ACTIVITY CHECKLIST

All tasks will be assessed focusing on the following as guidance:

Cost – Assess the contractor’s effectiveness in forecasting, managing, and controlling contract cost. Is the contractor experiencing cost growth or under run? If so, discuss the causes and contractor-proposed solutions for the cost overruns. In addition, the extent to which the contractor demonstrates a sense of cost responsibility, through the efficient use of resources in each work effort will be assessed.

Schedule – Assess the contractor’s adherence to the required delivery schedule by assessing the contractor’s efforts during the assessment period that contribute to or effect the schedule variance. Also address significance of scheduled events, discuss the causes of any delays, and assess the effectiveness of contractor corrective actions.

Quality – Assess the contractor’s quality of work in performing tasks assigned to complete the SOW. Areas of focus may include the planning and management of program tasks, the quality of support provided throughout all phases of contract execution, the integration of program management specialties, management of interfaces, and the management of a totally integrated effort of all program management concerns to meet cost, performance, and schedule objectives. Assess how successfully the contractor meets the program quality.

Management – Assess the timeliness, completeness and quality of problem identification, corrective action plans, proposal submittals (especially responses to change orders, Engineering Change Proposals or undefinitized contract actions), the contractor's history of reasonable and cooperative behavior, effective business relations, and customer satisfaction. Consider the contractor’s responsiveness to the program as it relates to meeting contract requirements during the period covered by the report.

The evaluation ratings are as follows:

Exceptional – Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds many to the Government’s benefit. The contractual performance of the tasks being assessed was accomplished with few minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were highly effective.

Very Good – Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds some to the Government’s benefit. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being assessed was accomplished with some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor was effective.

Satisfactory – Performance meets contractual requirements. The contractual performance of the tasks contains some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were satisfactory.

Marginal – Performance does not meet some contractual requirements. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being assessed reflects a serious problem for which the contractor has not yet identified corrective actions. The contractor’s proposed actions appear only marginally effective or were not fully implemented.

Unsatisfactory – Performance does not meet most contractual requirements and recovery is not likely in a timely manner. The contractual performance of the tasks contains a serious problem(s) for which the contractor’s actions appear or were ineffective.

3.1 Program Management

· Monthly review of technical, cost, schedule and performance;

· Effective coordination of meetings to minimize travel, documentation, and use of other resources;

· Timely presentation of agendas and meeting materials IAW the SOW

3.2 Engineering Support and Technical Services

Availability of SMEs and REAs to support engineering/analysis requirements of the SOW

3.3 Rocket Motor Production Assessment Material

Timely delivery of materials to support production assessment activities for planned manufacturing changes.

3.3.1 – Timely and accurate delivery of Material Changes Analyses

3.3.2 – Delivery of Bulk Propellant Cartons, C-BIT Bondline Cartons, and associated Data & Documentation

3.3.3 – Delivery of Rocket Motors

3.3.4 – Delivery of Rocket Motor Data & Documentation

3.4 Test Planning and Execution

· Timeliness and adequacy of Test Plans.

· Successful static fire tests IAW approved Test Plans

3.5.1 Test Analysis and Reporting for Government Conducted Tests

Timeliness and adequacy of required analyses and reports.

3.5.2 Test Analysis and Reporting for Contractor Conducted Tests

Timeliness and adequacy of required analyses and reports.

3.6 Historical LAT Data

Timeliness and adequacy of Historical LAT Data and associated database(s).

3.7 Rocket Motor Material Requirements Support

Timeliness and adequacy of data and reports.