beverage_presolicitation_tech_data.docx

Section C - DESCRIPTION/SPECIFICATIONS

C-1 NSN/ITEM DESCRIPTION

8960-01-631-1103 BEVERAGE BASE, SWEETENED WITH NON-NUTRITIVE SWEETENER, CRANBERRY GRAPE; 2.2 gm flex pg, CID A-A-20098, PKG&QAP, Type III, Flavor 22, Formulation a, Design D

8960-01-527-8377 BEVERAGE BASE, SWEETENED WITH NON-NUTRITIVE SWEETENER, LEMONADE; 2.2 gm flex pg, CID A-A-20098, PKG&QAP, Type III, Flavor 8, Formulation a, Design D

8960-01-584-8726 BEVERAGE BASE, SWEETENED WITH NON-NUTRITIVE SWEETENER, ORANGE, FORTIFIED WITH ASCORBIC ACID AND CALCIUM; 3 gm flex pg, CID A-A-20098, PKG&QAP, Type III, Flavor 1, Formulation h, Design D

8960-01-527-8378 BEVERAGE BASE, SWEETENED WITH NON-NUTRITIVE SWEETENER, RASPBERRY; 2.2 gm flex pg, CID A-A-20098, PKG&QAP, Type III, Flavor 13, Formulation a, Design D

8960-01-505-4234 BEVERAGE POWDER, CARBOHYDRATE, ELECTROLYTE, FRUIT PUNCH; 24 gm flex pg, PCR-B-013, Flavor I, Design A

8960-01-505-4236 BEVERAGE POWDER, CARBOHYDRATE, ELECTROLYTE, GRAPE; 24 gm flex pg, PCR-B-013, Flavor II, Design A

8960-01-505-4238 BEVERAGE POWDER, CARBOHYDRATE, ELECTROLYTE, LEMON-LIME; 24 gm flex pg, PCR-B-013, Flavor III, Design A

8960-01-505-4240 BEVERAGE POWDER, CARBOHYDRATE, ELECTROLYTE, ORANGE; 24 gm flex pg, PCR-B-013, Flavor IV, Design A

8960-01-523-6346 BEVERAGE POWDER, CARBOHYDRATE, FORTIFIED WITH ASCORBIC ACID AND ENHANCED WITH MALTODEXTRIN, LEMON-LIME; 34 gm flex pg, PCR-B-055, Flavor 3, Formulation a, Design E

8960-01-523-6344 BEVERAGE POWDER, CARBOHYDRATE, FORTIFIED WITH ASCORBIC ACID AND ENHANCED WITH MALTODEXTRIN, ORANGE; 34 gm flex pg, PCR-B-055, Flavor 4, Formulation a, Design E

8960-01-523-6348 BEVERAGE POWDER, CARBOHYDRATE, FORTIFIED WITH ASCORBIC ACID AND ENHANCED WITH MALTODEXTRIN, TROPICAL PUNCH; 34 gm flex pg, PCR-B-055, Flavor 5, Formulation a, Design E

8960-00-170-8446 COCOA BEVERAGE POWDER, SUGAR SWEETENED, WITHOUT MARSHMALLOWS, MILK CHOCOLATE; 35 gm flex pg, CID A-A-20189, PKG&QAP, Type I, Style B, Flavor A, Design B

8960-01-527-8228 COCOA BEVERAGE POWDER, SUGAR SWEETENED, WITHOUT MARSHMALLOWS, CHOCOLATE HAZELNUT; 35 gm flex pg, CID A-A-20189, PKG&QAP, Type I, Style B, Flavor F, Design B

8940-00-782-3161 CREAMER, NON-DAIRY, DRY, REGULAR; 4 gm flex pg, CID A-A-20043, PKG&QAP, Style I, Flavor A

8955-01-538-0702 FLAVORED INSTANT CAPPUCCINO, REGULAR, FRENCH VANILLA; 28 gm flex pg, CID A-A-20336, PKG&QAP, Type V, Style A, Flavor 1, Design B

8955-01-556-0077 FLAVORED INSTANT CAPPUCCINO, REGULAR, IRISH CREAM; 28 gm flex pg, CID A-A-20336, PKG&QAP, Type V, Style A, Flavor 4, Design B

8955-01-538-0705 FLAVORED INSTANT CAPPUCCINO, REGULAR, MOCHA; 28 gm flex pg, CID A-A-20336, CID A-A-20336, PKG&QAP, Type V, Style A, Flavor 2, Design B

C-2 PRIME DOCUMENTS

Prime Documents:

CID A-A-20043, PKG&QAP Creamer, Non-Dairy, Dry CID A-A-20098, PKG&QAP Beverage Bases (Powdered) CID A-A-20189, PKG&QAP Cocoa Beverage Powder CID A-A-20336, PKG&QAP Drink Mixes, Coffee, (Flavored & Unflavored) PCR-B-013 Beverage Powder, Carbohydrate Electrolyte, Packaged In A Pouch PCR-B-055 Beverage Powder, Carbohydrate, Packaged In A Flexible Pouch, Shelf Stable

Applicable versions of documents cited here as prime documents including changes are posted at http://www.dla.mil/TroopSupport/Subsistence/Operationalrations/Frozen.aspx

C-3 DATE OF PACK:

A. Acceptance will be limited to product processed and packed subsequent to award/invoking the option.

C-4 MISCELLANEOUS REQUIREMENTS

A. COMPLIANCE WITH APPLICABLE REGULATIONS

1. The Contractor shall comply with 21 CFR §110 “Current Good Manufacturing Practice in Manufacturing, Packaging, or Holding Human Food” and all applicable regulations. The Contractor shall insure all sub-contractors comply with all applicable regulations. In addition, the contractor is required to comply with all with all applicable parts of the Code of Federal Regulations. For example, for low-acid canned-food manufacturers, 21 CFR §110 and §113 are applicable.

2. All products shall comply with all applicable Federal and State mandatory requirements and regulations relating to the preparation, processing, thermoprocessing, packaging, labeling, packing, storage, and distribution of those products and with all applicable provisions of the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act and regulations promulgated thereunder.

B. PERFORMANCE, PACKAGING AND QUALITY SPECIFICATIONS

1. Unless otherwise specified in Sections C, D, or E of this document, the packaging provisions and quality assurance provisions (verifications) for individual component items are cited in their respective PCRs, MIL-STDs, MIL-PRFs, PKG&QAPs, and MIL specs.

C. PRODUCT SANITARILY APPROVED SOURCE REQUIREMENTS

1. As required by 48 CFR §246.408-70, Subsistence; AR 40-657/NAVSUP 4355.4H/MCO P10110.31H, Veterinary/Medical Food Safety, Quality Assurance, and Laboratory Service; DLAR 4155.3, Inspection of Subsistence Supplies and Services; DLAD 52.246-9044, Sanitary Conditions; and as clarified by the Armed Forces Food Risk Evaluation Committee, all Operational Ration Food Components shall originate from establishments sanitarily approved for supplying the specific food item.

2. Sanitary approval is established by:

a. Listing in the Worldwide Directory of Sanitarily Approved Food Establishments for Armed Forces Procurement (Worldwide Directory) as established by the Army Public Health Center (USAPHC).

b. An establishment specifically exempted from listing in the Worldwide Directory by AR 40-657/NAVSUP 4355.4H/MCO P10110.31H paragraph 2-15a(2)(a) through (i).

3. This requirement applies to all Operational Rations and all Government Furnished Materiel (GFM) and CFM Operational Ration food components.

4. Requests for inspection and Worldwide Directory listing by USAPHC will be routed through DLA Troop Support-FTR for coordination and action. Situations involving sole sources of supply, proprietary supply sources, and commercial Brand Name items will be evaluated directly by the Chief, DLA Troop Support-FTR, in coordination with the Chief, Approved Sources Division, USAPHC.

5. In addition to the above, all producers of MRE food components shall be listed in the Worldwide Directory.

D. NUTRITIONAL REQUIREMENTS

1. A nutritional analysis for each product requiring a PDM shall be provided to the U.S. Army Natick Soldier Research, Development & Engineering Center (NSRDEC) within two weeks of the award of the contract and each time there is a major formulation change.

3. The Nutritional analysis shall be generated by the Genesis® R&D Food Analysis and Labeling Software (ESHA Research, Salem, OR, USA), version 9.0 or higher. The analysis shall be sent electronically to NSRDEC (attn.: Julie Smith (julie.e.smith30.civ@mail.mil).

a. The Genesis® food list files shall be provided for a 100 gm portion.

b. Genesis® food item files shall be included in the analysis file.

4. The ingredients and weight of each ingredient shall be included for each formulation.

a. Nutrients included shall be:

b. The nutrients as required under the Nutrient Content paragraph and the verification of the nutrients as required under the Methods of Inspection paragraph in each specification is mandatory.

c. Nutrient measurements shall be to the first decimal.

E. INTEGRATED PEST MANAGEMENT PROGRAM REQUIREMENTS

1. The ”Integrated Pest Management (IPM) Program Requirements for Operational Rations,” of April 2011 is applicable to this DLA Troop Support Subsistence contract, except as specifically exempted in Section E of this solicitation/contract. The IPM program shall be in existence prior to contract award. The IPM plan and the associated pesticide labels and MSDS documents are not to be submitted to DLA Troop Support, unless specifically requested by the Contracting Officer. The contractor shall have these documents available for on-site review during a Quality Systems Management Visit (QSMV) or Quality Systems Compliance Audit. Evidence of any insect, rodent or pest infestation discovered in contact with materials or equipment used in the production of or found in an end-item component or assembly lot shall be cause for rejection of the involved lot. DLA Troop Support shall be notified when such pest activity has been found and informed of the corrective actions taken. IPM program requirements are found on the DLA Troop Support website at: http://www.dla.mil/TroopSupport/Subsistence/FoodSafety/FoodQuality.aspx

F. FOOD DEFENSE

1. The submission and implementation of a Food Defense Plan is required for this DLA Troop Support Subsistence contract. A Food Defense Plan shall be in existence prior to start of production. The plan shall address those areas of concern listed in the DLA troop Support Food Defense Checklist applicable to the contractor’s facility/operation. To download a copy of the DLA Troop Support Food Defense Checklist, go to http://www.dla.mil/TroopSupport/Subsistence/FoodSafety/FoodQuality.aspx or contact the applicable DLA Troop Support Contracting Officer or the Quality Audits & Food Defense Branch (DLA Troop Support-FTSB). Submit Food Defense Plans to the applicable DLA Troop Support Contracting Officer. The Quality Audits & Food Defense Branch (DLA Troop Support-FTSB) is the only DLA Troop Support office authorized to review and approve Food Defense Plans. All Food Defense Plans are maintained and secured by FTSB.

G. CONTRACTOR SANITATION PROGRAM

1. The “Contractor Sanitation Program – Operational Rations,” of November 2015 is applicable to this DLA Troop Support Subsistence contract, except as specifically exempted in Section E of this solicitation/contract. The Contractor Sanitation Program shall be in existence prior to contract award. The program is not to be submitted to DLA Troop Support unless specifically requested by the applicable DLA Troop Support Contracting Officer. The contractor shall have the program available for on-site review during a QSMV or Quality Systems Compliance Audit. Evidence of any insect, rodent or pest infestation; foreign material; or contamination discovered in contact with an end-item component or assembly lot shall be cause for rejection of the involved lot. Contractor Sanitation Program requirements are found on the DLA Troop Support website at: http://www.dla.mil/TroopSupport/Subsistence/FoodSafety/FoodQuality.aspx

H. ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS

1. In view of the fact that the ANSI/ASQC Z1.4 Standard does not contain the definitions for critical, major, and minor defects, the following definitions become contractually binding through their inclusion here:

Critical defect. A critical defect is a defect that judgment and experience indicate would result in hazardous or unsafe conditions for individuals using, maintaining, or depending on the item; or a defect that judgment and experience indicate is likely to prevent the performance of the major end item, i.e., the consumption of the ration.

Major defect. A major defect is a defect, other than critical, that is likely to result in failure, or reduce materially the usability of the unit of product for its intended purpose.

Minor defect. A minor defect is a defect that is not likely to reduce materially the usability of the unit of product for its intended purpose, or is a departure from established standards having little bearing on the effective use of operation of the unit.

Section D- PACKAGING/LABELING/PACKING/UNITIZATION/MARKING

D-1. PACKAGING: In accordance with D-1 PACKAGING of applicable Commercial Item Description (CID) Packaging Requirements and Quality Assurance Provisions or applicable Performance-based Contract Requirements (PCR) document.

D-2 LABELING: In accordance with D-2 LABLEING of applicable Commercial Item Description (CID) Packaging Requirements and Quality Assurance Provisions or applicable Performance-based Contract Requirements (PCR) document.

D-3. PACKING: Not more than 40 pounds of product shall be packed in a fiberboard shipping box constructed in accordance with style RSC-L of ASTM D5118/D5118M, Standard Practice for Fabrication of Fiberboard Shipping Boxes. The fiberboard shall conform to type CF, class D, variety SW, burst grade 200 or ECT grade 32 of ASTM D4727/D4727M, Standard Specification for Corrugated and Solid Fiberboard Sheet Stock (Container Grade) and Cut Shapes. Each box shall be securely closed in accordance with ASTM D1974/D1974M, Standard Practice for Methods of Closing, Sealing, and Reinforcing Fiberboard Boxes.

D-4. UNITIZATION: In accordance with paragraph 5.1.5 of ASTM D 3951 “Standard Practice for Commercial Packaging”.

D-5. MARKING: Shipping containers shall be marked in accordance with DLA Troop Support Form 3556, Marking Instructions for Boxes, Sacks, and Unit Loads of Perishable and Semiperishable Subsistence.

SECTION E INSPECTION AND ACCEPTANCE

FAR Clauses 52.246-2 and 52.246-11 are applicable to this solicitation/contract and shall be cited to properly enforce the Higher Level Contract Quality requirements.

Origin inspection shall be contractor paid United States Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Marketing Service, Fruit and Vegetable Program, Specialty Crops Inspection Division (USDA,AMS) inspection in accordance with Clause 246-9023, General Inspection Requirements, unless otherwise specified by this solicitation/contract. When USDA,AMS is designated cognizance for the support of the Government’s quality assurance requirements, the responsibilities and authorities cited in the regulations, policies, etc. of the respective agency and those regulations, policies, etc. to which that agency is subject, are applicable to the contract in conjunction with the quality assurance requirements of the contract. Optional contractor testing provided by Clause 246-9024, Alternative Inspection Requirements for Selected Items, is applicable unless otherwise specified by this solicitation/contract. Optional contractor testing provided by Clause 246-9024, Alternative Inspection Requirements for Selected Items, is not applicable to microbiological testing.

Those quality assurance provisions (product, packaging, packing, and regulatory requirements, procedures, and inspections) specified in Section E of this solicitation, and, as amended by this solicitation, those quality assurance provisions specified in the applicable component’s technical requirements documents (ex. MIL-PRF-44073, Performance-based Contract Requirements (PCR)) are required for contractor and United States Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Marketing Service, Fruit and Vegetable Program, Specialty Crops Inspection Division (USDA-AMS) inspection.

Saving and reserving all rights under the general inspection requirements of Clause 246-9023, the procedures for inspection and acceptance will be as follows:

E-1. Quality Assurance Requirements for Ration Component Production Plants and Ration Sub Assembly and Assembly Plants.

E-1-A. Higher Level Quality Requirements - Documented Quality Systems Plan (QSP)

The contractor shall model the documented QSP after ISO/ANSI/ASQ 9001, a system that meets other recognized industry quality standards, or a process control system that is equivalent to or better than ISO/ANSI/ASQ 9001. The contractor shall identify the quality standard used to model their QSP. If the contractor proposes an alternate (i.e., non-standard) process control system, this shall be clearly stated in the QSP. Some contractors may have third party certification of their quality system, which the private sector devised to administer the ISO series standards. However, certification by any third party, to include Government certifications, is not required. Whether or not contractors want to use third party certification is completely optional on their part. Although certification information may be provided as documentation and evidence to support the system proposed by the contractor, third party certification/registration documentation is not a substitute for government quality assurance with regard to components used in the operational ration programs. Regardless of the standard or non-standard document used to model the documented QSP, the documented QSP shall address, at a minimum, the following elements (within each section of the element the contractor shall provide the information and address the questions, as applicable, listed in Operational Rations Quality Systems Audit Workbook I: Documented QSP Evaluation Guideline:

QSP General Outline

1. General Regulatory Requirements (as applicable to the plant USDA-FSIS,

specifications/documents and ANSI/ASQ Z1.4)

NOTE: Integrated Pest Management Plan (IPM) and Contractor Sanitation Program: The IPM Plan is not required to be submitted but the questions concerning the facility's IPM listed in Section IX Regulatory Controls, Area 2 of the Quality Systems Audit Workbook I must be addressed within the QSP. Both the IPM Plan and Sanitation Program (Contractor Sanitation Program- Operational Rations, November 2015) must be in place at time of award and shall be made available for onsite review.

The documented QSP will be evaluated by the Operational Rations Quality System Audit Team (composed of DLA Troop Support-FTSB and USDA-AMS, Quality Systems Auditors), USDA-AMS Operational Rations Program Coordinator, and the Government In-Plant Quality Assurance Representatives (QAR) assigned to perform Government QA functions at contractors’ facilities. Government personnel will use the Operational Rations Quality Systems Audit Workbook I: Documented QSP Evaluation Guideline (in conjunction with the standard or other document identified in the contractor’s QSP) as the basic framework against which they will evaluate QSPs. Workbook I was developed to standardize the evaluations of documented QSPs (developed using ISO/ANSI/ASQ 9001, other recognized industry quality standards, or a non-standard contractor’s specific process control system) submitted by contractors for the purpose of demonstrating their capability to meet the higher-level contract quality requirements using any of the aforementioned documents and for the contracting officer to assess a contractor’s capability to meet the contract requirements.

NOTE: Although Government inspection personnel (USDA-AMS) are required to evaluate the contractors’ QSPs, the QSP rating will be determined and assigned by DLA Troop Support-FTSB’s Quality Systems Auditors.

Offerors/Contractors can request a copy of Workbook I by contacting the applicable contracting officer or DLA Troop Support-FTSB. Workbook I is also available online in PDF format at the following website: http://www.dla.mil/TroopSupport/Subsistence/FoodSafety/FoodQuality.aspx

DLA Troop Support will recognize a contractor’s quality system whenever it meets the contract requirements, whether the quality system is modeled on military, commercial, national, or international quality systems standards. The design and implementation of a QSP will be influenced by the varying needs of a company, its particular goals and objectives, the products produced, and the processes and specific practices employed in the operation. The intent of the requirement is for contractors to improve process capability and process control which, when used effectively, can result in a prevention-oriented approach rather than a detection approach that will improve product quality and lower cost through the use of a single quality system in any contractor facility.

A documented QSP is required when a contract references or requires a contractor to perform under the higher-level contract quality requirements. Contractors are responsible for complying with the quality system requirements set forth in their documented QSP in addition to all detailed requirements cited in the contract and for furnishing products that meet all requirements of the contract. Contractors are required to establish, document, submit for Government review, and maintain a quality system as a means of ensuring that product conforms to the requirements of the contract. The documented QSP shall include the quality system procedures and outline the structure of the documentation used in the quality system. When the requirements of the Statistical Process Control Quality Assurances Provision (SPC QAP) and/or the Manufacturing Process Controls and In-Process Inspection Quality Assurances Provision (MPC QAP) are applicable, these requirements must be addressed under the In-Process and Process Inspection and Testing section of the documented QSP. Redundant areas/requirements (cited in the MPC or the SPC QAPs) need only be addressed once in the QSP. The calibration of measuring and testing equipment shall, as a minimum, adhere to the requirements of NCSL Z540.3 or ISO 10012.

The Higher Level Contract Quality Requirements, Manufacturing Process Controls (MPC), and Statistical Process Controls Quality Assurance Provision (SPC QAP) apply to all CFM and GFM food components and Sub Assembly and Assembly Operations, except as indicated below:

The Higher Level Contract Quality Requirements, Manufacturing Process Controls (MPC), and Statistical Process Controls Quality Assurance Provision (SPC QAP) apply to all CFM and GFM food components and Sub Assembly and Assembly Operations, except as indicated below:

A. The following items are exempt from the Higher Level Contract Quality Requirements, MPC QAP and the SPC QAP (No QSP required): 1. Accessory package components 2. Condiments (even if packaged in laminated barrier pouches): hot sauce; ketchup; mayonnaise; mustard; etc. 3. Bulk packed items: beef snacks; ranger bar; First Strike bars; osmotic fruit; cookies (CID A-A-20295, PCR-C-031); almonds, roasted; cashews, roasted; peanuts, roasted; snacks (CID A-A-20195); commercial sandwich crackers/cookies; and bulk packed items procured using the commercial components solicitation (e.g., candies).

NOTE: Bulk packed, as used in this paragraph, means packing prior to finished product packaging. However, note that this does not prohibit the prime contractor on their own accord from requiring a QSP from their subcontractors for all products.

B. A QSP is required but SPC techniques are optional for the following items: Beverage bases, cheese spreads, cookies (CID A-A -20295, PCR-C-031), dairy component powders (cocoa beverages, dairy shakes, flavored coffees, non-dairy creamer, etc.), nut raisin mixes, peanut butter, peanut spread, jellies/jams/preserves, and bulked-packed items that are individually packaged by an assembler/packer in military packaging (laminated barrier pouches). However, note that this does not prohibit the prime contractor from requiring SPC techniques from their subcontractors for all products on their own accord.

NOTE: TO THE EXTENT OF ANY INCONSISTENCY BETWEEN THE CONTRACT OR ITS GENERAL PROVISIONS AND A CONTRACTOR’S QSP AND/OR IMPLEMENTED QUALITY SYSTEM, THE CONTRACT AND THE GENERAL PROVISIONS SHALL CONTROL.

The QSP shall be submitted to DLA Troop Support-FTSB, through the Contracting Officer, for review no later than at time of bid submittal to determine if the QSP meets the acquisition needs. The QSP shall be DOCUMENTED, DATED, AND SIGNED BY A RESPONSIBLE COMPANY OFFICIAL and WILL BE DISTRIBUTED UNDER COMPANY LETTERHEAD TO THE ADDRESSEES BELOW:

A. ONE COPY SHALL BE MAILED (AT TIME OF BID SUBMITTAL) TO:

DLA Troop Support ATTN: FTSB (Quality Systems Audit Team or Applicable Contracting Officer)

NOTE: It is important for BLDG. 6 to be included in the address above for timely delivery, especially for express deliveries.

B. AFTER CONTRACT AWARD ONE COPY SHALL BE MAILED PRIOR TO THE INITIATION OF PRODUCTION TO EACH OF THE FOLLOWING USDA-AMS OFFICES as applicable:

1. USDA-AMS OFFICES: When USDA-AMS is responsible for performing Government source inspection at a ration facility one copy shall be mailed to each of the following USDA-AMS offices:

a. CHIEF, CONTRACT SERVICES BRANCH

USDA, AMS, SCP, SCI DIVISION

ATTN: Richard Boyd

1400 INDEPENDENCE AVE. SW

ROOM 0726, SOUTH BLDG.

WASHINGTON, DC 20250-0247

b. USDA-AMS INSPECTION AREA OFFICE: The contractor/subcontractor shall contact USDA-Contract Services Branch (202-720-5021) for the applicable area office address (College Park, GA; Covina, CA; Hunt Valley, MD; North Brunswick, NJ; South Bend, IN; Richmond, VA; Oshkosh, WI; Stockton, CA; Winter Haven, FL: Yakima, WA, etc.).

2. USDA-AMS IN-PLANT INSPECTOR/GQAR: When a Government (USDA-AMS) inspector is assigned to perform Government source inspection at a contractor/subcontractor facility, one copy shall be personally delivered to the Government inspector prior to the initiation of production.

3. U.S. ARMY VETERINARY INSPECTION PERSONEL: When Army Veterinary Inspectors (AVIs) are responsible for performing Government source inspection at operational rations assembly plants, one copy shall be personally delivered to the resident AVI/GQAR prior to the initiation of production/assembly. The contractor/subcontractor shall contact USAPHC for questions regarding AVI’s inspection services.

4. DEFENSE CONTRACT MANAGEMENT AGENCY (DCMA): When DCMA inspectors are responsible for performing Government source inspection at the flameless ration heater (FRH) manufacturing facility, one copy shall be personally delivered to the resident Government QAR prior to the initiation of production. The contractor/subcontractor shall contact the applicable DCMA office for inspection services.

a. DCMA GARDEN CITY

605 STEWART AVE.

GARDEN CITY, NY 11530-4761

b. DCMA DAYTON

1507 WILMINGTON PIKE

DAYTON, OH 45444-5300

Aforementioned Government inspection personnel and In-Plant Government QARs shall fax, e-mail, or mail (via priority mail) their evaluations and comments regarding the contractor’s QSPs and/or QSP’s revisions, within 20 calendar days from the day of receipt of the QSP/revision.

Failure to submit comments within the suspense date may result in DLA Troop Support-FTSB Quality Systems Auditors not including the applicable inspection agency’s comments in Government QSP joint evaluations. In-Plant Government QARs are also required to report quality systems noncompliance within one working day using the Corrective Action Request (CAR) Form. QSP evaluations and CARs shall be faxed to the DLA Troop Support -FTSB Operational Rations Quality Systems Audit Team at fax number (215) 737-0379, the current DLA Troop Support -FTSB’s personnel E-mail addresses or mailed to the following address (the preferred and most expeditious method is via E-mail or fax):

During the Acquisition Phase: During the acquisition phase (prior to contract award), the documented QSP will only be considered either sufficient or insufficient for production (no unacceptable/acceptable rating will be assigned). If a plan as presented is determined to be insufficient for production (which would occur if it does not address the aforementioned minimum elements and include documents/procedures indicated in Workbook I as applicable, or if it is determine that the plan as presented will result in an increase in the consumer’s risk, production of nonconforming products or does not meet specification requirements/acquisition needs), the contracting officer, at his/her discretion, may provide the contractor with DLA Troop Support-FTSB’s QSP evaluation comments as to the cause(s) of why the plan was considered insufficient for production and with the opportunity to resubmit a revised QSP. If a contractor has previously submitted a QSP and the rating was, at a minimum, marginally acceptable, the contractor may reference this QSP by date and only changes (if deemed necessary) need to be submitted at time of bid submittal for this or for future contracts.

After the Acquisition Phase: After the Acquisition Phase (after contract award), if the contractor submitted a new QSP, DLA Troop Support-FTSB will assign a rating of acceptable, marginally acceptable or unacceptable (to a QSP rated sufficient for production during the acquisition phase) within 60 days of contract award. If a contractor’s QSP is rated unacceptable after contract award, the QSP must be revised to receive, at a minimum, a marginally acceptable rating within 90 days of contract award. The contractor can submit changes to improve the plan throughout the life of the contract.

DLA Troop Support-FTSB Quality Systems Auditors evaluate, assign QSP ratings, and approve or disapprove changes to the QSP. QSP procedures or changes to a QSP that may involve a change to a specific contractual requirement (cited in the contract TDP/ items specification/CID) must be coordinated and approved by the Contracting Officer. To expedite the evaluation process, all QSP changes (that do not involve a specific contractual change) shall be simultaneously provided to the In-Plant GQAR and a copy faxed, E-mailed, or mailed to DLA Troop Support-FTSB and each applicable office for their review. The GQAR's in-plant evaluation will be considered sufficient for production, unless specifically rejected by DLA Troop Support-FTSB after the contractor submits the change to DLA Troop Support. The contractor’s documented QSP is considered a living document and continuous improvements are highly encouraged.

Implementation, compliance, effectiveness, and continuous improvement of the QSP (implemented quality system) and the Food Defense Plan will be monitored by on-site quality systems compliance audits conducted throughout the life of the contract by the Operational Rations Quality Systems Audit Team and evaluations/internal audits conducted by the In-Plant Government QARs.

If a contractor fails to submit an acceptable QSP or copies of their QSP’s revisions to the Government for review or does not comply with other requirements of the contract, the Government may decline to perform verification acceptance inspection at that time and or refuse to accept any product produced in accordance with FAR 46.102 and 46.407. Additionally, the Government may also withdraw the acceptance of a QSP during the contract period if it is determined that the contractor has not implemented, complied with the documented QSP, or the implemented quality system is not sufficient to meet minimum contractual requirements.

NOTE: DLA Troop Support-FTSB and/or the Government QARs shall immediately notify the Contracting Officer of ALL noncompliance to specific contractual requirements. DLA Troop Support-FTSB will notify and/or obtain contracting officer’s support/involvement when a contractor fails to comply with the approved documented QSP requirements or fails to respond to quality systems deficiencies noted during an on-site compliance audit or evaluations/audits conducted by In-Plant Government QARs.

The offeror/contractor agrees to maintain current, and make available, all documents and/or records required by the documented QSP for Government review at any time throughout the life of the contract and for three years after final delivery on the contract (to include any documents/records maintained by any subcontractor used by the prime contractor to fulfill a Government contract).

NOTE: The procedures of how a contractor intends to comply with the requirements of the MPC QAP or the SPC QAP, as applicable, shall be covered in the In-Process and Process Inspection and Testing Section of the contractors’ documented QSP/Quality Manual. If the contractor uses a different/numbering system than the Section/Element number cited in the TDP, the contractor’s should cross-reference each applicable section of their QSP.

FOOD DEFENSE PLAN (FDP). The DLA Troop Support Subsistence Directorate provides world-wide subsistence logistics support during peacetime as well as during regional conflicts, contingency operations, national emergencies, and natural disasters. At any time, the United States Government, its personnel, resources and interests may be the target of enemy aggression to include espionage, sabotage, or terrorism. This increased risk requires DLA Troop Support to ensure steps are taken to prevent the deliberate tampering and contamination of Operational Rations.

As the holder of a contract with the Department of Defense, the Contractor should be aware of the vital role they play in supporting our customers. It is incumbent upon the Contractor to take all necessary actions to secure product produced for and delivered to all DLA customers. The Government strongly recommends that all firms review their food defense plans relating to plant security and security of the products produced in light of the heightened threat of terrorism, and secure product from intentional adulteration/contamination.

The Contractor shall comply with its Food Defense Plan (as submitted as the Food Defense portion under this contract solicitation) to prevent product tampering and contamination, and assure overall plant security and food safety. The Contractor must take all practicable measures that are within its control to deter or prevent tampering or contamination of supplies provided for under this contract solicitation. The Contractor must immediately inform DLA Troop Support Subsistence of any attempt or suspected attempt by any party or parties, known or unknown, to tamper with or contaminate subsistence supplies.

Food Defense Plans will be evaluated to ensure compliance with the DLA Troop Support Food Defense Checklist. A copy of the Checklist is available online at http://www.dla.mil/TroopSupport/Subsistence/FoodSafety/FoodQuality.aspx or through the applicable Contracting Officer or the DLA Troop Support Quality Audits & Food Defense Branch at 215-737-8656.

NOTE: The Food Defense Plan may be modified at any point prior to contract start-up/implementation or during the period of performance. Whenever a change is made to the Food Defense Plan, it shall be submitted to the Contracting Officer for evaluation.

DLA Troop Support-FTSB will conduct Food Defense Audits/reviews during Compliance Audits and/or other visits to verify the implementation, compliance and effectiveness of the firm’s Food Defense Plan. If a Food Defense Plan (including Food Defense Plans Covered in QSP) was previously submitted to DLA Troop Support, identify the office, name of the person the plan was submitted to, date of submittal, and rating assigned.

NOTE: If more than one facility under direct control of the contractor will be used to produce and/or store product, a separate Food Defense Plan for each facility must be submitted. A completed DLA Troop Support Food Defense Checklist, by itself, is not a Food Defense Plan but may be included as part of the Plan.

E-1-B. The following is applicable to this contract:

QUALITY ASSURANCE PROVISION

MANUFACTURING PROCESS CONTROLS AND IN-PROCESS INSPECTIONS

This clause supplements process control guidance of the International Organization for Standardization (ISO)/American National Standards Institute (ANSI)/American Society for Quality (ASQ) 9000 Series standard, or equivalent standards with process controls, and is applicable when the contract requires a higher-level quality system in accordance with Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 46.202-4. The Contractor shall:

(a) Ensure that all manufacturing operations are carried out under controlled conditions which will adequately assure that product characteristics and criteria specified by contract are achieved and maintained in the produced item. Controlled conditions include documented process control and in-process inspection procedures, adequate methods for identifying and handling material, and adequate production equipment and working environments.

(b) As a minimum, perform inspections, examinations and/or tests, during manufacturing on those product characteristics which cannot be inspected at a later stage, and ensure that process controls are implemented and effective.

(1) Manufacturing processes shall be evaluated to determine which process characteristics have an effect on the quality of the produced item. These manufacturing processes shall be identified and requirements for their control shall be specified in written process control procedures.

(2) When in-process inspection of material is not practical, control by monitoring processing methods, equipment, and personnel shall be provided. Both in-process inspection and process monitoring shall be provided when control is inadequate without both.

(3) Prompt corrective action shall be taken when noncompliance or out of control conditions occur.

(c) Clearly identify each in-process inspection and process control point at appropriate locations in the manufacturing operation.

(d) Prepare clear, complete, and current written procedures for:

(1) Each in-process inspection. Identify: the type, frequency, and amount (sampling plan/100 percent) of inspection; product characteristics to be inspected; criteria for approving and rejecting product; the record for documenting inspection results; and the method for identifying the inspection status of approved and rejected product.

(2) Each process control. Identify the criteria, frequency, and records used verifying control of the process.

(3) Assessing the adequacy of in-process inspections and process controls. The Contractor's quality organization shall assure by periodic surveillance that procedures are followed and are effective. Records of this surveillance will be maintained.

(e) Make the documented inspection system available for review by the Government Quality Assurance Representative prior to the initiation of production and throughout the life of the contract. The Government is under no obligation to perform verification inspection or to accept product produced under the contract until the Government has received acceptable written procedures, and has been afforded the opportunity to evaluate the inspection system. Acceptance of the Contractor's inspection system by the Government does not bind the Government to accept any nonconforming supplies that may be produced by the Contractor. Periodic evaluations of the system may be made by the Government throughout the life of the contract.

E-1-C. The following Statistical Process Control Quality Assurance Provision (SPC QAP) applies to this contract:

QUALITY ASSURANCE PROVISION

STATISTICAL PROCESS CONTROLS

DLA Troop Support FT-12-001

The requirements of this QAP shall be addressed in the Documented Quality System Plan (QSP) when applicable. Redundant areas/requirements cited in this QAP or the MPC Clause need only be addressed once in the In-Process and Process Inspection and Testing Section and/or other applicable section of the contractors’ documented QSP/Quality Manual. The characteristics requiring control will be those characteristics providing the best assurance of product conformance to end item contractual requirements. Therefore, the techniques (SPC/MPC) selected to control the processes shall be those that can best and most effectively/efficiently control the characteristics identified and provide the best assurance that the system implemented will consistently produce product conforming to contractual requirements. If the contractor uses a different/numbering system than the Section/Element number cited in the TDP, the contractor’s QSP should cross-reference each applicable section/element of their QSP.

I. General Requirements:

A. The offeror/contractor agrees to manage and improve process performance through the evaluation of the quality of the product at the prime contractor and, when required by contract, at subcontractor facilities, using SPC techniques or MPC techniques.

B. Minimum criteria are established in the American Society of Quality (ASQ) standards B.1, B.2 and B.3 (formerly the ANSI standards Z1.1, Z1.2, and Z1.3). Alternate SPC techniques such as short run methods are also allowed where applicable.

C. This QAP applies to all work performed at the prime contractor and, when required by contract, at subcontractor facilities. However, in those instances where it is not required of the subcontractor by contract, it does not prohibit the prime contractor from requiring it from their subcontractor of their own accord.

D. The implementation of SPC techniques (or alternate MPC techniques) and procedures shall be prepared in accordance with this provision and included in the documented QSP. Each offeror shall address the requirements of this QAP in their documented QSP (Section/Element VIII) and included with the proposal, when applicable. Failure to do so may result in rejection of the offer.

E. Exclusion of documented QSP submission: If a contractor has previously submitted a QSP and the rating was, at a minimum, marginally acceptable, the contractor may reference their QSP by date and only changes (if deemed necessary) need to be submitted at time of bid submittal for this or for future contracts.

1. Offerors who consider themselves eligible for exclusion of the documented QSP at bid submittal, based on satisfactory utilization of a previously approved QSP for identical or similar supplies, are to submit a written request for exclusion (RFE) to the Procuring Contracting Officer (PCO).

The offeror shall identify in the RFE the contract number(s) under which the supplies were previously furnished by them and accepted by the Government; and the applicable item nomenclature and National Stock Number(s); and the date of the documented QSP. QSP changes/revisions/updates, if applicable, need to be submitted along with the RFE at time of proposal. NOTE: Changes/revisions/updates must be well identified, dated and organized to facilitate posting to the QSP.

2. If techniques selected (MPC, SPC, or combination of both) were determined to be adequate (in a QSP previously submitted and approved by DLA Troop Support - FTSB), the offeror shall certify that these techniques are still adequate to effectively control the processes and that the system implemented is still capable of consistently producing conforming product.

II. SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS:

A. The offeror shall identify the characteristics to be controlled using SPC techniques (or the alternate MPC techniques). Application of SPC techniques shall be considered for all characteristics identified by performing pareto analysis on the defects from previous production, or projection of potential defects in future production, to discern the vital few and repetitive type failures from the trivial many. Additionally, offerors are encouraged to calculate quality costs to assist in determining what characteristics or processes to control statistically (QSP Element XIII). These defects, and all other characteristics identified by the offeror from process capability studies on current production, shall be subject to the application of SPC techniques or other analyses. The characteristics requiring control will be those characteristics providing the best assurance of product conformance to end item contractual requirements. In addition to the characteristics identified by the offeror, the following characteristics will be controlled using SPC techniques, MPC techniques, or other alternate controls methods deemed appropriate and effective in controlling the processes. Alternate controls to SPC and MPC must be clearly identified and explained in detail in the In-Process and Process Inspection and Testing Section of the contractors’ documented QSP/Quality Manual. The description of SPC or MPC techniques shall be sufficient to allow a reviewer unfamiliar with the item or the contractor’s production operation to properly assess the applicability of the control measures/techniques being proposed.

1. For Thermostabilized, High-Pressure Processed, or Hot Filled Items: (1) Laminated barrier pouch/tray integrity (absence of tears, cuts, holes, delamination, abrasions, leakage, and non-fusion bonded seals, etc.), (2) Polymeric tray integrity (absence of tears, cuts, holes, delamination, abrasions, leakage, and non-fusion bonded seals, etc.) and (3) All thermostabilized items - the critical control points of the process schedule as determined by the contractor’s Processing Authority and critical control points of the retort process schedule. The critical control points, other control points, and the contractor’s Processing Authority shall be clearly identified in the Regulatory Controls Section and/or the In-Process and Process Inspection and Testing Section of the contractor’s QSP, as applicable.

2. For Water Activity Stabilized Items: (1) Laminated barrier pouch/tray integrity (absence of tears, cuts, holes, delamination, abrasions, leakage, and non-fusion bonded seals, etc.), (2) Polymeric tray integrity (absence of tears, cuts, holes, delamination, abrasions, leakage, and non-fusion bonded seals, etc.) and (3) All water activity-stabilized items - control of water activity, and oxygen scavenger placement. The control points shall be clearly identified in the In-Process and Process Inspection and Testing Section of the contractor’s QSP.

3. Flameless Ration Heater (FRH): The FRH chemical formulation and those processes that affect the formulation, performance, and the packaging (including over-wrapped FRH) of the FRH. The control points shall be clearly identified in the In-Process and Process Inspection and Testing Section of the contractor’s QSP.

4. Assembly Operations: The use of SPC and/or MPC techniques is required. However, the Assembler shall determine application of SPC/MPC techniques for the assembly and sub assembly processes by performing a Pareto analysis. NOTE: The assembler shall identify the type of controls (MPC, SPC, or both) being applied for each process identified.