A01_QASP_POL_MR_2017_rev1.pdf

QUALITY ASSURANCE SURVEILLANCE PLAN (QASP)

ATC Petroleum, Oil, Lubricant (POL) Compliance Testing, Maintenance and Repair

18 MAY 2017

QUALITY ASSURANCE SURVEILLANCE PLAN

(QASP)

1 INTRODUCTION

This quality assurance surveillance plan (QASP) is pursuant to the requirements listed in the Performance Work Statement (PWS) entitled “POL UST, AST, OWS Compliance Testing, Maintenance and Repair for Aberdeen Test Center”. This plan sets forth the procedures and guidelines Aberdeen Test Center will use in ensuring the required performance standards or services levels are achieved by the contractor.

2 PURPOSE

This QASP provides a standard of surveillance for compliance testing, maintenance, and repair of ATC underground storage tanks (USTs), aboveground storage tanks (ASTs), and oil-water separators (OWSs) across all ATC locations, including APG-Aberdeen Area, APG-Edgewood Area, and Churchville Test Area.

For the purposes of this effort, the primary QA responsibilities will be handled by the Contracting Officers Representative (COR).

The QASP provides a method for evaluating the services provided by the contractor, but not the details of how the contractor accomplishes the work. This plan uses inspection as the primary evaluation criteria.

It assures the Government is receiving acceptable performance from the contractor.

The contractor is responsible for management and quality control actions to meet the terms of the contract. Effective management and use of a quality control plan will allow the contractor to operate within the specified surveillance requirements. Government QA personnel are expected to be objective, fair, and consistent in evaluating contractor’s performance against the standard.

3 IDENTIFICATION OF REQUIRED PERFORMANCE STANDARDS/QUALITY LEVELS

The required performance standards and/or quality levels are listed below and shall be included in Attachment 1, “Performance Requirements Summary.”

Quality – Does the product or service provided meet the specifications of the contract? Are the reports/data accurate? Does the contractor’s work measure up to commonly accepted technical or professional standards?

Schedule – Assess the timeliness of the contractor against the completion of the contract, delivery schedules, and administrative requirements. Include the contractor’s efforts that contribute to or affect the schedule variance (positively or adversely).

Business Relations – Is the customer satisfied? Is interaction/communication between the contractor and the government satisfactory? Address the timeliness of awards to subcontractors and management of subcontractors. Identify the quality of problem identification and corrective actions.

Include the contractor’s history of reasonable and cooperative behavior.

4 METHODOLOGIES TO MONITOR PERFORMANCE

4.1 Surveillance Techniques

In an effort to minimize the performance management burden, a simplified surveillance method shall be used by the government to evaluate contractor performance. The method of surveillance is 100% Inspection

– Each month, the COR shall review the work completed and verify that it was completed within the agreed upon timeframe with the contractor and as outlined in the PWS.

4.2 Customer Feedback

The contractor is expected to establish and maintain professional communication between its employees and customers. The primary objective of this communication is customer satisfaction. Customer satisfaction is the most significant external indicator of the success and effectiveness of all services provided and can be measured through customer complaints.

Performance management drives the contractor to be customer focused through initially and internally addressing customer complaints and investigating the issues and/or problems but the customer always has the option to communicate complaints to the COR as opposed to the contractor.

Customer complaints, to be considered valid, must set forth clearly and in writing the detailed nature of the complaint, must be signed, and must be forwarded to the COR. The COR will accept those customer complaints and investigate.

5 QUALITY ASSURANCE DOCUMENTATION

Performance standards are expressed in the PWS and are assessed using the acceptable quality levels (AQLs) for contractor performance as defined in Attachment 1.

The government’s QA surveillance, accomplished by the COR, will be reported using the COR Tool. The Government will randomly inspect performance by visual inspection of work performed to determine acceptability. The Government will also review compliance and maintenance reports to assess completion of quality work.

Unacceptable performance will be communicated to the contractor by the COR. The COR will also notify the KO either via email or the COR Tool. If any services do not conform to contract requirements, the Government may require the contractor to re-perform the contract requirements at no increased cost to the Government. If unacceptable performance cannot be corrected, the Government may take action, including requiring the contractor to demonstrate the issue is resolved for future actions or reducing the price of the contract. Continued unacceptable performance may result in termination of the contract for convenience or default.

6 SURVEILLANCE METHODOLOGY

Performance threshold for all required services is 100% adherence.

Required COR Comments Method of Service Surveillance

Contractor will conduct regulatory compliance testing

Ensure test is conducted when it is due

Review results of tests

Verification check with each test

Contractor will repair items as required

Ensure verbal confirmation of repair is received on site

Ensure written confirmation is received within 30 days

Verification Check with each repair

Certifications and accreditations

Monitor contractor to insure required certifications and accreditations are maintained

Random Check

ATTACHMENT 1: PERFORMANCE REQUIREMENTS SUMMARY

Performance Standard

Exceptional Very Good Satisfactory Marginal Unsatisfactory

Performance Category: Quality of Product or Service

Quality Quality of work performed exceeds the minimum SOW requirement and/or client expectations.

No deficiencies noted.

Work performed meets all SOW requirements with no identified deficiencies.

Work performed meets all SOW requirements with only minor identified deficiencies that do not compromise the quality of the data collected or work performed, and can be corrected.

Work performed meets minimum SOW requirement with identified deficiencies that compromise the quality of the data collected or work performed, but were corrected.

Work performed does not meet SOW requirements and/or identified deficiencies compromise the quality of the data collected or work performed, and cannot be corrected.

Performance Category: Schedule

Schedule All deliverables submitted on time, no extensions required for any deliverable submittals.

All deliverables submitted on time, with no more than one deliverable due date extension request.

All deliverables submitted on time, with more than one deliverable due date extension requests.

One deliverable submitted late.

Several deliverables submitted late.

Performance Category: Business Relations

Business Relations

Interaction/ communication between the contractor and the government is exceptional;

no problems identified.

Subcontracts awarded in a timely manner with exceptional management of subcontractors.

Interaction/ communication between the contractor and the government is very good; no problems identified.

timely manner with very good management of subcontractors.

Interaction/ communication between the contractor and the government is satisfactory; minor problems identified and adequate corrective actions taken.

reasonable manner with satisfactory management of subcontractors.

Interaction/ communication between the contractor and the government is marginal; major problems identified and adequate corrective actions taken.

awarded in an untimely manner and/or issues stemming from marginal management of subcontractors.

Interaction/ communication between the contractor and the government is unsatisfactory;

major problems identified and inadequate corrective actions taken.

Multiple issues stemming from poor management of subcontractors.