ATTACHMENT 8 - Air Force Materiel Command Instructions 23-113.pdf

BY ORDER OF THE COMMANDER

AIR FORCE MATERIEL COMMAND

AIR FORCE MATERIEL COMMAND

INSTRUCTION 23-113

20 FEBRUARY 2024

Materiel Management

PRE-AWARD QUALIFICATION OF

NEW OR ADDITIONAL PARTS

SOURCES AND THE USE OF THE

SOURCE APPROVAL REQUEST (SAR)

COMPLIANCE WITH THIS PUBLICATION IS MANDATORY

ACCESSIBILITY: Publications and forms are available for downloading or ordering on the ePublishing web site at www.e-Publishing.af.mil.

RELEASABILITY: There are no releasability restrictions on this publication.

OPR: AFMC/A4/10-EN Certified by: AFMC/A4/10-EN

(NH-04, Sean C. Coghlan)

Supersedes: AFMCI 23-113, 31 March 2020 Pages: 66

This instruction implements DAFPD 23-1, Supply Chain Materiel Management, Federal

Acquisition Regulation (FAR), Subpart 9.2, Qualifications Requirements, Title 10 United States

Code (USC) Section 3243, Encouragement of new competitors: qualification requirement, and 41

USC § 3311, Qualification requirement. It provides guidance and procedures to implement the manufacturing and repairing Source Approval Request process throughout Air Force Materiel

Command (AFMC). It is applicable to any organization which is managing items (Critical

Application Items (CAIs), Critical Safety Items (CSIs), and non-critical items) for the United

States Air Force (USAF) or the United States Space Force (USSF). It is applicable to any items managed by weapon systems at any AFMC Center. This publication does not apply to Air Force

Reserve Command (AFRC) Units. This publication does not apply to the Air National Guard

(ANG). The source approval requirements and process described within this instruction are not intended to restrict competition, but rather to provide for consistent application of the process required by FAR 9.202, Policy, through consistent documentation. This instruction should be used in conjunction with the Joint Aeronautical Commanders’ Group (JACG), Aviation Source

Approval and Management Handbook and the Defense Logistics Agency Source Approval Request

(SAR) and Alternate Offer (AO) Guide, but this instruction takes precedence if there are conflicts with the handbook. It is to be used by all AFMC organizations and its contractors to provide war-winning capabilities - on time, on cost. This instruction is applicable to both the manufacture and repair source approval process. Ensure that all records created as a result of processes prescribed in this publication are maintained in accordance with (IAW) Air Force Instruction (AFI) 33-322, ATTACHMENT 8 http://www.e-publishing.af.mil/

2 AFMCI23-113 20 FEBRUARY 2024

Records Management and Information Governance Program, and disposed of IAW the Air Force

Records Information Management System (AFRIMS) Records Disposition Schedule (RDS) located at https://www.my.af.mil/afrims/afrims/afrims/rims.cfm. Refer recommended changes and questions about this publication to the Office of Primary Responsibility (OPR) using the

DAF847, Recommendation for Change of Publication; route DAF847 from the field through the appropriate functional chain of command. This publication may be supplemented at any level, but all Supplements must be routed to the OPR of this publication for coordination prior to certification and approval. The authorities to waive wing/unit level requirements in this publication are identified with a Tier (“T-0, T-1, T-2, T-3”) number following the compliance statement. See

Department of the Air Force Manual (DAFMAN) 90-161, Publishing Processes and Procedures, for a description of the authorities associated with the Tier numbers. Submit requests for waivers through the chain of command to the appropriate Tier waiver approval authority, or to the

Publication OPR for non-tiered compliance items. The use of the name or mark of any specific manufacturer, commercial product, commodity, or service in this publication does not imply endorsement by the Air Force.

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

Major changes include the addition of Repair Development and Source Approval Request

Category V, Developing Repair. Other updates include minor grammatical administrative changes and updates to reference material.

1. Overview:

2. Responsibilities:

3. SAR Core Process

Figure 1. Source Approval Request Pre-Award Requirements Generation Process

Figure 2. Source Approval Request Package Approval Process

Attachment 1—GLOSSARY OF REFERENCES AND SUPPORTING INFORMATION 16

Attachment 2—JUSTIFICATION FOR QUALIFICATION REQUIREMENTS 24

Attachment 3—QUALIFICATION REQUIREMENT COST ESTIMATE 28

Attachment 4—WAIVER FOR DEVELOPMENT/SPECIFICATION OF

QUALIFICATION REQUIREMENT – FAR 9.202(B) 30

Attachment 5—SAR EVALUATION CHECKLIST 31

Attachment 6—SOURCE APPROVAL REQUEST CONTENTS CHECKLIST 47

Attachment 7—COMMON USE ITEM COORDINATION SHEET AND INSTRUCTIONS 63

1. Overview:

1.1. This instruction provides the procedures for qualification of new manufacture and repair sources to ensure Source Approval Requests (SARs) are submitted with complete information https://www.my.af.mil/afrims/afrims/afrims/rims.cfm

AFMCI23-113 20 FEBRUARY 2024 3

and are evaluated thoroughly and consistently. Procedures are being provided to formalize the activities for ensuring appropriate responsible technical oversight of the pre- award source qualification process within AFMC.

1.2. Approval to repair an item is not equivalent to approval to manufacture that item. Separate

SARs are required to obtain approval to both repair and manufacture an item; one SAR must be submitted for repair and another SAR for manufacture. (T-3)

2. Responsibilities:

2.1. AFMC/A4/10-EN:

2.1.1. Serves as the AFMC Office of Primary Responsibility (OPR) for the Source

Approval Request process for AFMC.

2.1.2. Prepares, coordinates, and issues SAR policy consistent with USAF and Department of Defense (DoD) efforts; ensures processes and procedures are implemented within

AFMC.

2.1.3. Coordinates SAR efforts with other DoD activities, federal agencies, and industry.

2.2. Single Manager/Program Manager Responsibilities:

2.2.1. Responsible for Operational Safety, Suitability, and Effectiveness (OSS&E) implementation, execution, and assurance for their system(s)/end-item(s) as assigned/applicable; may delegate OSS&E authority per AFMCI 63-1201, Integrated Life

Cycle Systems Engineering and Technical Management. May serve as an Engineering

Support Activity (ESA).

2.2.2. Ensures qualification requirements (QR) are advertised in advance of a solicitation or linked to a Sources Sought Synopsis in Contract Opportunities on SAM.gov with sufficient time to allow potential offerors the opportunity to gain qualification.

2.3. Engineering Support Activity (ESA) Responsibilities: The ESA is the engineer delegated with OSS&E authority/responsibility. ESA for USAF items is established through delegated/documented agreements with System Program Managers/System Support

Managers.

2.3.1. Evaluates the Technical Data Package (TDP) completeness, Data Rights availability and item Criticality (Critical Safety Item (CSI), Critical Application Item (CAI), Non-

Critical).

2.3.1.1. Establishes the Acquisition Method Suffix Codes / Repair Method Suffix

Code (AMSC/RMSC) before or at the same time as criticality determination along with the identification of critical characteristics. Note: Both AMSC and RMSC must be established prior to making the determination to identify pre-award qualifications.

2.3.1.2. Determines if QR per FAR 9.204(a), Arranging publicity for the qualification requirements, can be established. If the TDP is complete and data rights are available, the ESA prepares the source QR statement using Attachment 2 as a guideline. The QR must meet the minimum requirements established and identified by this Instruction. If there are fewer than 2 available sources, Per FAR 9.204(a)(1), the ESA will ensure that a notice seeking additional sources or products for qualification is periodically published in Contract Opportunities on SAM.gov and for Defense Logistics Agency

4 AFMCI23-113 20 FEBRUARY 2024

(DLA) in the DLA Internet Bid Board System (DIBBS). The ESA will maintain a record of each publication. Only those qualification requirements which are least restrictive to meet the purposes necessitating the qualification requirements shall be specified. (T-0)

2.3.1.3. Tailors as needed the SAR Contents Checklist provided in Attachment 6, to enable consistent and complete SAR package submissions from potential offerors.

2.3.1.4. Tailors as needed the SAR Evaluation Checklist provided in Attachment 5 prior to the evaluation of any SAR packages, to ensure consistent and thorough evaluation for all SARs.

2.3.2. Estimates the costs for testing and evaluation which a potential offeror will incur to become qualified using Attachment 3 as a guideline.

2.3.3. If the ESA determines it is unreasonable to develop or specify the pre-award qualification requirements, the ESA requests a waiver of up to two years (for the development or specification of the pre-award qualification requirements) using

Attachment 4 as a guideline. In accordance with FAR 9.202(b), the ESA submits the determination first to the Competition Advocate for review and comment. (T-0) Reasons for the waiver may include:

2.3.3.1. Extensive design engineering effort to determine exact requirements.

2.3.3.2. Limited government technical expertise to determine exact requirements.

2.3.3.3. Design instability of the article.

2.3.3.4. The government does not possess either the Technical data or the data rights needed to develop the qualification requirements and it is cost prohibitive to obtain those rights.

2.3.4. Forwards the qualification requirement or an approved waiver to Screening and a copy to the requesting organization. Uses the store attachments function in the Purchase

Request Process System (PRPS) to attach either the waiver; or the QR, cost estimate, tailored SAR Contents Checklist, and tailored SAR Evaluation Checklist to the National

Stock Number (NSN) / National Item Identification Number (NIIN).

2.3.5. Upon receipt of a SAR, the ESA ensures the SAR package has been assigned a tracking number by the Source Development Specialist (SDS) at the appropriate Small

Business Office (SBO). For items managed by a weapon system single manager/program manager at an AFMC Center, see paragraph 2.5. The ESA performs a comprehensive technical evaluation (using Attachment 5 as previously tailored) to determine if the prospective source complies with quantitative and qualitative pre-award qualification requirements and determine approval/disapproval of the potential offeror.

2.3.5.1. Common use items require coordination and approval by the other weapon systems or services prior to source approval. A common use item coordination sheet is provided at Attachment 7. (T-0)

2.3.5.2. In addition to comprehensive Qualification Testing, submittal of engineering data and evaluation of samples, typical pre-award qualification requirements may include but are not limited to the following elements:

AFMCI23-113 20 FEBRUARY 2024 5

2.3.5.2.1. Product verification testing.

2.3.5.2.2. Quality assurance measures.

2.3.5.2.3. Site Surveys and tooling inspection consistent with the new program requirements for Manufacturing Readiness Assessments (MRAs) and

Manufacturing Readiness Levels (MRLs).

2.3.5.2.4. Form, fit, and function (FFF) and interface verification of a part.

2.3.6. If the ESA is planning to consider qualification by similarity, category (CAT) II, a comprehensive analysis of the differences and the similarities (as opposed to just the similarities) between the item proposed by the prospective source versus the exact or subject item must be accomplished by the prospective source as a key element of the pre-award qualification requirements. Note: Source Approval Request Categories are defined in Section 3.6. The ESA evaluates this analysis.

2.3.7. If a decision on the proposed offeror’s SAR cannot be provided within 90 days, the

ESA provides a written response to the appropriate SBO or procurement contracting officer as to when the evaluation will be complete. For items managed by a weapon system single manager/program manager at an AFMC Center, see paragraph 2.5. When the system/product engineer’s evaluation is complete, ESA provides a written response to the

SBO as to the success or failure of the submitter in meeting the qualification requirements.

If disapproved, ESA provides a detailed listing of all SAR faults.

2.3.8. If the SAR package is approved, the ESA shall notify screening and request an updated SAW (AFMC Form 761, AMC/AMSC Screening Analysis) or CR-SAW (AFMC

Form 762, Contract Repair Screening Analysis Worksheet), as required, to update the

Acquisition Method Code/Acquisition Method Suffix Code (AMC/AMSC) or add additional source(s). After sources have been approved for a NSN, the ESA will consider assignment of the most appropriate AMSC to foster competition and meet technical requirements. DLA Logistics Information Services (DLIS) will make AMSC code changes as directed by the ESA. Copies of signed/approved/released Engineering Change Orders

(ECOs) for the item and next higher assemblies shall be provided to the system Equipment

Specialist for updating of Technical Orders (TOs), Illustrated Parts Breakdown (IPB), as well as cataloging action for new NSN(s). Copies of such Engineering Orders (EOs) shall also be submitted to Joint Engineering Data Management Information Control System

(JEDMICS) or other authorized engineering data repository for incorporation. More than one Part Number (P/N) (Original Equipment Manufacturer [OEM] and non-OEM) may be listed under the same NSN, all P/Ns listed under an NSN must represent interchangeable items, without any modification.

2.3.9. If the ESA approves a Repair SAR package, ESA will provide the Logistics

Management Specialist (LMS) a copy of the SAR approval notice to update the existing

AFMC Form 762, Contract Repair Screening Analysis Worksheet (CR-SAW).

2.3.10. Upon approval of Category IV SAR, owning-service Integrated Product Team

(IPT) may decide to create a new NSN if it is determined to be in the best interest for their program (i.e. common item not approved by all services). Note: Refer to paragraph 3.6 for category definitions. That NSN must then be one-way linked to the sub master NSN to

6 AFMCI23-113 20 FEBRUARY 2024

show equivalency, and order of use, and to facilitate competitive procurement of the item if applicable, by appropriate source of supply for the use of the approving service. (T-0)

2.3.11. Forms the site survey team. Schedules site visits with supplier and coordinates with the other service ESA on participation. Conducts the site survey using checklist in JACG

Aviation Source Approval and Management Handbook, Exhibit C, and tracks the findings, corrective action plans and implementation. Creates and distributes formal report. Issues

SAR approval/disapproval letter only after survey is complete and all findings have been closed. Maintains a record of all lead site surveys for internal and other service ESA use.

2.3.12. Monitors status of site survey and schedules the initial and follow up site survey as required.

2.4. The Procurement Contracting Officer (PCO) Duties:

2.4.1. The PCO (who is part of the Single Manager organization) shall follow FAR

9.202(c) if a potential offeror (or its product) meets the standards established for qualification or can meet them before the date specified for award of the contract. (T-0)

The PCO shall follow the FAR 9.202(e) procedures to not delay a proposed award in order to provide a potential offeror with an opportunity to demonstrate its ability to meet the standards specified for qualification. (T-0) If a Program Manager determines that timeliness of the acquisition will not allow a delay for SAR proposal package evaluation, the PCO will document the supporting rationale in the contract file for that acquisition and provide notification back to the appropriate SBO for possible future requirements. The

ESA shall continue with the SAR evaluation and take the appropriate actions upon conclusion of the analysis. (T-0)

2.4.2. The PCO will forward any SAR received in response to a solicitation directly to

SBO SDS to assign a tracking number and to distribute to the ESA for processing. The

SBO will notify the PCO of final disposition.

2.4.3. If a SAR is received for a DLA managed item, it should be forwarded to the appropriate DLA center. The procuring activity is defined per Department of the Air Force

Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (DAFFARS) 5306.501, Requirement.

2.5. Small Business Office (SBO) Duties:

2.5.1. In accordance with AFI 90-1801, Small Business Programs, the SDS manages the source development program at the Air Force Sustainment Center (AFSC). If a SAR package is received for an item managed by another AFSC location, it must be forwarded to that location’s SDS, and the responsibilities identified within this instruction as SBO

Duties are the responsibility of the AFSC location which manages the item. For items managed by a weapon system at an AFMC Center, the responsibilities identified within this instruction as SBO Duties are the responsibility of the weapon system single manager.

Weapon system single managers may apply the following requirements on prime contractors, but the method of compliance should not be limited by the examples in this instruction. Any requirements applied to prime contractors must be applied through their contract.

2.5.2. The SDS acts as the primary liaison with industry on all SAR packages. The receipt of a SAR package from industry is the starting point in the process. When a SAR package

AFMCI23-113 20 FEBRUARY 2024 7

is received the SDS will assign a tracking number, forward the SAR package to ESA for evaluation and notify the PCO that SAR has been received.

2.5.3. The SDS monitors SARs, participates in source development surveys and market surveys (not to be confused with a Market Research Report which is a joint effort performed by the ESA, Program Manager, Item Manager, Equipment Specialist, Buyer/PCO and SDS), to include the initiation of sources sought synopses.

2.5.4. Upon request by a prospective source, the SDS explains the qualification process, provides the ESA’s pre-award qualification requirements (Attachment 2) and ESA’s tailored SAR Contents Checklist (Attachment 6), and disseminates the resultant SAR packages.

2.5.5. The SDS conducts a non-technical review of any SAR package received, to ensure compliance with submittal format and presence of relevant documentation and information, using Attachment 5 part II. If the documentation is inadequate or incomplete, the submitter will be notified of deficiencies. The potential offeror will be given a specific amount of time (normally 72 hours, or as defined by the ESA) to provide the missing data, submit proof of the deficiency correction or ask for an extension. The evaluation will be continued with the available data after the defined correction period has closed. If the SAR cannot be approved as submitted it will be returned with a full disclosure of all missing data and deficiencies or instruction on what course of action the submitter can take. The potential offeror is encouraged to resubmit the SAR.

2.5.6. If the ESA approves a SAR package, SDS will provide Screening a copy of the SAR approval notice to update the existing AFMC Form 761, AMC/AMSC Screening Analysis

Worksheet (SAW).

2.5.7. The SDS notifies the potential offeror if approved. If disapproved, the SDS notifies the potential offeror and provides reasons for disapproval.

2.5.8. Sources that were previously qualified and are now determined not qualified will be advised of the reasons in accordance with FAR 9.207, Changes in status regarding qualification requirements. The ESA will provide the SBO a valid, documented reason for requesting removal of the source consistent with the qualification requirements set forth in the written justification for qualification requirements and the specific reason the product no longer meets the specification. The SBO will coordinate on the request and notify the source so that they may take action to become re-qualified. A copy of the notification letter, along with the attachments, will be forwarded to the Competition Advocate and to

Screening to update the AFMC Form 761. (T-0)

2.5.9. If a SAR is received for a DLA managed item, it should be forwarded to the appropriate DLA center. The procuring activity is defined per DAFFARS 5306.501, Requirement.

2.6. Competition Advocate:

2.6.1. In accordance with FAR 9.202(b) The Competition Advocate shall review all requests for waiver of the requirement to specify standards for qualification. The

Competition Advocate review comments will be forwarded to the HPA or delegate for

8 AFMCI23-113 20 FEBRUARY 2024

consideration in the decision to approve or disapprove the waiver request. The procuring activities are defined per DAFFARS 5306.501. (T-0)

2.6.2. At the request of the SBO, the Competition Advocate will review the justification for disapproved source qualification requests.

2.7. Screening:

2.7.1. Provides or updates the TDP or Engineering Data List (EDL) as required, as requested by ESA.

2.7.2. Maintains current information on source qualification in AFMC Form 761, AMC/AMSC Screening Analysis Worksheet.

2.7.3. Requests ESA prepare the pre-award qualification requirements or a waiver if they do not exist and are required.

2.8. Logistics Management Specialist:

2.8.1. Maintains current information on the AFMC Form 762.

2.8.2. Requests ESA prepare the pre-award qualification requirements or a waiver if they do not exist and are required.

3. SAR Core Process.

3.1. The screening process described in DFARS Procedures, Guidance and Information (PGI)

217.7506, Spare Parts Breakout Program, requires identification of additional sources to increase competition.

3.2. The AMSC/RMSC must be established by the ESA before or at the same time as the criticality. Both of these elements must be established prior to making the determination to identify pre-award qualifications.

3.3. When the ESA establishes pre-award qualifications of a new or additional source as a requirement, qualification requirements must be generated. If the ESA determines it is unreasonable to develop or specify the pre-award qualification requirements, the ESA requests a waiver of up to two years using Attachment 4 as a guideline. (T-0)

3.4. Establishing pre-award qualification requirements. Figure 1 describes the process to generate qualification requirements.

3.4.1. The ESA will establish the qualification requirements for parts being considered.

The qualification requirements will be in accordance with FAR 9.2 and DoDM 4120.24, Defense Standardization Program (DSP) Procedures. Qualification requirements will be documented as described in Attachment 2. (T-0)

3.4.2. The ESA will assign and document item-criticality (Critical Safety Item, Critical

Application Item, Non-critical), along with critical characteristics, for parts being considered. Note: DFARS 209.270-2, Definitions, defines Aviation CSI. In addition, there may be other definitions tailored to a specific type of weapon system.

3.4.3. The ESA will prepare pre-award qualification requirements whenever prequalification of a source or its product is required. The waiver process is available when prequalification is required but the ESA determines it is unreasonable to develop or specify

AFMCI23-113 20 FEBRUARY 2024 9

the standards for qualification which a potential offeror or its product must satisfy. Prepare waivers in accordance with FAR 9.202(b) and documented as described in Attachment 4.

(T-0)

10 AFMCI23-113 20 FEBRUARY 2024

Figure 1. Source Approval Request Pre-Award Requirements Generation Process.

AFMCI23-113 20 FEBRUARY 2024 11

3.5. Evaluating source approval request packages.

3.5.1. The process depicted in Figure 2 describes the cycle for pre-award qualification requirements by prospective sources, and the subsequent evaluation and disposition of the resultant technical proposals. SARs received from potential offerors are processed through the SBO. The ESA will evaluate the qualification requirements for potential offerors being considered.

3.5.2. A potential offeror seeking approval as a qualified source must meet the specified source qualification statement requirements established by the ESA. The potential offeror must meet the standards established for qualification before the date specified for award of the contract. Potential offerors, at their own expense, with exceptions noted in FAR

9.204(a)(2), will be given an opportunity to demonstrate their abilities to meet the standards specified for qualification. (T-0)

3.5.3. Common items used in multiple systems must have the coordination of all users, unless that ESA has the documented delegated authority, as required by AFMCI 63-1201 of the users, including the other services. If all AF users approve SAR but other services do not, then a separate NSN shall be established for AF use only using a new part number

(P/N) as the reference, if there is a technical or business case for doing so. (T-0)

3.5.4. Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Parts Manufacturer Approval (PMA) –

These are items that are developed for FAA type certificated products which may be included in Air Force commercial derivative aircraft (CDA). The FAA PMA is both a design and manufacturing approval governed by Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations

(CFR), Part 21, Subpart K, Parts Manufacturer Approvals, current edition. To make the

SAR process more efficient, the ESA may use the PMA data package submitted to the FAA to evaluate potential offerors. The ESA may require additional SAR elements for pre-award qualification for CAIs or CSIs with a current FAA PMA approved manufacturer’s part or repair for SAR Category I.

12 AFMCI23-113 20 FEBRUARY 2024

Figure 2. Source Approval Request Package Approval Process.

AFMCI23-113 20 FEBRUARY 2024 13

3.6. Source Approval Request Categories. there are five categories under which SARs may be submitted:

3.6.1. SAR Category I, ACTUAL ITEM – These SARs are received from proposed offerors who have manufactured or performed Repair, Overhaul, Maintenance and

Modification (ROMM) on the exact (Subject) item, using ESA or Original Equipment

Manufacturer (OEM) technical data, for the prime contractor, OEM, another service, civil agencies, or foreign governments. This category includes SARs for the exact (identical) item from manufacturers who have been granted Federal Aviation Administration (FAA)

Parts Manufacturer Approval (PMA) via identicality with a license agreement. The item will be produced and evaluated against the current ESA approved technical data package.

Separate SARs are required to obtain approval to both repair and manufacture an item.

3.6.2. SAR Category II, SIMILAR ITEM – These SARs are received from proposed offerors who have not previously manufactured or performed ROMM on the subject item but have manufactured or performed ROMM on items similar in complexity, design, criticality, manufacturing or ROMM processes, materials, and application for the prime contractor, OEM, another service, civil agencies, or foreign governments. The item will be produced and evaluated against the current ESA approved technical data package. Separate

SARs are required to obtain approval to both repair and manufacture an item.

3.6.3. SAR Category III, NEW MANUFACTURER OR SOURCE OF REPAIR OF

AN ITEM – These SARs are received from proposed offerors, who do not meet Category

I or II criteria but have access to current ESA or OEM approved technical data and intend to produce or repair to the current ESA or OEM approved technical data package. Separate

SARs are required to obtain approval to both repair and manufacture an item.

3.6.4. SAR Category IV, ALTERNATE ITEM – These are SARs received from proposed offerors who are proposing an alternate part (substitute part with like fit, form, function) or ROMM as potentially equivalent part to the OEM part or repair. These can be reverse engineered, but not reengineered components. Some alternate parts are provided for the civil sector under FAA PMA via tests and computations or identicality without a license agreement. Separate SARs are required to obtain approval to both repair and manufacture an item. Note: Reengineering is the creation of an alternative design or manufacturing process and should be addressed via Engineering Change Process MIL-

HDBK-61, Configuration Management Guidance.

3.6.5. SAR Category V, REPAIR DEVELOPMENT – This category applies only to repairs that are not already established in USAF technical data for the TMS in which the repair is proposed. This category covers the offerors who have a repair, or could develop a repair, that will satisfy the need of the USAF IAW an advertised requirement. Approval of a Category V SAR may still require repair verification, validation, and testing prior to complete approval of the offeror as an approved source.

3.6.6. The ESA may tailor the content and required elements of the SAR package for pre-award qualification for any SAR category.

3.7. Site Survey.

3.7.1. The lead service ESA for the site survey (survey initiator) will negotiate specific survey dates with the supplier. The survey typically lasts no more than three working days

14 AFMCI23-113 20 FEBRUARY 2024

and should be completed prior to SAR approval and contract award, unless specifically authorized by the Service ESA. As appropriate, the lead activity will coordinate the scheduling of surveys with other Services.

3.7.2. The site survey team will minimally consist of an engineer with manufacturing and/or industrial experience and quality assurance personnel from the interested Service

ESA(s). Other personnel may be required to support a survey if there are specific details that need to be addressed (e.g., availability of specific tooling, equipment, jigs, repair or overhaul issues, etc.). The lead service ESA will gather input from all survey team members and publish the formal site survey report.

3.7.2.1. If a site survey is required prior to source approval, notification to the procuring activity or supplier, as applicable, is required prior to source approval. In these cases, the supplier cannot be added as an approved source of supply until the site survey is completed and thus the source approval/disapproval letter should not be sent until the site survey has been completed. However, the technical evaluation of the SAR can be completed prior to completion of the survey. The Standard Form (SF) 1403, Pre-award Survey of Prospective Contractor (General), provides a means for requesting survey participation or survey support from the Defense Contract

Management Agency (DCMA).

3.7.2.2. Site survey teams conduct pre- and post-survey contractor briefings. Any concerns or findings are shared with the company at the exit brief.

3.7.2.3. A formal report of each survey is prepared by the lead service ESA within ten days of completion of the survey. The report consolidates the comments, observations, and recommendations of all team members and provides a schedule for follow-up actions, if required. Copies of the formal report are provided to team members and sent to the supplier. A copy of the report and any corrective actions will be maintained.

Checklist and documentation will be retained by the survey lead for reference to support future SAR submissions. The supplier has 30 days to address any major concerns and provide corrective action plans.

3.7.3. The Site Survey Checklist found in JACG Aviation Source Approval and

Management Handbook, Exhibit C, (https://www.dla.mil/Portals/104/Documents/Aviation/Source%20Approval%20Ha ndbook.pdf) can be tailored for a variety of survey requirements including source approval, site surveys, pre-award surveys, Supplier Interface and Oversight Program

(SIOP) surveys, etc. The checklist can be tailored for a particular inspection, and should be provided to the supplier prior to the visit. The checklist should be completed as fully as possible so that it can serve as a record of review to help preclude duplicate effort for other purposes (e.g., even though a site survey may have been initiated for a source approval request, it suffices the CSI or quality program review). The checklist has three main parts:

3.7.3.1. Part 1 contains an introduction with instructions for completing the checklist.

It provides general questions about the facility (location, size, points of contact, DoD contracts/parts, etc.) and listing of all survey participants.

ATTACHMENT 8

https://www.dla.mil/Portals/104/Documents/Aviation/Source%20Approval%20Handbook.pdf https://www.dla.mil/Portals/104/Documents/Aviation/Source%20Approval%20Handbook.pdf

AFMCI23-113 20 FEBRUARY 2024 15

3.7.3.2. Part 2 is a comprehensive list of questions that cover: (1) Production and

Contract History, (2) Production Engineering and Planning, (3) Industrial Resources and (4) Quality Assurance Program Compliance.

3.7.3.3. Part 3 is a Finding Report containing two forms – one for individual findings, and one to be used as a summary of findings. Detailed instructions and definitions are provided on the forms. These forms will be used to track follow-up actions and corrective actions.

3.7.4. Site surveys should be performed if any of the following apply:

3.7.4.1. For CAT III suppliers who have not previously manufactured or performed

ROMM on Critical Items (CIs);

3.7.4.2. As required by the Service ESA, if the supplier has not performed ROMM on, or manufactured and delivered the actual item in production quantities and/or had a site survey, for CSI within the past three years or CAI or within the past seven years. If multiple items are produced by the supplier, then only one site survey must be performed within the given time period based on the criticality of items produced.

3.7.4.3. As required by the Service ESA, if there has been a change in company location, ownership, and/or name since the last delivery of the actual or similar critical items and the cognizant Service ESA engineer determined that documentation provided by the company to describe the nature of the change is not sufficient (Reference FAR

9.207).

3.7.4.4. As required by the cognizant Service ESA, if quality issues have been identified.

3.7.4.5. As required by the service ESA, when supplier’s SAR includes information that is incomplete or unclear. This includes changes in capabilities, processes, specialized staff, manufacturing or quality problems, or issues unresolved from a previous survey.

3.7.4.6. As required by the service ESA, when item-specific issues (i.e., complex items, problematic items, etc.) are identified, a need exists to verify requirements in the solicitation or for suppliers who have previously repaired, overhauled or manufactured items in production quantities for DoD but the actual item requires operations, processes, or inspections not previously demonstrated by the supplier.

3.7.5. When a pre-award survey is required as the result of a SAR review, the decision to perform the survey will be included in the disposition letter from the Service ESA, and the procuring activity will issue a letter to DCMA documenting the Quality Assurance Letter of Instruction (QALI) requirements.

LYLE K. DREW, Brigadier General, USAF

Director of Logistics, Civil Engineering, Force

Protection, and Nuclear Integration

16 AFMCI23-113 20 FEBRUARY 2024

Attachment 1

GLOSSARY OF REFERENCES AND SUPPORTING INFORMATION

References

10 USC § 3243, Encouragement of new competitors: qualification requirement

14 CFR, Part 21, Subpart K, Parts Manufacturer Approvals, current edition

41 USC § 3311, Qualification requirement

AFI 20-106, Management of Aviation Critical Safety Items, 25 January 2006

AFI 33-322, Records Management and Information Governance Program, 23 March 2020

AFI 90-1801, Small Business Programs, 2 August 2018

AFMCI 63-1201, Integrated Life Cycle Systems Engineering and Technical Management, 2

December 2022

AFMCMAN 21-149, Contract Depot Maintenance (CDM) Program, 28 April 2020

DAFFARS 5306.501, Requirement, current edition

DAFMAN 90-161, Publishing Processes and Procedures, 18 October 2023

DAFPD 23-1, Supply Chain Materiel Management, 1 June 2023

Defense Logistics Agency Source Approval Request (SAR) and Alternate Offer (AO) Guide, November 2002

DFARS 209.270-2, Definitions, current edition

DFARS 209.270-4, Procedures, current edition

DFARS PGI 209.202, Policy, current edition

DFARS PGI 217.7506, Spare Parts Breakout Program, current edition

DoDM 4120.24, Defense Standardization Program (DSP) Procedures, 24 September 2014

DoDM 4140.01V3, DoD Supply Chain Materiel Management Procedures: Materiel Sourcing, 9

October 2019

DoD-STD-2101, Classification of Characteristics, 10 May 1979

FAR 9.2, Qualification Requirements, current edition

FAR 9.202, Policy, current edition

FAR 9.204, Responsibilities for establishment of a qualification requirement, current edition

FAR 9.207, Changes in status regarding qualification requirements, current edition

JACG, Aviation Source Approval and Management Handbook, 16 March 2011

MIL-HDBK-61, Configuration Management Guidance, 7 April 2020

MIL-HDBK-115, US Army Reverse Engineering Handbook (Guideline and Procedures), 21

March 2016

AFMCI23-113 20 FEBRUARY 2024 17

MIL-STD-882, Standard Practice System Safety, 27 September 2023

Public Law 108-136, Section 802, Quality Control in Procurement of Aviation Critical Safety

Items and Related Services, 24 November 2003

SAE AS9100D, Quality Management Systems - Requirements for Aviation, Space and Defense

Organizations, September 2016

Title 14 CFR, Part 21, Subpart K, Parts Manufacturer Approvals, current edition

TO 00-20-3, Maintenance Processing of Reparable Property and the Repair Cycle Asset Control

System, 17 December 2021

Adopted Forms

AFMC Form 206, Temporary Work Request

AFMC Form 761, AMC/AMSC Screening Analysis Worksheet

AFMC Form 762, Contract Repair Screening Analysis Worksheet

DAF Form 847, Recommendation for Change of Publication

DD Form 250, Materiel Inspection and Receiving Report

DD Form 1654, Evaluation of Transportation Cost Factors

DD Form 2345, Militarily Critical Technical Data Agreement

SF 1403, Pre-award Survey of Prospective Contractor (General)

Abbreviations and Acronyms

AFI—Air Force Instruction

AFMC—Air Force Materiel Command

AFMCI—Air Force Materiel Command Instruction

AFPD—Air Force Policy Directive

AFRC—Air Force Reserve Command

AFRIMS—Air Force Records Information Management System

AFSC—Air Force Sustainment Center

AMC—Acquisition Method Code

AMSC—Acquisition Method Suffix Code

ANG—Air National Guard

CAGE—Commercial and Government Entity

CA—Corrective Action

CAI—Critical Application Item

CAT—Category

CD—Compact Disc

18 AFMCI23-113 20 FEBRUARY 2024

CDA—Commercial Derivative Aircraft

CE—Chief Engineer

CEA—Cognizant Engineering Authority

CFR—Code of Federal Regulations

CI—Critical Item

CIP—Component Improvement Program

CR-SAW—Contract Repair Screening Analysis Worksheet

CSI—Critical Safety Item

DAFFARS—Department of the Air Force Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement

DAFMAN—Department of the Air Force Manual

DAFPD—Department of the Air Force Policy Directive

DCMA—Defense Contract Management Agency

DFARS—Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement

DIBBS—DLA Internet Bid Board System

DLA—Defense Logistics Agency

DLIS—DLA Logistics Information Services

DoD—Department of Defense

DoDM—Department of the Defense Manual

DVD—Digital Versatile Disc

ECO—Engineering Change Order

ECP—Engineering Change Proposal

EDL—Engineering Data List

EMP—Electro-Magnetic Pulse

EO—Engineering Order

ESA—Engineering Support Activity

FAA—Federal Aviation Administration

FAR—Federal Acquisition Regulation

FFF—Form, Fit, and Function

HPA—Head of the Procuring Activity

IAW—In Accordance With

IMS—Inspection Method Sheets

IPB—Illustrated Parts Breakdown

AFMCI23-113 20 FEBRUARY 2024 19

IPT—Integrated Product Team

JACG—Joint Aeronautical Commanders’ Group

JEDMICS—Joint Engineering and Data Management Information Control System

LMS—Logistics Management Specialist

LSE—Lead Systems Engineer

MRA—Manufacturing Readiness Assessment

MRL—Manufacturing Readiness Level

NIIN—National Item Identification Number

NSN—National Stock Number

OEM—Original Equipment Manufacturer

OPR—Office of Primary Responsibility

OSS&E—Operational Safety, Suitability, and Effectiveness

PAH—Production Approval Holder

PBL—Performance Based Logistics

PCO—Procurement Contracting Officer

PDF—Portable Document Format

PGI—Procedures, Guidance, and Information

PL—Public Law

PMA—Parts Manufacturer Approval

PMAH—Parts Manufacturer Approval Holder

P/N—Part Number

PRPS—Purchase Request Process System

QALI—Quality Assurance Letter of Instruction

QAM—Quality Assurance Manual

QR—Qualification Requirements

QWC—Qualification Waiver Criteria

RDS—Records Disposition Schedule

RMC—Repair Method Code

RMSC—Repair Method Suffix Code

ROMM—Repair, Overhaul, Maintenance and Modification

SAE AS—Society of Automotive Engineers International Aerospace Standard

SAR—Source Approval Request

20 AFMCI23-113 20 FEBRUARY 2024

SAW—Screening Analysis Worksheet

SBO—Small Business Office

SDS—Source Development Specialist

SF—Standard Form

SIOP—Supplier Interface Oversight Program

SPC—Statistical Process Control

STS—Sub-Tier Supplier

TDBD—Top Down Break Down

TDP—Technical Data Package

TO—Technical Order

UID—Unique Identification

USAF—United States Air Force

USC—United States Code

USSF—United States Space Force

WRE—War Readiness Engines

Office Symbols

AFMC/A4/10-EN—Air Force Materiel Command Engineering Technology and Technical Policy

Terms

Acceptance Test—A test conducted under specified conditions, by or on behalf of the government, using delivered or deliverable items in order to determine the item's compliance with specialized requirements.

Acquisition Method Code (AMC) and Acquisition Method Suffix Code (AMSC)—AMC is a single digit numeric code, assigned by a DoD activity to describe to the Contracting Officer and other Government personnel the results of a technical review of a part and its substantiation for breakout. AMSC is a single digit alpha code, assigned by a Department of Defense (DoD) activity which provides the Contracting Officer and other Government personnel with engineering, manufacturing and technical information. DFARS PGI 217.7506, Spare Parts Breakout Program, http://www.acq.osd.mil/dpap/dars/pgi/pgi_htm/PGI217_75.htm prescribes the AMC and

AMSC which indicate if the purchase of an item(s) is restricted to known, responsible, or an approved source(s) and the reason for that restriction.

Actual Manufacturer—An individual, activity, or organization that performs the physical material fabrication processes that produce the deliverable part or other items of supply for the

Government. The actual manufacturer must produce the part in-house. The actual manufacturer may or may not be the design control activity.

Approved or Qualified Source—Any potential offeror which has satisfactorily furnished or has formally demonstrated the ability to meet the qualifications established for the spare parts or http://www.acq.osd.mil/dpap/dars/pgi/pgi_htm/PGI217_75.htm

AFMCI23-113 20 FEBRUARY 2024 21

services, as determined by the responsible engineering activity. Note: A subcontractor, which has previously provided parts through a prime contractor, may be approved when it can be demonstrated that the subcontractor has the ability to meet the qualification requirements.

Cognizant Engineer—The chief or lead engineer as defined in AFMCI 63-1201, or their delegated representative.

Cognizant Engineering Authority—see ESA.

Common Use Item—A part, assembly, subsystem, or store used in different Air Force systems or that is unique to a specific system used by multiple military services.

Complete Current Configuration Drawings—Complete set of the latest revision drawings including forging/casting data and all drawings referenced therein, when applicable.

Correlating Experience (Qualification by Similarity)—Previous experience in the manufacture and qualification of articles which can be correlated with the part being procured.

Critical Application Item (CAI)—An item essential to weapon system performance or operation, or the preservation of life or safety of operating personnel, as determined by the military services.

Critical Characteristic—A critical characteristic is one that analysis indicates is likely, if defective, to create or increase a hazard to human safety, or result in failure of a weapon system or major system to perform a required mission.

Critical Safety Item (CSI)—A critical safety item means a part, an assembly, installation equipment, launch equipment, recovery equipment, or support equipment for an aircraft or aviation weapon system if the part, assembly, or equipment contains a characteristic any failure, malfunction, or absence of which could cause: (1) A catastrophic or critical failure resulting in the loss of or serious damage to the aircraft or weapon system; (2) An unacceptable risk of personal injury or loss of life; or (3) An uncommanded engine shutdown that jeopardizes safety.

Data Certification (Certificate of Law)—A certification statement on company letterhead signed by an authorized binding company official that states the said company has obtained the data by legal means and has the right to use the data for manufacturing or repair purposes.

Design Control Authority—A contractor or government activity having responsibility for the design of a given part and for the preparation and updating of engineering drawings and other technical data for that part. The design control authorities within the product directorates are the weapon system engineers.

Distributor—A buyer who buys and sells products, parts, appliances, components, or materials.

Distributors do not manufacture these items.

Engineering Support Activity (ESA)—The ESA is the engineer for the item and or system having delegated Operational Safety Suitability and Effectiveness (OSS&E) authority / responsibility. ESA and cognizant engineering authority (CEA) are used interchangeably.

Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Parts Manufacturer Approval (PMA) Part—An approved replacement for an FAA type-certificated part. PMA Holders (PMAHs) must demonstrate to the FAA through identicality or test reports and computations (reverse engineering) that the part is the same or better than the part it seeks to replace.

22 AFMCI23-113 20 FEBRUARY 2024

First Article—An item manufactured after contract award to verify the contractor’s capability to produce the item in accordance with the requirements of the contract. Note: First article is a post-contract award process and NOT a part of the pre-contract source qualification process.

Inspection Method Sheets—Sheets used to document the produced item inspection. Sheets must be certified by an authorized representative empowered to comply with the inspection process.

Inspection Procedures—An outline of the step-by-step procedures used for the inspection.

National Stock Number—A 13-digit number assigned by DLIS to identify each item of material in the federal supply distribution system of the United States.

Non-Conforming Material—The failure of a unit or product to conform to specified requirements for any quality characteristic.

Potential Offeror (Supplier or Source)—Any potential offeror who wants to be considered as a source for a given part, but who has not yet been approved/disapproved. A source of this type would normally be required to meet prequalification requirements prior to contract award and may also be subjected to production inspection or surveillance if a contract is received.

Prime Contractor—A contractor having responsibility for design control and/or delivery of a system/equipment such as aircraft, engines, ships, tanks, vehicles, guns and missiles, ground communications and electronics systems, and test equipment.

Process/Operation Sheets—Sheets used in manufacturing to reflect the step-by-step process / operation used to manufacture or repair the complete item. Includes detailed shop sketches.

Production Sample—A sample item taken from the production line that will be subjected to testing and evaluation to verify that it meets the requirements of the contract.

Purchase Order—The original order with precise accounting and tracking for each item referenced on order.

Qualification Article—An item manufactured prior to contract award to verify a potential offeror’s capability to produce the item in accordance with the qualification requirements.

Qualification Requirement—A government requirement for testing or other quality assurance demonstration that must be completed before award of a contract (FAR 2.101 & 10 USC 3243(a)).

Qualification Waiver Criteria (QWC)—A set of guidelines that may be used to determine if part or all of the qualification requirements may be waived for a potential source.

Repair Method Code (RMC) and Repair Method Suffix Code (RMSC)—AFMCMAN 21-149, Contract Depot Maintenance (CDM) Program, prescribes the RMC and RMSC which indicate if the repair of an item(s) is restricted to known, responsible, or an approved source(s) and the reason for that restriction.

Replacement Part—A reverse-engineered part for a military-only application.

Reverse Engineering—The process of developing procurement data by analyzing and testing serviceable spare parts to duplicate the parts as designed. Qualification and proofing requirements are determined by the product directorate engineers and will meet the requirements outlined in this guide.

AFMCI23-113 20 FEBRUARY 2024 23

Spare Parts—A repairable or consumable item purchased for use in maintenance, overhaul or repair of next higher assembly.

Similar Part—Item is similar to item previously provided to the OEM, Air Force, Army or Navy within the last three years. A similar item in this context is one whose design, application, operating parameters, material and manufacturing processes are similar to those of the item for which you are seeking source approval.

Shipping Documents—DD Form 250, Materiel Inspection and Receiving Report or documents related to the movement of items which reflect the point of origin and destination.

Source Approval Request Package—A vendor…