F-22 Actuators PC and Gap PWS.pdf

CUI

DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE

Ogden Air Logistics Center (OO-ALC) AFMC

Hill AFB, UT 84056-5609

PERFORMANCE WORK STATEMENT (PWS)

PROVISIONING & CATALOGING and GAP ANALYSIS FOR:

Dated: 30 April 2026

F-22 Actuators

AND ASSOCIATED COMPONENTS

PWS for Provisioning and Cataloging and Gap Analysis of the F-22 Actuators

Table of Contents

1.0 SCOPE

2.0 REPORTING AND DATA REQUIREMENTS

2.1 PROVISIONING

2.2 Provisioning Technical Documentation (PTD)

2.3 Engineering Data for Provisioning (EDFP)

2.4 PROVISIONING GUIDANCE CONFERENCE

3.0 GAP ANALYSIS

3.1 Description of Air Force End Items / Components

3.2 Gap Analysis Requirements

3.2.1 Major Gap Analysis Topics

3.2.2 Repairables

3.2.3 Non-Repairables

3.2.4 Consumables

3.2.5 Hazmat/Chemicals

3.2.6 Bill of Materials (BOM)

3.2.7 Support Equipment

3.2.8 Facility Requirements

3.2.9 Unique/Proprietary Processes

3.2.10 Training

3.2.11 Technical Data

3.2.12 Manpower

3.2.13 Information Technology (IT)

3.2.14 Initial and Full Rate Capacity

3.2.15 DEMIL Requirements

3.2.16 Supportability Outlook

3.3 Training Curriculum

3.4 Government Furnished Equipment (GFE)

1.0 SCOPE

This Performance Work Statement (PWS) defines the effort required by the Contractor to provide the data necessary for provisioning and complete cataloging of the F-22 Actuators and associated support equipment for the following Part Numbers identified in Table 1 in Section 3.1. This also establishes a provisioning baseline and the delivery of the Logistics Product Data (LPD) and Engineering Data for Provisioning (EDFP).

2.0 REPORTING AND DATA REQUIREMENTS

Reporting and data requirements shall be provided in the Contract Data Requirements List (CDRL), DD Form 1423-1. The Contractor shall prepare and submit the following records, forms, or reports in support of this work effort.

2.1 PROVISIONING

The Contractor shall provide data for and participate in the Provisioning process for the F-22 Actuators in accordance with Contact Data Requirement Lists (DD Forms 1423) and the Initial Provisioning Performance Specification (IPPS) in the contract (Attachment 1). The Contractor shall recommend logical spare/repair parts sufficient to meet operability and supportability objectives.

2.2 Provisioning Technical Documentation (PTD)

The Contractor will update and submit the PTD using the assigned Provisioning Contract Control Number (PCCN) on the next available submission control code for the router and Provisioning Part List (PPL) on required new and modified items of Support Equipment as indicated on the Support Equipment Recommendation Data (SERD) Approval Document in a format compatible with the Air Force Materiel Command (AFMC Automated Provisioning System (D220) as required by the Initial Provisioning Performance Specification (IPPS) (Attachment 1). SERD shall include the following:

-Identify the end item, component or assembly, and all support items which can be disassembled, reassembled, or replaced, and when combined, constitute the end item component or assembly.

-PPL includes items such as parts, materials, connecting cabling, piping and fittings required for the operation and maintenance of the end item, component, or assembly.

-Range and quantity of support items required to maintain the end item for an initial period of service.

-All repairable contractor off-the shelf (COTS) items unless excluded by the Prime Provisioning Activity (PPA).

-All Government Furnished Equipment (GFE) will be listed as one-line entries with no breakdown unless specified otherwise by the PPA.

-Items of common and special design hardware such as nuts, bolts, screws, keys, washers, and fittings.

-Electrical and electronic parts such as connectors, contacts, resistors, capacitors, transistors, and diodes.

Schedule for submitting the PTD shall be in accordance with the CDRLS and the Provisioning Performance schedule (PPS) (Attachment 2 - AFMC Form 718) which will be completed at the Provisioning Guidance Conference (PGC). Reference CDRL A001.

2.3 Engineering Data for Provisioning (EDFP)

Schedule and requirements for submitting the EDFP shall be in accordance with the CDRL for EDFP. Order of precedence for EDFP will be in accordance with the IPPS. Reference CDRL A002.

2.4 PROVISIONING GUIDANCE CONFERENCE

The contractor shall attend a Provisioning Guidance Conference (PGC) which will be scheduled by the PPA and held no later than 45 calendar days from receipt of contract. The PGC will be held at Hill AFB UT for approximately two days to ensure both the contractor and the government understand the provisioning requirements on contract.

3.0 GAP ANALYSIS

This section defines requirements for a Gap Analysis to establish Depot-Level Repair & Overhaul Capability in OO-ALC, located at Hill Air Force Base (HAFB). The Original Equipment Manufacturer (OEM) for these end items is Parker Hannifin Corporation (Parker) As part of the gap analysis, the Contractor shall perform comprehensive and thorough evaluations of parameters detailed further in section 3.

The Contractor shall provide analyses of the organic depot capabilities of the Air Force aircraft components listed in Table 1. The Contractor shall perform assessments for the provided list of end items and the current working skill sets, and training required to support the development of the organic depot capability. The Contractor shall identify all equipment and tools for which Parker is the Original and/or Current Design Authority and for which they have distribution authority, and a training plan proposal focused on the objective of ultimately establishing depot-level overhaul capabilities of the items in Table 1 at HAFB.

3.1 Description of Air Force End Items / Components

Table 1 - List of End Items/Components

FSC NIIN NSN Nomenclature Parker Part Current Depot

Capability

1650 015889024 1650015889024 SERVOMECHANISM,HYDRAULIC/PNEUMATIC,AIRCRAFT 362300-1027 No

1650 015890248 1650015890248 SERVOMECHANISM,HYDRAULIC/PNEUMATIC,AIRCRAFT 362300-1029 No

1650 015880518 1650015880518 SERVOMECHANISM,HYDRAULIC/PNEUMATIC,AIRCRAFT 362300-1031 No

2915 014869741 2915014869741 VALVE,INLET CONTROL 362500-1005 No

1650 014878684 1650014878684 SERVOCYLINDER 362700-1005 No

1650 014879461 1650014879461 SERVOMECHANISM,HYDRAULIC/PNEUMATIC,AIRCRAFT 366200-1015 No

1650 014920146 1650014920146 SERVOMECHANISM,HYDRAULIC/PNEUMATIC,AIRCRAFT 366200-1017 No

1650 014867272 1650014867272 SERVOMECHANISM,HYDRAULIC/PNEUMATIC,AIRCRAFT 366300-1019 No

1650 014920154 1650014920154 SERVOMECHANISM,HYDRAULIC/PNEUMATIC,AIRCRAFT 366300-1021 No

1650 014879459 1650014879459 SERVOMECHANISM,HYDRAULIC/PNEUMATIC,AIRCRAFT 366400-1015 No

1650 014875318 1650014875318 SERVOMECHANISM,HYDRAULIC/PNEUMATIC,AIRCRAFT 366400-1017 No

1650 014935692 1650014935692 SERVOMECHANISM,HYDRAULIC/PNEUMATIC,AIRCRAFT 366400-1019 No

4320 014887046 4320014887046 RESERVOIR,HYDRAULIC 373500-1011 No

1650 014879457 1650014879457 ACCUMULATOR,HYDRAULIC 373900-1005 No

1650 014867273 1650014867273 ACCUMULATOR 374000-1003 No

1650 014879463 1650014879463 ACCUMULATOR,HYDRAULIC 374000-1005 No

4820 014886032 4820014886032 VALVE,FLOW CONTROL 414100-1003 No

No assigned NSN 343900-1003 No

3.2 Gap Analysis Requirements

Parker shall perform a gap analysis for all designated end items in Table 1 individually. The results of identified gaps shall all be aggregated into a single report for each of the Parker Part Numbers, designated as the Gap Rollup, that summarizes all gaps, consolidates shared requirements, and provides a comprehensive list of major and minor gaps and preferred adjustments. Major gaps are defined as those that fully and completely prevent establishment of Maintenance, Repair, and Overhaul (MRO) activities for the specified end item without taking measures to close them. Minor gaps are defined as those that could prevent establishment of MRO activities for the specified end items, but for which alternative or equivalent mitigations exist at OO-ALC which may close the gap with proper approvals. Preferred adjustments are defined as those that would bring the OO-ALC depot up to a status that it is exactly mirroring the MRO activities at Parker-operated repair facilities (or their designated external repair facilities). Acceptable alternate equipment is defined as tools and/or equipment that, while potentially not meeting the Parker-designated identification scheme, can sufficiently meet all critical requirements. Priority shall be given to utilizing the government's existing equipment. An analysis of the expected remaining life of this equipment, including any necessary rehosts, refreshes, or upgrades, must be conducted to confirm its viability as a long-term solution. The alternative analysis must also include capacity of current workloads and the estimated full requirement of the new workload. This also includes aggregating multiple existing tools to meet the requirements of a single Parker-identified tool. For example, if Parker identifies test stand A, but the government's test stand B and test set C can perform equivalently, then equipment B and C shall be identified as acceptable alternates, pending the lifecycle analysis.

3.2.1 Major Gap Analysis Topics

As part of the gap analysis, Parker shall evaluate the fitness and deficiencies associated with the topics detailed below. Parker will also provide gap closure recommendations that provide sufficient detail and clarity to ensure that the government is well aware of necessary gap closure requirements and options. As part of the gap closure recommendations, Parker will recommend actions and deliverables to reach closure. Where multiple apparent or known options exist for gap closure Parker will identify the common tools/equipment that are used across different Logistics Readiness Centers (LRCs).

For example, if both asset A and asset B require the same wrench, then the “shared requirement” field for that wrench within the gap analyses for asset A and asset B will identify that this wrench is used for both assets. Shared requirements evaluation for proposed workload establishments shall also include existing workloads that potentially use the same, or acceptable alternative, equipment for proposed workloads being evaluated. If the government already has equipment, processes, training, facilities, or consumables on-site that would meet a given requirement then this shall be identified and annotated as a shared requirement with existing workloads. Shared requirements evaluation shall also consider existing equipment and facilities capacity to accommodate additional workload, and prioritize commercially available acceptable alternatives in lieu of highly specialized, proprietary equipment. For further reference, the specified stages of MRO activities referred to hereafter are: Disassembly, Cleaning, Check/Inspection, Repair, Assembly, Testing, and preparation for storage. The required topics to be evaluated by the gap analysis are:

• Repairables

• Non-Repairables

• Consumables

• Hazmat/Chemicals

• Bill of Materials

• Support Equipment

• Facility Requirements

• Unique/Proprietary Processes

• Training

• Technical Data

• Manpower

• Information Technology

• Initial and Full Rate Capacity Analysis of Each Workload

• DEMIL Requirements and Responsible Party

• Supportability Outlook

3.2.2 Repairables

Parker shall provide a list of all repairable items and subassembly components for each end item designated (see Table 1). The list shall include information about each item, to include: part number, nomenclature, manufacturer CAGE code, governing specifications, approved alternates or equivalent items, and additional comments. If an industry standard part number exists for any of the listed repairable items, both the Parker part number and the industry standard part number shall be provided. If a repairable item is listed for which Parker is not the OEM, Parker shall provide the Parker part number and the OEM part number with the OEM CAGE code.

3.2.3 Non-Repairables

Parker shall provide a list of all non-repairable items and subassembly components for each end item designated (see Table 1). Non-repairable items are defined as those items which if damaged would simply be replaced. An item is determined to be non-repairable if the cost for the government to organically repair the item would exceed 70% of the full replacement cost of the damaged subassembly components. The list shall include information about each item, to include:

part number, Nomenclature, manufacturer CAGE code, governing specifications, approved alternates or equivalent items, and additional comments. If an industry standard part number exists for any of the listed non-repairable items, both the Parker part number and the industry standard part number shall be provided. If a non-repairable item is listed for which Parker is not the OEM, Parker shall provide both the Parker part number and the OEM part number with the OEM CAGE code

3.2.4 Consumables

Parker shall provide a list of all consumables required to perform all stages of MRO for each end item designated (see Table 1). An item is considered consumable if it is “consumed” during its use, must be cut to size for each application, cannot be reused once installed, has an exceptionally short usage life, or is discarded after a single use. Examples of this include, but are not limited to:

safety wire (lockwire), safety cable (including associated swaging hardware), assembly fluids, masking tape, welding filler rods, abrasive paper or cloth, polishing stones, blast media, barrier materials, cleaning brushes, cleaning cloths, anti-seize compounds, marking instruments, filters, desiccant, etc. The list shall include the following information: Part number, NSN(s) (if one exists), technical data reference, product name/nomenclature, manufacturer CAGE code, standard units of issue, identified gaps, identification of shared requirements, and additional comments of ancillary information. If an industry standard part number exists for any of the listed consumable items, both the Parker part number and the industry standard part number shall be provided. If a consumable item is listed for which Parker is not the OEM, Parker shall provide both the Parker part number and the OEM part number with the OEM CAGE code. If the OEM doesn’t have a CAGE code, Parker shall provide the company name and address. If Parker doesn’t have a part number for a given consumable item, then the manufacturer part number shall be provided. Gaps shall be identified on the list in an easily identifiable way with the identified gap found in the designated gap column.

3.2.5 Hazmat/Chemicals

Parker shall provide a list of all hazardous materials and chemicals required to perform all stages of MRO of the end items designated (see Table 1). The list shall include the following information: Part number, NSN(s) (if one exists), technical data reference, product name/nomenclature, manufacturer CAGE code, standard units of issue, , identification if already in use at OO-ALC, a determination of approved alternatives, identified gaps, identification of shared requirements, and additional comments of ancillary information. For hazmat/chemicals that are identified by a trade name rather than a product number, the trade name will suffice. If an industry standard part number or specification number exists for any of the listed chemicals, both the Parker part number and the industry standard specification number (to include, type, class, grade, style, etc.) shall be provided. If a chemical is listed for which Parker is not the OEM, Parker shall provide both the Parker part number and the OEM part number with the OEM CAGE code. If the OEM doesn’t have a CAGE code, Parker shall provide the company name and address. If Parker doesn’t have a part number for a given chemical, then the manufacturer part number or specification number shall be provided. Gaps shall be identified on the list in an easily identifiable way with the identified gap found in the designated gap column.

3.2.6 Bill of Materials (BOM)

Parker shall provide a list of all subassembly components (excluding consumables) that make up the fully assembled end item for each of the end items designated (see Table 1). The list shall include the following information: indenture level, part number, NSN(s) (if one exists), nomenclature, planned replacement percentage, quantity per assembly, unit of issue, identified gaps, and additional comments of ancillary information. The indenture level is defined as the subassembly grouping level. This is used to identify which basic components are part of what assembly within the BOM, and to determine whether an item can be replaced as an assembly or by each component. If an item is only procurable as an assembly (i.e.: matched sets, printed circuit boards, non-repairable assemblies, repair kits, etc.) then the pricing for each subassembly component is not required and the item shall be designated as non-procurable on the BOM. All repair kits shall be included in the BOM as optional items with their associated information. All repair kits shall be itemized to show their constituent components as a lower indenture level of the kit. Replacement percentage shall be calculated based on at least the past 100 overhauls performed by Parker of the same item. If Parker doesn’t have sufficient data to meet the quantity of overhauls required, calculation shall be made using all available data. For items that lack any data, Parker shall provide estimations based on technician input, overhaul shop experience, overhaul of like or similar items, or engineering estimates on expected replacement frequencies.

Parker shall perform a comparative analysis of all BOM items listed in government Technical Order Illustrated Parts Breakdown documents of designated end items (see Table 1), compared to Parker’ most current BOM for that same item. Discrepancies found in the government T.O.s shall be provided in a separate report that identifies the document where the discrepancy was found (to include page number, figure number, index number, part number, or any other identifying referential information within the document), the exact nature of the discrepancy/disparity and the recommended correction to the government documents. Gaps shall be identified on the list in an easily identifiable way with the identified gap found in the designated gap column.

3.2.7 Support Equipment

Parker shall provide a list of all support equipment required to perform all stages of MRO of the end items designated (see Table 1). Support equipment is defined herein as all physical hardware required or preferred for any stage of overhaul and acceptance testing. This includes, but is not limited to: specialized hand tools, non-standard tools, modified tools, tools governed by standard specifications, test adapters, test stands, fixtures, shop aids, torque wrenches, measurement devices, inspection tools or devices, repair equipment and devices, etc.). The list shall include the following information: part number, NSN(s) (if one exists), technical data reference, nomenclature, manufacturer CAGE code, process application, calibration requirements, quantity required, unit of issue, identification of existing equipment, acceptable alternatives, identified gaps, identification of shared requirements, and additional comments of ancillary information.

Contractor shall make maximum effective use of existing equipment and provide justification of recommendations for replacements/upgrades. For obsolete equipment, or equipment specified within Parker’ documentation which can no longer be procured, or for which a better alternative is available or preferred, Parker shall provide a recommendation of the preferred replacement. All proposed replacement equipment must perform all current functions of legacy equipment it replaces. Any replacement equipment proposed should, maintain to the maximum extent, the existing footprint of the legacy equipment. If it is identified that the OO-ALC could procure a suitable substitute, the specifications for the substitute shall be provided to enable said procurement. For the specified “process application”, Parker shall identify all stages of overhaul that require the use of a given item of support equipment. As part of the gap analysis, Parker shall perform a technical evaluation of existing equipment located at OO-ALC, HAFB, and shall determine whether that equipment meets the minimum performance and calibration requirements to perform acceptance testing on the end items designated (see Table 1). If an industry standard part number or specification number exists for any of the listed support equipment, both the Parker part number and the industry standard specification number (to include, type, class, grade, style, etc.) shall be provided. If a support equipment item is listed for which Parker is not the OEM, Parker shall provide both the Parker part number and the OEM part number with the OEM CAGE code. If the OEM doesn’t have a CAGE code, Parker shall provide the company name and address. If Parker doesn’t have a part number for a given support equipment item, then the manufacturer part number or specification number shall be provided. The gap analysis shall also include itemized quotations for all specialized tools and equipment required to perform all stages of MRO, for which Parker is the Original Design Authority (ODA) and/or the Current Design Authority (CDA). Parker shall include in this quotation any items for which they possess distribution authority for tools or equipment for which they are not the ODA or CDA. For support equipment that is not widely available, for which Parker is not the ODA or CDA and doesn’t have distribution authority, Parker shall provide recommendations on procurement sources for the equipment or provide a recommendation of approved equivalent or alternative support equipment.

3.2.8 Facility Requirements

Parker shall provide a list of all necessary major facility requirements associated with or required to perform all stages of MRO of the end items designated (see Table 1). Facility requirements shall include the following: requirements derived from support equipment requirements, environmental requirements, preferred environmental conditions (identified as preferred rather than required), gaps identified, identification of common requirements, and additional comments of ancillary information. Parker shall perform a comparative analysis of existing facilities found within Buildings 505, 507, and 511, located at HAFB. The comparative analysis shall evaluate the current facilities compared to the stated requirements and offer recommendations of adjustments and changes needed to meet the minimum requirements. The comparative analysis shall also provide recommendations on preferred changes to meet preferred environmental conditions, capabilities, or similar quality of life upgrades associated with supporting the overhaul of the end items designated. Facility requirements derived from support equipment requirements shall include, but not be limited to: footprint/space needs, expected floor loads, ESD requirements, required clearances, environmental conditions (i.e.: controlled environment class and specification, etc.), power requirements, water supply requirements, nitrogen or inert gas requirements, lighting, start-up amperage, thermal min/max requirements, humidity limitations, compressed air requirements, cranes/hoists, grounding, vacuum requirements, exhaust/ventilation requirements, industrial waste streams, sanitary drains, mounting requirements, total max. power, max. heat dissipation, max. cooling requirements, air movement limitations, electromagnetic interference sensitivities, seismic requirements, cryogenics, fire suppression, estimated heat loads, Audio visual warnings, estimated noise in decibels, Roof or wall penetrations, explosion proof requirements, and safety requirements. Environmental requirements shall comprise of those required by identified support equipment, industrial waste stream handling, as well as processes associated with any/all stages of overhaul and testing.

3.2.9 Unique/Proprietary Processes

Parker shall provide a list of all necessary major processes required to perform all stages of MRO of the end items designated (see Table 1). Generally, these processes will be associated with the operation of support equipment, chemical usage, or other major overhaul stages. Unique processes identified shall include but not be limited to: Non-destructive Inspection (NDI) methods, proprietary repair procedures, operation of specialized tools and equipment, testing procedures required for acceptance testing, troubleshooting techniques, and non-standard calibration practices. Parker shall provide an evaluation of existing process capabilities established in OO-ALC at HAFB and an analysis of any identified gaps and recommendations for gap closures. The comparative analysis shall also include identification of shared requirements across all end items designated (see Table 1). Parker shall also provide a proposal for performing training and certification of all unique/proprietary processes that would need to be established at HAFB to fully realize workload establishment there. If there is a comparable specification (i.e.:

MIL-STD, AMS, or other standard) that the OO-ALC is already using, evaluation to determine if it could be used in lieu of the unique or proprietary process.

3.2.10 Training

Parker shall provide a list of all necessary training required to perform all stages of MRO of the end items designated (see Table 1). All identified training shall be reported individually for each gap analysis with shared requirements identified. Parker shall perform an evaluation of existing training and capabilities carried out by OO-ALC at HAFB to assess whether existing training of overhaul and testing technicians will meet the minimum requirements to assure certification by Parker to perform the overhaul and testing operations of the designated end items. See section 3.3 for further training requirements as part of the gap closure plan.

3.2.11 Technical Data

Parker shall perform a comprehensive and thorough evaluation of all technical documentation used by the government to perform all stages of MRO of the end items designated (see Table 1).

The evaluation shall compare the technical accuracy and completeness of the government documentation, the presence of discrepancies from the OEM current-revision documentation for the same end items, subassemblies, and components, and provide recommended changes to government documentation to close gaps identified. The evaluation results shall be provided to the government with identification of the documents that were evaluated, discrepancies identified and associated recommendations. For Parker-owned MRO documentation that the government has no similar or analogous document, Parker shall define a clear path or means of obtaining those documents as part of the gap analysis, along with the appropriate government-use technical data licenses for those data which are not already covered under an existing contract or support agreement. For technical data associated with legacy weapon systems, Parker shall perform an evaluation to determine whether the government has previously acquired government-use licenses for the data.

3.2.12 Manpower

Parker shall provide recommendations as part of their Gap Rollup that detail specific skills or skill types, manning quantities, or other similar recommendations based on the existing manning and capabilities at OO-ALC. Manpower recommendations shall account for expected quantities and workload volume projected/estimated for HAFB.

3.2.13 Information Technology (IT)

Parker shall provide a list of all necessary IT requirements associated with MRO activities for the end items designated (see Table 1). IT requirements shall include the incorporation of software required. Parker shall evaluate all test stand software used by OO-ALC on existing test stands to determine whether the existing versioning is adequate to perform the testing required. For existing test stands that meet the minimum requirements to close acceptance testing gaps and which utilize a Microsoft Windows-based operating system, the gap analysis shall include the mitigation recommendation and associated estimated gap closure plan to bring those systems to the most current version of the Windows operating system. As part of this gap analysis, Parker shall identify any risks to gaining an Authorization to Operate (ATO) Parker shall include in this portion of the gap analysis the identification of any specialized or proprietary software used by Parker in the MRO of the designated end items that the government doesn’t currently possess a license to operate. As part of the gap analysis closure recommendations, Parker shall define a clear path or means of obtaining those software, along with the appropriate government-use technical data licenses from Parker. For software that Parker is not the originator and/or intellectual property owner, Parker shall provide an exact definition of the software and identification of the manufacturer’s CAGE code, such that the government can obtain the proper software licensing from the current software owner. Parker shall also ensure Capability Maturity Model Integration (CMMI) compliance for all identified providers of IT equipment. If the manufacturer doesn’t have a CAGE code, Parker shall provide the company name and address.

3.2.14 Initial and Full Rate Capacity

The contractor shall define the Initial Rate Production process (including induction, ordering, selling, and process flow) and the validation steps required to correct deficiencies and approvals for Full-Rate Production.

3.2.15 DEMIL Requirements

The contractor shall review the Bill of Materials (BOM) to identify all items requiring Demilitarization (DEMIL). For partnered workloads, the contractor must identify if either the Depot or Partner will process DEMIL action.

3.2.16 Supportability Outlook

The contractor shall conduct a supportability assessment for this workload. Must identify all current parts manufacturers and an evaluation of their capability and intent for future production. Determine whether items are considered sole source or are commercially available.

The contractor shall also identify all existing supply contracts and remaining period of performance.

3.3 Training Curriculum

As part of the gap mitigation recommendations, also known as the gap closure plan, Parker shall develop a training plan and proposal to provide on-the-job training (OJT) for OO-ALC personnel.

The objective of the proposed training is ultimately to ensure all available and certified employees are competent and certified in proper repair methods, processes, quality requirements, LRU testing and airworthiness certification for return to service as established by Parker (OEM).

Proposed training plan and materials shall be focused on the objective of training a small group of experienced and qualified technicians at HAFB, who will then be sufficiently equipped to train all remaining technicians and incoming new-hires. Training plan will incorporate the use of Government Furnished Equipment (GFE) for each of the listed workloads (see Table 1). The training plan and proposal shall incorporate the expectation that Parker provides appropriate and qualified personnel, all training materials (excluding GFE), and consumables as agreed under the terms of the proposal.

For end items that have no USAF TO, Parker will offer to author a component maintenance manual (CMM) or similar document, as the basis of training and shop validation. The structure of the OJT will include both lecture/classroom-based training, as well as “hands-on”, in-the-shop training. Parker personnel would be expected to provide demonstrations and guidance on proper repair methods for the end items designated (see Table 1).

The training plan shall include the finalization of OEM certification, wherein a designated technician will prove competence in the repair/testing of the LRUs to Parker’s satisfaction and requirements. As part of the training plan proposal, Parker shall include final formal approval, certifications, and/or licenses to the government for trainers to perform subsequent training of technicians. Parker shall craft the training plan proposal under the expectation that the specified OJT would occur on-site at HAFB. As such, the training plan and estimated timelines for accomplishing it should take into account the amount of time needed to ensure all Parker personnel who may be travelling to HAFB are identified.

The training proposal shall also include the necessary lead time for the government to schedule the necessary training as well as the latest permissible date to reschedule the training for mission essential justifications. The training proposal shall include an expected training schedule, curriculum, duration of each training session, and number of OEM personnel that would be required on-site. The training proposal shall include training of maintenance personnel on the operation, maintenance, calibration, and troubleshooting of all specialized support equipment required for MRO activities, for which Parker is the ODA and/or CDA.

3.3.1 Follow-on Repair Training Requirements

Parker shall also provide a training plan proposal for follow-on training, should the need arise that required assistance from Parker following initial depot workload establishment, training, capability demonstration and certification. This would require a subsequent contracted sustainment support agreement, but this deliverable as part of the gap analysis would provide a Rough Order of Magnitude (ROM) estimation to the government for later use.

3.4 Government Furnished Equipment (GFE)

In the unlikely event that Government Furnished Equipment (GFE) is required for the gap analysis activities, Parker shall provide the government with at least four months' advance notice. This notice period is to allow the government to determine availability and to permit the timely delivery of the requested GFE

3.4 Government Furnished Equipment (GFE)