TO 00-35D-54.pdf

TO 00-35D-54

TECHNICAL MANUAL

USAF DEFICIENCY REPORTING, INVESTIGATION, AND

RESOLUTION

(ATOS)

THIS PUBLICATION SUPERSEDES TO 00-35D-54, DATED 1 JULY 2004 AND ALL SUBSEQUENT CHANGES.

DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT A: Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited. PA Case Number AFMC 04-334. Submit recommended changes or problems with this Technical Order to 558 CBSS/GBHA, Bldg 3001/1AC4106C, Tinker AFB OK 73145-3041.

Published under authority of the Secretary of the Air Force

1 MAY 2007

INSERT LATEST CHANGED PAGES. DESTROY SUPERSEDED PAGES.

LIST OF EFFECTIVE PAGES

NOTE: The portion of the text affected by the changes is indicated by a vertical line in the outer margins of the page. Changes to illustrations are indicated by shaded or screened areas, or by miniature pointing hands.

Dates of issue for original and changed pages are:

Original . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 May 2007

TOTAL NUMBER OF PAGES IN THIS MANUAL IS 128, CONSISTING OF THE FOLLOWING:

Page *Change Page *Change Page *Change No. No. No. No. No. No.

Title A i - iii iv Blank 1-1 - 1-13 1-14 Blank 2-1 - 2-7 2-8 Blank 3-1 - 3-7 3-8 Blank 4-1 - 4-22 5-1 - 5-23 5-24 Blank 6-1 - 6-13 6-14 Blank 7-1 - 7-8 8-1 - 8-6 A-1 - A-6 B-1 B-2 Blank C-1 - C-10

*Zero in this column indicates an original page

A USAF

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Chapter Page

1 REPORTING CRITERIA, SYSTEM DESCRIPTION, AND PROGRAM RESPONSIBILITIES..............................1-1

1.1 Authority ............................................................................................................................................................1-1

1.2 Scope and Intent ................................................................................................................................................1-1

1.3 Applicability ......................................................................................................................................................1-1

1.4 Methodology ......................................................................................................................................................1-3

1.5 Deficiency Reporting Criteria ...........................................................................................................................1-3

1.6 Deficiency Categorization and Prioritization....................................................................................................1-4

1.7 Key DRIS Responsibilities................................................................................................................................1-8

1.8 DRIS Database ..................................................................................................................................................1-9

1.9 Performance Metrics and Compliance Checklists..........................................................................................1-10

1.10 Cross Component Reporting ...........................................................................................................................1-10

1.11 Government Industry Data Exchange Program (GIDEP) ..............................................................................1-10

1.12 Materiel Safety Program Manager (MSPM) ..................................................................................................1-10

1.13 PQDR Exhibit Credit Policy...........................................................................................................................1-10

1.14 Waiver of DRIS Database Requirements .......................................................................................................1-11

1.15 Recommending Improvements........................................................................................................................1-11

1.16 DRI&R Advisory Council...............................................................................................................................1-11

2 REPORTING, INVESTIGATING AND RESOLVING TEST AND EVALUATION DEFICIENCIES....................2-1

2.1 Purpose, Scope and Applicability .....................................................................................................................2-1

2.2 Key Responsibilities ..........................................................................................................................................2-1

2.3 Defining Deficiency Reporting Procedures in the ITT Charter.......................................................................2-2

2.4 Documenting and Reporting Test & Evaluation Deficiencies.........................................................................2-3

2.5 Originating Point/Test Director Responsibilities..............................................................................................2-4

2.6 T&E Deficiency Resolution Criteria ................................................................................................................2-5

3 DEFICIENCY IDENTIFICATION AND REPORTING ...............................................................................................3-1

3.1 Purpose...............................................................................................................................................................3-1

3.2 Scope and Applicability ....................................................................................................................................3-1

3.3 Criteria, Category and Priority..........................................................................................................................3-1

3.4 Originator Responsibilities ................................................................................................................................3-1

3.5 Originating Point Responsibilities ....................................................................................................................3-4

3.6 Disputing DR Resolution Actions ....................................................................................................................3-6

3.7 Process Satisfaction Feedback ..........................................................................................................................3-6

4 DEFICIENCY REPORT PROCESSING, INVESTIGATION AND RESOLUTION ..................................................4-1

4.1 Purpose...............................................................................................................................................................4-1

4.2 Scope and Applicability ....................................................................................................................................4-1

4.3 DRIS Management ............................................................................................................................................4-1

4.4 DR Receipt, Assignment and Acknowledgement ............................................................................................4-3

4.5 Air Force Repair Enhancement Program (AFREP) and Lateral Support Deficiencies ..................................4-7

4.6 Warranty Manager Responsibilities ..................................................................................................................4-8

4.7 Deficiency Report Investigations, Exhibit Disposition, and Analysis.............................................................4-9

4.8 MIP Review Boards (MIPRB)........................................................................................................................4-12

4.9 Resolution of Disagreements ..........................................................................................................................4-13

4.10 DR Status, Resolution and Closing ................................................................................................................4-13

4.11 Credit Reversal Procedures .............................................................................................................................4-21

4.12 DR/MIP Response/Resolution Performance Metrics .....................................................................................4-22

4.13 Feedback ..........................................................................................................................................................4-22 i

5 TECHNICAL COORDINATION PROGRAM (TCP) AND INTERNATIONAL ENGINE MANAGE-

MENT PROGRAM (IEMP) PARTICIPANTS DEFICIENCY REPORTING AND INVESTIGATING

PROCEDURES ...........................................................................................................................................................5-1

5.1 Purpose...............................................................................................................................................................5-1

5.2 Scope and Applicability ....................................................................................................................................5-1

5.3 Security Classification.......................................................................................................................................5-2

5.4 Deficiency Reporting Criteria ...........................................................................................................................5-2

5.5 Deficiency Category and Priority .....................................................................................................................5-4

5.6 Key Responsibilities ..........................................................................................................................................5-6

5.7 Submitting Organization Tasks.........................................................................................................................5-6

5.8 Deficiency Report Processing, Investigation And Resolution .......................................................................5-15

5.9 DR/MIP Response/Resolution Performance...................................................................................................5-18

6 EXHIBIT HANDLING AND PROCESSING................................................................................................................6-1

6.1 Purpose...............................................................................................................................................................6-1

6.2 Applicability ......................................................................................................................................................6-1

6.3 Establishing the Exhibit Processing System.....................................................................................................6-1

6.4 Exhibit Control, Marking, and Handling..........................................................................................................6-1

6.5 Originator Exhibit Processing ...........................................................................................................................6-2

6.6 Originating Point Exhibit Processing................................................................................................................6-6

6.7 Exhibit Holding and Shipping Activity Processing - Base Level ...................................................................6-6

6.8 Action Point Exhibit Responsibilities...............................................................................................................6-8

6.9 ALC Receiving and Storage Activity Exhibit Processing .............................................................................6-10

6.10 Support Point Exhibit Processing ...................................................................................................................6-11

7 AIR FORCE BAD ACTOR PROGRAM .......................................................................................................................7-1

7.1 Background ........................................................................................................................................................7-1

7.2 Selection Procedures..........................................................................................................................................7-1

7.3 Identification Procedures...................................................................................................................................7-1

7.4 Depot Maintenance Data Documentation Systems ..........................................................................................7-2

7.5 Accountability and/or Supply Procedures ........................................................................................................7-2

7.6 Screening Point..................................................................................................................................................7-2

7.7 Engineering Analysis Activity to Maintenance................................................................................................7-2

7.8 Engineering Failure Analysis Procedures.........................................................................................................7-2

7.9 Engineering Analysis Guidelines ......................................................................................................................7-3

8 ACCEPTANCE INSPECTION DEFICIENCY REPORTING AND RESOLUTION..................................................8-1

8.1 Purpose...............................................................................................................................................................8-1

8.2 Scope and Applicability ....................................................................................................................................8-1

8.3 Performing Acceptance Inspections..................................................................................................................8-1

8.4 Reporting Acceptance Inspection Results ........................................................................................................8-2

8.5 Resolving Acceptance Inspection Discrepancies..............................................................................................8-4

8.6 Final Resolution and AI Report Closing ..........................................................................................................8-5

A METRICS AND COMPLIANCE CHECKLISTS.........................................................................................................A-1

A.1 Performance Management................................................................................................................................A-1

B MATERIEL CONDITION CODE Q............................................................................................................................. B-1

C ABBREVIATIONS AND DEFINITIONS .................................................................................................................... C-1

C.1 Abbreviations.................................................................................................................................................... C-1 C.2 Definitions......................................................................................................................................................... C-7 ii

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS

Number Title Page

2-1 T&E DR Process ......................................................................................................................................................2-7 5-1 DD Form 2332, Product Quality Deficiency Report Exhibit (Front) ...................................................................5-22 5-2 DD Form 2332, Product Quality Deficiency Report Exhibit (Back) ...................................................................5-22 5-3 DD Form 1575, Suspended Tag - Material ...........................................................................................................5-23 6-1 DD Form 2332, Product Quality Deficiency Report Exhibit (Front) new version................................................6-5 6-2 DD Form 2332, Product Quality Deficiency Report Exhibit (Back) .....................................................................6-5 6-3 DD Form 1575, Suspended Tag - Materiel ...........................................................................................................6-13 7-1 Identification of Bad Actors Through Data Analysis (Flow 1) ..............................................................................7-4 7-2 Tracking of Bad Actors (Flow 2) ............................................................................................................................7-5 7-3 Unit-level Identification of Bad Actors (Flow 3)....................................................................................................7-6 7-4 Depot Identification of Bad Actors (Flow 4) ..........................................................................................................7-7 7-5 Resolution of Bad Actors (Flow 5)..........................................................................................................................7-8

LIST OF TABLES

Number Title Page

1-1 Attributes That May Affect Operational Safety, Suitability, and Effectiveness ....................................................1-3 1-2 DR Category and Priority Determination ................................................................................................................1-6 1-3 Conditions Not To Be Reported ..............................................................................................................................1-7 1-4 Summary of Key Responsibilities..........................................................................................................................1-13 4-1 DR Validation Actions .............................................................................................................................................4-4 4-2 DR Status Codes.....................................................................................................................................................4-14 4-3 Deficiency Responsibility Code .............................................................................................................................4-16 4-4 Severity of Defect...................................................................................................................................................4-16 4-5 Broad Cause of Defect Codes................................................................................................................................4-17 4-6 Detailed Cause Codes.............................................................................................................................................4-17 4-7 Action Taken Code.................................................................................................................................................4-19 4-8 Material Disposition ...............................................................................................................................................4-20 4-9 Credit/Replacement Statement ...............................................................................................................................4-20 5-1 List of Attributes.......................................................................................................................................................5-3 5-2 DR Submittal Criteria...............................................................................................................................................5-3 5-3 Conditions Not to be Reported ................................................................................................................................5-4 5-4 DR Category and Submission Timelines.................................................................................................................5-5 5-5 How to Complete a TCP/IEMP Participant Deficiency Report .............................................................................5-8 5-6 HQ AFSAC Supply Discrepancy Report (SDR) Office Addresses .....................................................................5-15 5-7 Deficiency Report Action Point Addresses for TCP Participants Only ...............................................................5-18 5-8 Deficiency Report Action Point Addresses for IEMP Participants Only.............................................................5-20 5-9 Countries Supported by TCP/IEMP.......................................................................................................................5-20 5-10 How to Complete a DD Form 2332 ......................................................................................................................5-21 5-11 Required Entries for DD FORM 1575 Condition Tags........................................................................................5-23 6-1 How to Complete a DD Form 2332 ........................................................................................................................6-4 6-2 Required Entries For DD FORM 1575 Condition Tags .......................................................................................6-12 8-1 Discrepancy Classification Guide ............................................................................................................................8-3 A-1 DR Response/Resolution Timelines........................................................................................................................A-2 iii/(iv blank)

CHAPTER 1

REPORTING CRITERIA, SYSTEM DESCRIPTION, AND PROGRAM

RESPONSIBILITIES

1.1 AUTHORITY.

1.1.1 This Technical Order (TO) implements AFPD 63-5, Quality Assurance and AFI 63-501, Air Force Acquisition Quality Program requirements for deficiency reporting. The processes of this TO also ensure compliance with federal acquisition requirements in accordance with Title 41, Code of Federal Regulations, Subpart 101-26-8, Discrepancies or Deficiencies in GSA or DOD Shipments, Material, or Billings and supports AFI 21-115, Product Quality Deficiency Report Program.

1.2 SCOPE AND INTENT.

1.2.1 Deficiency reporting, investigating, and resolution processes promote the ability to identify and correct deficiencies before they impact mission capability. Successful implementation drives resolution decisions, tempered by total ownership cost, to correct, mitigate, and/or accept risk of, conditions impacting operational safety, suitability and effectiveness (OSS&E). Success is based upon two premises: 1) the user/operator/maintainer report deficiencies on their assigned systems;

and, 2) the program manager establishing a proactive process to analyze data and act accordingly to implement solutions.

Specific objectives include:

1.2.1.1 Identify and resolve Test & Evaluation, Product Quality, and Materiel deficiencies throughout a product or system lifecycle.

1.2.1.2 Commence deficiency reporting and resolution as early as possible during systems acquisition and throughout the government test and evaluation so systems improve faster with the least cost.

1.2.1.3 Integrate deficiency analysis and resolution processes within quality, systems engineering, and overall lifecycle management plans to identify root cause and prevent or mitigate recurrence.

1.2.1.4 Obtain cost credit, replacement, and/or contractual remedy for procurement, overhaul, or repair-related quality deficiencies resulting from poor workmanship, nonconformance to applicable specifications, drawings, standards, processes or other technical requirements.

1.2.1.5 Assess risk to OSS&E and investigate as necessary to resolve materiel deficiencies resulting from poor reliability and maintainability.

1.2.1.6 Provide historical collection of deficiency data to share knowledge to authorized activities responsible for design, development, safety, purchasing, production, supply, maintenance, contract administration, and other functions.

1.2.2 The processes of this TO supports AFI 63-1201, Assurance of Operational Safety, Suitability, and Effectiveness providing standardized methods, supporting databases, tools, and procedures to identify, investigate, and resolve deficiencies.

During Test and Evaluation, deficiency reporting identifies deficiencies or proposed enhancements at a point in development where changes may be made at a significantly reduced cost. Throughout operational deployment and sustainment, this TO provides a method to formally communicate user/operator identified deficiencies or proposed enhancements to managing activities for analysis and resolution.

1.2.3 The data captured by deficiency reporting may also be used as a source of information (with analysis), to reflect the past performance history of either a contractor or organic entity. In addition, organizations such as the Air Force Office of Special Investigation and the Defense Criminal Investigation Service may use this data to support or conduct investigations.

1.3 APPLICABILITY.

1.3.1 USAF Deficiency Reporting and Resolution processes apply to all USAF and contractor members and organizations who acquire, operate, or sustain USAF owned or managed military or weapon systems (Aeronautical, Air Armament, Space, and Command and Control and Information Systems), their sub and support systems; as well as vehicles, clothing, and

1-1 textiles. For military and weapon systems, deficiency reporting and resolution processes shall be established prior to government test and evaluation, and will continue throughout the system life cycle.

1.3.2 Participation in this process is extended to the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), which operate systems for which the USAF has program management responsibility. Through letter of agreement, NASA Aeronautical organizations are provided capability to perform cross-component deficiency reporting IAW this TO and DLAR 4155.24, Product Quality Deficiency Report Program.

1.3.2.1 NASA will perform Originator, Originating Point, and functional manager responsibilities consistent with the requirements identified in paragraph 1.7 and Chapter 3 of this TO.

1.3.2.2 When operations are co-located at a USAF location, the tenant NASA organization will coordinate with the host organization to de-conflict and document exhibit handling support requirements.

1.3.3 The procedures of this TO apply regardless of the contracting methodology employed. Contracting clauses such as warranty special provisions or contractor logistics support shall not preclude the implementation of these procedures for a system or component.

NOTE

Prime contractor or prime vendor identified deficiencies shall not be reported to the USAF on materiel procured directly through the DLA or other suppliers. These deficiencies shall be reported directly to the DLA or the offending supplier according to contractual or other agreements.

1.3.4 Prime Contractor Deficiency Reporting. Contractors shall report product quality deficiencies on (USAF) government furnished property (GFP) or equipment (GFE). The preferred method of reporting is directly to the USAF using the Deficiency Report Entry and Mail Submitter (DREAMS) submission tools (paragraph 1.8.4). The DRI&R team offers process training and technical support available at no cost to contractors choosing to use this method of submission.

Contractors unwilling to use the DREAMS process shall coordinate submissions through the applicable DCMA representative.

1.3.5 These procedures apply to all agencies and contractors involved in USAF test and evaluation on Air Force managed systems, programs, and items.

1.3.6 Joint systems under test, operated and/or maintained by the USAF will use these procedures to ensure commonality of reporting and resolution. The individual program office or lead service may establish specific reporting and resolution requirements over and above the requirements of this TO as long as those requirements are seamless to USAF users.

1.3.6.1 During test and evaluation, a Joint system may use the US Navy T&E DR process governed by NAVAIR 3960.5, Naval Air Systems Command Technical Assurance Board Monitoring and Reporting of Aircraft Weapon System Development. However, this process will also include a method to capture the condition and resolution within or through

DRIS.

1.3.6.2 During sustainment, deficiencies discovered by USAF users/operators of a Joint system managed by another service component will report these deficiencies to the USAF database. Assigned Action Points will then forward the DR using the cross-component reporting requirements established in AFI 21-115, Product Quality Deficiency Report Program.

1.3.7 Countries participating in the Deficiency Reporting program use the procedures under Chapter 5 of this TO and include those involved in the Technical Coordination Program (TCP), International Engine Management Program (IEMP), Foreign Military Sales (FMS), Security Assistance (SA), and European Participating Air Forces (EPAF) governed by AFMAN 16-101, and/or Letters of Offer Acceptance (LOA), and individual FMS case provisions, Multi-National Configuration Management Plan, and IEMP Agreements.

1.3.8 This TO interacts with AFI 21-118, Improving Air and Space Equipment Reliability and Maintainability; AFI 99-103, Capabilities Based Test and Evaluation; AFOTECI 99-101, Conduct of Operational Test and Evaluation; AFMAN 23-110, USAF Supply Manual; and the Government Industry Data Exchange Program (GIDEP).

1-2

1.4 METHODOLOGY.

1.4.1 DRIS basic system capability is centrally funded and available without cost to all programs and systems. DRIS shall remain under government cognizance in order to realize the benefits derived from commonality of reporting and to remain uninhibited from outside influences.

1.4.2 DRIS systems may be tailored to the unique aspects of a program while conforming to the requirements of this TO.

The use of contractor operated and maintained deficiency data systems may also augment DRIS capability if required, but may not replace the USAF DRIS as the official deficiency repository. When used to compliment DRIS capability the contractor system will have a USAF DRIS database interface and shall provide the same management visibility as established in Chapter 4 of this TO. Tailored requirements outside of the current DRIS baseline may require additional DRIS development and sustainment funding from the requesting organization.

1.5 DEFICIENCY REPORTING CRITERIA.

1.5.1 Deficiencies that impact the operational safety, suitability, and effectiveness (OSS&E) of systems or equipment in development, test, or employment shall be reported through DRIS to the appropriate managing activity. Table 1-1 provides examples of attributes to consider when identifying deficiencies and/or recommended enhancements. Deficient conditions shall be identified according to criteria and report type and categorized according to their impact to mission and/or safety, Table 1-2, DR Category and Priority Determination.

Table 1-1. Attributes That May Affect Operational Safety, Suitability, and Effectiveness

Compatibility Malfunction

Design Quality

Difficulty of operation or maintenance Reliability

Effectiveness Repairability

Environmental Safety

Expense of operation or maintenance Security

Fidelity/conformity of technical publications Suitability

Human Factors Survivability

Integration Training fidelity

Interoperability Undocumented features

Logistics supportability Utility

Maintainability Vulnerability

1.5.2 Although often overlapping in process and similar in workflow, three separate and distinct deficiency types are covered by this technical order. These include: (1) Product Quality, (2) Materiel, and (3) Test & Evaluation Deficiencies.

Product Quality and Materiel deficiencies are reported on USAF weapon system or end items, as well as on government owned, managed, or furnished products and equipment. They are also reported against contractor owned and managed assets when those assets are used to support a USAF weapon system or end item. During government conducted or managed Test & Evaluation, deficiencies shall be written when identified against a government stated need, performance parameter, or an impact to safety, suitability or effectiveness. Test & Evaluation procedures apply on an item or system under acquisition, regardless whether it is government or contractor owned. The types of USAF report designations include:

1.5.2.1 Product Quality Deficiency Report (PQDR). These are reports of deficiency (on hardware or software) resulting from an initial failure, defect, or nonconforming condition discovered on a new, newly repaired, or overhauled product typically when that product is placed in service. PQDRs include the reporting of failures that occur on contractually prescribed warranted items within the warranty period. PQDRs also include failures that result after the item was placed in service that are suspected as latent defects or quality escapes resulting from poor workmanship, nonconformance to applicable specifications, drawings, standards, processes or other technical requirements.

1.5.2.2 Acceptance Inspection Deficiency Report (AIDR). This product quality report type is used to identify discrepancies discovered during acceptance inspections performed on aircraft, engines, engine modules and major assemblies, support

1-3 systems, and equipment. Reportable discrepancies are those that are attributable to non-conformance to applicable specifications during manufacture, repair, modification, or maintenance associated with the general work requirements and contract specifications of the work performed. See Chapter 8 for additional guidance.

1.5.2.3 Materiel Deficiency Report (MDR). This report type is used to report an unacceptable condition or request failure analysis (on hardware or software) for conditions such as systems compatibility issues, mishap analysis, component/item failures, or to provide recommendations for enhancement. MDRs may include aging system issues or trends, improvement recommendations or request for investigation to determine the root cause or condition that induced the failure. An MDR should include trending observations and/or other observations to substantiate the condition being reported as well as impacts to the operational safety, suitability, and/or effectiveness of a system, subsystem or component. MDRs may also be used as recommendations for inclusion as agenda items in improvement working groups or forums.

1.5.2.4 Dropped Object Report (DOR). A report of a materiel or quality deficiency involving any aircraft part, component, surface, or other item lost during aircrew operations from engine start to engine shutdown that is confirmed or suspected to be the result of a materiel or design deficiency. The DOR will reference the associated dropped object prevention (DOP) program report number, any resulting damages and the results of any further inspections performed as a result of the dropped object.

1.5.2.5 Test and Evaluation Deficiencies (T&E DR). These are reports of deficiency (on hardware or software) identified during government conducted or managed test and evaluation. T&E DRs are those discovered during developmental test and evaluation (DTE), or those that fail to meet operational requirements as measured during operational test and evaluation (OTE). These include, but are not limited to, deficiencies that are the result of incompatibility or failures as measured against required capabilities, applicable specifications, procedures, or test equipment and may include recommendations for enhancements to improve OSS&E.

1.6 DEFICIENCY CATEGORIZATION AND PRIORITIZATION.

1.6.1 The deficiency category and associated risk priority is used to capture the severity of the condition by relative importance and the urgency of response. The submitting organization will be diligent in the categorization of deficiencies, particularly when describing support equipment, subsystems, reliability, and maintainability deficiencies. Each deficiency must be considered for its overall OSS&E impact.

1.6.2 Category I deficiencies are those which may cause death, severe injury, or severe occupational illness; may cause loss or major damage to a weapon system; critically restricts the combat readiness capabilities of the using organization; or result in a production line stoppage.

NOTE

The SAF/AQX preferred term of Program Manager is used in place of the Single Manager throughout this TO and is intended to also represent the responsibilities of the System Program Director, and if delegated by the PM, the Supply Chain Manager.

1.6.2.1 Category I deficiencies require the immediate attention and response of the system Program Manager and Chief/Lead Engineer to mitigate risk and/or limit/resolve mission impact, therefore strict application of Category I criteria is essential. If a Category I condition is noted or suspect, assess safety, mission, or operational impact and include a detailed statement outlining the safety, mission, or operational impact to the system or end item.

1.6.2.2 Suspected Category I deficiencies shall be validated as such by the appropriate authority level within the reporting organization (Chief of Maintenance, Safety Office, or other authority within the reporting organization). If any doubt exists concerning the category of a report between Category I and Category II, it will be coordinated with the wing safety office and/or other authority to aid in assessment of the deficiencies impact.

1.6.2.3 Report Category I deficiencies immediately to applicable organizations (MAJCOM, Program Manager, safety offices) within 24 hours by telephone, facsimile, email or other expedited methods, as required. Due to the critical nature of Category I DRs, the use of telecommunications facilities are authorized during MINIMIZE (MINIMIZE is the reduction of record and voice telecommunications traffic in an emergency).

1.6.3 Category II deficiencies are those that impede or constrain successful mission accomplishment (system impacts OSS&E but does not meet the safety or mission impact criteria of a Category I deficiency). Category II deficiencies may also include recommended enhancements that improves or complements successful mission accomplishment but is not absolutely required. If incorporated, the recommendation will enhance a system’s operational safety, suitability and/or effectiveness

1-4

(OSS&E). An enhancement report should not be designated as such solely due to an “out-of-scope” condition as described in contractual requirements.

NOTE

Program Managers will not close deficiencies as an enhancement solely because it is “out of scope” to contractual requirements. Enhancement deficiencies will be assessed as a potential requirement and prioritized based upon their impact to OSS&E.

1.6.4 Table 1-2 will assist the Originating activity in determining the report category and impact are consistent and provides the recommended priority. All Category I reports and all Category I & II T&E reports require the selection of a recommended priority. Priority selection is optional for all other Category II reports.

1.6.5 As a general rule, Priority 1A - 1C are considered Emergency conditions; Priority 1D - 2B are considered Urgent conditions; and Priority 2C - 2E are considered Routine conditions.

1.6.6 The PM will consider the priority as a statement of the tester and/or operator impact. The PM analyzes the priority in view of existing program factors and budget constraints and should prioritize resolution actions accordingly.

1.6.7 Conditions that do not meet the criteria of a Category I or Category II report should be investigated by the identifying organization to determine if other reporting avenues are available. These may include, but are not limited to product and component improvement working group action items, as well as transportation and supply discrepancy reporting. Refer to Table 1-3, Conditions Not To Be Reported, for deficiencies which are excluded from the provisions of this TO.

1-5

Table 1-2. DR Category and Priority Determination

Annotate the DR Category (I or II) and the corresponding alpha-numeric priority. Submit a Category I DR and assign the corresponding priority when a condition:

CAT I Priority Impact

1A If uncorrected, may cause death, severe injury, or severe occupational illness and no workaround is known; or, 1B If uncorrected, may cause major loss or damage to equipment or a system and no workaround is know; or, 1C Prevents the accomplishment of an essential capability or critically restricts OSS&E, to include required interaction with other mission critical platforms or systems; and no acceptable workaround is known.

1D Adversely affects an essential capability or negatively impacts operational safety, suitability, or effectiveness and no acceptable workarounds are known.

1E Adversely affects technical, cost or schedule risks to the project or to life cycle support of the system, or, results in a production line stoppage and no acceptable workaround is known.

When the condition does not meet the safety or mission impact criteria of a Category I report, submit a Category II DR with the corresponding priority when the condition:

CAT II Priority Impact

2A Adversely affects an essential capability or negatively impacts operational safety, suitability, or effectiveness and adequate performance is achieved through signifi-cant compensation or acceptable workaround.

2B Adversely affects technical, cost, or schedule risks to the project or to life cycle support of the system, but an acceptable workaround is known.

2C Does not affect an essential capability but may result in user/operator inconve-nience or annoyance. Adequate performance is achieved through minimal compen-sation.

2D Results in inconvenience or annoyance for development or maintenance personnel, but does not prevent the accomplishment of the task. Adequate performance is achieved through minimal compensation.

2E Any other effect, i.e., enhancements having little or no impact to OSS&E under current requirements.

NOTES:

1. Careful consideration should be given in assigning the category and corresponding priority recommendation to accurately define the deficiencies impact.

2. Priority 1A - 1C are considered Emergency Conditions; Priority 1D - 2B are considered Urgent Conditions; and Priority 2C - 2E are considered Routine conditions.

3. Prior to test, the test team and program office shall ensure understanding and consensus of priority definitions. If required, definitions may be further defined to support the individual test program.

4. T&E deficiency category and priority will be determined by the test director. Subsequent changes may occur only with consensus of primary MIPRB members (program office, lead operating command, and applicable test director).

5. Originators/Originating Points should consider and document factors such as cost, schedule and performance risks;

availability of spares; difficulty of operation or maintenance, repair, or replacement; system redundancy; associated trends; secondary failures or damages; and environmental impacts among other possible factors.

6. Workarounds refer to approved/authorized alternate procedures which could include, but are not limited to: manual processes, order of task accomplishment, more restrictive or intensive procedures, and the use of back-up or redundant systems or processes, etc.

1-6

Table 1-3. Conditions Not To Be Reported

Do not submit a DR when the following condi- Applicable Directive or FORM tions are noted:

1. Unsatisfactory condition is attributable to improper Report IAW SF 364, Supply Discrepancy Report (DLAI packaging and handling. Items found properly packaged 4140.55, SECNAVINST 4355.18A, AFJMAN 23-215, with no apparent damage to the container, but the items AFMAN 23-110.

is damaged. Condition attributable to or responsibility of the shipper, detected by the receiving activity. This in-cludes conditions such as shortages, overages, erroneous material, unacceptable substitute, duplicate shipments, missing tags or labels, or expired shelf life.

2. Deficiencies in medical supplies and equipment listed Report IAW AFMAN 23-110, Volume 1, part 1, chapter 5 in Military Medical Stock List SL-6500. and volume 5, chapter 9.

3. Substitute items. Report using DD FORM 1608 - Unsatisfactory Material Report - (Subsistence). See DLAR 4155.3.

4. Proposed new allowance documents and changes to Report IAW AFMAN 23-110.

existing allowance documents.

5. Established administrative systems, procedures, meth- Report by letter, through channels to the office of primary ods, publications, and forms. responsibility.

6. Real property and real property installed equipment. Report IAW AFH32-9007.

7. Pricing deficiencies (e.g., zero overpricing). Report AFPAM 23-117.

8. Processing and handling of civilian and military sug- Report IAW AFI 38-401.

gestions.

9. Deficiencies in items procured from commercial off- Resolve locally through the base contracting officer or if the-shelf local purchase/repair, directly from GSA or a an IMPAC purchase, IAW AFI64-117. For items procured commercial vendor, when such items are designated in a directly from GSA, report discrepancies directly to the supply catalog or stock list for base procurement. This National Customer Service Center at 1-800-488-3111 or does not apply to components of special purchase equip- via the GSA website at http://www/gsa/gov.

ment (Air Force or Technical Service designated as those items which are procured through other services.)

10. Specific deficiencies in technical orders. Publication Report IAW AFTO Form 22, Technical Order Improve change processes apply to specific change requests ment Report and Reply, or AFTO Form 27, Preliminary against specific procedures. A DR may be submitted to Technical Order (PTO) Publication Change Request identify systemic TO issues involving the acquisition (PCR)/TO Verification Record/Approval (TO 00-5-1).

process of publications or TO fidelity/conformity issues impacting OSS&E.

11. Deficiencies in flight manuals. Report IAW AF Form 847, Recommendation For Change or Publication (Flight Publications).

12. Deficiencies in supply catalogs or stock lists. Report IAW AFMAN 23-110, Volume 1, part 1, chapter 7.

13. Carrier caused transportation type discrepancies for Report IAW SF 361, Transportation Discrepancies Report, the purpose of adjusting property and inventory records (DODM 4140.25).

of damaged freight for action by the transportation con tracting officer.

14. The need for new (not enhancement) operational ca- Submit IAW AFI 23-101 and/or DODI 5000.2 AF SUP1.

pabilities.

15. Category II deficiencies concerning tools procured Report tool discrepancies directly to the National Custom-through GSA Tools Commodity Center, including all er Service Center at 1-800-488-3111 or via the GSA web Standardization and Control of Industrial Quality Tools site at http://www.gsa.gov.

(SCIT).

1-7

1.7 KEY DRIS RESPONSIBILITIES.

1.7.1 The following provide a summary of primary DRIS positions and their key responsibilities. These responsibilities are not all inclusive; specific tasks and performance responsibilities are in Table 1-4, DR Submission and Processing Responsibility Chart and the corresponding chapters of this TO.

1.7.2 Originator. The Originator may be any individual who identifies conditions that limit or restrict an item or system from fulfilling its intended purpose. The Originator discovers the deficiency, identifies its impact, and initiates reporting and exhibit processes as established within their organization or Group.

1.7.3 Originating Point. The Originating Point is a function typically located within the organization’s quality, safety, or resource management office and has overall DR program management responsibility for the submitting organization or Group. Responsibilities include promoting the DR program and web-based training available at https://afkm.wpafb.af.mil/DRIS to ensure knowledge of criteria and processes; interacting with Originators to ensure the DR is valid, accurate, and complete; validating the deficiency category; ensuring applicable exhibits are available, secured, and properly identified; submitting the validated report to the DRIS database by the appropriate means; tracking DR progress and resolution; performing trend analysis and providing feedback.

1.7.4 Screening Point. The Screening Point is the designated focal point for the receipt and processing of DRs. The Screening Point reviews the DR for proper categorization, validity, correctness of entries, accuracy and completion of information addresses; determines and transmits the DR to the proper Action Point within or outside the organization and/or Component; maintains an audit trail for each DR and establishes routing and tracking mechanisms. These duties may be performed in whole or in part by the System Program Office (SPO) or the Single Point of Contact Office (SPOCO) or delegated by the SPO or SPOCO to meet the needs of the Center’s DR program.

1.7.5 Action Point. The Action Point is the focal point between the support point and the submitting organization. The Action Point is responsible for all technical/administrative actions for resolution of a DR submitted IAW this TO. They evaluate and will initiate a course of action for DR resolution through coordination with engineering, item managers, and equipment and quality specialists. Action Points provide status updates, closing actions, and exhibit disposition instructions.

They maintain active oversight of DRs assigned to them; monitors program metrics/trends, program compliance, and advocates improvement within their Center and the DRIS. The Action Point will also act as the service Screening Point when deficiency reports are forwarded across service component lines.