PWS_for_BASIC.pdf

PERFORMANCE WORK STATEMENT (PWS)

Engineering Service Contract

Northrop Grumman Corporation for the

Mature and Proven Aircraft Directorate

20 March 2013

Prepared by:

Michael P. Blinn

AFLCMC/WLDEJ

(801) 777-0535 michael.blinn@hill.af.mil

OGDEN AIR LOGISTICS COMPLEX

MATURE AND PROVEN AIRCRAFT DIRECTORATE

HILL AIR FORCE BASE, UTAH 84056

PERFORMANCE WORK STATEMENT

i MAPA/NGC Engineering Services Last Rev. Date: 20 Mar 2013

Table of Contents Page

RECORD OF REVISIONS ......................................................................................................... iv ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS ......................................................................................v

1 DESCRIPTION OF SERVICES

1.1 Performance Based Service Acquisition (PBSA)

1.2 Scope

2 SERVICE SUMMARY

3 GOVERNMENT FURNISHED PROPERTY AND SERVICES

3.1 Modification Drawings, Contractor Reports, and Tech Orders Provided

3.1.1 T-38C Structural Modification Drawings

3.1.2 Contractor Reports and Tech Orders

3.2 Security and Access to Government Facilities and Equipment

3.2.1 Security Clearance

3.2.2 Access to Government Facilities

3.2.3 Access to Government Equipment

4 GENERAL INFORMATION

4.1 General Requirements

4.2 Technical Objectives and Goals

4.3 Specific Requirements

4.3.1 Aircraft Structural Integrity Program (ASIP)

4.3.2 Structures

4.3.3 Avionics Integrity Program (AVIP)

4.3.4 Mechanical Systems Integrity Program (MECSIP) and Landing Gear

4.3.5 Non-Destructive Inspection (NDI)

4.3.6 Systems and Sustainment Engineering

4.3.7 Failure and Metallurgical Analysis

4.3.8 Material Properties Testing

4.3.9 Component Testing

4.4 Technical Documentation

4.4.1 Data Compatibility

4.4.2 Data Analysis

4.4.3 Data Documentation

4.5 Formal Evaluations

ii MAPA/NGC Engineering Services

4.5.1 Preliminary Program Reviews

4.5.2 Mid-course Evaluations and Status Updates

4.5.3 Final Program Reviews

4.6 Contractor Travel

4.6.1 Preliminary Program Review Trip

4.6.2 Final Program Review Trip

4.6.3 Miscellaneous Program Support Trips

4.6.4 Government Site Visits

4.7 Integrated Management Support

4.7.1 Contractor Program Manager

4.7.2 Contractor Interim Reporting

4.7.3 Management Systems Requirements

4.7.4 Validation Program

4.7.5 Maintainability Program

4.8 Configuration Management

4.9 Quality Control

4.10 Management Objectives

4.10.1 Government Inspection and Acceptance of Deliverables

4.10.2 Assessment

5 APPENDICES AND ATTACHMENTS

5.1 Applicable Documents

5.1.1 Document Availability and Delivery

5.2 Applicable CDRLs

5.2.1 CDRL List

5.2.2 Contractor Reporting

Attachment One: List of Applicable Documents ................................................................. A1-1 Attachment Two: Applicable CDRLs ................................................................................... A2-1 iii MAPA/NGC Engineering Services

List of Tables Page

Table 1: Service Summary for the MAPA/NGC Engineering Services Table 2: CDRL List for the MAPA/NGC Engineering Services Contract ............................... A2-1 iv MAPA/NGC Engineering Services

RECORD OF REVISIONS

REV DATE PAGE(S)

AFFECTED

SECTION

AFFECTED REASON FOR REVISION

- n/a n/a Original PWS date of release 18 Oct 2012

1 13 Feb 2013 7 4.7.1

Update paragraph to include man-hour documentation requirements.

2 20 Mar 2013 1 A1-1 Included note identifying references are applicable in their entirety v MAPA/NGC Engineering Services

ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS

AETC - Air Education and Training Command AF - Air Force AFI - Air Force Instruction AFB - Air Force Base ASIP - Aircraft Structural Integrity Program AUP - Avionics Upgrade Program DoD - Department of the Defense FEA - finite element analysis FEM - finite element model MAPA - Mature and Proven Aircraft Directorate MSC/NASTRAN - finite element computer program maintained by the MacNeal-Schwendler Corporation MSFT - Microsoft NGC - Northrop Grumman Corporation NOR - Northrop OEM - Original Equipment Manufacturer OO-ALC - Ogden Air Logistics Center Para. - paragraph PBSA - Performance Based Service Acquisition PWS - Performance Work Statement PM - Program Manager PMP - Propulsion Modernization Program QA - Quality Assurance Ref. - reference SPM - System Program Manager SPO - System Program Office SS - Service Summary TBD - to be determined TCTO - Time Compliant Technical Order T.O. - Technical Order USAF - United States Air Force

1 MAPA/NGC Engineering Services

1 DESCRIPTION OF SERVICES

The following Performance Work Statement (PWS) provides a general description of the required contractor services in support of the T-38 and F-5 weapon systems. Both weapons systems are managed by the Mature and Proven Aircraft Directorate, T-38 System Program Office (SPO), Air Education and Training Command (AETC), and/or other commands and services.

1.1 Performance Based Service Acquisition (PBSA)

This PWS is prepared in accordance with FAR 37.601 and 37.602. The philosophy of PBSA is to design mission support strategies that obtain higher levels of contractor performance, foster synergistic partnerships, accommodate changing or unforeseen mission needs, and leverage commercial best practices.

1.2 Scope

This PWS specifically covers the broad, over-arching engineering and technical activities that are required by the government to support the T-38 & F-5 aircraft.

2 SERVICE SUMMARY

Table 1 describes the Service Summary (SS) for the tasks as outlined in this PWS. Most of the efforts as described in this PWS will be engineering services and program management related.

3 GOVERNMENT FURNISHED PROPERTY AND SERVICES

3.1 Modification Drawings, Contractor Reports, and Tech Orders Provided

3.1.1 T-38C Structural Modification Drawings

The Government will provide the contractor with the available structural modification drawings and engineering data that relate to the latest configuration T-38C aircraft. Key modifications that the T-38 weapon system has undergone include: Pacer Classic I and II, the T-38C Avionics Upgrade Program (AUP), and the Propulsion Modernization Program (PMP). The intention here is for the contractor to have all the required configuration baseline data readily available, assisting in the development of the T-38 finite element model (FEM) and stress reports.

3.1.2 Contractor Reports and Tech Orders

The Government will provide the contractor with all the necessary Government Technical Orders (T.O.s), Time Compliant Technical Orders (TCTOs), and contractor reports, required to accomplish the tasks as detailed in this PWS.

2 MAPA/NGC Engineering Services

Table 1 – Service Summary for the MAPA/NGC Engineering Services

Performance Objectives PWS Reference

Performance Threshold (Minimum Acceptable)

Engineering Activities:

Provide engineering analyses, assessments, studies, component or system-level designs, or testing to substantiate a new or improved system (or sub-system or component) capability or troubleshoot / isolate faults in a current design configuration.

4.3.1 through 4.3.9

For engineering analysis (or assessments or studies): the analysis must have standard English grammar, punctuation and spelling; the problem statement and assumptions must be clearly stated;

the reference must be cited for the mathematic analytical model (be it deterministic or a stochastic model); the flow of analysis must be logical, the analysis steps must be shown in sufficient detail such that an entry-level engineer can follow and a journeymen engineer can recreate; the input values/units to the model must be cited; the mathematics must be free from significant errors;

the results/conclusions must be clearly identified;

and the implications of the result/conclusion must be clearly stated.

For component or system-level designs: the design must be validated by one or more of the following methods: analysis, inspection, demonstration, or test

For testing: the test must follow the approved test plan.

Technical Documentation:

Submit revisions to Technical Orders (T.O.) and Time Compliance Technical Orders (TCTO) to include source data for USAF aircraft specific T.O.’s and TCTO’s.

4.4.1 through 4.4.3

100% of revisions are free of content errors (i.e.

they reflect the configuration defined in the approved product or functional baseline.

Configuration Management:

Establish and implement control procedures for managing established USAF aircraft specific baselines.

4.8 A clear and unambiguous definition of the product

and functional configuration baseline.

Quality Control:

Engineering services shall develop and maintain a quality program to ensure services are delivered in accordance with established procedures and guidelines.

4.9 Provide Quality Assurance program 15 days after

contract award, program shall include procedures and policies for demonstrating 100% inspection of studies/reports are accomplished prior to delivery.

3 MAPA/NGC Engineering Services

3.2 Security and Access to Government Facilities and Equipment

3.2.1 Security Clearance

The efforts required for this task are UNCLASSIFIED and will not require Contractor personnel to obtain a security clearance. Contractor personnel shall abide by all Air Force rules, procedures, and standard of conduct. Contractors requiring access to Air Force Automated Information Systems (AIS) shall have background investigations and security awareness training completed prior to the start of contract performance. When the period of performance is complete and/or the contractor personnel leave work on this project, they will return all access cards and base identification badges within five days.

3.2.2 Access to Government Facilities

Access to Government facilities is limited. Therefore, the contractor shall coordinate the need, time, and personnel requiring access to Government facilities with the Government Program Manager (PM), at least one week prior to need. The Government PM or designated representative will coordinate between the contractor and base personnel as required.

3.2.3 Access to Government Equipment

The Government PM will assist the contractor in obtaining the necessary clearance for access to Government equipment, as the program dictates.

4 GENERAL INFORMATION

4.1 General Requirements

General requirements for sustainment engineering are given in MIL-HDBK-514, “Operational Safety, Suitability, and Effectiveness for the Aeronautical Enterprise,” (Ref. 4, Attachment One).

In addition, other key guiding documents that cover the integrity programs are JSSG-2006, MIL- STD-1530C, MIL-STD-1798B, MIL-HDBK-515, and MIL-HDBK-87244 (Ref. 1-3, 5 and 6, Attachment One).

4.2 Technical Objectives and Goals

The T-38 and F-5 weapon systems are required to remain viable for at least the next decade. As mature weapon systems in their later stages of sustainment, it is imperative that the T-38 and F-5 communities have a strong and experienced engineering support system to address the anticipated aging aircraft related challenges yet to be faced. Under the over-arching guidance of this PWS, it is intended that the Government shall have a direct link to the T-38 and F-5 OEM (Northrop Grumman Corporation) in order to obtain engineering services to meet the sustainment goals of both weapon systems.

4 MAPA/NGC Engineering Services

4.3 Specific Requirements

The contractor shall provide the appropriate engineering, program management, and technical services as required for this PWS. It is an objective of this program that the contract defines, as a minimum, the contractor’s support of the following USAF aircraft engineering activities:

4.3.1 Aircraft Structural Integrity Program (ASIP)

General requirements for the ASIP are given in JSSG-2006 and MIL-STD-1530C (Ref. 1 and 2, Attachment One). Engineering services for ASIP can include, but are not limited to: damage tolerance analyses (DTA), finite element modeling (FEM) and analyses, stress analyses, failure analyses, life predictions, risk assessment, environmental impact assessments (e.g., corrosion study), weight and balance assessments, flight loads recorder programs (FLDR), individual aircraft tracking programs (IATP), force structure planning and maintenance documentation (FSMP), loads analyses, and general consultations.

For establishing a baseline for ASIP and structures technical activities, some of the more recent (and core) documents are included at the end of this PWS (Ref. 7-12).

4.3.2 Structures

General requirements for structures are given in JSSG-2006 (Ref. 1, Attachment One).

Engineering services can include, but are not limited to: structural design, repair evaluations, classic stress analyses, FEM and analyses, failure analyses, special reviews/studies (e.g., bonded honeycomb evaluation, weight reduction study), part improvements (e.g., wing, horizontal tail), and general consultations.

4.3.3 Avionics Integrity Program (AVIP)

General requirements for the AVIP are given in MIL-HDBK-87244 (Ref. 6, Attachment One). Engineering services can include, but are not limited to: electrical loads analyses, wiring studies, electrical component evaluations, focused avionics and electrical engineering studies, and general consultations.

4.3.4 Mechanical Systems Integrity Program (MECSIP) and Landing Gear

General requirements for MECSIP are given in MIL-STD-1798B (Ref. 3, Attachment One). Engineering services can include, but are not limited to: component (part) stress analyses, FEM and analyses, component failure analyses, risk assessment, mechanical parts and/or system improvements, focused studies, and general consultations.

In addition to MECSIP and other mechanical systems technical activities, engineering services for landing gear sustainment are required. Engineering services can include, but are not limited to: component (part) stress analyses, FEM and analyses, component failure analyses, risk assessment, mechanical parts and/or system improvements, focused studies, and general consultations.

5 MAPA/NGC Engineering Services

4.3.5 Non-Destructive Inspection (NDI)

Engineering services can include, but are not limited to: NDI improvement studies, methods developments, teardown analysis support, and general consultations.

4.3.6 Systems and Sustainment Engineering

General requirements for systems and sustainment engineering are given in MIL-HDBK- 514 and MIL-HDBK-515 (Ref. 4 and 5, Attachment One). Engineering services can include, but are not limited to: systems analyses, fault tree analyses, single-point failure analyses, Functional System Integrity Program (FSIP) studies (i.e., maintenance related), and general consultations.

4.3.7 Failure and Metallurgical Analysis

Engineering services can include, but are not limited to: structural teardowns (e.g., wing, empennage, horizontal stabilizer), scanning electron microscopy (SEM) evaluation, low-power microscope assessments, failure analysis support, and general consultations.

4.3.8 Material Properties Testing

Engineering services can include, but are not limited to: static testing, fatigue testing, crack growth testing, fracture toughness testing, and general consultations.

4.3.9 Component Testing

Engineering services can include, but are not limited to: wing testing, empennage testing, fuselage testing, built-up coupon testing, and general consultations.

4.4 Technical Documentation

Engineering services can include, but are not limit to revisions to USAF aircraft-specific Technical Orders (T.O.s) and Time Compliance Technical Orders (TCTOs). Engineering services can also include providing source data for TOs or TCTO.

4.4.1 Data Compatibility

All contractor work shall be fully compatible and usable when loaded onto MAPA assets.

It should be noted that software is continually being upgraded, so any specific listing herein are given as examples. At the present time, the T-38 ASIP and Analysis Group (AFLCMC/WLDEJ) has PATRAN 2010 (R1), NASTRAN 2010 (R1), StressCheck Ver.

9.2, AFGROW Ver. 5.01.05.16, Siemens NX Ver. 7.5, and a MSFT Windows based operating system.

4.4.2 Data Analysis

Data modeling and analysis techniques for Para. 4.3.1 through 4.3.9 cover a broad range of engineering disciplines; thus, these analyses require their own specific and unique engineering approaches. As good examples of recent modeling and analysis work, a number of engineering reports are provided at the end of this PWS (Ref. 7-12, 6 MAPA/NGC Engineering Services

Attachment One). All reporting of the data analysis shall be according to the guidelines of the Service Summary (see Table 1) and Para. 5.2.2 of this PWS.

4.4.3 Data Documentation

The following documentation may be required under each delivery order per the CDRL (DD Form 1423). Additional data requirements, such as Technical Orders and particular CDRLs, may be specified in the individual delivery orders.

4.5 Formal Evaluations

The following formal evaluations are to be supported by the contractor:

4.5.1 Preliminary Program Reviews

A preliminary program review for the contractor to present their refined “way ahead” for each task order, and further discuss the anticipated challenges with the tasks, is required.

The contractor shall provide a PPT document as well as present minutes of the meeting in the most appropriate quarterly report.

4.5.2 Mid-course Evaluations and Status Updates

Depending on the needs of a specific task order, monthly or quarterly status updates and information exchanges between the Government and the contractor will be conducted.

These interchanges can be accomplished via teleconferencing or by a face-to-face meeting. Unless otherwise arranged, minutes will be maintained by the Contractor. For each task order, performance and cost reporting must be submitted monthly. The performance and cost reports shall provide current status and projected requirements of funds, man-hours, and work completion.

4.5.3 Final Program Reviews

A final review to present the final results and discuss the outcomes of the particular task orders shall be held at the conclusion of the program.

4.6 Contractor Travel

The following are general contractor travel requirements to be considered:

4.6.1 Preliminary Program Review Trip

To ensure the appropriate level of up-front detail for each specific task order, the contractor shall plan for one preliminary program review trip (see also Para. 4.5.1).

4.6.2 Final Program Review Trip

To ensure a final close-out for each specific task order, the contractor shall plan for one final program review trip (see also Para. 4.5.3).

7 MAPA/NGC Engineering Services

4.6.3 Miscellaneous Program Support Trips

The contractor should plan for miscellaneous trips, tailored to each task order.

4.6.4 Government Site Visits

During the course of task order execution and in addition to the program reviews, the contractor shall plan for various site visits to Government facilities (e.g., Hill AFB, UT, Randolph AFB, TX, etc.). These site visits are intended to promote better communication during the course of any program.

4.7 Integrated Management Support

4.7.1 Contractor Program Manager

For all tasks required by this PWS, the contractor shall identify and maintain a program manager (PM). The program manager shall have a defined and direct line of authority and responsibility over all aspects of the work effort. The contractor’s work progress, status and any corrective action shall be documented. The contractor shall report ALL contractor labor hours (including subcontractor labor hours) required for performance of services provided under this contract via a secure data collection site. The contractor is required to completely fill in all required data fields at http://www.ecmra.mil. Reporting inputs will be for the labor executed during the period of performance for each Government fiscal year (FY), which runs 1 October through 30 September. While inputs may be reported any time during the FY, all data shall be reported no later than 31 October* of each calendar year. Contractors may direct questions to the CMRA help desk.

4.7.2 Contractor Interim Reporting

The contractor shall submit status reports on the program’s progress. Reports shall be relatively error free and technically correct, as per the guidelines of Table 1.

4.7.3 Management Systems Requirements

Management systems requirements are to be provided by the contractor.

4.7.4 Validation Program

Management systems requirements are to be provided by the contractor.

4.7.5 Maintainability Program

Management systems requirements are to be provided by the contractor.

4.7.5.1 Continuation of Essential DoD Contractor Services During Crisis: The contractor is responsible for ensuring provisions are in place to continue to provide the essential services of this program in times of crisis. The contractor shall work with the Government to define those essential services, with these services defined in the first quarterly report.

http://www.ecmra.mil/

8 MAPA/NGC Engineering Services

4.8 Configuration Management

Engineering services can include, but are not limited to updating of the USAF aircraft-specific baseline (e.g., engineering drawings or engineering change orders and associated process specifications). These configuration baselines could be either the product, allocated or functional configuration baselines.

4.9 Quality Control

Engineering services shall include development and maintenance of a quality program to ensure services are delivered in accordance with requirements. Assume some oversight from Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA).

4.10 Management Objectives

The management objective is to allow Northrop the maximum flexibility to innovatively manage the program schedule, performance, risks, warranties, subcontracts, and data to produce engineering services that satisfy the USAF performance requirements. Another objective is to maintain clear government visibility into the program schedule, performance, and risk.

4.10.1 Government Inspection and Acceptance of Deliverables

The Government Program Manager shall have the right to reject or require corrections of any deficiencies found in deliverables. In the event of rejection of any deliverable, the Contractor will be notified in writing by the Government Program Manager of the specific reason/s why the deliverable was rejected. The Contractor shall have 30 workdays to correct the rejected deliverable and resubmit to the Government Program Manager for re-inspection. If no comments are provided within 30 calendar days of deliverable receipt, the deliverable will be deemed to have been accepted by the Government.

4.10.2 Assessment

The contractor, not the Government, is responsible for managing and ensuring the contractor’s performance meets the terms of the contract. It is the Governments responsibility to monitor the performance and hold the contractor accountable for meeting the performance requirements in the contract. The contractor’s performance will be evaluated, by the responsible multi-functional team (MFT) member assigned to the engineering activity addressed in 2.1-2.1.9 of this document, according to three categories: 1) Superior, 2) Acceptable, and 3) Unacceptable.

All efforts performed by the contractor will be expected to meet the level of “Acceptable” at a minimum. For each delivery order, that contractor performs at an “Unacceptable” level; the Government will first negotiate re-performance measures to eliminate deliverable defects. If re-performance measures fail to produce “Acceptable” levels the Government Program Manager will compile a list of “Unacceptable” performances and

9 MAPA/NGC Engineering Services notify the contractor’s upper management in writing of the Government’s dissatisfaction with the level of performance demonstrated.

Additionally, the notifications may result in negative entries into the Contractor Performance Assessment Report System (CPARS) in accordance with Federal Acquisition Regulations (FAR) Part 15.304.

5 APPENDICES AND ATTACHMENTS

5.1 Applicable Documents

5.1.1 Document Availability and Delivery

If the Government deems appropriate, the contractor may use other applicable documents. Also, the contractor shall request necessary documents from the Government, as required. In turn, the Government shall supply all required TOs and TCTOs for the contractor to perform the tasks of this PWS.

5.2 Applicable CDRLs

5.2.1 CDRL List

The deliverable products (CDRL list) for this PWS are presented in Table 2 (see Attachment Two).

Note: See DD Form 1423 for further details.

5.2.2 Contractor Reporting

The contractor shall submit reports in accordance with the DIDs specified in DD form 1423 (see Attachment Two) with the following stipulations. Tables, figures, drawings, etc. shall be placed immediately following their reference in the main body of the text (i.e. same page if possible or on the next page). Reports shall be submitted in a hard cover 3-ring binder. This will facilitate the report revision by allowing addition/replacement of individual pages without having to submit a completely new report. Unless otherwise noted, any necessary corrections shall be made within 30 days of Government notification.

A1-1 MAPA/NGC Engineering Services

Attachment One: List of Applicable Documents

Department of Defense (DoD) Specifications

1) JSSG-2006, “Aircraft Structures,” October 1998.

Department of Defense (DoD) Standards

2) MIL-STD-1530C, “Aircraft Structural Integrity Program,” November 2005.

3) MIL-STD-1798B, “Mechanical Equipment and Subsystems Integrity Program,” January

2010.

Department of Defense (DoD) Handbooks

4) MIL-HDBK-514, “Operational Safety, Suitability, and Effectiveness for the Aeronautical

Enterprise,” March 2003.

5) MIL-HDBK-515, “Weapon System Integrity Guide (WSIG),” October 2002.

6) MIL-HDBK-87244, “Avionics/Electronics Integrity,” January 1995.

Northrop Grumman Reports

7) NOR 07-101, Rev. C, “Finite Element Model User's Manual,” September 2010.

8) NOR 08-100, Rev. C, “T-38C Fuselage Update Analysis,” September 2010.

9) NOR 09-100, Rev. A, “Finite Element Model Description and Internal Loads,”

September 2010.

10) NOR 09-101, Rev. A, “Finite Element Model Section Properties,” September 2010.

11) NOR 09-102, “T-38C Pacer Classic III (Phase I) Engineering Study,” August 2009.

12) NOR 10-104, “T-38C Pacer Classic III (Phase II) Engineering Study,” September 2010.

Note: If the Government deems appropriate, the contractor may use other applicable documents.

Documents listed above are applicable in their entirety.

A2-1 MAPA/NGC Engineering Services

Attachment Two: Applicable CDRLs

Table 2 - CDRL List for the MAPA/NGC Engineering Services Contract

CDRL DID Reference Title A001 DI-MISC-80508B Technical Report - Study/Services.

Delivery Order Status Report A002 DI-MISC-80508B Technical Report - Study/Services.

Presentation Material A003 DI-ADMN-81249A Conference Agenda A004 DI-ADMN-81505 Report, Record of Meeting/Minutes A005 DI-MISC-80508B Technical Report - Study/Services. Trip

Report A006 DI-MISC-80508B Technical Report - Study/Services. Issue

Resolutions A007 DI-MISC-80508B Technical Report - Study/Services.

Analysis of Components A008 DI-MISC-80508B Technical Report - Study/Services.

Repairs and Modifications A009 DI-MISC-80508B Reserved A010 DI-NDTI-80603A Test Procedure A011 DI-NDTI-80809B Test/Inspection Report A012 DI-MISC-80508B Technical Report - Study/Services, Aircraft Mishap Investigation A013 DI-MISC-80508B Technical Report - Study/Services, Logistics Assessment and Survey A014 DI-MISC-80508B Technical Report - Study/Services.

Facilities Requirements Plan A015 DI-MISC-80508B Technical Report - Study/Services.

Component Repair Data Book A016 DI-MISC-80508B Technical Report - Study/Services. Spares and Support Equipment Data A017 DI-SAFT-8010IB System Safety Hazard Analysis Report A018 DI-SAFT-80105B System Safety Program Progress Report

A2-2 MAPA/NGC Engineering Services

Table 3 - CDRL List for the MAPA Engineering Services Contract (cont.)

CDRL DID Reference Title A019 DI-SAFT1-80102B Safety Assessment Report A020 DI-MCCR-80700 Computer Software Product End Items A021 DI-SESS-81000D Product Drawings/Model and Associated

Lists A022 DI-GDRQ-81257A Mathematical Model Finite Element

Analysis Report A023 DI-SESS-81010D Source Control Drawing Approval

Request A024 DI-GDRQ-80198A Internal Loads and Static Strength

Analysis Report A025 DI-GDRQ-81256B Mathematical Model Finite Element

Structures Report