Attachment 1 03SEP2009.doc

*** Source Selection Sensitive IAW FAR Subparts 2.101 and 3.104 *** N00019-09-R-0296

Attachment (1)

STATEMENT OF WORK

E-6 CARBON BRAKES

03 September 2009 Approved_________________________

Date_____________________________

1.0 Scope

This Statement of Work (SOW) defines the effort required to integrate carbon brakes, new wheels that support the installation of the carbon brakes and radial tires onto the United States (US) Navy model E-6 aircraft and potentially other Government aircraft models with brake system designs similar to that of the E-6 aircraft.

The Contractor shall conduct an engineering analysis, qualification testing, develop design changes and perform integration to modify and incorporate C/KC-135 carbon brakes.

1.1 Background

The E-6 Mercury TACAMO (Take Charge And Move Out) aircraft is a quad-engine communications platform that was manufactured by the Boeing Aircraft Company from 1989 to 1992. The aircraft was based on the Boeing 707-321 commercial airliner platform. The primary purpose of the E-6 aircraft is to operate as an airborne command and communications center, relaying instructions from the National Command Authority.

There are sixteen (16) E-6B aircraft in service. These aircraft operate out from a main operating base (Tinker Air Force Base) and forward operating bases (Travis Air Force and Offutt Air Force Base (AFB)) that also host the Air Force KC-135 aircraft. The Air Force logistics network for the KC-135 is fairly extensive so it is in the Navy’s best interest to access this network for support of the E-6 aircraft. Therefore, a collateral objective in upgrading from steel to carbon brakes is to maximize compatibility and interchangeability between the KC-135 and E-6 brake, wheel, and tire assemblies.

2.0 Applicable Documents

The documents shown herein are requirements of this SOW to the extent specifically invoked, by reference, in other sections. When so referenced, full title, revision letters, and dates of issue may be omitted for brevity. The short form references shall be understood to be the document identified in sections 2.1 through 2.3 below. Unless otherwise indicated, copies of the specifications, standards, and handbooks in paragraphs 2.1 thru 2.3 are available from the Document Automation and Production Service, 700 Robbins Avenue, Building 4D, Philadelphia, PA 19111-5094. E-6 Program and NAVAIR unique documents are available from the PMA 271 Information Management Center, 22487 Cedar Point Road, Unit 1 Bldg 1652, Patuxent River, MD 20670-1123.

2.1 Government Specifications and Standards

2.2 Other Government Documents

with Notice 1 dtd 18 January 2005

2.3 Non-Government Documents

3.0 Requirements

The Contractor shall execute the tasks herein in support of the implementation, evaluation, testing, sparing, and kitting of the carbon brakes, wheels, and radial tires. This includes follow-on support, “over and aboves”, repairs incident to modification and performing revisions to technical publications.

The modification shall not decrease landing or takeoff performance; all current landing distances must be met or decreased. The modification shall utilize the C/KC-135 brake design (Messier-Bugatti Part Number C20578000) or brakes with the same specifications that could be used interchangeably; thus adhering to the same form, fit, function, and performance. Combined brakes and wheels modification shall achieve a minimum of 800 pounds weight savings per aircraft. Replacing bias tires with radial tires shall achieve an additional 200 pounds weight savings per aircraft.

The Contractor shall be required to provide to the Government their FAA certification. Additionally, the Contractor shall provide a final FAA certification for the Carbon Brakes program.

The information provided by the Contractor for this requirement will used by the Government for the Government preparation of an Engineering Change Proposal (ECP) and Technical Directive. The Contractor shall provide the Government the information necessary to prepare and carry out the ECP.

Base Period

The Contractor shall perform engineering analysis to prove the selected brakes and tires can be incorporated on the E-6 aircraft without reducing aircraft performance. Detailed requirements are spelled out in subsequent sections of the SOW.

Option Period One The Contractor shall assemble two (2) conversion kits for the E-6 carbon brake production installation: one (1) for analysis and lab testing which will later be used to modify the landing gear trainer at Tinker AFB and one (1) for installation on the prototype aircraft, with delivery of those kits based on a Government approved delivery schedule. Detailed requirements are spelled out in subsequent sections of the SOW.

The prototype aircraft must complete all requirements of this contract, and be returned to service for other requirements in accordance with a Government approved delivery schedule.

Separately priced line items for “over and aboves” and repairs incident to modification will be included along with a separately priced line item for additional engineering and or logistics support.

Option Period Two The Contractor shall identify and deliver recommended Logistics products, and assemble and deliver conversion kits for the remaining fifteen (15) E-6 production aircraft based on a Government approved delivery schedule. Spares to support modified aircraft will be delivered incrementally, concurrent with delivery of the 15 production kits. Logistics support and additional conversion kits for other government entities may be considered during this option. Detailed requirements are spelled out in subsequent sections of the SOW.

Separately priced line items for “over and aboves” and repairs incident to modification will be included along with a separately priced line item for additional engineering and or logistics support.

3.1. Schedule

The following are the project timelines:

The anticipated period of performance for the Base Period shall not exceed four (4) months.

The anticipated period of performance for Option Period One shall not exceed seven (7) months.

NOTE: the prototype installation and testing shall be completed no later than 28 February 2011.

The anticipated period of performance for Option Period Two shall be from date of option exercise through completion of the final aircraft installation.

3.2 Base period requirements

The Contractor shall perform engineering analysis to prove the selected brakes and tires can be incorporated on the E-6 aircraft without reducing aircraft performance. The modification shall not decrease landing or takeoff performance; all current landing distances must be met or decreased. The modification shall utilize the C/KC-135 brake design (Messier-Bugatti Part Number C20578000) or brakes with the same specifications that could be used interchangeably; thus adhering to the same form, fit, function, and performance. Combined brakes and wheels modification shall achieve a minimum of 800 pounds weight savings per aircraft. Replacing bias tires with radial tires shall achieve an additional 200 pounds weight savings per aircraft.

Modification to the existing E-6B hydraulic system shall meet MIL-H-5440/SAE AS5440.

Modification to the existing E-6B (MARK III system) skid control shall be analyzed for compliance in accordance with MIL-B-8075 or applicable SAE requirement.

Structural (Strength/Stress) requirements are specified SD-569-1-4, Section 3.0. The Contractor shall conduct a strength (stress) analysis of the wheel (rim) using standard industry analysis procedures and shall document the results demonstrating aircraft structural integrity meets the requirements of SD-569-1-4. Analysis shall address any/all added components, added components interface with the airframe structure, and ability of airframe structure to react added components resultant loads in combination with any/all other applied loads. Load derivation methodology for added components and for modified structure shall be explicitly stated. Static yield and static ultimate shall be addressed as applicable by documenting margins of safety. Fatigue and damage tolerance shall be addressed per SD-569-1-4 to ensure that no additional inspections are required as a function of the modification within the E-6B service lifetime (E-6B service lifetime defined as 50,000 flight hours) by showing compliance with the following:

A. Usage spectra shall not cause structural defects (cracks, deformations, loss of modulus, etc.) or failure (using crack initiation (0.010 inch) as the primary failure criteria) within four times service life based on analysis and/or two times service life based on full scale tests;

B. Crack growth life from 0.010 inch initial assumed defect size to critical defect size at the residual strength requirement exceeds two service lifetime based on analysis; and C. Critical crack size exceeds 0.250 inch (surface length).

The Contractor shall conduct a strength (stress) analysis of the tire using standard industry analysis procedures and shall document the results demonstrating aircraft structural integrity meets the requirements of SD-569-1-4. Analysis shall address the tire itself (static and dynamic load induced stresses/strains). It shall also address the change in rotational forces/stresses/strains on the landing gear components created by the radial tire whether it be the same size as current time or the larger diameter. Analysis shall address all applied ground load deltas created by the radial tire and their impact on the landing gear and airframe. The contractor shall also analyze radial tire behavior upon ground impact and make a recommendation as to whether or not a drop test is required. Load derivation methodology shall be explicitly stated. Static yield and static ultimate shall be addressed as applicable by documenting margins of safety.

3.2.1 Operating Envelope

The carbon brakes, wheels, tires and all associated equipment shall be capable of meeting the following specifications:

3.2.1.1 Storage: -80°F to +185°F.

3.2.1.2 Operating realm: -65°F to +160°F, from sea level to 20,000 feet.

3.2.2. Base Period – Assessment

3.2.2.1 Design Review #1 (DR#1)

The Contractor shall attend a Government-hosted Design Review #1 no later than (4) months after contract award. This meeting shall serve as a review of the Contractor’s preliminary technical design concepts as well as an opportunity for the Contractor and the Government to coordinate on program issues and contract requirements. DR#1 shall include at a minimum:

System-Level and Performance Specification with compliance matrix (CDRL A003)

Preliminary architecture for the brake control system in AutoCAD-compatible format (CDRL A010)

Preliminary weight impact of the wheel and brake upgrade analysis shall include (CDRL

A011):

* A summary of all changes required to accomplish the incorporation of the new system.

* A comprehensive add and remove list detailing the total impact of the modification, to include relocations, detailed with the weight, moment, and center of gravity of all items including equipment, structure, and cabling. This shall be submitted in sufficient detail to ensure all affected items are included, and updated through the design monthly to provide a status weight report.

* All data shall be prepared using Society of Allied Weight Engineers (SAWE) RP7 paragraph 3.3.4a as guidance.

* Source data shall be provided by the Contractor for the Government’s Mass Properties specialist to update the Mass Properties Control and Management Report and shall include estimates of component weights, their distribution, and proper allocations to predict and control aircraft weight and balance.

Preliminary Bill of Materials inclusive of Support Equipment (CDRL A004)

Preliminary Removed / Replaced / Modified Parts Lists (CDRL A006)

Stop performance predictions based on Contractor analysis (CDRL A007)

Trade studies of options (i.e. - radial tire, C/KC-135 frozen brake mitigation and other reliability improvements for the landing system) (CDRL A008)

Preliminary Failure Modes, Effects, and Criticality Analysis (FMECA) of the Wheel and Brake Upgrade (CDRL A005) Flight Test Plan (CDRL A027)

Ground Test Plan (CDRL A027) Updated program risk assessment (CDRL C001) CDRL A002 for DR#1 Report

3.3 Base period Qualification Report

Provide a qualification report that demonstrates full compliance with the E-6 Performance Specification. The qualification report may be formatted in Contractor format, but shall be presented in a sequential order that is consistent with each paragraph (and sub-paragraph) of the Performance Specification.

CDRL A031

3.4. Failure Modes, Effects and Criticality Analysis (FMECA)

The Contractor shall provide a FMECA report for both the wheel assembly and the brake assembly no later than Design Review #1 (DR#1). MIL-STD-1629A, Task 101 and Task 102, may be used as a reference guide. The FMECA shall be completed in electronic web-based format and be made available to the Government. The FMECA report shall include:

Failure mode description

Local failure effects

End failure effects

Detection method

Mean Time Between Failure (MTBF)

Severity Classes

Part number

Failure consequences

Whether the failure is hidden or evident

Task man-hours for inspection/repair/replacement

Task cost for inspection/repair/replacement

The FMECA will be periodically reviewed by the Government, and if problems/concerns arise, the Contractor shall work closely with the Government to resolve those issues/ concerns. The Contractor shall notify, in writing, the Government within two (2) days of discovering a problem or concern. The contractor shall this support through the last aircraft modified.

CDRL A005

3.5 Program Management

The following Program Management sections are also applicable to Option Periods One and Two of this SOW.

The Contractor shall develop and maintain a program management system to ensure that its personnel have the authority to satisfy the requirements of this contractual action and be responsive to the Government. This task shall include elements of cost, schedule, and technical management. The Contractor shall have electronic information transfer with the Government. This capability shall provide electronic transfer of messages and unofficial transfer of data through e-mail. The Contractor shall also provide a principal point of contact with the Government. As a means to reduce overall program risk, the Contractor shall use Department of the Navy Best Practices (NAVSOP-6071) as a guide in program planning and management activities. The Contractor shall perform the following functions to ensure effective planning and control of all Contractor efforts:

3.5.1 Integrated Product Team (IPT) Development Approach

The Contractor shall support an Integrated Product Team (IPT) development approach in order to execute the performance requirements in this SOW. The IPT approach requires the Contractor to support the working groups, IPT meetings, and reviews required by this SOW.

3.5.2 Program Planning and Control

The Contractor shall provide for the planning, direction, coordination and control of all activities within the Contractor's organization, team members and all Subcontractors. The Contractor shall include a comprehensive program management and systems engineering approach for all elements of the SOW. The Contractor shall address all issues related to risk management and contractual execution including critical path items and program engineering, production and ILS milestones as an ongoing process.

3.5.3 Program Reviews

The Contractor shall conduct Program Management Review (PMR) meetings at mutually agreed upon dates and locations. During these reviews, the Contractor shall present integrated cost, schedule and technical performance status. Integrated Product Team leads or functional managers shall include cost information in discussions of schedule status, technical performance and risk. The following shall be addressed: cost/schedule trends, significant cost/schedule/technical variances, projected impacts, quantified risk assessments and corrective action plans.

The Contractor shall conduct the Program Reviews listed below:

3.5.4 Program Meetings

The Contractor shall participate in the meetings identified in table below:

Data required for obtaining a flight clearance. The contractor will support the final executive review board prior to test plan signature

3.5.5 Risk Management

The Contractor shall develop and maintain a Risk Management Plan for the Carbon Brake program. The Contractor’s plan shall include identifying risks, formulating risk mitigation plans, completing risk mitigation steps, and providing a status of all risk-related activities.

CDRL C001

3.5.6 Integrated Master Plan (IMP)/Integrated Master Schedule (IMS) The Contractor shall manage the execution of the Carbon Brake program using the IMP and the associated IMS as day-to-day execution tools and to periodically assess progress in meeting program requirements. The IMP shall be maintained and shall be updated when it is deemed necessary to reflect changes to the ongoing program, subject to Government approval. The Contractor shall report on program progress in accordance with the IMP at each program review, at selected technical reviews, and at other times at the Government’s request.

The Contractor shall revise the IMS, where necessary, to reflect the IMP. They shall use it as a day-to-day execution tool and to periodically assess progress in meeting program requirements. The Contractor shall maintain and update the IMS, when necessary, to reflect Government approved changes in the IMP, or changes in the Contractor’s detailed execution activities or schedule. The IMS shall include the activities of the prime contractor and their major subcontractors. All Contractor schedule information delivered to the Government or presented at program reviews shall originate from the IMS. The contractor shall perform appropriate analysis of the IMS tasks and report potential or existing problem areas and recommend corrective actions to eliminate or reduce schedule impact.

CDRL C002

3.5.7 Program Security

The Contractor shall implement a facility level OPSEC Plan that will address the threats to and vulnerabilities of the program, in both the classified and unclassified areas to protect information to be held, provided, used, handled, discussed, processed, stored, transmitted or delivered to the Contractor. Security policy, procedures, and requirements for classified information shall be submitted in the OPSEC Plan.

Both classified and unclassified information shall remain in the Contractor’s possession at all times, and if any information is needed by any subcontractors (for test, evaluation, or engineering analysis), the Government shall be notified five (5) working days before the information is to be disseminated.

The Contractor shall submit an OPSEC plan within 90 days after contract award.

CDRL A001

3.6 Option Period One Requirements:

The Contractor shall furnish and install carbon brakes, wheels, and radial tires, along with all required hardware. The Contractor shall assemble two (2) conversion kits for the E-6 carbon brake production installation: one (1) for analysis and lab testing which will later be used to modify the landing gear trainer at Tinker AFB and one (1) for installation on the prototype aircraft. The Contractor shall perform design, evaluation, testing and integration work of the E-6 carbon brake, wheel, and tire assemblies to include logistics support identified in this section.

Modification to the existing E-6B hydraulic system shall meet MIL-H-5440/SAE AS5440.

Modification to the existing E-6B (MARK III system) skid control shall be analyzed for compliance in accordance with MIL-B-8075 or applicable SAE requirement.

Structural (Strength/Stress) requirements are specified SD-569-1-4, Section 3.0. The Contractor shall conduct a strength (stress) analysis of the wheel (rim) using standard industry analysis procedures and shall document the results demonstrating aircraft structural integrity meets the requirements of SD-569-1-4. Analysis shall address any/all added components, added components interface with the airframe structure, and ability of airframe structure to react added components resultant loads in combination with any/all other applied loads. Load derivation methodology for added components and for modified structure shall be explicitly stated. Static yield and static ultimate shall be addressed as applicable by documenting margins of safety. Fatigue and damage tolerance shall be addressed per SD-569-1-4 to ensure that no additional inspections are required as a function of the modification within the E-6B service lifetime (E-6B service lifetime defined as 50,000 flight hours) by showing compliance with the following:

A. Usage spectra shall not cause structural defects (cracks, deformations, loss of modulus, etc.) or failure (using crack initiation (0.010 inch) as the primary failure criteria) within four times service life based on analysis and/or two times service life based on full scale tests;

B. Crack growth life from 0.010 inch initial assumed defect size to critical defect size at the residual strength requirement exceeds two service lifetime based on analysis; and C. Critical crack size exceeds 0.250 inch (surface length).

The Contractor shall conduct a strength (stress) analysis of the tire using standard industry analysis procedures and shall document the results demonstrating aircraft structural integrity meets the requirements of SD-569-1-4. Analysis shall address the tire itself (static and dynamic load induced stresses/strains). It shall also address the change in rotational forces/stresses/strains on the landing gear components created by the radial tire whether it be the same size as current time or the larger diameter. Analysis shall address all applied ground load deltas created by the radial tire and their impact on the landing gear and airframe. The contractor shall also analyze radial tire behavior upon ground impact and make a recommendation as to whether or not a drop test is required. Load derivation methodology shall be explicitly stated. Static yield and static ultimate shall be addressed as applicable by documenting margins of safety.

3.6.1 Operating Envelope

The carbon brakes, wheels, tires and all associated equipment shall be capable of meeting the following specifications:

3.2.1.1 Storage: -80°F to +185°F.

3.2.1.2 Operating realm: -65°F to +160°F, from sea level to 20,000 feet.

3.6.2 Design Review #2 (DR#2)

The Contractor shall attend a Government-hosted Design Review #2 no later than four (4) months after Option 1 is exercised. This meeting shall serve as a review of the Contractor’s final technical design to be qualified. DR#2 shall include at a minimum.

An established system product baseline An updated risk assessment (CDRL C001) An updated program development schedule (CDRLs C002 and C003) Component-Level Specifications (CDRL A009)

Engineering Drawings (CDRL A010)

Weight Report (CDRL A011)

Bill of Materials (CDRL A004)

Removed / Replaced / Modified Parts Lists (CDRL A006)

Updated to the System-Level and Performance Specification with compliance matrix (CDRL A003) Qualification Plan (CDRL A013) Flight Test Report (CDRL XXXX)

Ground Test Report (CDRL XXXX) Updated FMECA (CDRL A005)

System Safety Evaluation (SSE) (CDRL A012)

Anti-skid system evaluation (CDRL A025)

Technical Manual changes (CDRL A033)

Aircraft Flight Manual changes (CDRL A024)

Hardware in the Loop simulation report (CDRL A027)

Flight test hardware requirements; cost and lead time (CDRL A027) CDRL A026 for DR#2 Report

3.7 Conversion Kits

In Option Period One, the Contractor shall furnish two (2) conversion kits as follows:

3.7.1 Components (Hydraulic hoses, clamps, tubes, brackets, bolts, washers, etc. needed to integrate wheels, brakes, and tires onto the E-6).

3.7.2 Eight (8) wheels.

3.7.3 Eight (8) carbon brake sets.

3.7.4 Eight (8) radial tires.

3.7.5 Parts/Inventory list (hard copy and in electronic format; Microsoft Word-compatible).

3.8 Aircraft Accessibility and Availability

The Navy shall retain controlling and reporting custody of the prototype aircraft during the modification effort. The accessibility of the aircraft will be dependent upon aircraft availability, maintenance issues that could arise, and operating requirements. The Government will make every effort to make the plane available to the Contractor for testing and evaluation. If the aircraft is not available to the Contractor during the requested time period, the Government will propose an alternate time period, or will work closely with the Contractor to propose a time to satisfy the requirements of both the Government and Contractor.

3.9 Logistics

The Contractor shall develop and implement an Integrated Logistics Support (ILS) Program for the carbon brakes modification.

A single manager shall have the authority for complete ILS planning, and execution of the ILS program. The ILS Manager shall serve as the focal point for ILS program management, technical performance, requirements determination, pricing and funding, scheduling, and timely definition of ILS resource requirements. The ILS Manager shall be equal to the Chief Engineer and shall be responsible to the Program Manager, and shall ensure that the ILS program has visibility in the Engineering process. The ILS manager shall be responsible for the timely planning and execution of the tasks described in this SOW.

3.9.1 Logistics Elements

The following paragraphs present those minimum performance factors that will be implemented for each logistics element.

3.9.2 Design Interface / Supportability Analyses

The Contractor shall provide all Design Interface requirements. These logistics related design parameters are expressed in operational terms rather than as inherent values and specifically relate to system readiness objectives and support costs of the system.

The Contractor shall perform and document the results of a supportability analysis that identifies all tasks that must be accomplished to operate and maintain all carbon brakes new and modified equipment at the organizational level of maintenance. The supportability analysis shall identify all support resources (e.g., manpower, maintenance plans, spares, parts, publications, support equipment, training, etc.) that are required to complete those tasks. Corrective maintenance tasks shall be identified for all failure modes. The Component-level Specification shall include a listing of ground rules and assumptions to be used during the supportability analysis. The following, at a minimum, are required:

• Provision of the information necessary to facilitate supportability analysis;

• Provision of the information necessary to support a comprehensive Configuration Management; and

• Provision of the data necessary to specifically measure support performance requirements as logistic support resources required by analytically developed Maintenance Plans. These Logistic support resources shall include people, parts, publications, tools and test equipment.

CDRL A009

3.9.3 Maintenance Planning

The system maintenance concepts developed for the E-6B Aircraft reflect the Commercial-Off-The-Shelf /Non-Developmental Item (COTS/NDI) acquisition strategy. All components are intended to be maintained at organizational (O) level, with Depot support from the Original Equipment Manufacturer (OEM) and/or integrator. COTS/NDI items shall be analyzed for O-level trouble shooting, removal and replacement. COTS/NDI items shall be analyzed for Organizational level maintenance removal and replacement, to consist of testing and troubleshooting to the Weapon Replaceable Assembly (WRA) and Shop Replaceable Assemblies (SRA) where applicable. The Contractor shall identify the tools, test equipment, material, facilities, and step-by-step procedures for “O” level maintenance and repair. The Contractor shall identify expected life and system failure indications and modes. The Contractor shall identify and develop tasks necessary to maintain the E-6B Carbon Brakes modification, including the associated procedural steps and support resources. The following, at a minumum, shall include:

• Comprehensive and accurate Supportability Analysis (SA) data;

• Identification of any unique maintenance requirements or test equipment; and

• Identification of any new tasks, training and skills necessary for the proper manning and maintenance

• Phased Support Plan.

CDRL A009

3.9.3.1 Logistics Management Information (LMI)

The Logistics Management Information (LMI) product data elements to be used to populate the LMI database shall be developed from MIL-PRF-49506. The Contractor shall supply LMI Data Product Elements per CDRL A030.

3.9.3.1.1 Logistics Management Information Plan

The Contractor shall develop an LMI plan. This plan should leverage to the greatest extent possible from previously developed information. The LMI Plan shall describe the methodology, controls, and organizational structure to be employed for implementing and controlling the LMI process. Included in this description shall be the Contractor's review, including the data obtained from analyses such as Level of Repair; Design Interface and Support Analyses, and Failure Mode Effects and Criticality Analysis (FMECA). The plan shall include:

· The development and delivery of a Reliability Centered Maintenance Summary developed from the current Navy web based program (Integrated Reliability Centered Maintenance Software - IRCMS)

· Develop and deliver, a Phased Support Plan

· The Logistics Planning Schedule

· Any other information deemed necessary to describe the Contractor’s logistics support process

CDRL XXXX

3.9.3.1.2 Logistics Planning Schedule

The Contractor shall develop a Logistics Planning Schedule that ensures ILS data and support will be available to support installation, testing, and maintenance of the E-6B carbon brake modification.

3.9.3.1.3 LMI Data Requirements

The LMI approach shall be the single, analytical effort that interfaces with the systems engineering process to identify logistic support resources. Technical information required herein shall be developed in Microsoft Access for LMI data products and in Microsoft Word for text files.

3.9.3.1.4 Indentured Product Codes (IPC)

IPCs shall be assigned to all systems, subsystems, assemblies, subassemblies, piece parts, common items, and bulk items in a physical top-down breakdown order traceable to the engineering drawings and associated lists. Where control drawings (specification, source, vendor item, etc) are identified on the engineering drawings or associated lists, IPCs shall be assigned to the control drawing and the manufacturer’s part number will be listed as an additional reference number. Attaching hardware shall be documented at the same indenture as the item that it is attaching and will be assigned the next logical IPC following the IPC of the item being attached. The break-down of unaltered or unmodified COTS items are exempt from these requirements; altered or modified COTS and any new development items are not exempt, regardless of the item’s maintenance concept.

In the event that the system or subsystem functional breakdown, as indicated in Reliability / Maintainability documents, differs from the physical breakdown, functional IPCs and physical IPCs shall be assigned and each functional IPC correlated to a physical IPC.

The IPC for any identified support equipment shall be assigned a unique IPC, separate from the IPC’s representing components of the end item. The Contractor shall ensure that sub-Contractor and vendor IPC’s are compatible with the Government's IPC system. IPC assignments shall consider the addition of components due to design change. The re-sequencing of IPC after initial assignment shall be approved by the Government.

CDRL XXXX

3.9.3.1.5 Logistic Support Analysis (LSA)

The Contractor shall conduct a detailed analysis of operations and maintenance tasks to the depth necessary to identify the procedural steps required for task accomplishment. A Reliability Centered Maintenance (RCM) Analysis shall be conducted with the Navy approved tool (Integrated Reliability Centered Maintenance Software - IRCMS). The analysis shall consider the use of RCM for a system-based methodical approach to determine causes of failure, failure consequences, and to identify the most applicable and effective maintenance task(s). The Contractor shall address appropriate use of proactive maintenance technologies embodied in diagnostics and prognostics.

CDRL XXXX

3.9.3.2 Maintainability Requirements

The Contractor shall perform, and document the results of an analysis that identifies tasks that must be accomplished to operate and maintain Carbon Brake and Wheel Assembly systems. The analysis shall identify resources required to complete those tasks. Corrective maintenance tasks shall be identified for all failure modes that are identified during the FMECA process. Applicable scheduled maintenance tasks shall be supported by RCM analysis. The RCM analyses shall be conducted using the Government’s web based Integrated Reliability Centered Maintenance Software (IRCMS).

The carbon brake and wheel assembly shall be designed and constructed to satisfy the following qualitative maintainability requirements:

3.9.3.2.1. It shall be a requirement that Navy personnel can perform all flight line maintenance tasks. Support equipment, tools, and test equipment required for repair and overhaul shall be standard Navy items to the maximum extent possible.

3.9.3.2.2. The design of repairable items and their components shall be such that the items may be supported by replacement of interchangeable parts or subassemblies.

3.9.3.2.3. Modules or components that perform a common function shall be interchangeable to the greatest extent possible.

3.9.3.2.4. Wheels shall be such that preflight, post-flight, and phase inspections can be accomplished on aircraft by visual inspection methods requiring no disassembly to the maximum extent possible.

3.9.3.2.5. The time/tire change counter shall be located so as to be directly readable without mirrors or any other devices, at any point of wheel rotation.

3.9.3.2.6. The wheel halves shall be so balanced that no possible rotational index shall effect balance of the complete wheel and bearings assembly beyond the requirements of this performance specification or shall be so designed that assembly in proper index only can be made.

3.9.3.2.7. The wheels shall carry suitable wording, warning against loosening of the wheel tie bolts without first releasing tire pressure.

3.9.3.2.8. Bleeder valves and service tubing connections shall be readily accessible on-aircraft.

3.9.3.2.9. The wheels shall contain a pressure relief device to prevent over-inflation of the tire.

3.9.3.3 Maintainability Demonstration

The Contractor shall provide a Maintainability Predictions Report describing the maintainability design and testing. The Contractor shall perform a Remove and Replacement (R&R) demonstration with Government participation of all carbon brakes modification equipment. The demonstration shall verify that the installation shall not degrade the maintainability of the E-6 aircraft.

CDRL A028

3.9.4 Supply Support

The Contractor shall provide all elements required, as defined in the LMI product data, to properly establish the infrastructure to provision fleet assets. The Contractor shall identify all Supply Support requirements including all management actions, procedures, and techniques necessary to acquire, catalog, receive, store, transfer, issue and dispose of secondary items. This includes identifying provisioning for initial support, as well as acquiring, distributing and replenishing inventory spares and parts and planning. The Contractor shall notify the Government immediately, in writing, when Original Equipment Manufacturers do not intend to provide provisioning data and recommend alternate methods of furnishing the necessary provisioning data. The following shall be included at a minimum:

• Identification and acquisition of all spares and parts necessary to support the carbon brakes modification at the organizational level of maintenance;

• Consumable and Bulk Items List;

• Initial Support Items List; and

• Acquire, distribute and replenish inventory spare and repair parts.

CDRL A030

3.9.4.1 Interim Support Items Lists (ISIL)

The Contractor shall provide data elements for entry into the LMI Database for the development of an Interim Support Item List (ISIL) of recommended spares, including vendor items, to support new or modified Carbon Brake and Wheel Assembly systems during the interim period. The data elements, required to be delivered with the submission of the LMI data, are: Item Name, CAGE, Part Number, Mean Time Between Failure (MTBF), Mean Time Between Failure Measurement Base (MTBFMB), Production Lead Time (PLT), Price, Items per assembly, Item category code, Items per end item and Source, Maintenance and Recoverability (SM&R) code. The interim supply support period begins concurrently with the delivery of the first new or modified system and continues until the system Material Support Date (MSD) is achieved. During the interim supply support period, the Navy’s Interim Supply Support (ISS) system will manage spares through the provisioning process until MSD is achieved. The Contractor shall use the Navy’s ISS system as a destination for all spare assets.

CDRL XXXX

3.9.4.2 Marking of Components

Marking of all components shall be in accordance with MIL-STD-130N or best commercial practices.

3.9.4.3 Item Unique Identification Data (IUID)

The Contractor shall assign Item Unique Identification Data (IUID) to Weapons Replaceable Assemblies (WRAs) as well as embedded subassemblies, components or parts that may be serial item number managed, mission essential or a controlled inventory item in accordance with existing regulations. The list of identified WRAs, subassemblies, components or embedded parts that may require an IUID shall be delivered for Government review/concurrence.

3.9.4.4 Initial Spares List

The contractor shall develop an Initial Spares List that identifies all spare components, assemblies, subassemblies and miscellaneous repair parts required to support the Maintenance Trainer and preproduction aircraft through the completion of modification.

CDRL XXXX

3.9.4.5 Packaging, Handling, Storage and Transportation (PHS&T) The Contractor shall develop Packaging Requirements, including Packaging Requirements Codes, for all new items in accordance with “Best Commercial Practices”. The Contractor shall develop packaging requirement data for all new, procurable source code items. The Contractor shall assign, to the maximum extent possible, existing, reusable, multi-application containers for packaging Depot Level Repairable items. The Contractor shall mark packages in accordance with MIL-STD-129N: Marking for Shipment and Storage. The Contractor shall provide the DAPML a list of candidates for new specialized containers. The Contractor shall not design specialized reusable containers for any item without prior written authorization from the Government. The Contractor shall label and certify that hazardous materials, excluding radioactive materials and compressed gas, have passed United Nations Performance-Oriented Packaging (POP) tests specified in the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) Dangerous Goods Technical Instructions. The Contractor shall prepare POP reports and submit to the DAPML for CLS-managed Depot Level Repairable (DLR’s) and Organizational and Depot Level explosives, if any exist.

3.9.4.6 Hazardous Material

The Contractor shall identify hazardous materials, prepare Material Safety Data Sheets (MSDS) and provide them to the CLS Manager. The Contractor shall preserve, package, pack and mark hazardous material in accordance with the requirements of Title 49, Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) and comply with additional marking and labeling requirements of Title 29, CFR 1910, 1200.

CDRL XXXX

3.9.4.7 Engineering Change Proposals

The Contractor’s PHS&T Logistics Element Manager shall review Engineering Change Proposals (ECPs) to ensure impacts on PHS&T are adequately addressed for Navy approval.

3.9.4.8 Electrostatic Discharge Sensitive Materials

All items susceptible to damage or degradation of performance from electrostatic discharge (ESD) and/or electromagnetic forces will be protected to preclude such damage or degradation, using MIL-HDBK-263B for guidance.

3.9.4.9 Plastics Removal in Marine Environment (PRIME)

The Contractor shall ensure that only non-plastic materials are used for items entering the supply system except in cases where non-plastic packaging materials are incapable of providing required protection.

3.9.4.10 Damage Reporting

The Contractor shall report damage to E-6B DAPML during forward or retrograde shipment to any location. Notification shall be accomplished, in writing, within 5 working days of discovery.

3.9.4.11 CDC Detailed Requirements

The Contractor shall collect Carbon Brake and Wheel Assembly system failure data pertaining to design and qualification testing, all item acceptance tests, and data required to verify the system effectiveness requirements such as supportability, maintainability, and reliability. The Contractor shall document each system fault or failure experienced during prototyping, testing, integration, installation, follow-on testing and evaluation, and initial deployment of the system.

The Contractor shall also record and report all of the following as they occur or are discovered:

a. Equipment damage sustained during shipment.

b. Equipment damage sustained in the laboratory, regardless of the cause.

c. Equipment failures during operation or testing.

d. Aircraft installation related problems, including but not limited to: improper wiring, bonding and grounding, hardware and software compatibility, corrosion, and damage sustained by system elements during installation.

e. Equipment damage sustained while installed aboard the aircraft due to location and operator or maintainer error.

f. Operator and maintainer abnormalities, regardless of the cause, but with special attention to operation and maintenance procedure related problems.

Every report shall include:

a. Location of incident.

b. Suspected cause of anomaly.

c. Methodology used to identify and isolate the fault.

d. Corrective action taken or recommended.

e. Logistics resources required to correct discrepancy.

f. Time required isolating and correcting discrepancy (expressed in man-hours).

CDRL XXXX

3.9.5 Support Equipment (SE)

The Contractor shall deliver all equipment to support the carbon brakes modification. This includes all equipment required to install, take-off, land, inspect, test, adjust, calibrate, appraise, gauge, measure, assemble, disassemble, handle, transport, safeguard, store, actuate, service, repair, maintain, or operate the End Item, system, subsystem, equipment or component. SE includes ground stations, Automatic Test Equipment (ATE) hardware and software, and ATE Test Program Sets (TPSs), as defined by MIL-HBDK-2097A. Logistics support documentation for SE shall be based upon and traceable to the supportability analysis and include a listing of specific equipment required to be provided or utilized by a Depot repair facility.

The Contractor shall identify Support Equipment requirements in sufficient detail to allow the Government to determine the actual need for SE for the Carbon Brake and Wheel Assembly system. The Contractor shall report known or anticipated SE prior to formal LMI product data and maintenance planning when design and procurement lead-time considerations dictate a need for recommending the SE item in a timely manner, such as to meet test, evaluation, or operational requirements. The Contractor shall provide and support all SE required for pre-operational and interim support through modification of the fleet.

CDRL XXXX

3.9.5.1 Support Equipment Candidate List (SECL)

Any peculiar support equipment (PSE) or common support equipment (CSE) requirements shall be identified by type designator, part number, manufacturer, and nomenclature with reference to the applicable line in the maintenance plan. This includes associated multi-use end items, ground handling and maintenance equipment, tools, metrology and calibration equipment, test equipment, automatic test equipment, and items with special maintenance considerations such as portable computers and software programs to setup, diagnose, or monitor the End Item. If there is a requirement for SE, the Contractor shall generate a Support Equipment Candidate List (SECL) for approval by the Government. The approved SECL shall identify all pre-production SE that is to be delivered and evaluated during Government testing.

CDRL A023

3.9.5.1.1 Special and/or Hand Tool List

If there is a requirement for Special and/or Hand Tools, the Contractor shall generate a Special and/or Hand Tool List for approval by the Government and include it in the SECL.

CDRL A023

3.9.5.1.2 Support Equipment Recommendation Data (SERD)

The Contractor shall ensure that Support Equipment Recommendation Data (SERD) documents the necessary requirements for support in the SECL. Data shall be current and include a validated non-proliferation check.