Brakes SOW 5 April 2010.doc

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

Attachment (1)

STATEMENT OF WORK

E-6 BRAKES MODIFICATION

5 April 2010

41.0 Scope

41.1 Background

42.0 Applicable Documents

42.1 Government Specifications and Standards

52.2 Other Government Documents

62.3 Non-Government Documents

63.0 Requirements

73.1. Reserved

83.2 Base Period Requirements

93.2.1 Operating Envelope and expected usage

9Storage

9Operating realm

93.2.2.1 Design Review #1 (DR#1)

103.2.2.2 Final Design Review

113.3 Base Period Qualification Report / Brake Torque Characterization Data (BTCD)

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

123.5 Program Management

133.5.1 Integrated Product Team (IPT) Development Approach

133.5.2 Program Planning and Control

133.5.3 Program Reviews

133.5.4 Program Meetings

153.5.5 Risk Management

153.5.5.1 Risk Areas

153.5.6 Integrated Master Plan (IMP)/Integrated Master Schedule (IMS)

153.6 Conversion Kits

163.7 Aircraft Accessibility and Availability

163.8 Logistics

163.8.1 Logistics Elements

163.8.2 Design Interface/Maintenance Planning and Supportability Analyses

173.8.3 Maintenance Planning

183.8.3.1 Logistics Management Information (LMI)

183.8.3.1.2 Logistics Planning Schedule

183.8.3.1.3 LMI Data Requirements

193.8.3.1.4 Indentured Product Codes (IPC)

193.8.3.1.5 Logistic Support Analysis (LSA)

203.8.3.2 Maintainability Requirements

203.8.3.3 Maintainability Demonstration

203.8.4 Supply Support

213.8.4.1 Interim Support Items Lists (ISIL)

213.8.4.2 Marking of Components

213.8.4.3 Item Unique Identification Data (IUID)

233.8.4.4 Packaging, Handling, Storage and Transportation (PHS&T)

233.8.4.5 Hazardous Material

233.8.4.6 Failure Reporting, Analysis, and Corrective Action System (FRACAS)

233.8.4.7 Electrostatic Discharge Sensitive Materials

243.8.4.8 Plastics Removal in Marine Environment (PRIME)

243.8.4.9 Damage Reporting

243.8.5 Support Equipment (SE)

253.8.5.1 Identification of Support Equipment (SE)

263.8.5.2 Calibration/Measurement Requirement Information (CMRI)

273.8.5.3 Technical Manuals for Support Equipment

273.8.5.4 Maintenance Tool Control Program

273.8.6 Technical Data

273.8.6.1 Description and Specifications of Source Data

283.8.7 Quality Requirements

283.8.7.1 Quality Assurance Engineering

293.8.8 Configuration Management

293.8.8.1 Documentation (Hardware and Software)

293.8.8.2 Configuration Control

303.8.8.3 Configuration Identification

303.8.8.4 Deviations

303.8.8.5 Configuration Status Accounting

313.8.8.6 Configuration Audits

313.8.8.6.1 Functional Configuration Audit (FCA)

323.8.8.6.2 Physical Configuration Audit (PCA)

323.8.8.7 Weight and Balance

333.9 NATOPS Manual Support

333.10 Brake Temperature Monitoring System (BTMS)

343.10.1 BTMS Documentation

343.11 Installation

353.12 Prototype Testing

363.12.1 Prototype Scheduled Maintenance, Repairs Incidental to Modification (RIM), and “Over and Aboves”

363.12.2 Prototype Test Report

363.13 System Engineering

363.13.1 Performance Specification

373.13.2 Government Flight Test Evaluation Articles

373.13.3 Brake Thermal Analysis

373.13.4 Component Level Stress Analysis

373.14 Scheduled Maintenance, Repairs Incidental to Modification (RIM) and “Over and Aboves”

393.16 Option Period Requirements:

393.17 Aircraft Accessibility and Availability

393.18 (OPTION) Contractor Performed Installations

403.19 Scheduled Maintenance, Repairs Incidental to Modification (RIM) and “Over and Aboves”

1.0 Scope

This Statement of Work (SOW) defines the effort required to integrate new brakes, wheels, and radial tires onto the United States (US) Navy model E-6 aircraft.

The Contractor shall conduct an engineering analysis, qualification testing, develop design changes and perform integration of a reduced weight braking system. Although the E-6 airframe might necessitate unique design characteristics, the contractor shall maximize the use of Government Off The Shelf (GOTS) components in order to minimize Total Ownership Cost (TOC).

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 from the main operating base at Tinker Air Force Base (AFB) and forward operating bases (Travis AFB, Offutt AFB and Naval Air Station (NAS) Patuxent River). The E-6 shares logistics with US Air Force Boeing 707 platforms, including the KC-135, E-3, and E-8, in order to reduce Government sustainment and support costs.

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 most current revision of items in Sections 2.1 through 2.3 shall be utilized unless noted. 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 new brakes, wheels, and radial tires. This includes engineering, logistics, trainer support, “over and aboves”, repairs incident to modification, and providing all the source data for the Government to perform revisions to technical publications, and modifications to trainers.

The modification shall not decrease landing or takeoff performance; all current landing distances must be met or decreased as stated in E-6B Weapons Systems Performance Specification SD-569-1-4. The modification shall utilize the design requirements as stated in Attachment (2), E-6B Brakes Modification Performance Specification or brakes with the same specifications that could be used interchangeably; thus adhering to the same form, fit, function, and performance. The 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 information provided by the Contractor for this requirement will be used by the Government for the Government preparation of an Engineering Change Proposal (ECP) and Technical Directive (TD). The Contractor shall provide the Government the information necessary to prepare and carry out the ECP and TD. The Contractor shall deliver all data in accordance with contract requirements.

Base Period

The Contractor shall perform engineering and design analysis to prove the selected brakes and tires can be incorporated on the E-6 aircraft without reducing aircraft performance as stated in SD-569-1-4 and Attachment (2). The Contractor shall assemble two (2) conversion kits for the E-6 Brake Program: 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 this 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.

Option Periods 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.

3.1. Reserved

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 design requirements as stated in Attachment (2) E-6B Brakes Modification Performance Specification 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 furnish and install brakes, wheels, and radial tires, along with all required hardware. The Contractor shall assemble two (2) conversion kits for the E-6 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 brake, wheel, and tire assemblies to include logistics support identified in this section.

During the Base Period, the Contractor shall provide all associated wiring, thermocouples, temperature probes, and Brake Temperature Monitoring Units (BTMUs), up to and including the BTMU, for two (2) aircraft. The Contractor shall install the first BTMS (not including the wiring from the BTMU to the cockpit display devices) onto the prototype (i.e. test) aircraft only. The Contractor shall also include all engineering drawings and electrical information of the thermocouples and BTMU in order to facilitate Government BTMS installation of the rest of the 15 aircraft.

Modification to the existing E-6B hydraulic system shall meet SAE AS5440.

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

Structural (Strength/Stress) requirements are specified in SD-569-1-4. 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 with 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 the current tire 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.

The BTMS kits shall be included in the base period to be installed by the Government. The BTMS kits shall include all thermocouples, connectors, associated wiring, screws, nuts, bolts, electrical harnesses, and control boxes. The BTMS kits shall NOT include the digital cockpit display.

3.2.1 Operating Envelope and expected usage

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

Storage: -80°F to +185°F.

Operating realm: -65°F to +160°F, from sea level to 50,000 feet.

3.2.1.2 Each of the 16 Aircraft are expected to fly 950 hrs and perform 185 full stop landings per year through the year 2040. The minimum landing weight is approximately 205,000 pounds and the max non-emergency landing weight is approximately 250,000 pounds. Maximum weight is approximately 342,000 pounds. Average takeoff weight is 295,000 pounds.

3.2.2.1 Design Review #1 (DR#1)

Design Review #1 shall be held as stated in the Contractor’s proposed schedule, but no later than twelve (12) 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 Description and Performance Specification with compliance matrix (CDRLs A003 and A041) Preliminary architecture for the brake control system in AutoCAD format (CDRL A010) Preliminary weight and balance impact of the wheel and brake upgrade. (CDRL A011) Analysis shall include:

* 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) Preliminary thermal analysis of brake, wheel, tire, and surrounding hardware (CDRL A043)

· Preliminary analysis of Radial tire suitability to include at a minimum: (CDRL A038)

· 1. Tire size recommendation (46"X17" or 49"X17" or other size).

· Dimensions of the static "cold" (normal air temperature) tire, including ultimate static load.

· Dimensions of dynamic "hot" tire during run-up and take-off.

· Clearances of tire in wheel well when landing gear is up.

· 2. Loads analysis on radial tire.

· 3. Attitude and handling characteristics and/or limitations of radial tire

Preliminary stress/strength analysis (static, fatigue, dynamic) (part of CDRLs A002 and A035) Preliminary Failure Modes, Effects, and Criticality Analysis (FMECA) of the Wheel and

Brake Upgrade (CDRL A005) Brake Comparison Performance Data Plan (CDRL A021)

Flight Test Plan (CDRL A037) Ground Test Plan (CDRL A037)

· Integrated Master Plan/Integrated Master Schedule (CDRL A012)

· Risk Mitigation Plan (CDRL A012) CDRL A002 for DR#1 Report

3.2.2.2 Final Design Review

Final Design Review shall be held as stated in the Contractor’s proposed schedule; however, the final design review shall be held within twelve (12) months after contract award. This meeting shall serve as a review of the Contractor’s final technical design to be qualified. Final design review shall include at a minimum.

An established system product baseline An updated risk assessment (CDRL A012) An updated program development schedule (CDRL A012) An updated thermal analysis (CDRL A043)

An updated stress analysis (part of CDRLs A008 and A035)

Updated Weight and Balance Report (CDRL A011) Updated Bill of Materials (CDRL A004) Updated Removed / Replaced / Modified Parts Lists (CDRL A006)

Update to the System-Level Description and Performance Specification with compliance matrix (CDRLs A003 and A041) Qualification Plan (CDRL A013) Flight Test Plan (CDRL A037) Ground Test Plan (CDRL A037) Updated FMECA (CDRL A005)

System Safety Evaluation (SSE) (CDRL A019) Anti-skid system evaluation (CDRL A028) Technical Manual changes (CDRL A032) Aircraft Flight Manual changes (CDRL A027)

· Updated Engineering Drawings and Associated Lists (CDRL A010) Flight test hardware requirements; cost and lead time (CDRL A029) CDRL A008 for Final Design Review Report

3.2.3 Stop Performance Predictions

The Contractor shall deliver to the Government a Stop Performance Prediction. The Stop Performance Prediction shall be delivered in the Contractor’s own format. The Stop Performance Predictions shall include, at a minimum, the following:

1. Estimated landing distances based on gross weights in 5,000 lb. intervals starting at a landing weight of 200,000 lbs. up to a weight of 345,000 lbs.

2. Estimated maximum energy limit.

3. Minimum static torque at full brake pressure.

4. Whether anti-skid modification is needed (if applicable).

5. Minimum structural torque with and without Anti- skid.

6. Estimated kinetic energy as a function of landing (or taxi) speed, in 5 MPH increments, up to the maximum worn rejected take-off.

7. Estimated core temperatures of the brake disks as a function of landing (or taxi) speed based on a full application of the brakes.

CDRL A007

3.3 Base Period Qualification Report / Brake Torque Characterization Data (BTCD) Provide a qualification report that demonstrates full compliance with the E-6 Performance Specification, SD-569-1-4. 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.

The Contractor shall provide BTCD to the Government. The BTCD will contain a comparison to the current steel braking system. The BTCD shall contain a list of test results per Performance Specification (Brake Normal and Overload Test). The BTCD may be formatted in Contractor format.

CDRL A022 BTCD

CDRL A031 Qualification Report

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-1629 series, 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 provide this support through the last aircraft modified.

CDRL A005

3.5 Program Management

The following Program Management sections are also applicable to the Option Periods 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 principal point(s) 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. IPT 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:

3.5.5 Risk Management

The Contractor shall develop and maintain a Risk Management Plan for the E-6B 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.

3.5.5.1 Risk Areas

The following are some known areas of technical risk experienced on other platforms that changed from steel brakes to a lighter design. The Contractor shall include, at a minimum, mitigations for these areas in their risk mitigation plan:

a. Heat Shield Cracking

b. Rubber Bumpers Cracking/Dissolving

c. Rubber Seating Area Cracking

d. Frozen Brakes

e. Wheel Drive Key Spacer Grinding

f. Other risk concerns that the Contractor deems necessary

CDRL A012

3.5.6 Integrated Master Plan (IMP)/Integrated Master Schedule (IMS) The Contractor shall manage the execution of the 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 A012

3.6 Conversion Kits

The Contractor shall furnish two (2) conversion kits as follows:

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

3.6.2 Eight (8) wheels.

3.6.3 Eight (8) brake sets.

3.6.4 Eight (8) radial tires.

3.6.5 Parts/Inventory list (hard copy and in electronic format; Microsoft Word 2003-compatible).

3.6.6 Spares to support the test aircraft after install.

3.6.7 BTMS Components, including wiring, connectors, BTMU, thermocouples, etc. (but not including the components as explained in Section 3.2 above).

3.7 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.

3.8 Logistics

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

3.8.1 Logistics Elements

The following paragraphs present those minimum performance factors that will be implemented for the Brakes program.

3.8.2 Design Interface/Maintenance Planning and Supportability Analyses

To be operationally suitable, weapons systems must be able to be effectively operated and maintained by operational and maintenance personnel. Design considerations such as reliability, maintainability, and logistics must be adequately considered and not compromised during the acquisition process.

Design Interface defines and specifies measurable “design to” requirements to ensure developing systems and equipment are designed for supportability to meet system readiness objectives.

The Contractor shall provide all design parameters that impact readiness and logistics resource requirements. These design parameters shall be expressed in operational terms rather than inherent values, and shall specifically relate system readiness objectives to support costs of the system. Some examples of these design parameters are:

Supportability Analysis (SA) employs analytical techniques to determine logistics support requirements. 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 brakes, new and modified, as well as 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. Additionally, the Supportability Analysis will identify the estimated annual Operations and Support (O&S) cost based on the operational parameters established to support the planning required for long term sustainment of the product with the goal of reducing the life cycle O&S cost for the platform. Corrective maintenance tasks shall be identified for all failure modes. Preventative maintenance tasks shall be identified to safely maintain the system at Full Mission Capability (FMC). The following, at a minimum, are required:

Provision of the information necessary to facilitate supportability analysis;

Provision of the information necessary to support comprehensive Configuration Management;

Provision of the data necessary to identify and justify the logistics support requirements (people, parts, pubs, tools, and test equipment) to support corrective and preventative maintenance tasks; and

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

CDRL A030

3.8.3 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 Brakes modification, including the associated procedural steps and support resources. The following, at a minumum, shall include:

Comprehensive and accurate Supportability Analysis 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 A030

3.8.3.1 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 series. The Contractor shall supply LMI Data Product Elements per CDRL A030 with Attachment 2 – LMI Data Requirements, and Attachment 3 – Data Product Definitions.

3.8.3.1.1 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

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

CDRL A030

3.8.3.1.2 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 brake modification.

3.8.3.1.3 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.

CDRL A030

3.8.3.1.4 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. Control drawings shall be marked in accordance with Attachment 1– Product Drawing List to CDRL A030. 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 A030

3.8.3.1.5 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.

CDRLs A030 AND A005

3.8.3.2 Maintainability Requirements

The Contractor shall perform, and document the results of an analysis that identifies tasks that must be accomplished to operate and maintain 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 IRCMS.

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

3.8.3.2.1. 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.

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

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

3.8.3.2.4. Brakes, wheels and tires 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.

3.8.3.2.5. 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.

3.8.3.2.6. The wheel halves (if so equipped) 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.

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

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

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

3.8.3.3 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 brakes modification equipment. The demonstration shall verify that the installation shall not degrade the maintainability of the E-6 aircraft.

CDRL A009

3.8.4 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 provide projected spares recommendations based on supportability analysis to support Fleet operations based on current operational trends. 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 brakes modification at the organizational level of maintenance;

Consumable and Bulk Items List;

Initial Support Items List (ISIL); and

Acquire, distribute and replenish inventory spare and repair parts.

CDRL A030

3.8.4.1 Interim Support Items Lists (ISIL)

The Contractor shall provide data elements for entry into the LMI Database for the development of an ISIL of recommended spares, including vendor items, to support new or modified 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 A030

3.8.4.2 Marking of Components

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

3.8.4.3 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 shall 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.

Marking or Labeling Tangible Items with Unique Item Identification

a. Item Unique Identification (IUID) labeling or part marking shall be designed into each part requiring a Unique Item Identifier (UII) per DFARS 211.274/DFARS Clause 252.211-7003, as contained in Section I of the contract.

b. Per DFARS 252.211-7003 (c) (4) (i) (B), the following UII mark or label criteria are provided, utilizing MIL-STD-130L w/CHANGE 1; and tailored, as per paragraph 1.3 of MIL-STD-130L w/CHANGE 1. In addition, per DFARS 252.211-7003 (g), these same criteria shall be applied to all subcontracts where DFARS 252.211-7003 paragraph (c) (1) applies.

IUID 2D Data Matrix Labeling or Marking Criteria

a. The UII shall be a discrete data string composed of the data elements/characters defined by MIL-STD-130L w/CHANGE 1. Construct #2 is preferred. The IUID 2D Data Matrix containing the UII of a part shall be a discrete, stand-alone label or mark containing the UII data elements string. The UII data elements and its’ 2D Data Matrix will be a permanent, indelible mark, that does not change with configuration changes and subsequent part number changes to the configuration item [See MIL-STD-130L w/Change 1, paragraph 4.8.1].

b. The 2D Data Matrix Machine Readable Symbology shall be as follows:

i. Data Matrix Symbology Specification: ECC 200 per ISO/IEC 16022, which uses Reed-Solomon error correction.

ii. Syntax: ISO/IEC 15434

iii. Semantics: ISO/IEC 15418, Format 06 - Data Identifiers (DI)

1. Use DI 17V for CAGE

2. Use DI S for Serial Number

3. Use DI 1P for Original Part Number

SHAPE \* MERGEFORMAT

c. The Issuing Agency Code of D (for CAGE) should be utilized in the UII data string.

d. Human Readable Information:

i. Not required for the IUID 2D Data Matrix’s embedded UII data element(s).

e. Minimum cell size and quality: Should meet or exceed the minimum requirements of MIL-STD-130L w/CHANGE 1, paragraph 4.4.2 through 4.4.2.2

f. Permanency and legibility: The IUID 2D Data Matrix should be of a type so as to conform to MIL-STD-130L w/CHANGE 1, paragraph 4.5.

3.8.4.4 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.