LONG_-_Statement_of_Work.doc

ENG SOW: Liquid Oxygen/Nitrogen Generator

30 July 2013

NAVAIR LAKEHURST

PMA260C21/3070

Engineering Statement Of Work

FOR THE

Liquid Oxygen/Nitrogen Generator Naval Air Systems Command

Naval Air Warfare Center, Aircraft Division

SE and ALRE Department

SE and ALRE Systems Engineering Division

Lakehurst, New Jersey 08733-5109

30 July 2013 Prepared For:

Commander, Naval Air Systems Command

PMA260

Patuxent River, MD 20670 Revision History

Table of Contents Scope

11.1 Purpose

11.2 Objectives

11.3 Background

Applicable Documents

Requirements

23.1 Post Award Conference

33.2 Safety

33.2.1 System Safety Hazard Analysis

43.2.2 System Waivers

43.3 Quality Assurance

43.3.1 Quality Management

53.3.2 Quality Assurance Program Plan

53.4 Hazardous Materials Management

53.4.1 Hazardous Materials management Program

53.4.2 Hazardous Materials Management Program Plan

53.4.3 Hazardous Materials Management Program Report

63.4.4 Sub-Contractors, Vendors and Suppliers

63.5 Lithium Batteries

63.6 Reliability and Maintainability (R&M) Program

63.7 Reliability Modeling and Predictions

63.8 Maintainability Modeling and Predictions

73.9 Technical Data Package

73.10 Systems Engineering Technical Reviews

73.10.1 Contractor SETR Responsibilities

73.10.2 System Requirements Review-II/Preliminary Design Review

83.10.3 Critical Design Review

93.10.4 Contractor Test Review

103.10.5 System Verification Review/Production Readiness Review

113.11 Technical Interchange Meetings

113.12 Testing

113.12.1 Pilot Production Test Program

113.12.1.1 Pilot Production Testing I

123.12.1.2 Pilot Production Testing II

123.12.1.3 Failure Reporting, Analysis and Corrective Action System

123.12.1.4 Independent Government Testing

123.12.1.5 Deficiency Reports

133.12.2 Production Acceptance Test Program

133.12.2.1 Production Acceptance Test Procedures

133.12.2.2 Production Acceptance Test Report

133.13 Full-Rate Production Unit Delivery

133.14 Contract Data Requirements List

133.14.1 Data Item Numbers

133.14.2 Distribution Statements

143.15 Logistics

IAppendix A: Acronyms & Abbreviations

IIIAppendix B: Technical Data Package Option Selection Worksheet

Tables and Figures Tables

Table 1: Hazard Risk Criteria

Figures

Figure 1: TDP Option Selection Worksheet

Engineering Statement Of Work For The Liquid Oxygen/Nitrogen Generator 1 Scope

1.1 Purpose

The purpose of this document is to establish instructions for contract deliverables for NAVAIR Systems Engineering. All reference to “days” herein shall be considered calendar days.

1.2 Objectives

The contractor shall provide a design that satisfies requirements in the System Specification (SS), PMA260C21/3014, Engineering Statement of Work (SOW), and the Acquisition Logistics Support Statement of Work (ALSSOW), NAWCADLKE CRYO CS-260-267(S).

1.3 Background

The Navy’s new Liquid Oxygen/Nitrogen Generator (herein referred to as “the generator”) will serve as a replacement for the Liquid O2/N2 Generating Plant. The generator will be used at overseas locations to provide Aviators’ Breathing Oxygen (ABO) as well as nitrogen used for various situations in which an inert gas is required.

2 Applicable Documents

Below is a list of external documents applicable to this SOW. This SOW takes precedence if a conflict exists between this SOW and any other document specified herein. Equivalent or better specifications and standards may be substituted upon approval of the Navy. The revision listed below shall be used unless otherwise specified.

Government

Standards

MIL-STD-31000

Technical Data Packages

MIL-STD-882E

System Safety Report Requirements

Manuals

NAVSEA S9310-AQ-SAF-010

Technical Manual for Batteries, Navy Lithium Safety

Program Responsibilities and Procedures

Specifications

PMA260C21/3014

System Specification for the Liquid Oxygen/Nitrogen

Generator

Handbooks

MIL-HDBK-217

Reliability Prediction of Electronic Equipment

MIL-HDBK-470A

Designing and Developing Maintainable Products and

Systems

MIL-HDBK-781

Reliability Test Methods, Plans, and Environments for

Engineering, Development Qualification, and Production

MIL-HDBK-2155

Failure Reporting, Analysis and Corrective Action Taken

Data Item Descriptions

DI-ADMN-81250A

Conference Minutes

DI-MGMT-81398

Hazardous Materials Management Program Plan

DI-MISC-81397

Hazardous Materials Management Program Report

DI-MNTY-81602

Maintainability Predictions Report

DI-NDTI-80809B

Test/Inspection Report

DI-NDTI-81307

First Article Qualification Test Plan

DI-RELI-81497

Reliability Prediction and Documentation of Supporting

Data

DI-SAFT-80101B

System Safety Hazard Analysis

DI-SESS-81002E

Developmental Design Drawings/Models and

Associated Lists

DI-SESS-81003D

Commercial Drawings/Models and Associated

Lists

DI-SESS-81315B

Failure Analysis and Corrective Action Report

DI-SESS-81613

Reliability Maintainability Program Plan

Other

NAWCADLKE CRYO CS-260-267(S)

Acquisition Logistics Support Statement of Work for the

Liquid Oxygen/Nitrogen Generator Non-Government

ANSI/ISO/ASQ Q9001-2008

Quality management Systems Requirements Standard

ISO 10005:2005

Quality Management Systems - Guidelines for Quality

Plans

SAE JA1000

Reliability Program Standard

SAE JA1000-1

Reliability Program Standard Implementation Guide

SAE JA1010-1

Maintainability Program Standard Implementation Guide

ASME Y14.34

Associated Lists

NAS 411, NASC #7013

Hazardous Materials Management Program 3 Requirements

3.1 Post Award Conference

Within 20 Days After Contract Award (DAC), the contractor shall host a Post Award Conference (PAC). The PAC provides the contractor with an introduction to the government Integrated Product Team (IPT) and establishes a formal and informal means of communication. This meeting will include a full review of the Integrated Master Schedule (IMS) (Contract Data Requirements List [CDRL] LB03) to ensure agreement between both parties. Additionally, any preliminary questions or concerns that the contractor has with regard to the requirements of the contract may be discussed at this time.

3.2 Safety

The contractor shall perform all work under this contract in full compliance with all applicable Federal, State, and local environmental and occupational safety and health regulations. In addition, the contractor shall be responsible for ensuring that all vendors, suppliers, and subcontractors similarly perform all work under this contract in full compliance with all applicable Federal, State, and local environmental and occupational safety and health regulations.

3.2.1 System Safety Hazard Analysis

The contractor shall perform and document a system safety hazard analyses to identify potential system hazards and all safety features of the hardware/software system design and to identify procedural, hardware and software related hazards that may be present in the system including specific procedural controls and precautions that should be followed. Each identified hazard is comprised of the expected severity and frequency of occurrence. A Hazard Risk Index (HRI) and associated risk level shall be assigned to all hazards in accordance with Table 1. The contractor shall obtain appropriate decision authority concurrence from the government for all identified hazards. The analyses shall include the identification of operating and support hazards and their controls. All phases of intended unit use, including but not limited to operation and maintenance shall be considered when incorporating safety features for the unit. System safety design guidance precedence of MIL-STD-882E shall be followed for the unit, its components, and all of its man and machine interfaces. A System Safety Hazard Analysis (SHA) shall be submitted to the procuring activity in accordance with CDRL A004.

Table 1: Hazard Risk Criteria

S E V E R I T Y

CATASTROPHIC

(1)

Death or permanent total disability; system loss or mishap damage > $10,000,000; irreversible severe environmental damage that violates law or regulation

CRITICAL

(2)

Severe injury, occupational illness, or permanent partial disability; mishap damage (> $500,000 but < $10,000,000); or irreversible environmental damage that violates law or regulation

MARGINAL

(3)

Minor injury or minor occupational illness (no permanent effect); mishap damage (> $50,000 but < $500,000);

NEGLIGIBLE

(4)

Less than minor injury or occupational illness (no lost workdays); mishap damage (< $50,000), minimal environmental damage not violating law or regulation.

(100/100K flt hrs

(P ( 1x10-3)

PROBABLE (B)

10-99/100K flt hrs

(1x10-3 ( P ( 1x10-4)

OCCASIONAL (C)

1-9.9/100K flt hrs

(1x10-4 ( P ( 1x10-5)

REMOTE (D)

0.1-0.99/100K flt hrs

(1x10-5 ( P ( 1x10-6)

IMPROBABLE (E)

(0.1/100K flt hrs

(1x10-6 ( P)

3.2.2 System Waivers

Waivers to safety requirements in the SS shall require prior and written approval of the procuring activity. Waivers will be granted only upon demonstration that the equipment has been tested in accordance with the appropriate Underwriters Laboratories (UL), government, or other industry consensus tests to demonstrate its safety for use in the military environment.

3.3 Quality Assurance

3.3.1 Quality Management

The contractor shall continually manage and improve the quality of all products and services delivered under this contract and the processes by which they are realized. The system used by the contractor to manage quality shall be compliant with all requirements of, and at a minimum be functionally equal to, a current active version of the ANSI/ISO/ASQ Q9001-2008, Quality Systems - Model for Quality Assurance in Design, Development, Production, Installation and Servicing. The Government shall have the right to audit the contractor's quality system for ANSI/ISO/ASQ Q9001-2008 compliance. The Government shall have access, for review and analysis purposes, to contractor QMS documents; raw data that have not been subjected to processing or any other manipulation; summarized, tabularized, or graphical depictions of the data; and records under this contract.

3.3.2 Quality Assurance Program Plan

The contractor shall prepare and maintain a Quality Assurance Program Plan commensurate with ISO 10005:2005, Quality Management Systems - Guidelines for Quality Plans, for product and service deliverables under this contract. The Government shall have the right to review and approve the Quality Assurance Program Plan.

3.4 Hazardous Materials Management

3.4.1 Hazardous Materials management Program

The contractor shall be responsible for maintaining an effective Hazardous Materials Management Program (HMMP) in accordance with the Aerospace Industries Association/National Aerospace Standard for the HMMP. In designing, manufacturing, testing, operating, maintaining and disposing of the unit, all forms of pollution shall be prevented or reduced whenever feasible. The emphasis shall be on eliminating or reducing hazardous materials early in the design and properly controlling hazardous materials, which cannot be eliminated. In the event that a hazardous material must be used, the contractor must have the approval of the government. Approval for use of Restricted Chemicals as defined in the SS will not be given. Approval for use of Targeted Chemicals as defined in the SS shall require documentation of absence of suitable alternative.

3.4.2 Hazardous Materials Management Program Plan

The contractor shall prepare a HMMP Plan. The plan shall be used to evaluate the contractor’s approach to, understanding of, and execution of an HMMP. (CDRL A005)

3.4.3 Hazardous Materials Management Program Report

A HMMP Report shall be prepared by the contractor in accordance with the Hazardous Materials Management Program Report (CDRL A006). The report shall contain a well defined table that identifies and lists all HAZMAT as defined in the SS. As a minimum, the following information is required.

a) HAZMAT nomenclature/name

b) Technical documentation and/or specification that require the use of the HAZMAT, if applicable

c) Name and Part Number of the component/part that contains the HAZMAT or is associated with the use/generation of the HAZMAT

d) Process associated with the use or generation of the HAZMAT

e) Material Safety Data Sheets (MSDS) for each HAZMAT

f) Chemical name(s) of hazardous component(s). (Sometimes found on MSDS)

g) Chemical Abstract Service (CAS) number(s) of each hazardous component(s)

h) Waste and disposal codes/regulations for the HAZMAT when appropriate

i) Weight of HAZMAT (as Parts Per Million (PPM) or per system/component as appropriate using best engineering judgment)

The contractor shall maintain and update this report throughout the life of the contract. Documentation justifying use of Targeted Chemicals shall also be included in the report.

3.4.4 Sub-Contractors, Vendors and Suppliers

The contractor shall ensure that all vendors and suppliers including those of sub-contractors provide all information to accurately and fully complete the HMMP requirements.

3.5 Lithium Batteries

The use of lithium batteries as a part of the generator shall be documented in accordance with NAVSEA S9310-AQ-SAF-010, “Technical Manual for Batteries, Navy Lithium Safety Program Responsibilities and Procedures.” All documentation will be submitted to the Naval Ordnance Safety and Security Activity (NOSSA) by the NAVAIR program office after the data is received from the contractor. (CDRL A007)

3.6 Reliability and Maintainability (R&M) Program

The contractor shall maintain a comprehensive R&M program to ensure that the generator meets the R&M standards set forth in the Liquid Oxygen/Nitrogen Generator SS. The overall goal of the R&M program is to proactively influence design and logistics processes in order to achieve a high level of operational availability while optimizing life cycle cost. The contractor shall deliver a Reliability and Maintainability Program Plan in accordance with CDRL A008.

The Reliability Program shall be planned and accomplished in accordance with SAE JA1000; SAE JA1000-1 Reliability Development Program Requirement R3, Activity 4.3; MIL-HDBK-781; and Section 4 of the Liquid Oxygen/Nitrogen Generator SS. The Maintainability Program shall be planned and accomplished in accordance with SAE JA1010, MIL-HDBK-470A, Section 4 of the Liquid Oxygen/Nitrogen Generator SS, and the Liquid Oxygen/Nitrogen Generator ALSSOW.

3.7 Reliability Modeling and Predictions

Reliability predictions shall be performed in accordance with SAE JA1000-1 Reliability Method A.32 to evaluate the generator design and provide inputs into logistics support analyses. The reliability prediction shall provide a prediction of Mean Time Between Failure (MTBF) for the generator. The prediction shall be based on failure rates in the environment identified in the SS for all components or assemblies. The reliability prediction shall be addressed at each design review.

Electronic component predictions can be extracted from the following sources: (1) vendor supplied, (2) like and similar correlations, both with appropriate derating applied per Reliability Information Analysis Center (RIAC) System Reliability Toolkit, or (3) calculated utilizing MIL-HDBK-217, using the parts stress method as guidance. Mechanical reliability shall be based on engineering design calculations (i.e. fatigue) where required or on historical or similar data, vendor data, or Reliability Analysis Center Non-electronic Parts Reliability Database (RAC-NPRD) data. For parts where no failure rate is available, a failure rate shall be estimated and the basis for the estimate shall be documented. Reliability prediction and documentation of supporting data shall be delivered in accordance with CDRL A009.

3.8 Maintainability Modeling and Predictions

Maintainability modeling and predictions shall be performed in accordance with SAE JA1010-1 Method C.19 to evaluate the system design in the total expected maintenance environment, to provide data to estimate the amount and level of maintenance required in the field, and to provide data to determine logistical needs of the fielded system. Results from the Failure Mode, Effects, and Criticality Analysis (FMECA) shall be used to determine maintenance tasks, and reliability prediction data will be incorporated for use in the quantitative analysis. Modeling and prediction efforts shall assume a basis of a Ground Model environment as identified in the Liquid Oxygen/Nitrogen Generator SS. These predictions shall be documented in accordance with CDRL A010.

3.9 Technical Data Package

The contractor shall develop a Technical Data Package (TDP) to support the government’s review of the generator’s design. The TDP will allow the government to assess the contractor’s approach to meeting the requirements of the SS. During review of the TDP, any potential risk areas seen by the government will be brought to the attention of the contractor. However, it is ultimately the contractor’s responsibility to pass the verification requirements of the SS and therefore the contractor alone is responsible for making design decisions based on assessment of risk. The TDP shall be developed based on the form found in Figure 1 (as described in MIL-STD-31000) and delivered in accordance with CDRLs A023 and A024.

3.10 Systems Engineering Technical Reviews

A systems engineering process with Systems Engineering Technical Reviews (SETRs) will be used during the procurement of the generator. The technical reviews are conducted so the contractor can show progress toward meeting desired requirements in the form of a design solution and that the conditions of the contract are being satisfied. The SETRs are multi-disciplined product and process assessments consisting of technical, logistics, and Subject Matter Experts (SMEs) from the contractor and government IPT. Each SETR review will have an Independent Government Chair and Technical Review Board (TRB) who will act as impartial assessors of program progress and risk as well as entrance and exit deliverables. The Independent Chair will also have the final approval/disapproval decision of the review. Completion of each SETR should be entered as a milestone on the IMS (CDRL LB03). The SETRs will be spaced out according to the contract and will be tentatively scheduled with the contractor at the PAC.

3.10.1 Contractor SETR Responsibilities

Unless otherwise specified, each meeting shall be hosted at the contractor's location or via video teleconference. The venue for each will be chosen by the government on a case by case basis. Prior to each SETR, an agenda shall be created by the contractor and submitted to the government (CDRL LB02). A PowerPoint presentation shall be created for each SETR (CDRL A001). Enough background information should be provided in the presentation to bring the independent chair and TRB up to speed with the program. The presentation shall also include a slide each for any real or potential risks to the program’s execution within schedule and budget that have been identified by the contractor. Each risk slide shall include a description of the risk, the potential impact, and the contractor’s intended strategy to mitigate the risk. The contractor shall record minutes and action items from each meeting and provide tracking resolution (CDRL LB01). Unless otherwise noted, the contractor shall be responsible for ensuring that each item identified as an entrance criterion is provided to the government at least 10 days prior to the related SETR. All exit criteria should be completed by the SETR and should be presented at the meeting. Failure to complete entrance/exit criteria by the time the meeting is held will result in Requests For Action (RFAs) written by the government and provided to the contractor. Each RFA will indicate the specific problem/concern, the individual responsible for taking action on that problem/concern, a recommended action, and an urgency (completion) date. Until all RFAs are completed (closed out), the SETR milestone cannot be passed. RFAs will be provided to the contractor within 5 days after each SETR.

3.10.2 System Requirements Review-II/Preliminary Design Review

The System Requirements Review-II is used to ensure that the contractor understands the requirements of the SS, Statements of Work, statutory and regulatory guidance, and applicable public laws. This meeting shall include a full review of the SS, Engineering SOW, and the ALSSOW. During the meeting, contractor questions and concerns related to their contractual obligations will be addressed. The Preliminary Design Review (PDR) is used to ensure that the contractor has mapped each requirement to a design solution. The Physical Allocated Baseline will be established at the PDR. This baseline defines the configuration items making up the generator system and how the system function and performance requirements are allocated across those configuration items. The contractor shall present to the government a TDP representing at least 60% of the generator’s design at least 10 days prior to the SETR (CDRLs A023 and A024). This SETR shall be conducted within 45 days after PAC.

Entrance Criteria

· SRR-II/PDR Agenda (CDRL LB02)

· SRR-II/PDR Presentation (CDRL A001)

· Updated IMS with critical path through the Critical Design Review (CDR) shown (CDRL LB03)

· First submittal of the System SHA (CDRL A004)

· Submittal of the HMMP Plan (CDRL A005)

· Initial submittal of the HMMP Report (CDRL A006)

· Submittal of the Reliability and Maintainability Program Plan (CDRL A008)

· Initial submittal of the Reliability Prediction and Documentation of Supporting Data (CDRL A009)

· Initial submittal of the Maintainability Predictions Report (CDRL A010)

· Submittal of the Requirements Traceability Matrix Level I (CDRL A012)

· Submittal of a 60% TDP (CDRLs A023 and A024)

Exit Criteria

· All performance requirements are understood by the contractor

· The preliminary design satisfies the top-level requirements

· The presented design is considered 60% complete

· A Physical Allocated Baseline configuration has been established

· A final design solution is achievable by the CDR date

· Understanding of logistics programs integration with the unit development, i.e. what elements are needed when

· Accepted first submittal of the System SHA (CDRL A004)

· Acceptance of the Reliability and Maintainability Program Plan (CDRL A008)

· Acceptance of the Requirements Traceability Matrix Level I (CDRL A012)

· A Physical Allocated Baseline configuration has been established (TDP Approved)

· Risk level identified and accepted by Program/Competency leadership

· The IMS is executable (technical/cost risks)

3.10.3 Critical Design Review

The CDR is used to determine that the generator’s design is complete, baselined, and will meet the requirements of the contract. The Requirements Traceability Matrix (CDRL A012) is updated at this point to outline each performance requirement, a design solution to the performance requirement, and the verification method for the requirements. The TDP shall be complete prior to this review (CDRLs A023 and A024). This package will represent the Initial Product Baseline for the generator. The Initial Product Baseline represents the configuration baseline to which Pilot Production Units (PPUs) will be built. Once the CDR is closed out the Initial Product Baseline is frozen and any changes must be reviewed and approved by the government. Prior to closure of the CDR the contractor is not authorized to begin construction of the PPUs; however, as long lead items are identified earlier during the design process the contractor should notify the government to allow authorization to order those parts.

Entrance Criteria

· CDR Agenda (CDRL LB02)

· CDR Presentation (CDRL A001)

· Updated IMS with critical path through testing shown (CDRL LB03)

· All previous SETR exit criteria has been met, all RFAs are closed out

· Second submittal of the System SHA (CDRL A004)

· Second submittal of the HMMP Report (CDRL A006)

· Second submittal of the Reliability Prediction and Documentation of Supporting Data (CDRL A009)

· Second submittal of the Maintainability Predictions Report (CDRL A010)

· Submittal of all Component Specification Sheets (CDRL A011)

· Submittal of the Requirements Traceability Matrix Level II (CDRL A012)

· Submittal of a complete TDP (CDRLs A023 and A024)

· 30% Technical Manual submission (CDRL LN03) Exit Criteria

· The presented design is considered complete

· Witnessed complete design through technical data package

· Accepted second submittal of the System SHA (CDRL A004)

· Accepted second submittal of the HMMP Report (CDRL A006)

· Accepted second submittal of the Reliability Prediction and Documentation of Supporting Data (CDRL A009)

· Acceptance that the submission of Component Specification Sheets is complete (A011)

· Acceptance of the Requirements Traceability Matrix Level II (CDRL A012)

· An Initial Product Baseline configuration has been established (TDP Approved)

· Risk level identified and accepted by Program/Competency leadership

· The IMS is executable (technical/cost risks)

3.10.4 Contractor Test Review

The Contractor Test Review (CTR) is used to assess test objectives, test methods, procedures, scope of tests, and determines if resources have been identified. During CTR, the contractor is ensured to have complete and detailed test procedures and compliance with test plans. The Test Configuration Baseline will also be established at CTR. This baseline represents the generator configuration that will be formally tested to verify conformance to the requirements of the SS. The Test Configuration Baseline will be represented by an updated, complete TDP representing the current configuration (CDRLs A023 and A024). Formal testing will not be allowed to begin until the CTR milestone is passed.

Entrance Criteria

· CTR Agenda (CDRL LB02)

· CTR Presentation (CDRL A001)

· Presentation shall include a detailed discussion of any changes to the initial product baseline that was established at CDR.

· Updated IMS (CDRL LB03)

· Full test schedule to include prep time, shipping time (to/from test locations), and actual test time.

· CTR delivery of CDRL LB03 shall be made 60 days prior to the SETR.

· All previous SETR exit criteria has been met, all RFAs are closed out

· Submittal of the Requirements Traceability Matrix Level III (CDRL A012)

· Submittal of an updated complete TDP (CDRLs A023 and A024)

· Submittal of the Pilot Production Testing I (PPT I) Test Procedures (CDRL A014)

· Submittal of the Pilot Production Testing II (PPT II) Test Procedures (CDRL A016)

· Submittal of a 90% Technical Manual (CDRL LN03)

· All required test resources (people, facilities, test articles, test instrumentation) are identified and are available for testing Exit Criteria

· Acceptance of the Requirements Traceability Matrix Level III (CDRL A012)

· Approval of PPT I Procedures (CDRL A014)

· Acceptance that the Technical Manual submitted is at a 90% level (CDRL LN03)

· Logistical needs identified and available for contractor and government testing

· Spare parts availability

· A Test Configuration Baseline configuration has been established (TDP Approved)

· Risk level identified and accepted by Program/Competency leadership

· The IMS is executable (technical/cost risks)

3.10.5 System Verification Review/Production Readiness Review

The System Verification/Production Readiness Review (SVR/PRR) will be used to confirm that any changes negotiated during Pilot Production Testing and Independent Government Testing have been incorporated into the design and that a representative generator exists with those design elements incorporated. The contractor shall have a final technical data package available for government review at least 10 days prior to the SETR as well as a printed copy at the review. The Final Product Baseline is established at this review. The Final Product Baseline is the configuration to which all production units will be built. The Final Product Baseline will be represented by an updated, complete TDP representing the current configuration incorporating any changes that resulted from PPT or Independent Government Testing failures/DRs (CDRLs A023 and A024). At this review, the IPT shall also review the readiness of the manufacturing processes, the Quality System, and the production planning (i.e. facilities, tooling and test equipment capacity, personnel development and certification, process documentation, inventory management, supplier management, etc). The government decision to enter into full rate production (i.e. award production options on the contract) will not be considered until the SVR/PRR milestone is passed. The SVR/PRR shall occur within 28 months of contract award.

Entrance Criteria

· SVR/PRR Agenda (CDRL LB02)

· SVR/PRR Presentation (CDRL A001)

· Updated IMS (CDRL LB03)

· All previous SETR exit criteria has been met, all RFAs are closed out

· Submittal of the Requirements Traceability Matrix Level IV (CDRL A012)

· Submittal of an updated complete TDP (CDRLs A023 and A024)

· All pilot production testing has been successfully completed

· Submittal of the PPT I Test Report (CDRL A015)

· Submittal of DR Resolution Reports (CDRL A019)

· Submittal of the PPT II Test Report (CDRL A020) Exit Criteria

· Acceptance of the Requirements Traceability Matrix Level IV (CDRL A012)

· All agreed upon DR resolutions have been incorporated into the PPUs and/or logistics documentation.

· The design solution satisfies all requirements from the SS

· The detailed design is producible within the production budget

· A Final Product Baseline configuration has been established (TDP Approved)

· Risk level identified and accepted by Program/Competency leadership

· The IMS is executable (technical/cost risks)

3.11 Technical Interchange Meetings

In addition to the SETRs called out above, the contractor shall be available to host up to ten (10) in-prompt-to Technical Interchange Meetings (TIMs) at their facility or via video teleconference. These meetings will be used as an opportunity for government personnel to visit the contractor’s facility for troubleshooting, progress checks, or any other unforeseen reasons. The contractor shall ensure that all necessary contractor and Subcontractor personnel, along with any hardware, software, or technical data, are available for each TIM. For each TIM, the contractor shall be responsible for providing the government with an agenda and meeting minutes in accordance with CDRLs A002 and A003, respectively.

3.12 Testing

The contractor shall begin PPT I within 10 days after closure of CTR. PPT II and Independent Government Testing shall begin after the completion and government approval of PPT I. The contractor shall allow the government to witness all testing. The contractor may forgo requested government testing with previous or equal test data after prior government approval. The government will determine whether supplied data is sufficient to forgo testing.

3.12.1 Pilot Production Test Program

The contractor shall produce two (2) PPUs for use during PPT. If calibration is required for the generator, both PPUs shall be calibrated by the contractor prior to PPT I. Additionally, any follow-on calibration required during the testing phase (PPT I, PPT II, and Independent Government Testing) shall also be performed by the contractor. Both PPUs shall undergo all PPT I testing in accordance with paragraph 3.12.1.1. Once PPT I is completed the contractor shall use one PPU for PPT II testing in accordance with paragraph 3.12.1.2 and ship the other PPU for use in Independent Government Testing in accordance with paragraph 3.12.1.4. Upon completion of testing the contractor shall refurbish both PPUs to production level standards and tested in accordance with the Acceptance Test Procedures (ATPs) in accordance with paragraph 3.12.2. These units, along with the technical data package, will represent the Final Product Baseline and will serve as models to which all production units will be built.

3.12.1.1 Pilot Production Testing I

PPT I will be used to test basic performance requirements of the SS ensuring the generator can perform its mission in a standard environment prior to being subjected to environmental extremes. The contractor shall compile PPT I procedures (CDRL A014) based on the PPT I selected requirements in Appendix A, Table 1 of the SS and the approved Requirements Traceability Matrix. The contractor may substitute commercial acceptance procedures as PPT I procedures following government approval. PPT I testing shall not begin until government approval of the PPT I procedures and successful completion of CTR. Both PPUs shall be subjected to all PPT I tests. The contractor will have 30 days to complete PPT I testing. The government may ask for a demonstration of any or all of the PPT I tests.

3.12.1.2 Pilot Production Testing II

PPT II will be used to verify that the generator complies with environmental, certification, and reliability & maintainability type requirements. The contractor shall compile PPT II procedures based on the PPT II selected requirements in Appendix A, Table 1 of the SS and the approved Requirements Traceability Matrix. The plan and procedure shall be in contractor format and include a summary description of all tests; test data sheets; lists of test equipment, accessories, and test fixtures required; and detailed test procedures (CDRL A016). The contractor will use one (1) of the PPUs for PPT II Testing. PPT II testing shall not begin until government approval of PPT II procedures and the successful completion of PPT I on both generators. Throughout testing, the contractor will provide weekly progress reports to the government in accordance with CDRL A013. The contractor will have 180 days from the approval of PPT II procedures and the completion of the PPT I milestone in which to complete all PPT II testing.

3.12.1.3 Failure Reporting, Analysis and Corrective Action System The contractor shall utilize a closed loop Failure Reporting, Analysis and Corrective Action System (FRACAS) system for reporting, analyzing, and correcting failures that occur throughout development, testing and production down to the lowest replaceable assembly level. The contractor shall identify procedures for initiating failure reports; analyzing failures; and feeding of corrective action back into the design, manufacturing, and test processes. The FRACAS shall include provisions that ensure timely contractor-implemented corrective actions, and that provide for follow-up audits. The audits shall review all open failure reports, failure analyses, and corrective action suspense dates. The contractor shall notify the government of all failures within 24 hours. False alarms and failure to detect and/or isolate a failure shall be included in the FRACAS program.

The contractor shall pass all FRACAS requirements to their sub-contractors. All subcontractors shall have the responsibility to pass the FRACAS requirement down to their subcontractors. Subcontractor FRACAS information shall be made available for government review and must be included in the prime contractors FRACAS reports to the government.

Included in the FRACAS reporting shall be quantities of components that fail to pass quality assurance at the sub-contractors manufacturing facility and how many fail to pass acceptance test at the prime contractors facility. The contractor will notify the government immediately if a “Bad Actor” component from a sub-contractor impacts the IMS. If such an impact occurs the government shall work with the prime contractor to determine schedule slips and work around to ensure the successfully fielding of the generator. (CDRLs A017 and A018)

3.12.1.4 Independent Government Testing

The contractor shall send one PPU to Patuxent River, MD for Independent Government Testing. The testing will allow government testers to analyze the PPU for fleet personnel suitability and further verify SS, Engineering SOW, and ALSSOW requirements. Upon completion of Independent Government Testing, the PPU will be returned to the contractor for refurbishment. The contractor will be responsible for arranging and funding shipment of the PPU to and from Naval Air Systems Command, Patuxent River, MD 20670 for Independent Government Testing. The exact shipping address and point of contact will be provided prior to shipment.

3.12.1.5 Deficiency Reports

Government testers will document any suitability, requirement, and supportability deficiencies in the form of Deficiency Reports (DRs), which will then be supplied to the contractor. The contractor shall analyze and develop a resolution strategy for each DR (CDRL A019). Resolution strategies will be reviewed by the government and a decision on the course of action will be made. If a resolution is to be implemented, the timeframe, procedure, and effect on the Contract for doing so will be decided on a case-by-case basis. If the DR resolution results in a redesign of the unit the government may request repeating of any PPT or government tests.

3.12.2 Production Acceptance Test Program

3.12.2.1 Production Acceptance Test Procedures

The contractor shall provide a list of production ATPs for government approval. The acceptance test procedures are simple performance checks of SS requirements that the two refurbished PPUs and each production generator shall meet. The contractor shall compile ATPs based on the requirements indicated in the SS, Appendix A, Table 1. (CDRL A021)

3.12.2.2 Production Acceptance Test Report

The contractor shall provide a Production Acceptance Test Report detailing the results of each production unit and the two refurbished PPUs. The Production Acceptance Test Report shall display successful passing, failure, and failure resolution of all ATPs for all units tested. (CDRL A022)

3.13 Full-Rate Production Unit Delivery

Full-Rate Production (FRP) Units will be ordered in accordance with the contract, provided that release for production has been authorized. Within 240 days after award of the first production delivery order, the contractor shall deliver the first FRP unit and continue delivery at a minimum rate of one (1) Liquid Oxygen/Nitrogen Generator per 6 month period. The government will supply shipping instructions for each delivery order after contract award.

3.14 Contract Data Requirements List

The contractor shall deliver the required data as specified in the CDRLs. Data shall be delivered electronically (Microsoft Word for reports and Microsoft PowerPoint for presentations, except where otherwise specified) to the individuals identified in Block 14 of the CDRL as addressees. The Data Items on the CDRLs are cross-referenced thereon to the associated tasks in this SOW under which the basic information is generated. Data previously developed or available shall be used to the maximum extent possible in satisfying the requirements of this document to the degree authorized by the government. Access to contractor on-line developed data rather than data delivery is acceptable. The contractor shall assist the government in updating CDRLs. This assistance shall include identifying additional items as well as recommending items for tailoring and deletion when appropriate.

3.14.1 Data Item Numbers

The following Data Item Number (DIN) identifications may appear in Block 1 of the CDRL:

A – Engineering Data

B – Administrative/Management Data

L – Logistics Data (reference ALSSOW) In Block 14 of the CDRL “# /E” indicates the quantity of copies (“#”) that are to be delivered electronically (via email) to the addressee specified. Email addresses will be provided after contract award.

3.14.2 Distribution Statements

All CDRLs with DINs beginning with “A” or “B” shall be marked with a distribution statement on the bottom of the front cover/page. The statement shall read “DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT A. Approved for public release.” In instances where the specified format does not contain room on the first page for this statement, a front cover shall be added with the data item title, program name, contractor name, and date.

3.15 Logistics

The contractor shall provide all logistical data and accomplish all logistical requirements per the ALSSOW.

Appendix A: Acronyms & Abbreviations The following list of Acronyms applies to this Statement of Work and accompanying CDRLS.

1TIME

Once

ABO

Aviators’ Breathing Oxygen

ADMN

Administrative

ALSSOW

Acquisition Logistics Support Statement of Work

ANSI

American National Standards Institute

ASQC

American Society for Quality Control

ASREQ

As Required

ATP

Acceptance Test Procedure

CAE

Component Acquisition Executive

CAS

Chemical Abstract Service

CDR

Critical Design Review

CDRL

Contract Data Requirements List

CRYO

Cryogenics

CTR

Contractor Test Review

DAC

Days After Contract Award

DARC

Days After Recent of Comments

DATC

Days After Test Completion

DI

Data Item

DIN

Data Item Number

DPTT

Days Prior To Testing

DR

Deficiency Report

ENG

Engineering

FLT HRS

Flight Hours

FMECA

Failure Mode, Effects, and Criticality Analysis

FRACAS

Failure Reporting, Analysis and Corrective Action System

FRP

Full-Rate Production

HAZMAT

Hazardous Material

HMMP

Hazardous Materials Management Program

HRI

Hazard Risk Index

IMS

Integrated Master Schedule

IPT

Integrated Product Team

LKE

Lakehurst

MGMT

Management

MIL-HDBK

Military Handbook

MIL-STD

Military Standard

MISC

Miscellaneous

MNTY

Maintainability

MS

Microsoft

MSDS

Material Safety Data Sheets

MTBF

Mean Time Between Failures

N/A Not Applicable

NAVAIR

Naval Air Systems Command

NAVSEA

Naval Sea Systems Command

NAWCAD

Naval Air Warfare Center Aircraft Division

NDTI

Nondestructive Testing and Inspection

NOSSA

Naval Ordnance Safety and Security Activity

ONE/R

Once with Revisions

PAC

Post Award Conference

PAX

Patuxent River

PDR

Preliminary Design Review

PEO

Program Executive Officer

PMA

Program Management Air

PPM

Parts Per Million

PPT I

Pilot Production Testing I

PPT II

Pilot Production Testing II

PPU

Pilot Production Unit

PRR

Production Readiness Review

PUID

Project Unique Identifier

QA

Quality Assurance

R&M Reliability and Maintainability

RAC-NPRD

Reliability Analysis Center Non-electronic Parts Reliability Database

RELI`

Reliability

RFA

Request For Action

RIAC

Reliability Information Analysis Center

SAE

Society of Automotive Engineers

SAFT

System Safety

SESS

Systems Engineering Standards and Codes

SETR

Systems Engineering Technical Review

SHA

Safety Hazard Analysis

SME

Subject Matter Expert

SOW

Statement Of Work

SRR

System Requirements Review

SS

System Specification

SVR

System Verification Review

TBD

To Be Determined

TDP

Technical Data Package

TIM

Technical Interchange Meeting

TRB

Technical Review Board

TWO/R

Twice with Revisions

UL

Underwriters Laboratories

Appendix B: Technical Data Package Option Selection Worksheet

Figure 1, combined with section 3.9 and CDRLS A023 and A024, defines the requirements for the TDP deliverable.

TDP OPTION SELECTION WORKSHEET

A. CONTRACT NO.

TBD

B. EXHIBIT/ATTACHMENT NO.

TBD

A023 & A024

1. TDP Level (X and complete as applicable.)

A.

FORMCHECKBOX

CONCEPTUAL LEVEL

DEVELOPMENTAL LEVEL

PRODUCTION LEVEL

B. REMARKS: As defined in MIL-STD-31000

2. TYPE AND FORMAT (X all that apply and complete as applicable)

A.

FORMCHECKBOX

TYPE 2D: 2D DRAWINGS

FORMCHECKBOX

TYPE 3D: 3D MODELS ONLY

FORMCHECKBOX

TYPE 3D: 3D MODELS WITH ASSOCIATED 2D DRAWINGS

B.

NATIVE CAD (SPECIFY TYPE)

ISO 10303 STEP FORMAT (Specify STEP PROTOCOL AP203, AP214 etc.)

ISO 3200 PORTABLE DOCUMENT FORMAT

OTHER ELECTRONIC FORMAT (SPECIFY TYPE)

HARDCOPY To be provided at each SETR per CDRLs A023 and A024

REMARKS:

CONTRACTOR CAGE AND DOCUMENT NUMBERS

GOVERNMENT CAGE (COMPLETE 3B & 3C OR 3D)

D. To Be Assigned By:

N/A

B. USE CAGE CODE:

N/A

C. USE DOCUMENT NUMBERS:

N/A

4. DRAWING FORMATS (X one and complete as applicable)

FORMCHECKBOX

CONTRACTOR FORMAT.

FORMCHECKBOX

GOVERNMENT FORMAT.

REMARKS:

5. TDP ELEMENTS REQUIRED (X all that apply)

FORMCHECKBOX

ELEMENTS REQUIRED TO BE DETERMINED BY CONTRACTOR – OR THE FOLLOWING ARE REQUIRED:

FORMCHECKBOX

CONCEPTUAL DRAWINGS/MODELS AND ASSOCIATED LISTS

FORMCHECKBOX

DEVELOPMENTAL DESIGN DRAWINGS/MODELS AND ASSOCIATED LISTS

FORMCHECKBOX

PRODUCT DRAWINGS/MODELS AND ASSOCIATED LISTS

FORMCHECKBOX

COMMERCIAL DRAWINGS/MODELS AND ASSOCIATED LISTS

FORMCHECKBOX

QUALITY ASSURANCE PROVISIONS

FORMCHECKBOX

SPECIAL INSPECTION EQUIPMENT (SIE) DRAWINGS/MODELS AND ASSOCIATED LISTS

FORMCHECKBOX

SPECIAL TOOLING (ST) DRAWINGS/MODELS AND ASSOCIATED LISTS

FORMCHECKBOX

SPECIFICATIONS

FORMCHECKBOX

SOFTWARE DOCUMENTATION

FORMCHECKBOX

SPECIAL PACKAGING INSTRUCTIONS (SPI) DRAWINGS/MODELS AND ASSOCIATED LISTS

6. ASSOCIATED LIST (X and complete as applicable)

FORMCHECKBOX

A. PARTS LIST (X ONE)

FORMCHECKBOX

(1) INTEGRAL

FORMCHECKBOX

(2) SEPARATE

FORMCHECKBOX

B. DATA LISTS (X ONE)

FORMCHECKBOX

(1) NOT REQUIRED

FORMCHECKBOX

(2) REQUIRED (SPECIFY LEVELS OF ASSEMBLY)

FORMCHECKBOX

C. INDEX LISTS (X ONE)

FORMCHECKBOX

(1) NOT REQUIRED

FORMCHECKBOX

(2) REQUIRED (SPECIFY LEVELS OF ASSEMBLY)

FORMCHECKBOX

D. WIRING LISTS (X ONE)

FORMCHECKBOX

(1) NOT REQUIRED

FORMCHECKBOX

(2) REQUIRED (SPECIFY LEVELS OF ASSEMBLY)

FORMCHECKBOX

E. INDENTURED DATA LISTS (X ONE)

FORMCHECKBOX

(1) NOT REQUIRED

FORMCHECKBOX

(2) REQUIRED (SPECIFY LEVELS OF ASSEMBLY)

FORMCHECKBOX

F. APPLICATION LISTS (X ONE)

FORMCHECKBOX

(1) NOT REQUIRED

FORMCHECKBOX

(2) REQUIRED (SPECIFY LEVELS OF ASSEMBLY)

7. APPLICABILITY OF STANDARDS. The following Standards apply: (X as applicable)

FORMCHECKBOX

ASME Y14.100

ENGINEERING DRAWING PRACTICES

WITH APPENDICES:

FORMCHECKBOX

B FORMCHECKBOX

C FORMCHECKBOX

D FORMCHECKBOX

E

FORMCHECKBOX

ASME Y14.24 TYPES AND APPLICATIONS OF ENGINEERING DRAWINGS

FORMCHECKBOX

ASME Y14.34 ASSOCIATED LIST

FORMCHECKBOX

ASME Y14.35M REVISION OF ENGINEERING DRAWINGS AND ASSOCIATED LISTS

FORMCHECKBOX

ASME Y14.41 DIGITAL PRODUCT DEFINITION DATA PRACTICES

FORMCHECKBOX

ASME Y14.5 DIMENSIONING AND TOLERANCING

FORMCHECKBOX

OTHER STANDARDS APPLY AS DESCRIBED:

COMPANY STANDARDS PERMITTED FORMCHECKBOX

YES FORMCHECKBOX

NO

8. OTHER TAILORING (Attach additional sheets as necessary)

Block 2, A: 3D models may be used where 2D drawings are not available.

Block 5: TDP elements shall include detailed flow and electrical schematics for the generator.

Block 6: Data List shall be tailored from ASME Y14.34 to only include drawing numbers and names.

Figure 1: TDP Option Selection Worksheet

PAGE