SPRBL126R0007 TRD for SINCGARS IKs Components FINAL.docx

TECHNICAL REQUIREMENTS

FOR

SPRBL1-26-R-0007:

5-YEAR INDEFINITE DELIVERY INDEFINITE QUANTITY (IDIQ)

IN SUPPORT OF THE

ACQUISITION OF SINCGARS INSTALLATION KITS (IKS) AND THE ASSOCIATED COMPONENTS

VERSION REVISIONS

Delete: DLAD 52.247-9012 Requirements for Treatment of Wood Packaging Material (WPM).

Add: DLAD T/Q Requirement RP001 DLA Packaging Requirements for Procurement, which includes requirements for treatment of wood packaging material.

DLAD 52.247-9012 Requirements for Treatment of Wood Packaging Material (WPM) are obsolete.

Added “DMSMS” to sub-section title.

Added two Reminder statements.

Added new section: Total Asset Visibility-Contractor (TAV-C)

Revise KO/KS Instructions on CDRL page.

Revised footer to only cover page.

Remove requirement to sign each individual CDRL.

2023 May 02

Add Configuration Baseline additional text.

Add Obsolescence Management additional text.

Add additional notes for CDRLs.

Change Item Manager (SP) to Supply Planner (SP) for CECOM functional reorganization as of 2023 Mar 15.

Configuration Baseline text added for technically complex requirements.

Obsolescence Management text added due to CECOM additional requirements.

CDRL list as a separate document due to additional requirements which can result in up to 20 CDRLs or more.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Military and Federal Standards

Military and Federal Specifications

Other Documents

Specification For

Commercial Documents

Security Documents

CONFIGURATION BASELINE

The applicable Configuration Baselines (CB), for the listed Configuration Item (CI) and/or Computer Software Configuration Item (CSCI), are as listed in the table below.

Each CI/CSCI, as developed/built and delivered, shall conform to the cited CB and (if applicable) all subsequent CB’s that will be made contractually binding by the Procuring Contracting Officer (PCO). The Contractor shall establish a Configuration Management Program in accordance with EIA-649-1.

No changes or departures from the CB are acceptable except for changes or departures which are submitted in accordance with EIA-649-1, CDRL A001, CDRL B001, CDRL C001, and CDRL D001, and are approved by the Government Configuration Manager (C Mgr.) or Configuration Management Officer (CMO) and which are made applicable to the contract by the PCO.

An Engineering Change Proposal (ECP) describes the changes to be made to the CI/CSCI and all associated Government documents and data that are affected by the proposed engineering change. ECP should be prepared in accordance with EIA-649-1, CDRL A001, and DI-SESS-80639.

A Notice of Revision (NOR) shows the detailed changes that must be made to technical documentation, except specifications, following approval of an ECP. A NOR shall be submitted for each document affected by an ECP. The NOR shall be submitted as part of the ECP. NOR should be prepared in accordance with EIA-649-1, CDRL B001, and DI-SESS-80642.

A Specification Change Notice (SCN) is used to delineate the exact change(s) in a specification that will be distributed to users when the ECP is approved. The SCN shall submitted as part of the ECP. The SCN is not used for a military or federal document. NOR should be prepared in accordance with EIA-649-1, CDRL C001, and DI-SESS-80643.

A Request for Variance (RFV) is a specific written authorization to depart from a particular requirement(s) of an item’s approved configuration documentation for a specific number of units or a specified period of time, either as an advance request or after the fact. The contractor shall identify the impact of the RFV on performance, operational readiness and logistics support of the affected CIs. The Government may require consideration for any RFV. RFV should be prepared in accordance with EIA-649-1, CDRL D001, and DI-SESS-80640.

Value Engineering Change Proposal (VECP) is the same as an ECP except there are proposed cost savings for the program. The contractor shall follow the guidance in Section I of this contract for VECPs.

Contractor shall provide all supporting program or cost data with the Configuration Control Documents. The contractor shall uniquely and sequentially identify (including the use of the contract number) each ECP, NOR, SCN or RFV. The identification number should use less than 16 characters.

Obsolescence Management Requirements / Obsolete Components and Materials / DMSMS

DLAD Proc Note C02 Manufacturing Phase-Out or Discontinuation of Production, Diminishing Sources, and Obsolete Materials or Components (DEC 2016)

The contractor shall notify the contracting officer immediately upon determining the unavailability of obsolete materials or components. The contractor may recommend a solution to include the impact on the contract price and delivery. The contractor shall not initiate any item redesign or incur any additional costs without the express, written authorization of the contracting officer.

In the event that manufacturing phase-out or discontinuance of production of such items is contemplated, the contractor is required to notify the contracting officer and publish the discontinuance in the Government-Industry Data Exchange Program (GIDEP), where feasible; and to provide immediate advance notice of production phase-out to DLA DMSMS at dscc.dmsms@dla.mil.

obsolescence management / OBSOLETE COMPONENTS and MATERIALS

Please see “Technical Requirements Document (TRD)” for Obsolescence Management Requirements.

OBSOLESCENCE / DMDS CDRLS (FOR INTERNAL GOVERNMENT USE ONLY)

(Obsolescence/DMS Case Summary)

Risk Management (identify risk type)

The Contractor shall submit a status report within thirty (30) calendar days after the quarterly forecast is provided by the Government. This quarterly status report shall be IAW the guidelines of the CDRL G001 for DI-MISC-80711A and this TRD for the duration of the base contract period and any exercised option periods. The Contractor shall include information in the report that elaborates on its actions to identify potential obsolescence issues, provide detailed findings describing new obsolescence issues and discoveries, provide brief outlines of potential alternatives to overcome the specific issue to include estimated cost of each, any impact to current delivery schedules and if there is an impact, its plan to maintain the production lead time of scheduled deliveries and the future requirements of NSNs under the delivery/task order.

An “Approved Item” is the resolution of an obsolescence issue by the use of items already approved for use on the drawing (e.g., an approved alternate part already on a specification control drawing). The use of an approved item does not require configuration management approval or the establishment of a DMSMS Management Case.

“Backorder Avoidance” is an estimate of the number of supply system backorders for the next higher assembly (NHA) which would be avoided by resolving the case proactively. Backorder Avoidance is defined as the user demand for the NHA that would not have been filled as a result of the time spent resolving the issue had the issue been discovered reactively (i.e., the commencement of a contractual procurement or repair action).

A “Bill of Materials (BOM)” is a list of the items, including but not limited to: raw materials, sub-assemblies, intermediate assemblies, sub-components, parts, chemicals, software (SW), and the quantities of each needed to produce an end product. The BOM may include additional information that allows the user to determine the precise location of an item within an end product. A DMSMS BOM is limited to just those items selected for comprehensive monitoring by the DMSMS program.

“Commercial item” and “commercially available off-the-shelf (COTS) item” are items that meet their respective definitions in FAR Part 2.101 – Definitions.

A “Complex Substitute” is the resolution of an Obsolescence Issue by the use of a replacement item that has different specifications which need to be researched and validated but requires no modification of the Next Higher Assembly (NHA). The use of a complex substitute requires configuration management approval and the establishment of a DMSMS Management Case.

“Cost Avoidance” is the difference between the cost of the government approved proactive DMSMS Case resolution and the estimated cost of case resolution should the DMSMS issue have been discovered reactively (i.e., the commencement of a contractual procurement or repair action). Note that this definition shall be used in lieu of the definitions in SD-22.

“Diminishing Manufacturing Sources and Material Shortages (DMSMS)” is the loss, or impending loss, of qualified source(s), manufacturers, or suppliers that may impact the production or sustainment of an item or system.

“DMSMS Issues” are problems related to shortages or projected shortages of items caused by obsolescence or the loss of qualified manufacturers or suppliers of items. DMSSMS issues are further classified as:

“Documented DMSMS Issues” are DMSMS Issues for which there is documentation advising that an item is unavailable or will be unavailable at a specific date in the future. Documented DMSMS Issues tend to identify issues for which the Years to End of Life (YTEOL) is typically one year or less and rarely in excess of two years.

“Predicted DMSMS Issues” are DMSMS Issues predicted to occur that have been identified by analysis of the item, its technology and market forces affecting the future availability of this item. A number of service providers exist in the private sector with tools capable of predicting DMSMS issues beyond 2 years to as much as 10 years.

A “Reactive DMSMS Issue” is a DMSMS Issue which was not identified until the commencement of a current procurement or production action for the item or a higher assembly for which the item is a component.

A “DMSMS Management Case” is a project established to analyze and resolve DMSMS Issues.

“DMSMS Impact” is the negative effect of a DMSMS Issue on the ability to produce and/or support an item and/or its higher assemblies during its planned service life.

“End of Life” is the last date for which the item can be purchased. In the case of software, it represents the last day a software license is available for purchase.

“Item” means any part, assembly, software, material, chemical, etc., used in the manufacture, assembly, or operation of deliverables of this contract.

“Non-Development Items (NDI)” shall be as defined in the FAR Part 2.101 – Definitions. Privately developed NDI which do meet the FAR definition of a commercial item are considered commercial items.

“Obsolescence” is the condition when a needed item is out of production.

The “Original Component Manufacturer (OCM)” is the organization responsible for the component design, specification, and its production.

The “Original Equipment Manufacturer (OEM)” is the organization responsible for the equipment design, specification, and its production.

“Standard Parts” or “Commonly Used Parts” are those parts identified in the contractor’s Parts Management or Parts Selection processes as preferred for use by their design engineers. These parts are typically documented on Preferred Parts List (PPL) or equal.

“Subcontractor” is a person or entity to which the prime Contractor has delegated part or all of its obligations. Note that by this definition, most suppliers will not be considered “Subcontractors”, and as such, would not be automatically subject to the flow down of DMSMS program requirements.

“Technology Refreshment” is a defined programmatic system management strategy to replace the electronics (including software/firmware) in a system over a specific period of time, usually with the goal of resolving multiple DMSMS issues or to prevent the occurrence of DMSMS Issues preemptively by upgrading the technology of the design. From a DMSMS perspective, Technology Refreshment events should be planned to coincide with Technology Insertion events whenever possible.

Part Revisions Notification of revisions to parts is required. No changes to the configuration are acceptable except for changes which are submitted IAW DI-MISC-80711A (CDRL A001) and are approved by the Government Configuration Manager. For an Engineering Change Proposal (ECP), the contractor shall submit a filled-out DD1692 form. To make a request for a Request for Variance (RFV), the contractor shall fill out form DD1694. For a Notice of Revision, the contractor shall fill out form DD1695. See CONFIGURATION BASELINE section of TRD for further details.

Obsolescence Status Report

The contractor shall submit to the Government a quarterly obsolescence status report in accordance with the guidelines of the CDRL E001, DI-MISC-80711A and this Technical Requirement Document for the duration of the contract. The contractor shall include information in the report that elaborate on its actions to identify potential obsolescence issues, provide detailed findings describing new obsolescence issues and discoveries, provide brief outlines of potential alternatives to overcome the specific issue to include any impact to current delivery schedules and if there is an impact to maintain the production lead time of scheduled deliveries and the future requirements of NSNs under the contract.

Production Evaluation

a. General. The equipment on contract, including all materials, parts, subassemblies and assemblies, shall be produced in strict conformance with the Government-Furnished technical data, including all changes cited in the solicitation/contract, and as supplemented or modified by approved Engineering Change Proposals (ECPs). This technical data may require compatibility corrections, referred to throughout this Technical Requirements Document as 'Production Evaluation (PE) Compatibility' corrections, to improve production efficiency.

b. Contractor's Obligation and Responsibility. The contractor shall perform the following tasks.

c. Perform a PE review. The contractor shall continually review the technical data to identify and propose corrections for all PE compatibility discrepancies. This review will commence during the production and quality planning phase and continue through the preproduction, production, inspection and testing phases of this contract. The contractor will evaluate the Government-Furnished Technical Data Package (including drawings, specifications, gage drawings, test fixture drawings, master pattern drawings or data, engineering change proposals with notices of revisions (NOR) and specification change notices (SCN), models (if any) and any other data defined as technical data by the government) to determine such PE corrections, and submit PE Compatibility ECPs to the Government to reflect these corrections, as described below. PE Compatibility corrections are discussed in Appendix A entitled “Sample PE Compatibility Discrepancies, Errors, Omissions and Deficiencies.”

d. Submit PE Compatibility Engineering Change Proposals to the Government. Recommendations for compatibility changes shall be prepared and submitted as Engineering Change Proposals (ECP) with appropriate NORs and SCNs in accordance with the Configuration Management Section. PE ECPs will:

e. Be submitted as soon as the need for a change is recognized.

f. Clearly and explicitly state the proposed change and the need for the change.

g. Include all technical documentation and supporting data required to justify the change.

h. Special Instructions for PE ECPs. The first page of the ECP form shall have the following:

i. This statement: “This ECP is submitted as a PE compatibility change as defined in the contract”.

j. Have 'PE Compatibility' stamped in 3/8-inch block letters at the top and bottom of the page.

k. The effect on Delivery Schedule and Estimated Costs shall be indicated as “none”.

l. If the incorporation of a PE Compatibility ECP does not correct the deficiency, or creates another deficiency, the contractor shall submit any further ECPs and incorporate such approved changes into all items not yet accepted by the Government, at no cost to the Government.

m. Implement PE ECPs. The contractor shall apply all approved PE ECPs to the manufacture of the hardware on contract without an increase in contract price or delay in delivery.

n. Revise Technical Data (as required). The contractor will generate all required additional data and revise affected Technical Data to incorporate PE corrections in accordance with the “Requirements for Drawing (Revisions)” section below without increase in contract price or delay in delivery.

o. Submit TDP Review Report. The contractor shall prepare and submit a TDP Review Report (including subcontracted PE effort - see paragraph u and v below) in accordance with DI-MISC-80750 as implemented by the DD Form 1423 for DI-MISC-80750.

p. Submit TDP Certification. The contractor shall prepare and submit a letter of PE certification in accordance with DI-MISC-80750 as implemented by DD Form 1423 for DI-MISC-80750. This letter shall be prepared in accordance with the specific content and format requirements described below.

• The certification shall be provided on company letterhead and shall be dated and signed by an authorized official of the company.

• This letter will state the following:

• (Company Name) has conducted the Production Evaluation effort required to date by Provision Number (Number) of Contract Number (Number) for the (End Item). Although we recognize that PE is a continuing effort and that occasional PE Compatibility ECP's may arise during the full scale production phase of this contract, we have sufficiently identified and corrected any discrepancy, error, omission or deficiency in design or technical data which would otherwise have precluded practical manufacture, assembly or attainment of required performance as set forth in specification (Number of End Item Specification). Accordingly, we hereby certify that the technical data package, as changed or supplemented by the ECP's approved to date, is suitable for our use in fulfilling our obligation of delivering conforming items at the price and delivery schedule established in this contract’.

• If the contractor does not submit this letter of certification at the specified time, the contractor shall be deemed to have failed to make delivery within the meaning of the 'Default' clause of this contract, and this contract shall be subject to termination for default. However, failure of the Government in such an event to terminate this contract for default shall not relieve the contractor of its responsibility to continue the Production Evaluation effort and to meet the delivery schedule for all items, as well as meeting all other contract requirements.

• Submission of the Certification shall not relieve the contractor from compliance with the PE requirement, which remains in effect for the duration of the contract.

q. PE Compatibility Discrepancies, Errors, Omissions and Deficiencies. The types of discrepancies, errors, omissions and deficiencies which require PE compatibility corrections are listed in Appendix entitled “Sample PE Compatibility Discrepancies, Errors, Omissions and Deficiencies.” Examples are provided for illustrative purposes, and are not inclusive.

NOTE: In the event of incompatibility between a 'common' or 'standard' part and a mating part, preference shall be given to correcting the incompatibility by changing the mating part.

r. Other Discrepancies. The following discrepancies may be uncovered during the PE review. While the contractor is responsible for submitting ECPs to propose corrections to the discrepancies, such ECPs will not be submitted as PE ECPs, but as described below.

• Over-specified and nonessential requirements. When over-specified or nonessential requirements are identified, the contractor shall submit an ECP proposing the elimination or modification of the nonessential or over-specified requirements in accordance with the 'Configuration Management' provision of this contract. If significant savings are anticipated, the contractor shall submit the change as a Value Engineering Change Proposal (VECP) in accordance with the 'Value Engineering' provision of this contract.

• Design Deficiencies. While it is not the intent of the Government to transfer full design responsibility to the contractor, it is recognized that the PE effort may require some design effort on the part of the contractor. In the event that the contractor discovers a conflict between the specified performance requirements and the construction characteristics specified by the technical data, the contractor shall immediately submit an ECP in accordance with the 'Configuration Management' provision of this contract. Such ECPs shall be identified as 'Basic Design Deficiency' ECPs, and shall describe the alleged design deficiency, the basis for the contractor's conclusion that it is not a PE compatibility discrepancy and the proposed change that will correct the deficiency.

s. Subcontracting of PE. If any item described by the Government-furnished technical data should be subcontracted, one of the following tasks shall be performed by the contractor:

• This Production Evaluation requirement shall be made a part of the subcontract. The prime contractor is responsible for assuring that the subcontractor complies with the Production Evaluation requirements. Submission of ECPs to the Government shall be made only by the prime contractor.

• Production Evaluation responsibility will be retained by the prime contractor, and all approved PE ECPs will be provided to the subcontractor for incorporation on hardware. In this situation, the contractor will prepare and submit a letter to the Procuring Contracting Officer within seven (7) days of the reward of the subcontract. This letter will identify the item that has been subcontracted without the PE clause and state the contractor's intention of retaining Production Evaluation responsibility for the subcontracted item.

t. Alternate Changes. The Government reserves the right to direct an alternate change to a PE ECP.

Appendix A - Sample PE Compatibility Discrepancies, Errors, Omissions and Deficiencies

A.1. Compatibility among the drawings and between drawings and other technical data. For example:

- Are the correct specifications cited?

- If a specification has been superseded, is the appropriate replacement cited?

- When parts are specified, is the quantity and part number correct?

- Are code identifications correct?

A.2. Compatibility between the equipment drawings and related gage/test fixture drawings, test procedures, master pattern drawings and other drawings in the technical data package. For example:

- Are the desired characteristics adequately and correctly specified?

A.3. Compatibility between Data Lists, Parts Lists, assembly drawings and other technical data. For example:

- Does information on the Data List match or correctly supplement information on the Parts List?

- Do the Data Lists and Parts Lists cite all required drawings?

A.4. Compatibility between the physical or functional requirements of the specifications or drawings and the inspection provisions to verify compliance. For example:

- If the requirement specifies operation at a certain temperature, does the inspection requirement provide for its measurement at that temperature?

- Are specified parts and materials compatible with the performance or testing requirements specified for the end item or assemblies?

A.5. Correction of absence of an inspection that is necessary to ensure compliance with the performance requirements established by the equipment specification. For example:

- Do inspection requirements exist, either on the drawings or in the applicable specification(s), to ensure the proper function of the component described by the technical data?

A.6. Correction of an impossible or impractical manufacturing condition. For example:

- Are the specified dimensions or tolerances of material appropriate?

- Can the item be manufactured using only the cited information?

In these cases, the contractor will provide any data required to provide complete manufacturing instructions.

A.7. Correction of an impossible or impractical assembly procedure. For example:

- If assembly is possible in only one sequence of actions, is that sequence specified?

- Can data be added or deleted to facilitate efficient assembly?

- Will mating parts assemble as specified?

A.8. Correction of a condition which precludes inspection (examination or testing). For example

- Should hole locations be inspected before or after fasteners are installed?

- Is the part to be inspected accessible without unreasonable disassembly?

A.9. Correction of obvious administrative and typographical errors in the drawings and in the performance requirements of the end item specification.

A.10. Corrections to permit procurement of physically and functionally suitable and interchangeable purchased parts and materials. For example:

- Is the correct vendor part number specified?

- Are the specified sources still viable?

Drawing Revisions

a. Revision Procedures. The contractor shall furnish a list of all drawings and specifications to be revised to the Technical Activity upon approval of the First Article Test (FAT) Report, or delivery of the first production lot when there is no FAT requirement. This list shall cross reference the applicable Engineering Change Proposal (ECP) and Notice of Revision (NOR) to the affected drawing or specification. Within 30 days after receipt of approval of the list the contractor shall revise and/or create these drawings/specifications. The contractor shall incorporate all cited exceptions to the drawings and specifications, in addition to any approved ECPs submitted since the contract award and submit the revised drawings and specifications to the Government in accordance with this Technical Requirements Document.

b. Revised Drawings. All revised drawings shall follow the same system for Assembly callouts, Parts Lists, Revision Blocks, etc., used on the Government furnished drawings. ASME Y14.100-2004 and/or IPC 2221B shall be used for the drawing package revisions, as appropriate. Drawing formats shall be in accordance with ASME Y14.100. Drawing revisions shall include the Notice of Revision (NOR) number in the change column of the drawing revision block.

c. The contractor shall maintain the drawings in the identical native software format in which it was created or alternatively, in the appropriate format described in ISO 10303. All revised drawings shall be submitted to the Government in the identical native format in which it was created and supplied to the contractor by the Government. Submission of alternate software formats are addressed in the “Delivery of Product Data” paragraph below.

d. New Drawings. New drawings associated with this effort shall be assigned new numbers in the designated series of Government drawing numbers. A CECOM LCMC drawing number and Government CAGE CODE shall appear on each new Product Drawing and Associated List. If required, drawing and Master Pattern numbers will be furnished by the Government upon written request to the Technical Activity. This request shall indicate the type of numbers (i.e. AXXXXXXX for drawings, PL AXXXXXXX for Parts Lists, MP AXXXXX for Master Patterns, and/or DMPXXXXX for Digital Master Patterns) and estimated quantity required of each type. The contractor shall use the assigned numbers for the corresponding contract only. Unused numbers shall be returned via a letter from the contractor to the Technical Activity. Sample Product Data (data files) for new drawings shall be submitted to the Technical Activity for Government review in accordance with the CDRL for DD-1423 for DI-MISC-80508B.

e. When alternate designs are used, they shall reference the drawing of the approved design.

f. Marking for Government Use. Each drawing sheet shall bear the following notation in Gothic letters.

THIS DOCUMENT HAS BEEN PURCHASED BY THE GOVERNMENT AND MAY BE REPRODUCED AND USED IN CONNECTION WITH ANY GOVERNMENT PROCUREMENT OR MAINTENANCE OPERATION.

g. Source and Vendor Item (Specification) Control Drawings, depicting existing commercial items or vendor developed items advertised as available on an unrestricted basis as an “off the shelf” item, must identify at least two approved sources of supply unless specific approval is received from the Technical Activity for using a single source. The contractor shall not generate a Source Control Drawing without the specific, written approval of the Technical Activity.

h. Delivery of Product Data. The contractor shall deliver Product Data IAW DI-MISC-80508B. Submission of other information and file formats requires prior Government approval and submission of sample files.

i. Audit of Product Data. The Government will review the PD for accuracy and completeness before the Government will accept the data. The audit process may require disassembly of the contractor provided hardware. The contractor should provide sufficient resources, including hardware, for the Government to perform an audit on the PD to be delivered, if one is required.

Part Revisions: N/A

CHEMICAL AGENT RESISTANT COATING (CARC):

Paint Colors

The paint color for Mounting Base, Electrical Equipment, MT-6352/VRC is identified on Drawing A3013722, Paragraph 3.2.3.

The paint color for Loudspeaker, Control Unit, LS-671/VRC is identified on Drawing A3140027, Paragraph 3.3.1.

The paint color for Antenna, Vehicular – AS-3900A/VRC is identified on Drawing A3148018, Paragraph 3.3.1.

Special Instructions:

X = Applicable

Antenna Elements, including protective covers, i.e. fiberglass shields.

Exhibit A SPRBL1-26-R-0007 Page 1 of 11 Issue: 22 SEP 2025

PACKAGING

Wood Packing Material:

Wood packing material includes pallets. See DLAD T/Q Requirement RP001 DLA Packaging Requirements for Procurement, which includes requirements for treatment of wood packaging material.

Military Packaging:

DS7029 and/or DS7033 Preservation, Packing and Marking Instructions

DS7029 - DS7033 LEGEND

The below codes are for special markings:

DS7029 - DS7033

Special Markings

ZZ and Z = See SPI for requirements Z*= ¼” cushioning on connectors

SPECIALIZED TESTING:

Contractor Performed First Article Testing.

a. General. The contractor shall perform First Article Testing (FAT) in accordance with FAR 52.209-3 (see Section I of this contract) and this SOW. As part of FAT, the contractor shall:

1) Select the test unit(s) used for FAT from the first production lot. Test unit(s) shall be selected by the Government representative, such as a Quality Insurance Representative (QAR) from Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA).

2) Develop the test procedures and plans necessary to demonstrate that these units conform to the requirements established by the applicable specifications(s) and other technical data provided in this contract. (Para 3.5.4)

3) Notify the Government and test the First Article units.

4) Provide a First Article Test Report to the Government which documents the FAT results.

5) Ensure all equipment used to take performance readings for acceptance tests is kept within the performance parameters delineated by the manufacturer of that equipment. All equipment manufactured by the contractor shall be listed and the parameters established and maintained for this equipment also.

b. Test Requirements. The FAT inspections for SINCGARS Installation Kits shall be performed on the major components, to include Mounting Base MT-6352/VRC, Loudspeaker - Control Unit LS-671/VRC, Antenna AS-3900A/VRC, Antenna AS-3916/VRC, Handset H-250/VCEB and Various Cable Assemblies in accordance with the test requirements for each of the above-mentioned major components set forth below.

a. FAT Inspection for Mounting Base MT-6352/VRC. The FAT inspection shall be in accordance with paragraph 4.3 of Drawing No. A3013722 to verify compliance with the requirements set forth in Paragraph 3.0 of Drawing No. A3013722. FAT inspection shall consist of the inspections specified in the following table which replaces Table III of Drawing No. A3013722. The number of test units used for FAT inspection is eleven (11). Test units shall be selected from the first production lot, which shall contain a minimum of 30 units.

TABLE III. First Article Inspection

(Environmental)

Subgroup I

Subgroup II

Subgroup III

b. FAT Inspection for Loudspeaker - Control Unit LS-671/VRC. The FAT inspection shall be in accordance with paragraph 4.4 of Drawing No. A3140027 to verify compliance with the requirements set forth in Paragraph 3.0 of Drawing No. A3140027. FAT inspection shall consist of the inspections specified in the following table which replaces Table III of Drawing No. A3140027. The number of test units used for FAT inspection is eleven (11). Test units shall be selected from the first production lot, which shall contain a minimum of 30 units.

Table III. First Article Inspection

1. Group A Inspections

All Units

(see Table IV)

2. Group C Inspections

7 Units

a. Shock

b. Extreme temp

d. Vibration

3. Group E inspections

4. Group F inspection

c. FAT Inspection for Antenna AS-3900A/VRC. The FAT inspection shall be in accordance with paragraph 4.4 of Drawing No. A3148018 to verify compliance with the requirements set forth in Paragraph 3.0 of Drawing No. A3148018. FAT inspection shall consist of the inspections specified in the following table which replaces Table V of Drawing No. A3148018. The number of test units used for FAT inspection is eight (8). Test units shall be selected from the first production lot, which shall contain a minimum of 30 units.

TABLE V. First Article Inspection

(Environmental/Electrical)

Subgroup II

high temperature low temperature

(Impact)

d. FAT Inspection for Antenna AS-3916/VRC. The FAT inspection shall be in accordance with paragraph 4.2.1 of Drawing No. A3180155 to verify compliance with the requirements set forth in Paragraph 3.0 of Drawing No. A3180155. FAT inspection shall consist of the inspections specified in the following table which replaces Table 4-1 of Drawing No. A3180155. The number of test units used for FAT inspection is eight (8). Test units shall be selected from the first production lot, which shall contain a minimum of 30 units.

TABLE 4-1 FIRST ARTICLE TEST (FAT) INSPECTION

Electrical:

e. FAT Inspection for Handset H-250/VCEB. The FAT inspection shall be in accordance with MIL-STD-810H to verify compliance with the operating environment requirements set forth in Paragraph 3.5 of MIL-PRF-49078A. The number of test units used for FAT inspection is five (5). Test units shall be selected from the first production lot, which shall contain a minimum of 30 units.

f. FAT Inspection for Cable Assemblies. The FAT inspection shall be in accordance with Paragraph 4.2a (Step 1 and Step 2) of Drawing No. A3014056 to verify compliance with the requirements set forth in Paragraph 3.0 of Drawing No. A3014056. The number of test units used for FAT inspection is three (3) per each nomenclature of cable by CX-XXXXX No. Test units shall be selected from the first production lot, which shall contain a minimum of 10 units for each nomenclature of cable by CX-XXXXX No. or CG-XXXX No. Please note that FAT shall be performed on each nomenclature of cable by CX-XXXXX No. or CG-XXXX only.

c. Production of First Article Units. All FAT samples shall be assembled at the same location at which production units will be assembled, using the same parts, materials, and manufacturing processes to be employed for subsequent production.

d. Test Plan. The contractor shall prepare and submit a First Article Qualification Test Plan in accordance with DI-NDTI-81307A as implemented by the DD Form 1423 for DI-NDTI-81307. In addition to the information required by DI-NDTI-81307, this submission shall contain:

1) The name, title and signature of the FAT Plan preparer and the name, title and signature of the FAT Plan reviewer/approver, which shall be the management level or senior engineer/quality assurance certifying the FAT Plan is complete, accurate and contains the required information set forth in this Technical Requirements Document.

2) The delineation and allocation of tests to be performed on each of the First Article units and the order of such tests (this may be prescribed in applicable technical data).

3) Step-by-step test procedures for each test and the data sheets to be employed to document the results of testing. The date sheet shall include the test location, tester, inspector and witness information along with their signature blocks and date blocks for each test.

4) Identification of required test facilities, equipment (including nomenclature, model number, serial number, manufacturer, calibration status, accuracy data, and comments, if applicable) and personnel.

5) Test milestones schedules and the contractor's test readiness postures for the major FAT events including but not limited to Material Purchase, FAT Plan Submitted, FAT Plan Approval, Material Received, Production (initial Lot) Start, Production (initial Lot) Finish, FAT start, FAT completion, FAT Report Submitted, FAT report Approval and First Product Delivery.

6) A table which cross references the paragraph number of the specification requirement (including a brief description of the requirement) and the associated paragraph number of the First Article Qualification Test Plan.

e. Notice of FAT Performance. As required by FAR 52.209-3, written notices concerning the time and location of FAT shall be furnished to the PCO, the Administrative Contracting Officer and the Government Technical Activity listed in Block 6 of the DD Form 1423 for DI-NDTI-82326.

1) Selection of First Article Samples. When Initial Production FAT applies to this contract (i.e., when FAR 52.209-3 ALT I and ALT II are specified in Section I), FAT samples shall be selected at random from the initial production lot.

2) Reporting of FAT Failures. Reporting FAT failures shall be by the FAT Report, in lieu of any other reporting requirements specified in this contract. In addition, FAT failures shall be verbally reported to the Government's Quality Assurance Representative (QAR) and Government Technical Activity listed in Block 6 of DD Form 1423 for DI-NDTI-82326 within twenty-four hours of occurrence.

f. FAT Report. A FAT Report shall be prepared and submitted in accordance with FAR 52.209-3 and DI-NDTI-82326 as implemented by the DD Form 1423 for DI-NDTI-82326. The FAT Report shall be complete, accurate, and readable and shall provide sufficient data to determine that the hardware item meets all the requirements stated in the contract. The report will include the following:

1) General Data.

a. Contractor's name and address.

b. Contract number.

c. Nomenclature, type number and (if assigned) stock number of item represented by the First Article.

d. Name and address of plant where First Article was fabricated and assembled.

e. Place and date of performance of tests.

f. Identification (including date) of applicable equipment specifications and associated amendments.

g. Sample size or quantity submitted for test or inspection.

h. The name, title and signature of the FAT report preparer and the name, title and signature of the FAT report reviewer/approver, which shall be the management level or senior engineer/quality assurance certifying the report is complete and accurate and the test data included in the report are the actual test result from the tests.

2) Cross Reference. A table which cross-references the paragraph numbers of the specification, the test procedures, and data sheet entry.

3) Test Results. Complete test results showing actual or quantitative observations and all required calculations. ‘GO/NOGO’ data is allowable (under certain circumstances) only with prior Government approval. Allowable tolerances for each parameter shall be presented. Test data should also include the date that the test was performed, name and signature of tester, name and signature of the Government verifier/witness (if applicable) and serial number of the equipment. Test results shall cite detailed qualitative and quantitative data results such as test categories, test conditions, test methods employed, and types of inspection and test equipment used during the test or inspection.

4) FAT Failures. FAT failures shall list all requirements not complied with during FAT. If none, this should be explicitly stated. For each requirement not met, a corrective action to remove the noncompliance will be proposed. This corrective action must include retest or other verification that the corrective action does remedy the problem/failure. The corrective action will address changes in design or manufacturing process which will preclude this deficiency in subsequent production units. Verified corrective action must be implemented prior to the contractor entering production.

5) FAT/Production Discrepancies. Any Government approved, difference between the parts, materials and processes used to manufacture FAT samples and production units shall be documented in the FAT report.

g. FAT Approval. FAT samples shall meet all contractual requirements, or all variances shall be documented by Government approved waivers. First Article approval will be contingent upon the submission of a complete and acceptable FAT report to include verification of corrective action for reported FAT failures to include adequacy of identified changes to the design/manufacturing process.

h. FAT Samples and First Production Lot Inspection. If FAR 52.209-3 ALT II is specified in Section I, First Article units shall be utilized to satisfy the initial production lot inspection requirements.