QUALIFICATION REQUIREMENTS FOR P/N: 5125T85G01 Previous Editions NSN: 2840-01-490-1337 OK are Superseded NOUN: Case, Augmentor, Aircraft [Afterburner Casing] I. JUSTIFICATION FOR QUALIFICATION REQUIREMENTS Criticality: The item is the major structural portion of the J85 engine afterburner section and supports the variable exhaust nozzle mechanism. Non-conformance to manufacturing drawings and specifications is likely to degrade the engine's overall performance and can lead to hot air leaks that will compromise the structural integrity of the engine. The drawing states that - Vendor Substantiation is required. Vendor substantiation requirements for this item are based on FPD-STD-12A5, the drawings for this item, and General Electric's Critical Engine Spare Parts Technical, Manufacturing, and Source Substantiation handbook. The purpose of vendor substantiation is to assure operational capability by imposing manufacturing process control for characteristics that non-destructive inspection cannot assure. A. Complexity: The item requires specialized manufacturing processes such as metal forming, sheet metal fabrication, heat treating, casting, and welding that have a major effect on the performance and durability of the assembly. B. Risk: Due to the criticality and complexity described above, this item is coded AMSC "C". Therefore, all offerors must demonstrate manufacturing capability, as defined in para II and III, prior to contract award. II. DATA/DOCUMENTATION REQUIREMENTS All contractors seeking approval to manufacture the subject item must submit the following documentation/certification: A. General Electric drawing 5125T85, revision E or later, its parts list, and all subtier drawings such as the bolt drawings and drawing 5053T99 for the supports. B. All applicable specifications listed on the manufacturing drawings. A copy of the first page of the specification is sufficient to show possession. C. Documentation that the potential source has a quality system that meets/exceeds the requirements of ISO 9002 or commercial equivalent. Submit a quality control manual along with the documentation. D. Process sheets for manufacture of the item (same for III.A and similar for III.B). E. Identify all processes and inspections to be performed by sub-vendors. Identify the vendors. Vendors must be approved by the engine Original Equipment Manufacturer (OEM) or the Government for the major processes. Forging and casting vendors must be approved by the OEM for that specific item, or a full raw material substantiation will be required before contract award. III. SUBSTANTIATION OF MANUFACTURING CAPABILITY A. Offerors requesting approval on the basis of previous manufacture of production quantities of the same part for the government, OEM or other users of the end item engine must submit the following additional documentation/certifications: 1. Evidence or certification that the contractor was responsible for the entire manufacture of the item-i.e. the OEM did not add any value to the item (should include all material, processes, inspections). 2. Evidence that the item was produced in production quantities, the items met all requirements, and were acceptable to the customer. 3. Evidence that manufacture was recent, within the last two years, and that there have not been any significant changes to the drawing since manufacture. B. Offerors requesting approval on the basis of previous manufacture of production quantities of a similar aerospace part for the government, OEM or other user of the engine must submit the following additional documentation/certifications: 1. Drawing(s) of similar part(s) 2. Evidence to support "similarity", to include: a. Comparison of manufacturing/inspection processes to show that the similar part includes the full scope of processes, including inspections, required to manufacture the subject item and the processes are of equal or greater complexity and/or difficulty. b. Comparison of materials: Material for similar part must have comparable or more difficult manufacturing characteristics than this part. c. Comparison of functions: Provide a description of the function of the similar part. This must be similar to the function of this part. 3. Evidence or certification that the contractor was responsible for entire manufacture of the similar item-i.e. the OEM did not add any value to the item (should include all material, processes, inspections). Submit process sheets for the similar item(s). 4. Evidence that the item was produced in production quantities and the end items met all requirements and were acceptable to the customer, e.g. a contract and shipping document showing part number and/or stock number of subject part with quantities delivered and accepted. 5. Evidence that manufacture was recent, within the last two years, and that there have not been any significant changes to the drawing since manufacture. 6. Submit preliminary process sheets for the item for which source approval is requested. Full process definition is not required, but routing order and description of major processes (e.g. heat-treating, machining, radiographic inspection, fluorescent penetrant inspection, metal forming, and welding) must be stated. C. Offerors requesting approval on any other basis rather than para III.A above must provide, after receipt of notification that all other requirements/certifications have been met: 1. Submit one (1) production representative sample part for evaluation along with a test report documenting conformance to all the requirements of the top drawing and all sub-tier drawings. Testing shall be performed by an independent laboratory. Material certifications and 100% dimensional inspection are required. Forgings and castings require submittal of a forging or casting drawing, along with metallurgical cut up report and non destructive inspection reports appropriate to the casting or forging. The contractor must certify that the sample items were manufactured by the prospective source, utilizing the same facilities, manufacturing processes and methods, materials and sub-vendors which will be utilized to produce the item under contract to the Government. 2. The sample part and test report submitted to the Government will be evaluated by the Air Force in order to substantiate the prospective source's ability to successfully manufacture the item. Evaluation will consist of an inspection of the sample for conformance to the top drawing noted above, including all drawings and specifications listed thereon. Any significant nonconformance found on the sample part is cause for rejection. The sample part may be subjected to destructive examination, form and fit testing, and engine testing. Prepared by: Robert Burns, OC-ALC/LPERC _________________________________________ OC-ALC/LPK _____________________________________ Date:______________________
