Standard for Preparing a COTS Assembly Management Plan

PURPOSE

This document is intended to help aerospace equipment and subsystem
integrators, manufacturers, subcontractors, maintenance facilities, and
other aerospace electronic assembly, equipment and system users develop
their own COTS Assembly Management Plans (CAMP's), hereinafter also
called the Plan. This document states objectives to be accomplished; it
does not require specific tasks to be performed, specific data to be
collected or reports to be issued. Those who prepare Plans in compliance
with this document are encouraged to document processes that are the
most effective and efficient for them in accomplishing the objectives of
this document. In order to allow flexibility in implementing and
updating the documented processes, Plan authors are encouraged to refer
to their own internal process documents instead of including detailed
process documentation within their Plans.

This COTS assembly management document is intended for aerospace users
of electronic assemblies. This standard is not intended for use by the
manufacturers of electronic assemblies. Assemblies selected and managed
according to the requirements of a Plan compliant to this document may
be approved by the concerned parties for the proposed application, and
for other applications with equal or less severe requirements.

Organizations that prepare such Plans may prepare a single Plan, and use
it for all relevant products supplied by the organization, or may
prepare a separate Plan for each relevant product or customer.

## **Table of Contents**

1\. Scope

2\. Normative References

3\. Requirements

3.1 General

3.1.1 Assembly Selection

3.1.2 Open Interfaces

3.1.3 Design To Cost

3.1.4 Assembly Criticality

3.2 Characteristics

3.2.1 Performance

3.2.1.1 Functionality

3.2.1.2 Heat Dissipation and Cooling

3.2.2 Physical Characteristics

3.2.2.1 Useful Life

3.2.2.2 Storage Life

Table of Contents (Continued)

3.2.3 Integrity/Reliability

3.2.3.1 Integrity

3.2.3.1.1 Thermal Evaluation

3.2.3.1.1.1 Temperature Evaluation

3.2.3.1.1.2 Temperature Durability Analysis (Low Cycle Fatigue
Evaluation)

3.2.3.1.2 Mechanical Evaluation

3.2.3.1.2.1 Mechanical Environmental Evaluation

3.2.3.1.2.2 Mechanical Durability Analysis (High Cycle Fatigue
Evaluation)

3.2.3.1.3 Combined Environment Fatigue Evaluation

3.2.3.1.4 Moisture/Corrosion Resistance Evaluation

3.2.3.1.4.1 Assembly Level Moisture/Corrosion Resistance Evaluation

3.2.3.1.4.2 Component Moisture/Corrosion Durability Analysis

3.2.3.1.5 Electrical Stress Evaluation

3.2.3.1.6 Natural Radiation Environment Evaluation

3.2.3.1.6.1 Assembly Susceptibility and Shielding Evaluation

3.2.3.1.6.2 System Architecture Evaluation

3.2.3.1.7 Induced Radiation Environment Evaluation

3.2.3.1.8 Other Environments Evaluation

3.2.3.2 Reliability

3.2.3.3 Derating and Stress Analysis

3.2.3.3.1 Application Analysis

2.  Vendor Derating and Stress Analysis

3.2.3.4 FMECA

3.2.3.5 Integrity/Reliability Assessment Schedule

3.2.4 Maintainability and Human Engineering

3.2.4.1 Quantitative Maintainability

3.2.4.2 Qualitative Maintainability

3.2.4.3 Built-In-Test

Table of Contents (Continued)

3.3 Design and Construction

3.3.1 Materials, Processes and Parts

3.3.1.1 Vendor Design

3.3.1.1.1 Hazardous Materials

3.3.1.1.2 FOD

3.3.1.1.3 Fungus

3.3.1.1.4 Flammability

3.3.1.1.2 Vendor Process Management Approval

3.3.2 Electromagnetic Compatibility (EMC)

3.3.3 Marking

3.3.4 Safety

3.4 Documentation

3.4.1 Plan Owner Documentation

3.4.2 Assembly Supplier Documentation

Table of Contents (Continued)

3.5 Logistics Management

3.5.1 Assembly Risk Management

3.5.1.1 Assembly Technology & Obsolescence Risk Assessment

3.5.1.2 Assembly Cost Risk Assessment

3.5.1.3 Assembly Quality Risk Assessment

3.5.2 Assembly Corrective Action

3.5.2.1 Assembly Technology & Obsolescence Corrective Action

3.5.2.2 Assembly Cost Corrective Action

3.5.2.3 Assembly Quality Corrective Action

3.5.3 Assembly Substitution

3.5.3.1 Acceptable Substitute Assemblies

3.5.3.2 Assembly Substitution Documentation

3.5.3.3 Customer Notifications and Approvals

Table of Contents (Continued)

4\. Quality Assurance

4.1 General

4.1.1 Management Responsibility

4.1.2 Quality System

4.1.2.1 OEM Quality System

4.1.2.2 Vendor Quality System

4.1.2.3 Distributor Quality System

4.1.3 Handling, Storage, Packaging, Preservation and Delivery

4.1.4 Infant Mortality Elimination

4.1.5 Assessment and Qualification of Tools Used for Design and
Verification

4.2 Quality Conformance

4.2.1 Qualification

4.2.1.1 Plan Owner Qualification

4.2.1.2 Vendor Assembly Qualification

4.2.1.3 Vendor Component Qualification

4.2.2 Acceptance

4.2.2.1 OEM Acceptance

4.2.2.2 Vendor Assembly Acceptance

4.2.2.3 Vendor Component Acceptance

4.3 Product Identification and Traceability

5\. Plan Administration

5.1 Plan Content and Organization

5.2 Plan Terms, Definitions and Abbreviations

5.3 Plan Focal Point

5.4 Plan References

5.5 Plan Applicability

5.6 Plan Implementation

5.7 Plan Acceptance

6\. Notes

6.1 Intended Use

6.2 Terms, Definitions and Abbreviations

6.3 Bibliography

6.4 Smart Numbering System for Environmental Grades

6.5 Assembly Maturity Rating

**Standard for Preparing a COTS Assembly Management Plan**

**1. Scope**

This document defines the requirements for developing a Commercial Off
The Shelf (COTS) Assembly Management Plan (CAMP) to assure customers and
regulatory agencies that all of the COTS (electronic) assemblies in the
equipment of the Plan owner are selected and applied in controlled
processes; and that the Technical Requirements detailed in clause 3. are
accomplished. In general the owners of a complete COTS Assembly
Management Plan are electronics equipment and system
integrators/manufacturers.

**2. Normative References**

The following normative documents, of the exact issue shown, contain
provisions that, through reference in this text, constitute provisions
of this Standard to the extent specified herein. Additionally, the most
recent issue of applicable documents may be used provided that
performance, including integrity, reliability and cost, are not
adversely affected.

Members of IEC and ISO maintain registers of currently valid
International Standards.

### Standards

ANSI/EIA-649-1998 EIA Standard, National Consensus Standard for
Configuration

Management

EIA GEB1 Diminishing Manufacturing Sources and Material Shortages
(DMSMS)

Management Practices

EIA SSB-1 Guidelines for Using PEMS

EIA-724 Product Life Cycle Data Model

IEC PAS 62239, Edition 1.0, 2001-04, Electronic Component Management
Plans

IEC PAS 62240, Edition 1.0, 2001-4, Use of Semiconductor Devices Outside

Manufacturers' Specified Temperature Ranges

RTCA/DO-254 Design Assurance Guidance for Airborne Electronic Hardware

SAE AS9100 Quality Systems -- Aerospace -- Model for Quality Assurance
in Design,

Development, Production, Installation and Servicing

SAE ARP4761 Guidelines and Methods for Conducting the Safety Assessment
Process

on Airborne Systems and Equipment

SAE ARP 5890 Guidelines for Preparing Reliability Assessment Plans for
Electronic

Engine Controls.

TBD Atmospheric Radiation Effects (Single Event Effects)

**3. Requirements**

This clause includes some categories of assembly application processes
that may be documented in a Plan. Not all of the categories listed below
are relevant to every assembly application; therefore, the requirements
listed below are applicable only if relevant to the given application.

**3.1 General**

The documented process ***shall*** include determination and control of
the design life cycle stage.

NOTE RTCA DO/254, Clause 3 provides guidance on Design Life Cycle and is
a recommended practice for meeting the objectives of this document.

The documented process ***shall*** define the Planning Process.

NOTE RTCA DO/254, Clause 4 provides guidance on the Planning Process and
is a recommended practice for meeting the objectives of this document.

The documented process ***shall*** define the Requirements Capture
Process. The documented process ***shall*** include Contract Review per
SAE AS9100, Clause 4.3.

NOTE RTCA DO/254, Clause 5.1 provides guidance on the Requirements
Capture Process and is a recommended practice for meeting the objectives
of this document.

NOTE ARP 5890, Clause 4.1.1.2 provides guidelines for reliability
requirements and is a recommended practice for meeting the objectives of
this document.

The documented process ***shall*** define the Conceptual Design Process.

NOTE RTCA DO/254, Clause 5.2 provides guidance on the Conceptual Design
Process and is a recommended practice for meeting the objectives of this
document.

The documented process ***shall*** address the system aspects of
hardware design assurance.

NOTE RTCA DO/254, Clauses 2.0 and 2.1 provide guidance for system
aspects of hardware design assurance and are a recommended practice for
meeting the objectives of this document.

The documented process ***shall*** identify standards to be used in the
design process.

NOTE RTCA DO/254, Clause 10.2 provides guidance on hardware design
standards and is a recommended practice for meeting the objectives of
this document.

The documented process ***shall*** address complexity considerations.

NOTE RTCA DO/254, Clause 1.6 provides guidance on complexity
considerations and is a recommended practice for meeting the objectives
of this document.

The documented process ***shall*** include Design Reviews per SAE
AS9100, Clause 4.4.6.

The documented process ***shall*** define the Detailed Design Process.

NOTE RTCA DO/254, Clause 5.3 provides guidance on the Detailed Design
Process and is a recommended practice for meeting the objectives of this
document.

The documented process ***shall*** define the Implementation Process.

NOTE RTCA DO/254, Clause 5.4 provides guidance on the Implementation
Process and is a recommended practice for meeting the objectives of this
document.

The documented process ***shall*** include Design Verification per SAE
AS9100, Clause 4.4.7.

NOTE RTCA DO/254 , Clauses 6.1 and 6.3 provide guidance on the
Validation Process and provide a recommended practice for meeting the
objectives of this document.

The documented process ***shall*** define the Production Transition
Process.

NOTE RTCA DO/254, Clause 5.5 provides guidance on the Production
Transition Process and is a recommended practice for meeting the
objectives of this document.

**3.1.1 Assembly Selection**

All assemblies ***shall*** be selected according to documented processes
and ***shall*** satisfy the requirements of this Plan regardless of
additional criteria such as standardisation, order of preference, etc.

NOTE Because of the highly individual nature of most Plan Owners'
administrative processes, no detail is included here. It may include the
use of a standard assembly list, provided the requirements of this Plan
are met when the assemblies are placed onto the standard list.
Assemblies should then be selected from the standard list for use in
specific applications. The selection process may include levels of
preference. This may refer to another process document describing how
assemblies are selected. A preference list may be something that would
be included in a contract document.

NOTE It is recommended that:

The number of assembly types should be minimized

\- Assemblies be selected from those readily available and produced in
large volume

\- Assemblies be selected from those in a preferred stage of their
lifecycle.

The conditions for use of the assembly ***shall*** be adequately
identified, and compared to the assembly specification based on the
assembly manufacturer's data sheet and any additional relevant data to
ensure suitability in the end application.

Availability and level of obsolescence risk ***shall*** be considered as
major assembly selection criteria (see Clause 3.5.1). The Plan
***shall*** document the processes used by the Plan Owner to minimize
the future impact of assembly obsolescence.

NOTE This includes pro-active processes used to minimize the impact of
assembly obsolescence. They usually are associated with the
system/equipment design process and may include such activities as
inclusion of a assembly obsolescence forecast for each assembly during
design review, throw-away modules or designs (open architecture, etc.),
or design processes to accommodate future assemblies. They also may
include review of a plan for the entire life cycle, including planned
block upgrades and technology insertion, of the equipment during design
review. They also may include plans for maintaining a technology roadmap
of assemblies with a substantial risk of obsolescence.

The Plan owner's assembly identification ***shall*** reference all of
this documentation. It will be used as the basis for the electronic
assembly management process.

If additional performance is required (e.g. upscreening, uprating,
additional parameters defined) then the assembly ***shall*** be
considered as a specific one and ***shall*** be uniquely identified (See
Clause 3.2.3.3.1).

The performance and characteristics of each selected assembly
***shall*** be comprehensively identified within the selection process.
As a minimum, the assembly manufacturer data sheet, assembly
manufacturer technical and application notes, packaging, reliability and
availability data, producibility data (including storage, ESD
sensitivity, etc) ***shall*** be identified. For assemblies specified by
the Equipment Manufacturer, the specific documentation (including
specification, manufacturer data and process, reliability, specific
tests and screening, and associated in-house continuous monitoring)
***shall*** be identified.

The documented process ***shall*** include circuit tolerance analysis
and mechanical tolerance analysis.

**3.1.2 Open Interfaces**

The documented processes ***shall*** assure that adequate consideration
is given to selection of assemblies with well defined open standard
non-proprietary interfaces.

Note: Selection of assemblies with well defined standard non-proprietary
interfaces as part of an open architecture that is scaleable and
evolvable is an essential element of minimizing total ownership cost
(TOC) through mitigation of DMS impacts, technology independence/ease of
technology insertion

**3.1.3 Design To Cost**

The documented processes ***shall*** assure that adequate consideration
is given to selection of assemblies that will support the minimization
of total ownership cost (TOC).

NOTE ARP 5890, Clause 4.1.4.1.3 provides guidance on the use of
reliability assessment results to substantiate business decisions and is
a recommended practice for meeting the objectives of this document.

**3.1.4 Assembly Criticality**

The documented process ***shall*** reflect the assembly criticality, and
corresponding development assurance level, specified in the
equipment/system specification or determined by assessment and rating.

The process for assembly criticality assessment and rating, and
corresponding design assurance levels, when not specified in the
equipment/system specification, ***shall*** be identified by the plan
owner and the metrics documented.

NOTE: Item criticality assessment and rating is a two step process.
First the equipment/system functional criticality must be determined.
Next individual item criticality is defined based on system redundancy.
The FMECA defines equipment/system item criticality through an analysis
of system architectures and consequence of equipment/system item
failure.

NOTE: RTCA-DO/254, Clauses 2.0, 2.1 and 2.3.4 provide guidance on
determination of development assurance levels and is a recommended
practice for meeting the objectives of this document.

**3.2 Characteristics**

**3.2.1 Performance**

**3.2.1.1 Functionality**

The documented processes ***shall*** verify that the selected assemblies
satisfy the functional requirements for each application.

NOTE Examples of these processes include analysis, modelling,
simulation, and testing.

**3.2.1.2 Heat Dissipation and Cooling**

The documented process ***shall*** verify that the assembly heat
dissipation and cooling requirements are consistent with the
equipment/system specification.

NOTE For forced fluid cooled equipment it is essential to assure that
the coolant flow rate is adequate given the coolant supply temperature.

**3.2.2 Physical Characteristics**

**3.2.2.1 Useful Life**

The documented process ***shall*** verify that the assembly meets the
useful life requirement for the equipment/system.

NOTE Negotiation of a realistic useful life requirement with the
customer is an essential element of minimizing TOC. Negotiation of a
shorter useful life should lead to a direct reduction in the duration of
specified environmental exposure.

**3.2.2.2 Storage Life**

The documented process ***shall*** verify that the assembly meets the
storage life requirement for the equipment/system.

NOTE The storage life assessment identifies parameters that could
potentially degrade assembly capability as a result of exposure to the
specified storage environment. The method of storage assessment depends
on the types of materials used in the assembly. Areas of concern
typically include corrosive (gas) environment, humidity, fungus, elastic
material hysteresis, diurnal thermal expansion/contraction, preservation
medium attack on assembly materials, preservation medium shelf life and
contaminants.

**3.2.3 Integrity/Reliability**

Integrity/Reliability assessment results ***shall*** be reported in
consistent formats, with sufficient information provided to understand
their uses, limitations, and uncertainties.

NOTE ARP 5890 provides guidelines for preparing reliability assessment
plans and is a recommended practice for meeting the objectives of this
document.

NOTE ARP 5890, Clause 4.1.4.2 provides guidelines for the quantification
reliability assessment limitations and uncertainties and is a
recommended practice for meeting the objectives of this document.

**3.2.3.1 Integrity**

The documented processes ***shall*** determine if the assembly will be
used within the environmental limits specified by the assembly
manufacturer. If the assembly is not used within the environmental
limits specified by the assembly manufacturer, then the process of
clause 3.2.3.3.1 ***shall*** be followed.

NOTE ARP 5890, Clause 4.1.3.2 provides guidance on durability assessment
and is a recommended practice to meet the objectives of this document.

NOTE ARP 5890, Appendix B provides information to help the user
understand the durability analysis method of reliability assessment.

**3.2.3.1.1 Thermal Evaluation**

NOTE Evaluation processes may include analysis, modeling, thermal
survey, simulation, or testing.

**3.2.3.1.1.1 Temperature Evaluation**

The documented processes ***shall*** determine if the assembly will be
used within the temperature limits specified by the assembly
manufacturer. If the assembly is not used within the temperature limits
specified by the assembly manufacturer, then the process of clause
3.2.3.3.1 ***shall*** be followed.

**3.2.3.1.1.2 Temperature Durability Analysis (Low Cycle Fatigue
Evaluation)**

The documented process ***shall*** verify that the assembly meets the
temperature cycling requirement specified in the equipment/system
specification.

NOTE Low cycle fatigue is typically the result of differential expansion
of joined materials due to differences in material coefficient of
thermal expansion (CTE).

**3.2.3.1.2 Mechanical Evaluation**

The documented processes ***shall*** verify that the assembly is
mechanically compatible with the application.

NOTE This includes mechanical fit, as well as the ability to withstand
dynamic and mechanical stresses, including those generated by mismatches
of coefficients of thermal expansion of the different materials, and
exposure to moisture/corrosion.

NOTE Verification processes may include analysis, modelling, simulation,
or testing.

NOTE Evaluation processes may include analysis, modeling, thermal
survey, simulation, or testing.

**3.2.3.1.2.1 Mechanical Environmental Evaluation**

NOTE Dynamic limits typically include maximum vibration, shock or
acceleration levels specified in g's or g~rms.~

**3.2.3.1.2.2 Mechanical Durability Analysis (High Cycle Fatigue
Evaluation)**

The documented process ***shall*** verify that the assembly meets the
vibration life/exposure requirement specified in the equipment/system
specification.

NOTE High cycle fatigue is typically the result of stresses and strains
resulting from cycling deflections of the assembly under vibration,
acoustic and shock loading.

**3.2.3.1.3 Combined Environment Durability Analysis (Fatigue
Evaluation)**

The documented process ***shall*** verify that the assembly meets the
total fatigue life required by summing all relevant environmental
exposures.

NOTE Relevant environmental exposures typically include vibration (sine
and random), shock, acceleration, temperature cycling.

**3.2.3.1.4 Moisture/Corrosion Resistance Evaluation**

**3.2.3.1.4.1 Assembly Level Moisture/Corrosion Resistance Evaluation**

The documented process ***shall*** verify that the assembly meets the
specified moisture/corrosion exposure requirements.

NOTE The intent of this clause is to verify the adequacy of conformal
coatings, structural and interconnect materials, dissimilar metal
couples, etc. Component adequacy is addressed in clause 3.2.3.1.4.2.

NOTE Assembly level moisture/corrosion environments typically include
humidity, rain, salt fog/atmosphere and corrosive gas.

**3.2.3.1.4.2 Component Moisture/Corrosion Resistance Evaluation**

The documented process ***shall*** verify that the components used in
the assembly meet the specified moisture/corrosion exposure
requirements. The documented process ***shall*** take into account the
effect of other environments on component moisture/corrosion resistance.

NOTE EIA SSB-1 provides guidelines for using plastic encapsulated
microcircuits.

NOTE Assembly level moisture/corrosion tests are generally inadequate to
verify the moisture/corrosion resistance of components due to the
difference in failure mechanisms and acceleration factors.

NOTE Temperature cycling exposure typically has an extremely significant
effect on how well PEM's perform in moisture/corrosion environments.
Testing of PEM's should include a full lifetime of temperature cycling
prior to exposure to the moisture/corrosion environment.

**3.2.3.1.5 Electrical Stress Evaluation**

The documented process ***shall*** determine that electrical stresses
are within allowable limits for the assembly.

**3.2.3.1.6 Natural Radiation Environment Evaluation**

**3.2.3.1.6.1 Assembly Susceptibility and Shielding Evaluation**

The documented process ***shall*** determine the level of assembly
susceptibility to the effects of atmospheric radiation. These effects
include single event effects (SEE) and total ionizing dose. In
applications where total ionizing dose is a concern determination of
susceptibility ***shall*** verify that the assembly will survive the
required exposure.

Note: Reference TBD provides requirements for processes to deal with
single event effects.

**3.2.3.1.6.2 System Architecture Evaluation**

The documented process ***shall*** determine that the system
architecture contains features to assure that the level of assembly
susceptibility is consistent with meeting equipment/system requirements.

Note: Examples of architecture features to compensate SEE include, but
are not limited to, Error Detection and Correction (EDAC) coding
algorithms and internal hidden registers for internal device control.

**3.2.3.1.7 Induced Radiation Environment Evaluation**

For assemblies in systems whose requirements include induced radiation
the processes of clause 3.2.5.4 ***shall*** be repeated for the induced
radiation environment.

**3.2.3.1.8 Other Environments Evaluation**

The documented process ***shall*** verify that the assembly meets all
specified environments not addressed above.

NOTE: "Other" environments typically include altitude, explosive
decompression, sand and dust, solar radiation, fluid compatibility,
explosive atmosphere and biological and chemical agents.

**3.2.3.2 Reliability**

The documented process ***shall*** verify that reliability requirements
specified in the equipment/system specification are met.

**3.2.3.3 Derating and Stress Analysis**

**3.2.3.3.1 Application Analysis**

The documented processes ***shall*** determine if the assembly will be
used (operated and stored) within the limits specified by the assembly
manufacturer. All instances in which an assembly is not used within the
limits defined above ***shall*** be documented. In all such instances,
either corrective action ***shall*** be taken to bring the planned usage
within the limits specified by the manufacture, or justification showing
that all equipment/system requirements will be met while not satisfying
the criteria ***shall*** be documented.

NOTE For those conditions (environments, etc.) where the assembly
manufacture does not specify a limit, the assembly is by definition
being used beyond the limits specified by the assembly manufacturer.

**3.2.3.3.2 Vendor Derating and Stress Analysis**

The documented process ***shall*** determine derating criteria the
assembly manufacturer used in their design process. When the assembly
manufacturer provides derating criteria and methods, they ***shall*** be
used where appropriate. If the assembly manufacturer does not provide
this information, or if it is not appropriate, then the Plan Owner
***shall*** develop and document an appropriate estimate of the derating
criteria and methods used by the vendor.

**3.2.3.4 Failure Modes and Effects Criticality Analysis**

The documented process ***shall*** include Failure Modes and Effects
Criticality Analysis (FMECA) as part of the design process integrating
the COTS assembly.

NOTE Development efficiency may be enhanced by integrating FMECA with
hazard analysis and testability analysis.

**3.2.3.5 Integrity/Reliability Assessment Schedule**

It is recommended that the integrity/reliability assessment process be
continually updated as data become available throughout the assembly
life cycle.

NOTE ARP 5890, Clause 4.1.1.1 provides guidelines for Reliability
Assessment Schedule and is a recommended practice for meeting the
objectives of this document.

**3.2.4 Maintainability and Human Engineering**

**3.2.4.1 Quantitative Maintainability**

The documented process ***shall*** assure that the assembly, as
incorporated in the equipment/system meets quantitative maintainability
requirements.

NOTE: Quantitative maintainability requirements typically include time
diagnose failure and time to remove and replace the assembly.

**3.2.4.2 Qualitative Maintainability**

The documented process ***shall*** assure that the assembly meets
qualitative maintainability requirements.

Note: This requirement also includes design for maintainability, e.g.,
placement for ease of assembly replacement, mounting that minimizes the
risk of damage during maintenance and assures equipment quality
following maintenance or repair by equipment manufacturer.

**3.2.4.3 Built-In-Test**

The documented processes ***shall*** assure that the assembly meets the
equipment/system testability requirements.

NOTE The focus is typically on isolation to the faulty modules during
equipment/system test. Built-in-test (BIT) may include start-up bit
(SBIT), initiated bit (IBIT) and performance bit (PBIT).

**3.3 Design and Construction**

The documented process ***shall*** include Process Control per SAE
AS9100, Clause 4.9.

**3.3.1 Materials, Processes and Parts**

**3.3.1.1 Vendor Design**

The documented processes ***shall*** assure the assembly is compatible
with integration processes as supplied (without any quality or
reliability impact) throughout:

-   Assembly shipping, handling, and storage

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   Equipment/system manufacturing, assembly, shipping, handling,
    storage, test, repair and rework by equipment/system manufacturer.

-   

The documented processes ***shall*** identify the key
assembly/integration shipping, handling, storage, test, repair and
rework processes by equipment/system integrator; and the Plan
***shall*** describe how their impact on assemblies is identified,
documented and controlled.

NOTE Of concern is protection of assemblies from electrostatic discharge
(ESD) damage. Use of the relevant sections of EN 100015, MIL-STD-263,
IEC 61340-5-1, and IEC 61340-5-2 will aid in controlling ESD damage.

**3.3.1.1.1 Hazardous Materials**

**3.3.1.1.2 FOD**

**3.3.1.1.3 Fungus**

**3.3.1.1.4 Flammability**

**3.3.1.2 Vendor Process Management Approval**

The Plan Owner ***shall*** verify that the assembly manufacturer has a
manufacturing process capability utilising manufacturing technologies
with demonstrable repeatability.

This may be satisfied by one of the following:

> Manufacturing approval of the component technologies by a third party
> (e.g. CECC, DSCC, IECQ) or within an international second party
> system.
>
> Where the component manufacturer is not assessed as above then the
> Plan Owner may demonstrate how the process management capability of
> the assembly manufacturer is ensured. Where the Plan Owner conducts or
> enables an audit on the component manufacturing facility then the
> audit should be conducted in accordance with one of the above systems
> by suitably accredited auditors.

**3.3.2 Electromagnetic Compatibility (EMC)**

The documented process ***shall*** assure the electromagnetic
compatibility of the assembly with the equipment/system within which it
is to be integrated. EMC guidelines ***shall*** form part of the design
process.

NOTE EMC typically includes conducted and radiated emission levels as
well as conducted, radiated and ESD susceptibility.

NOTE EMC is demonstrated by analysis, testing and simulation.

NOTE EMC guidelines should consider factors such as component and
assembly type/technology, physical placement and grounding when
integrating assemblies.

NOTE Certain assemblies e.g. high power switching assemblies may produce
more electromagnetic signal than other types and additionally certain
assemblies can be more susceptible to electromagnetic interference than
others.

**3.3.3 Marking**

**3.3.4 Safety**

The documented process ***shall*** verify assembly, equipment and system
safety.

NOTE RTCA DO/254, Clause 2.2 provides guidance on the System Safety
Assessment Process and is a recommended practice for meeting the
objectives of this document.

NOTE RTCA DO/254, Clause 2.3 provides guidance on the Hardware Safety
Assessment and is a recommended practice for meeting the objectives of
this document.

NOTE ARP 4761 provides guidelines for the use of reliability assessment
results for a safety analysis.

The documented processes ***shall*** verify that the assembly does not
contain or use materials known to produce toxic gasses when overheated
or burned, in sufficient quantity, to compromise the safety or health of
personnel associated with the application.

NOTE Personnel may include pilots, flight attendants, passengers,
maintenance personnel, or others. In some applications, e.g., external
engine mounted equipment, the relevance of this requirement may be
limited or non-existent.

NOTE A suitable method to evaluate toxicity of materials is described in
ISO/TR9122-1:1989, see Bibliography.

**3.4 Documentation**

The documented process ***shall*** include a configuration management
process appropriate to the product. The documented processes ***shall***
verify that the equipment/system configuration control is maintained
relative to the assembly usage in the application.

NOTE RTCA DO/254, Clause 7. provides guidance on the Configuration
Management Process and is a recommended practice for meeting the
objective of this document.

NOTE EIA-649 provides a National Consensus Standard for Configuration
Management.

NOTE Guidance on configuration management is given in ISO 10007.

The documented process ***shall*** verify that tools used for design and
verification are under configuration control.

The documented process ***shall*** include Design Control per SAE
AS9100, Clauses 4.4.1 through 4.4.5.

The documented process ***shall*** include Design Changes per SAE
AS9100, Clause 4.4.9.

NOTE ARP 5890, Clause 4.1.2.1 provides guidelines on data sources and
types and is a recommended practice for meeting the objectives of this
document.

A focal organization for configuration control ***shall*** be identified
in the Plan.

**3.4.1 Plan Owner Documentation**

The documented process ***shall*** include Documentation and Data
Control per SAE AS9100, Clause 4.5.

The documented processes ***shall*** include a system for collection,
storage, retrieval, analysis and reporting of all relevant data from the
assembly, equipment/system design, equipment/system
manufacturing/integration and equipment/system use in service; and for
keeping the data per customer or regulatory requirements.

NOTE The data need not reside within the data system described. A
relational approach may be used wherein the data system provides access
to the data. For example, if the assembly qualification data is
collected and stored by the assembly manufacturer, the equipment/system
manufacturer's/integrator's data system could consist of a process,
software, and hardware to access that data through the assembly
manufacturer's web page or other source, provided the access is
available when needed. As another example, any data that is specific to
a program, such as functional simulation results or thermal analysis
data, could be accessible via a path through the program data. The Plan
Owner may wish to identify processes that were developed and documented
for other initiatives, such as ISO 9000, QS 9000, or AS 9000, to satisfy
this requirement.

NOTE Typical data include:

-   Assembly Data Sheet or Specification Data, e.g., input and output
    parameters, voltage rating, packaging dimensions, availability data,
    etc.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   Application Data, e. g., functional simulation data, breadboard test
    data, thermal analysis data, structural analysis data, and
    electromagnetic emission and susceptibility data.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   Assembly Qualification Data, e. g., assembly manufacturer
    qualification test data, assembly qualification data collected by
    the equipment manufacturer, or a third party test house, similarity
    analysis results, and assembly in-service data used for
    qualification.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   Assembly Quality Assurance Data, e. g., assembly manufacturer
    statistical process control data, assembly manufacturer assembly
    and/or component screening data, assembly screening data collected
    by the equipment/system manufacturer/integrator or a third party
    test house, and ESS data from higher-level screening.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   Manufacturing, Assembly and Integration Data, e. g.,
    equipment/system manufacturer/integrator statistical process control
    data, ESS data from manufacturing, assembly and integration, and
    in-process and final functional test.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   Customer Reject Data.

In-service Data.

NOTE ARP 5890, Clause 4.1.2.2 provides guidelines on data collection,
storage and retrieval and is a recommended practice for meeting the
objectives of this document.

NOTE It is anticipated that this information will be available to the
customer upon request.

The documented processes ***shall*** ensure that the following are
available for each assembly: data sheet, technical and application
notes, conditions of use, packaging data, reliability data, availability
information, storage conditions, integration data (e.g., ESD
sensitivity) and any additional information to ensure suitability in the
application.

Note: Most of the above information should be available from the
assembly manufacturer. If the information is modified, or additional
information is required to satisfy this objective, then that information
falls within this requirement. Examples include results of additional
tests or screens conducted by the Plan Owner or third parties,
programming data, or modifications to the data sheet.

**3.4.2 Assembly Supplier Documentation**

The Plan Owner ***shall*** have a process in place to request
configuration data when available from assembly manufacturers to assure
dependability and to facilitate related analyses \[e.g. integrity,
reliability\]. An adequate engineering link between assembly user and
manufacturer ***shall*** be identified with the related
information/process for each assembly part type/manufacturer.

In the event that the Plan Owner is unable to document the assembly's
configuration in adequate detail to assure dependability then the Plan
Owner ***shall*** provide alternate assurance that the assembly will
perform as required in the specified usage.

**3.5 Logistics Management**

**3.5.1 Assembly Risk Management**

The documented processes ***shall*** identify risks associated with
availability of the assembly, and methods to mitigate those risks.

NOTE These may include low volume manufacturers, allocation risks,
financial stability of manufacturers, single source manufacturers, etc.

NOTE EIA GEB1 includes proactive DMSMS mitigation methods and is a
recommended practice for meeting the objectives of this document.

NOTE RTCA DO/254, Clause 5.7 addresses considerations related to Series
Production.

The documented processes ***shall*** include tracking and reporting the
status of risk mitigation efforts when required by customer or business
needs. The documented processes ***shall*** address logistics
supportability and life management issues when required by customer or
business needs.

Note: The following are primary examples of assembly risk areas that may
be addressed in the Plan, specifically or generically: These risk areas
may be addressed as part of other design, production, procurement or
marketing processes or practices.

\(a\) New technology availability or maturity for meeting the specified
requirements,

\(b\) Assembly delivery and production rate schedules,

\(c\) Assembly obsolescence during design, production, or support,

\(d\) Lack of qualification or quality assurance data,

\(e\) Qualification test schedule (especially risk of failure),

\(f\) Cost drivers (especially with custom assemblies),

\(g\) Assembly changes (design or process changes, known and unknown),

\(h\) Quality and reliability of product from assembly manufacturer
(especially new manufacturer), and

\(i\) Radiation effects, such as single event upset.

NOTE Use of components outside manufacturers\' specifications and
component obsolescence are specific risk issues that that may be
addressed outside of or included in this section.

NOTE Clause 6.5 provides guidance on the evaluation of electronics
assembly maturity.

**3.5.1.1 Assembly Technology & Obsolescence Risk Assessment**

Assembly risk ***shall*** be rated using appropriate metrics that
reflect susceptibility to technology change and obsolescence.

NOTE Input, from the assembly and its components, for consideration of
metrics include: technology risk and maturity, life cycle, level of
confidence in manufacturer, predicted obsolescence, monosource assembly
or components, manufacturer supply file information, imprecise
manufacturer specification of component performance (specified as
"typical", not specified, etc.), assemblies and components other than
those readily available in large volumes and identified on avionics
technology roadmaps.

The Plan owner ***shall*** document the processes utilized for
obsolescence awareness.

NOTE This includes processes used to become aware of existing and
impending assembly and/or component discontinuance situations, changes
in assembly and/or component design or manufacturing processes, and
other assembly and/or component manufacturer actions that may result in
assemblies becoming unavailable. This may include use of one or more
commercial services or in-house processes.

**3.5.1.2 Assembly Cost Risk Assessment**

**3.5.1.3 Assembly Quality Risk Assessment**

The documented processes ***shall*** verify that the installed assembly
is compatible with the application requirements through the processes
listed in this document. These processes include assembly qualification
(including a life test requirement), assurance of quality (consistency),
equipment reliability assessments, qualification of the equipment
(environments), and equipment reliability monitors.

NOTE This could be produced either by using a standard method, component
manufacturer reliability tests, equipment field return data, similarity
with any other similar applications, etc.

**3.5.2 Assembly Corrective Action**

**3.5.2.1 Assembly Technology & Obsolescence Corrective Action**

The Plan ***shall*** document the processes used by the Plan owner to
resolve obsolete assembly occurrences to assure continued production and
support as required.

NOTE Coordination of obsolescence corrective action with planned "block
upgrades" and technology insertion will mitigate the impact of
obsolescence.

NOTE This includes processes used to react to assembly obsolescence
occurrences. They may include last- or lifetime buy, identification of
alternative sources, equipment re-design, etc.

NOTE Equipment/system design with an open architecture will
substantially mitigate the impact of obsolescence.

**3.5.2.2 Assembly Cost Corrective Action**

**3.5.2.3 Assembly Quality Corrective Action**

The Plan ***shall*** document the process used by the Plan owner for
data collection and analysis, or systems in place to use factory data,
customer reject data, and in-service data to improve the design,
manufacturing and integration processes for assembly, equipment and
system improvement, e.g., FRACAS, reliability growth, reliability
enhancement, statistical process control, etc.

NOTE RTCA DO/254, Clause 7.2.3 provides guidance on Problem Reporting,
Tracking and Corrective Action and is a recommended practice for meeting
the objectives of this document.

**3.5.3 Assembly Substitution**

**3.5.3.1 Acceptable Substitute Assemblies**

Alternative sources of assemblies may be qualified and identified in the
equipment/system manufacturer/integrator assembly database to reduce
potential risks of assembly procurement or to solve an obsolescence or
unavailability problem of the previous sources.

In this case, the alternative source assembly performance (Fit, Form,
Function and producibility) ***shall*** be functionally compliant with
the assembly drawing (or the data sheet and technical performance notes)
of the previous assembly, as described within its selection process.

The alternative source assembly ***shall*** be selected to ensure the
reliability, functionality, performance, interchangeability, etc. of the
equipment, assembly or system is not compromised.

**3.5.3.2 Assembly Substitution Documentation**

All assembly substitutions ***shall*** be documented. The documentation
should include the following information as per agreement between both
parties**:**

a\) CN (change notice) number,

b\) Change date,

c\) other related CNs,

d\) name of the substitute assembly manufacturer,

e\) reason for change,

f\) type of customer notification required (see the note 3.5.3.3, also,
it is anticipated that this information will be available to the
customer upon request),

g\) applications or equipment in which the new assembly is used,

h\) existing assembly part number,

i\) existing assembly specified environmental ranges,

j\) new assembly specified environmental ranges,

k\) application environmental requirements,

l\) existing assembly qualification process,

m\) existing assembly quality assurance process,

n\) new assembly qualification process,

o\) new assembly quality assurance process,

p\) a statement that the new assembly is compliant to this Plan,

q\) a statement that the new assembly meets the requirements of the
application

r\) impact of the change, if any equipment requirements, and

s\) required signatures (program manager, assembly engineer, quality
assurance representative, etc.).

Note: Usually, CNs are stored in a controlled, retrievable data system.
A copy of the CN form may be included as an Annex to the Plan.

**3.5.3.3 Customer Notifications and Approvals**

Customer notifications and approvals ***shall*** be defined between Plan
Owner and customer, if required. Since the customer notification and
approval process is likely to be unique to each customer-supplier
relationship, related requirements are beyond the scope of the baseline
assembly management process described in this document, and should be
documented in the contractual agreements between the supplier and the
customer.

NOTE Documenting the notification and approval process is complicated by
the fact that some customers may wish to approve all assembly
substitutions, other customers may not want to approve any
substitutions, and still other customers could desire to approve some
substitutions but not others. The various types of approvals that some
customers could wish to grant further complicated the issue. For
example, approvals could be divided into two categories:

\(1\) those that affect form, fit, or function of the equipment, and

\(2\) those that do not.

Furthermore, there could be two types of approval:

\(1\) active approval, in which the manufacturer is not allowed to
proceed without the written authorization of the customer, and

\(2\) passive approval, in which the manufacturer may proceed after a
specified time period has elapsed, provided that the customer has not
objected to the substitution.

NOTE Some customers may wish to approve substitutions of certain
assemblies or assembly types regardless of their effects on system form,
fit, or function. These assemblies are called special interest
assemblies. They are usually assemblies that may be new to the
application, or may have features or attributes that warrant special
attention. If this is the case, the customer may issue a controlled list
of special interest assemblies. New assemblies may be added to the list,
and they may be removed as experience and knowledge of their use is
achieved.

NOTE It is likely that the special interest assembly lists will be
unique to each supplier-customer relationship. As such, it is beyond the
scope of the baseline assembly management process described in this
document. If a supplier and a customer agree on a list of special
interest assemblies, and on a process for approving them, then the list
and the approval process should be documented as requirements in the
contract.

**4. Quality Assurance**

**4.1 General**

The documented process ***shall*** include Control of Inspection,
Measuring and Test Equipment per SAE AS9100, Clause 4.11.

The documented process ***shall*** include Inspection and Test Status
per SAE AS9100, Clause 4.12.

The documented process ***shall*** include Control of Nonconforming
Product per SAE AS9100, Clause 4.13.

The documented process ***shall*** include Corrective and Preventative
Action per SAE AS9100, Clause 4.14.

The documented process ***shall*** include Control of Quality Records
per SAE AS9100, Clause 4.16.

The documented process ***shall*** include Internal Quality Audits per
SAE AS9100, Clause 4.17.

The documented process ***shall*** include Training per SAE AS9100,
Clause 4.18.

The documented process ***shall*** include Servicing per SAE AS9100,
Clause 4.19.

The documented process ***shall*** include Statistical Techniques per
SAE AS9100, Clause 4.20.

**4.1.1 Management Responsibility**

The documented process ***shall*** include Management Responsibility per
SAE AS9100, Clause 4.1.

**4.1.2 Quality System**

The documented process ***shall*** include Inspection and Testing per
SAE AS9100, Clause 4.10.

**4.1.2.1 OEM Quality System**

The documented process ***shall*** include a quality system in
accordance with SAE AS9100, Clause 4.2.1.

The documented process ***shall*** include Quality System Procedures per
SAE AS9100, Clause 4.2.2.

The documented process ***shall*** include Quality Planning per SAE
AS9100, Clause 4.2.3.

**4.1.2.2 Vendor Quality System**

The Plan Owner ***shall*** verify that the assembly manufacturer has a
documented quality management system.

Unless otherwise specified by the customer, the assembly manufacturer
should have a quality system assessed to the relevant parts of the ISO
9000 family or equivalent.

Where the assembly manufacturer is not assessed in accordance with the
relevant parts of ISO 9000 family or equivalent, then the Plan Owner
***shall*** demonstrate how the quality management system of the
assembly manufacturer is adequate.

Where the plan owner conducts or enables an audit on the assembly
manufacturing facility, then the audit should be conducted in accordance
with the relevant standards of the ISO 9000 family or equivalent system.
Suitably accredited auditors should conduct that audit.

**4.1.2.3 Distributor Quality System**

If the assembly is purchased from a distributor then the requirements of
this clause 4.1.2.2 ***shall*** apply to the distributor also.

**4.1.3 Handling, Storage, Packaging, Preservation and Delivery**

The documented process ***shall*** include Handling, Storage, Packaging,
Preservation and Delivery per SAE AS9100, Clause 4.15.

**4.1.4 Infant Mortality Elimination**

The documented process ***shall*** include cost effective measures to
eliminate infant mortality defects.

NOTE The traditional method of elimination of infant mortality defects
is ESS. If some form of ESS is determined to be cost effective then it
may be accomplished by the assembly supplier and/or the Plan Owner.

NOTE Durability analysis and/or accelerated life testing can provide the
basis for a cost effective screen to eliminate infant mortality defects.

**4.1.5 Assessment and Qualification of Tools Used For Design and
Verification**

The documented process ***shall*** include assessment and qualification
of tools used for design and verification.

NOTE RTCA DO/254, Clause 11.4 provides guidance on tool assessment and
qualification and is a recommended practice to meet the objectives of
this document.

**4.2 Quality Conformance**

The documented process ***shall*** include process assurance to ensure
that the life cycle process objectives are met and activities have been
completed as outlined in plans or that deviations have been addressed.

NOTE RTCA DO/254, Clause 8., provides guidance on Process Assurance and
is a recommended practice for meeting the objectives of this document.

**4.2.1 Qualification**

NOTE In service experience with the assembly in question may be used to
the extent allowed by the customer's specification and SOW to meet the
requirements of this clause.

NOTE Qualification of similar assemblies may be used to the extent
allowed by the customer's specification and SOW to meet the requirements
of this clause.

NOTE ARP 5890, Clause 4.1.3.1 provides guidance on similarity analysis
and is a recommended practice to meet the objectives of this document.

**4.2.1.1 Plan Owner Qualification**

The documented process ***shall*** assure that the assembly is fully
qualified for its intended application as required by the equipment
specification and statement of work (SOW).

NOTE RTCA DO/254, Clauses 6.2 and 6.3 provide guidance on the
Verification Process and provide a recommended practice to meet the
objectives of this document.

The documented process ***shall*** include Design Validation per SAE
AS9100, Clause 4.4.8.

**4.2.1.2 Vendor Assembly Qualification**

The Plan Owner should document the assembly supplier's assembly
qualification process. In the event that the Plan Owner is able to
document the assembly supplier's assembly qualification process, then
the Plan Owner ***shall*** provide an assessment of the adequacy of the
assembly supplier's qualification effort and ***shall*** describe any
additional effort required to assure that the assembly will meet all
specified requirements.

In the event that the Plan Owner is unable to document the assembly
supplier's assembly qualification process then the Plan Owner
***shall*** provide alternate assurance that the assembly will perform
as required in the specified usage.

**4.2.1.3 Vendor Component Qualification**

The Plan Owner should document the assembly supplier's component
selection/qualification process. In the event that the Plan Owner is
able to document the assembly supplier's component qualification
process, then the Plan Owner ***shall*** provide an assessment of the
adequacy of the suppliers selection/qualification effort and ***shall***
describe any additional effort required to assure that the assembly will
meet all specified requirements.

In the event that the Plan Owner is unable to document the assembly
supplier's component selection/qualification process then the Plan Owner
***shall*** provide alternate assurance that the assembly will perform
as required in the specified usage.

NOTE IEC PAS 62240, clauses 4.3.3 and 4.3.4 define requirements for
acceptable vendor qualification.

**4.2.2 Acceptance**

**4.2.2.1 Plan Owner Acceptance**

The documented process ***shall*** define assembly, equipment and system
acceptance test as applicable.

NOTE RTCA DO/254, Clause 5.6 provides guidance on Acceptance Test and is
a recommended practice for meeting the objectives of this document.

The documented process ***shall*** include Purchasing per SAE AS9100,
Clause 4.6.

**4.2.2.2 Vendor Assembly Acceptance**

**4.2.2.3 Vendor Component Acceptance**

The Plan Owner should document the assembly supplier's component
acceptance process. In the event that the Plan Owner is able to document
the assembly supplier's component acceptance process, then the Plan
Owner ***shall*** provide and assessment of the adequacy of the
suppliers acceptance effort and ***shall*** describe any additional
effort required to assure that the assembly will meet all specified
requirements.

In the event that the Plan Owner is unable to document the assembly
supplier's component acceptance process then the Plan Owner ***shall***
provide alternate assurance that the assembly will perform as required
in the specified usage.

NOTE IEC PAS 62240, clause 4.4 defines requirements for acceptable
vendor acceptance of components.

**4.3 Product Identification and Traceability**

The documented process shall include Product Identification and
Traceability per SAE AS9100, Clause 4.8.

**5. Plan Administration**

**5.1 Plan Content and Organization**

The Plan ***shall*** be organized in such a manner that each of the
requirements of clauses 3 and 4 is addressed clearly, concisely and
unambiguously.

The Plan ***shall*** document the processes used by the Plan owner to
accomplish the following objectives. These objectives ***shall*** apply
to all assemblies.

-   Assembly Selection (3.1.1)

-   Assembly Application (3.)

-   Assembly Qualification

-   Assembly Quality Assurance

-   Assembly Dependability (3.2.3)

-   Assembly Compatibility with the Equipment Manufacturing Process

-   Assembly Data

-   Configuration Control

The Plan ***shall*** state clearly, concisely, and unambiguously:

-   What the Plan owner does to accomplish each of the objectives;

-   How compliance to the Plan is demonstrated; and

-   The evidence that is available to show that the objectives have been
    accomplished.

The Plan ***shall*** document the processes used to address each of the
requirements of clauses 3. and 4.

All the objectives and requirements given in this clause apply to
deliverable equipment or systems as stated in clause 5.5. The Plan Owner
has the responsibility of satisfying the requirements given in clauses
3. And 4. These requirements may be accomplished by either the Plan
Owner or may be subcontracted. In either case, the Plan Owner has the
responsibility for ensuring all objectives and requirements are met.

Note: Ground support Test Equipment, Flight Demonstrator Assemblies, and
Prototypes are typically exempt from these requirements, unless the Plan
Owner states otherwise in their Plan, see clause 5.5.

If the Plan Owner obtains assemblies from a distributor or other third
party source, the relevant requirements of this document ***shall***
apply also to that source.

**5.2 Plan Terms, Definitions and Abbreviations**

The terms, definitions and abbreviations used in the Plan ***shall*** be
those of clause 6.2 of this document, unless they are clearly defined
otherwise in the Plan.

**5.3 Plan Focal Point**

The Plan ***shall*** identify an authority or an organization to serve
as the primary interface between the Plan owner and outside parties in
matters pertaining to the Plan. The plan's focal point shall assure that
the Plan is reviewed and updated as necessary.

**5.4 Plan References**

The Plan ***shall*** include a list of references to all the documents
referenced in the Plan, including this document, other industry and
government documents, and Plan owner's internal documents.

**5.5 Plan Applicability**

The Plan ***shall*** document all the electronic assembly types or
technologies and the range of equipment and/or systems manufactured
and/or integrated by the Plan owner to which the Plan applies.

Note: The range of equipment is not intended to be a list of part
numbers. It may include, for example, the applicable market segment;
e.g., "This Plan applies to all equipment manufactured for aerospace
applications." It also may include an affectivity date; e.g., "This Plan
applies to all new equipment, and to components substituted into
existing equipment." The range of equipment also may be limited or
required by certain contractual agreements.

**5.6 Plan Implementation**

The Plan owner ***shall*** implement and follow the processes documented
in the Plan, within its range of applicability. The Plan owner
***shall*** provide objective evidence that the provisions of this
document are met, and that the Plan has been implemented.

**5.7 Plan Acceptance**

The Plan ***shall*** be accepted when the Plan owner and the customer
agree that the Plan is acceptable to both parties. Certification by an
assessment body, such as IECQ, may be used as evidence that the Plan
satisfies the requirements of this document.

**6. Notes**

**6.1 Intended Use**

**6.2 Terms, Definitions and Abbreviations**

For the purpose of this International Standard, the following
definitions apply. Plan owners may use alternative definitions
consistent with convention within their company in their plan if those
definitions are defined as required by clause 5.2.

[Aerospace Recommended Practice (ARP)]{.underline}

[Analysis (for Verification)]{.underline} - Utilization of data,
reference materials, actions, or test results previously obtained that
can be utilized for comparison to verify the requirement has been met.
If actual tests were conducted for a related or unrelated purpose, and
utilization of this data will prove the requirement has been met, it
should be considered "analysis".

[Anomalous Behavior]{.underline} -- Behavior that is inconsistent with
specified requirements.

[Application Environment]{.underline} -- Where a product is used, for
example, defense systems and facilities, energy facilities, aircraft,
space systems, automobiles, pharmaceuticals, commercial products.

[Assembly]{.underline} -- A number of components or any combination
thereof, joined together to perform a specific function.

[Assembly Application]{.underline} - The process that assures that the
assembly meets the requirements of the equipment and/or system in which
it is used.

[Assembly Manufacturer]{.underline} - The organization responsible for
the assembly specification and its production.

[Assembly Obsolescence Management]{.underline} - The range of management
actions taken to avoid or resolve the effects of assemblies not being
procurable due to the manufacturer(s) ceasing production. Assembly
obsolescence management should be considered an element of risk
management. (See Risk Management.)

[Assembly Qualification]{.underline} - The process used to demonstrate
that the assembly is capable of meeting specified requirements for all
required conditions and environments.

[Assembly Quality Assurance]{.underline} - All activities and processes
to provide adequate confidence that each individual assembly meets
specified requirements.

[Assembly Selection]{.underline} - The process of choosing a specific
assembly for a specific application.

[Assessment]{.underline} -- An evaluation based on engineering
judgement.

[Assumptions]{.underline} -- Statements or principles offered without
proof.

[Assurance]{.underline} -- The result of planned and systematic actions
necessary to provide adequate confidence and evidence that a product or
process satisfies given requirements.

[Availability]{.underline} - Probability that an assembly, equipment,
system or function is in an operable state.

[Baseline]{.underline} -- An identified and approved configuration that
thereafter serves as the basis for further design, and that is changed
only through change control procedures.

[Capable]{.underline} - A term used to indicate that an assembly can be
used successfully in the intended application.

[Certified]{.underline} - Indicates assessment and compliance to an
applicable third party standard and maintenance of a certificate and
registration \[i.e. CECC, JAN, IECQ\].

[Characterization]{.underline} - A process of testing a sample of
assemblies to determine the key performance parameter values that can be
expected of all produced assemblies of the type tested.

[Circuit Tolerance Analysis]{.underline} - An electrical/optical design
variability analysis of the assembly performance parameters that assures
equipment/system performance while taking into account worst case
combinations of assembly parameter tolerances, including end-of-life
limits on tolerances.

[Commercial Off-The-Shelf (COTS) Item]{.underline} -- An item developed
by a supplier for multiple customers, whose design and configuration is
controlled by the supplier's or an industry specification.

[Common Mode]{.underline} -- Event which causes anomalous behavior of
two or more items.

[Complex Item]{.underline} -- All items that are not simple are
considered to be "complex". See definition of Simple Item.

[Configuration]{.underline} -- (1) The performance, functional, and
physical attributes of an existing or planned product, or a combination
of products. (2) One of a series of sequentially created variations of a
product.

[Configuration Change Management; Configuration Control]{.underline} --
(1) A systematic process which ensures that changes to released
configuration documentation are properly identified, documented,
evaluated for impact, approved by a appropriate level of authority,
incorporated and verified. (2) The configuration management activity
concerning: the systematic proposal, justification, evaluation,
coordination, and disposition of proposed changes; and the
implementation of all approved and released changes into (a) the
applicable configurations of a product, (b) associated product
information, and (c) supporting and interfacing products and their
associated product information.

[Configuration Documentation]{.underline} -- Technical information, the
purpose of which is to identify and define a product's performance,
functional, and physical attributes (e.g. specifications, drawings).

[Configuration Verification]{.underline} -- The action verifying that
the product has achieved its required attributes (performance
requirements and functional constraints) and the product's design is
accurately documented.

[Data]{.underline} -- Recorded information of any nature (including
administrative, managerial, financial, and technical) regardless of
medium or characteristics.

[Demonstration. (for Verification)]{.underline} - A simple act or
performing an operation without data recording.

[Dependability]{.underline} - A measure of consistency in meeting
reliability, availability and obsolescence expectations, using
logistical support methods.

### Derating -- This is a design method which increases the operational margins of items by imposing modified item usage limitations which are more restrictive than the usual or manufacture's item operational ratings.

[Derived Requirement]{.underline} -- Additional requirement resulting
from the design process, which may not be directly traceable to higher
level requirements.

[Design Process]{.underline} -- The process of creating an item,
equipment or system from a set of requirements using the following set
of processes: requirements capture, conceptual design, detailed design,
implementation and production transition

[Diminishing Manufacturing Sources and Material Shortages
(DMSMS)]{.underline} -

[Distributor]{.underline} - An organization contractually authorized by
a manufacturer to store, split, repack and distribute completely
finished assemblies which have been declared by the manufacturer as
conforming to their specifications. The distributor is responsible for
providing any technical information and traceability information
supplied by the assembly manufacturer.

[Durability Analysis]{.underline} - The structured analysis of the
assembly's response to the stresses resulting from operation,
maintenance, shipping, storage, and other activities throughout its
specified life in order to estimate its expected life.

[Electromagnetic Compatibility (EMC)]{.underline} -

[Electronic Assembly Management Plan (EAMP)]{.underline} - An assembly
integrator's document that defines the processes and practices for
applying assemblies to an equipment or system. Generally, it addresses
all relevant aspects of controlling assemblies during system design,
development, production, and post-production support.

#### [Electronic Assembly Management Plan (EAMP) Compliant Assembly]{.underline} - An assembly selected and managed according to the Plan requirements. 

[Electronic Assemblies]{.underline} - Electrical or electronic devices
that are subject to disassembly without destruction or impairment of
design use. This definition includes electro/optical assemblies.
Examples are circuit cards, displays, storage devices, etc. Electronic
assemblies include electro/optical assemblies.

[Electronics Assembly Environment]{.underline} - The applicable
environmental conditions (as described per the equipment/system
specification) that the assembly shall be able to withstand without loss
or degradation in assembly performance, beyond specified performance
limits, during its useful life (the length of which is defined by the
assembly integrator in conjunction with customers).

[Electronics Assembly Maturity]{.underline} -

[Electronic Component]{.underline} - Electrical or electronic devices
that are not subject to disassembly without destruction or impairment of
design use. The are sometimes called *parts*, or *piece parts*. Examples
are resistors, capacitors, diodes, integrated circuits, etc. Electronic
components include electro/optical devices.

[Electronic Equipment]{.underline} - An item produced by the Plan owner,
which incorporates electronic assemblies. Examples are end items, line
replaceable units, cabinets, etc. Electronic equipment includes
electro/optical equipment.

[Electrostatic Discharge (ESD)]{.underline} -

[Environmental Stress Screening (ESS)]{.underline} -

[Error]{.underline} -- A mistake in requirements, design or
implementation.

[Failure]{.underline} -- The inability of an item to perform a required
function within specified limits. A failure may be produced when a fault
is encountered.

[Failure-Free Operating Period (FFOP)]{.underline}

[Failure Mode and Effect Analysis (FMEA)]{.underline} -

[Failure Mode Effect and Criticality Analysis (FMECA)]{.underline} -

### Failure Reporting, Analysis and Corrective Action System - 

[Fault Tree Analysis (FTA)]{.underline} -

[Federal Aviation Regulations]{.underline}

[Finite Element Analysis (FEA)]{.underline}

[Fit]{.underline} -- The ability of a product to interface or
interconnect with or become part an integral part of another product.

[Form]{.underline} -- The shape, size, dimensions, and other physically
measurable parameters that uniquely characterize a product. For
software, for denotes the language and media.

[Function]{.underline} -- The action or actions that a product is
designed to perform.

[Functional Attributes]{.underline} -- Measurable performance parameters
including reliability.

[Functional Failure Path (FFP)]{.underline}

[Functional Failure Path Analysis (FFPA)]{.underline}

[Functional Hazard Assessment (FHA)]{.underline}

[Guidance]{.underline} -- Advice or counseling for complying with
requirements.

[Hardware]{.underline} -- Products made of material and their components
(mechanical, electrical, electronic, optical, hydraulic, pneumatic).
Computer software and technical documentation are excluded.

[Hardware Description Language (HDL)]{.underline}

[Infant Mortality]{.underline} -

[Inspection (for verification)]{.underline} - Visual observation of the
item or drawings to prove a requirement has been met.

[Interchangeable]{.underline} -- A product which possess such functional
and physical attributes as to be equivalent in performance to another
product of similar or identical purposes; and is capable of being
exchanged for the other product without selection for fit or
performance, and without alteration of the products themselves or of
adjoining products, except for adjustment.

[Implementation]{.underline} -- The act of generating a physical reality
from a specification.

[Item]{.underline} -- A general term used to refer to a subject
component, assembly, equipment or system.

[Life Cycle]{.underline} -- A generic term relating to the entire period
of conception, definition, build, distribution, operation and disposal
of a product.

[Line Replaceable Unit (LRU)]{.underline}

[May]{.underline} - Indicates a course of action which is permissible
within the limits of this document.

[Maintenance-Free Operating Period (MFOP)]{.underline} - That segment of
the required useful life (service life) during which preventative
maintenance is not required to assure performance and operational
readiness.

[Mean Time Between Failures (MTBF)]{.underline} -

[Mean Time Between Unscheduled Removals (MTBUR)]{.underline} -

[Mechanical Tolerance Analysis]{.underline} -

[Nomenclature]{.underline} -- (1) Names assigned to kinds and groups of
products. (2) Formal designations assigned to products by customer or
supplier (such as model number, or model type, design differentiation,
specific design series or configuration.)

[Obsolete Assembly]{.underline} - An assembly, which is no longer
manufactured, and may or may not still be available.

[Original Equipment Manufacturer]{.underline} -

[Plan Owner]{.underline} - The original design authority responsible for
all aspects of the delivered equipment's or system's capability and
responsible for writing and maintaining their specific EAMP.

[Preliminary System Safety Assessment]{.underline} -- A systematic
evaluation of a proposed system architecture and its implementation,
based on the functional hazard assessment and failure condition
classification, to determine safety requirements for all items in the
architecture.

NOTE A Preliminary Systems Safety Assessment applies to the system under
development. It is used to direct further safety analysis activity
required to complete the final system safety assessment.

[Preventative Maintenance]{.underline} - Replacement of the assembly
that precludes failure due to wear out or fatigue. This does not include
replacement of items normally referred to as "servicing" operations.

[Reliability]{.underline} -- The probability that an item will perform
its intended function for a specified interval under stated conditions

[Requirements]{.underline} -- Specified essential attributes.

[Risk]{.underline} - A measure of the potential inability to achieve
overall program objectives within defined cost, schedule, and technical
constraints.

[]{.mark}

[Risk Management]{.underline} - The act or practice of dealing with
risk. It includes planning for risk, assessing (identifying and
analyzing) risk areas, developing risk-handling options, monitoring
risks to determine how risks have changed, and documenting the overall
risk management program.

[Safety]{.underline} -- The state in which risk is lower than the
boundary risk. The boundary risk is the upper limit of the acceptable
risk. It is specific for a technical process or state. The risk is
defined by the rate or probability or occurrence and the expected damage
or injury.

[Safety Analysis]{.underline} - The disciplined approach to identifying
hazards and their causes, and to assessing their risks.

[Shall]{.underline} - Indicates a requirement.

[Shop Replaceable Unit (SRU)]{.underline} -

[Should]{.underline} - Offers a guideline or recommendation that might
be used or helpful to assure compliance to an objective.

[Similarity Analysis]{.underline} - The structured comparison of the
elements of the assembly being assessed with those of predecessor
assemblies for which in-service reliability data are available.

[Simple Item]{.underline} -- An item is considered simple if a
comprehensive combination of deterministic tests and analyses can ensure
correct functional behavior under all foreseeable operating conditions
with no anomalous behavior.

[Single Event Effect]{.underline} - The response of the electronic
components of an assembly to the impact of galactic cosmic rays, solar
enhanced particles and/or energetic neutrons and protons. The range of
responses can include both non-destructive (e.g. upset) and destructive
(e.g. latch-up or gate rupture) phenomena.

[Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE)]{.underline}

[Specification]{.underline} -- A document that explicitly states
essential technical attributes/requirements for a product and procedures
to determine that the product's performance meets its
requirements/attributes.

[Standard]{.underline} -- A rule of basis of comparison use to provide
both guidance in and assessment of a given activity or the content of a
specified data item.

[Storage Life]{.underline} -

[Subcontractor]{.underline} - A person or entity to whom the holder of
obligations under a contract has delegated part or all of such
obligations.

[Substitute Assembly]{.underline} - An assembly used as a replacement in
equipment or system after the equipment or system design has been
approved. (In some contexts, the term "alternate assembly" is used to
describe a substitute assembly that is "equal to or better than" the
original assembly.)

[System Architecture]{.underline} -- The structure of hardware and
software selected to implement the requirements.

[System Safety Assessment (SSA)]{.underline} -- An ongoing systematic,
comprehensive evaluation of the proposed system to show that relevant
safety requirements are satisfied.

[Test (for Verification)]{.underline} - Where actual test are conducted
and specific data is obtained, analyzed, corrected to standard
conditions, and compared to acceptance criteria to verify performance
requirements. Where "test" is the designated verification method, it is
understood that some degree of analysis is inherent in the verification
process and need not be so identified on the verification
cross-reference index.

[Testability]{.underline} -- (1) The ability to test an item
sufficiently to guarantee that all possible states of the item perform
to its specification. (2) The ease with which an item can be tested to
provide evidence of compliance with its requirements.

[Time to Failure (TTF)]{.underline}

[Tool Assessment]{.underline} -- A set of activities to assess the tools
used in the design and verification of an item, equipment or subsystem
to provide confidence that the tool is capable of performing its
functions correctly consistent with the design assurance level of the
functions to be performed by the item, equipment or system.

[Tool Qualification]{.underline} -- The process necessary to obtain
certification credit for a tool within the context of a specific
electronic system.

[Traceability]{.underline} -- An identifiable association between items
or processes, such as between a requirement and the source of the
requirement or between a verification method and its base requirement.

[Useful Life]{.underline} - The period of time from delivery of the
assembly to the using activity until its identity is destroyed by
classifying it as salvage. Sometimes referred to as *life-cycle*.

[Validation]{.underline} -- The process of determining that the
requirements are the correct requirements and that they are complete.
Validation occurs prior to verification.

[Validation (in reference to SAE AS9100)]{.underline} The evaluation of
an implementation of requirements to determine that they have been met.
Validation occurs after verification.

[Verification]{.underline} -- The evaluation of an implementation of
requirements to determine that they have been met. Verification occurs
after validation.

[Verification (in reference to SAE AS9100)]{.underline} The
determination, at each design stage, that the design meets requirements.
Verification occurs prior to validation.

[Verification Tool]{.underline} -- Tools used to ensure performance
against predetermined standards or requirements. These tools do not
introduce errors, but may fail to detect them. For example, an analog or
digital circuit simulator or an automated test that measures actual
circuit performance.

[Will]{.underline} - Expresses a declaration of intent when used in the
context of being compliant to this document or to an EAMP.

[Working Group (WG)]{.underline}

**6.3 Bibliography**

**6.4 Smart Numbering System for Environmental Grades**

![](media/image1.wmf){width="5.996527777777778in"
height="1.1861111111111111in"}

![](media/image2.wmf){width="5.997222222222222in" height="3.76875in"}

![](media/image3.wmf){width="5.997222222222222in" height="3.76875in"}

![](media/image4.wmf){width="5.997222222222222in"
height="3.9166666666666665in"}

![](media/image5.wmf){width="5.997222222222222in" height="3.76875in"}

**6.5 Assembly Maturity Rating**

NOTE EIA-724 provides definitions for the purpose of describing the life
cycle of electronics.