PdM SPE Body 

Armor Vital Torso 

Protection Update
Product Manager 

Soldier Protective Equipment

LTC Kenneth Elgort

Product Manager

Soldier ProtectiveEquipment

Sarah Coleman

Deputy ProductManager

Soldier ProtectiveEquipment

Product Manager Soldier Protective Equipment 

(PdM SPE)

Joint Advanced Planning Brief to Industry 

Body Armor Vital Torso Protection Update

Every Ounce Matters, Every Bullet Counts

16 November 2023

CUI

CUI

Controlled by: PEO SOLDIER

Controlled by: PEO SOLDIER Security

CUI Category: Privacy Information

Limited Dissemination Control: FEDCON

POC: Nolan, Bryan E. CIV, bryan.e.nolan.civ@army.mil
10

2

Agenda

 Opening Remarks

 Mission, Vision, and Priorities

 Vital Torso Protection (VTP) Purchase Description (PD) 

Development Overview

 VTP Plate Testing Overview

 X-Variant Discussion

Please Note Change of Address:

Product Manager Soldier Protective Equipment (PdM SPE)

10125 Kingman Road, Bldg 317

Fort Belvoir, VA 22060-5862

CUI

CUI
10

3

Mission, Vision, and Priorities

Mission

To increase Warfighter lethality, survivability, and 

mobility by delivering cutting edge Soldier protective 

equipment

Vision

To continuously optimize Soldier protective 

equipment based on operational threats and deliver 

the right equipment, to the right Soldier, at the right 

time

Principles

Understand user needs

Have a plan/roadmap

Be responsive 

Simplicity matters

Data supported decisions

Fiscally Responsible

Priority 2 – Deliver Capability

 Right Soldier, right time, right 

place

• Support fieldings and RFI

• Maintain industrial base

• Understand supply chain risks

• Pursue flexible contract options

• Stay current on operating 

environment and threats

 

Priority 1 – People & Networks

 Build the team internally and 

externally 

• Balance workload

• Recognize, reward, and promote

• Build predictability into the 

workplace 

• Work across PM lines / integrate 

early 

• Nurture stakeholder relationships

Priority 3 – Improve & Innovate

 Continuous optimization

• Transparency with roadmap

• Track Industry and S&T 

advancements to better manage 

technology transition 

• Seek and incorporate User feedback

• Pursue inter-service efforts and 

collaboration 

CUI

CUI
FOUO

Body Armor Team

Product Manager Soldier ProtectiveEquipment 

Every Ounce Matters, Every Bullet Counts

APM: MAJ Pierre-Zamora 

Program Executive Office Soldier 

peosoldier.army.mil

CUI

CUI
Pre-Decisional

Soldier Protection System (SPS)

105

CUI

CUI
Pre-Decisional

106

Body Armor

Torso Extremity Protection (TEP)

Modular Scalable Vest (MSV)

Blast Pelvic Protector (BPP)

Female Ballistic Combat Shirt

(FBCS)

Female/Small Stature Specific Adjustments

 Female Ballistic Combat Shirt (FBCS)

• Five (5) sizes for female Soldiers: XS, SM, 

MED, LG,XL

• Shorter arm lengths

• Hair bun cut-out in the back of the collar

• Flared sweep at hips and to prevent the shirt 

from riding up

Modular Scalable Vest

(MSV)

Ballistic Combat Shirt (BCS)

 Modular Scalable Vest (MSV) – Unisex 

• System is modular enabling the operator to wear components together as a system or each 

component separately

• 8 Sizes: Extra Small Short (XS-S), Extra Small (XS), Small Short (SS), Small Long (SL), Small 

(S), Medium (M), Large (L), Extra Large (XL)

• Sized to fit virtually all Soldiers

• Customizable from a concealable carrier to full Assault profile

• Accepts soft armor and Shooter Cut ballistic plates

 Ballistic Combat Shirt (BCS)

• Provides ballistic fragmentation protection and flame-resistant protection to the Soldier

• Multi-fabric design using three separate flame-resistant cloths for the main outer garment 

construction; one for the deltoid, yoke, and collar, and two for the sleeve components 

• There are five standard unisex and five standard female sizes (XS, SM, MED, LG,XL)

 Blast Pelvic Protector (BPP) – Unisex 

• Six (6) core sizes (XS, SM, MD, LG, XL, XXL) available

 Modular Scalable Vest (MSV) – Unisex 

• Three (3) expanded sizes for female and 

small statured Soldiers are Small-Long, 

Small-Short, and X-Small-Short

• Two (2) expanded size plate carriers 

(6x6, 6x8) to accommodate female 

and small statured Soldiers currently

available

TEP and VTP Goals:

 Development of a light ballistic plate technology that matches or exceeds the current 

performance thresholds

 Establish production of hard and soft armor systems for small stature Soldiers

 Investigate improved soft armor material solutions aimed increasing mobility, flexibility and 

weight reduction

Torso Extremity Protection 

(TEP)

CUI

CUI
Pre-Decisional

107

 Continued work with industry to refine the Improved Geometry (Shooter’s 

Cut) Enhanced Small Arms Protective Insert (ESAPI)

 Because of the success of industry and technology to meet or 

exceed our current threshold (7%), the Value Adjusted Total 

Evaluated (Unit) Price (VATEP) ceiling will increase for future fair 

opportunities to further incentivize weight savings.

 Fielding priority Close Combat Soldiers in accordance with HQDA

 Plan is to transition VTP to Defense Logistics Agency (DLA) for 

sustainment in the next fiscal year

 All future sustainment contracts will be modified to reflect the 

Shooter’s Cut design

 Intent is to place X variants into a contingency stock

 Army is reevaluating the X-Variant requirements

Vital Torso Protection (VTP) Plate Update

CUI

CUI
Pre-Decisional

108

Successful Director Operational Test 

and Evaluation (DOT&E) Touchpoint 1

 Held on 13 Oct 23

 Reviewed Sections 3 (Requirements) 

and 4 (Verification) of the proposed 

VTP PD

 Relevant action items:

• PdM SPE will be requesting user 

input on operationally relevant 

environmental conditions for testing 

in PD

 Follow-on Touchpoints will review 

appendices and updates from due outs

 Next Touchpoint week of 13 Nov 23

Coming up: 

 Meeting with Combat Capabilities 

Development Command (DEVCOM) to review 

their version of VTP PD

 JAPBI Brief/Industry Touchpoint and Release 

of Request for Information (RFI)

• Pending outcome of DEVCOM meeting and 

implementation of DOT&E changes

 DOT&E Touchpoint 2

Ongoing: 

 Non-Ballistic test procedure practice w/ ATC’s 

non-ballistics team (bi-weekly)

 Aberdeen Test Center (ATC) review of PD

 Completed:

• ATC touchpoint and handoff of PD draft

• DOT&E Touchpoint 1

VTP Purchase Description (PD) Progress

CUI

CUI
Pre-Decisional

109

1: Increase statistical significance of testing on behalf of the Soldier 

2: Improve operational relevancy of testing on behalf of the Soldier

3: Improve alignment to directed requirements on behalf of all 

partners

4: Improve usability on behalf of our industry partners and everyday 

users 

VTP PD Update Goals

CUI

CUI
Pre-Decisional

110

• Removal of V50

• New Acceptable Quality Limit (AQL)

• New fair hit criteria and velocity tolerance

• Backface Deformation (BFD) (Upper Tolerance Level (UTL) for First Article Test 

(FAT) and AQL for Lot Acceptance Test (LAT))

• Defect classification (Lower Confidence Level (LCL) for FAT and AQL for LAT)

• Shot patterns

• Environmental factors 

• Dimensional evaluations

• Mass 

VTP PD Update Summary

CUI

CUI
Pre-Decisional

111

During a “3rd party” review conducted by DEVCOM of our 

first VTP PD draft, they reached out to their Research & 

Development (R&D) industry partners to share some of 

our initial test changes. The following changes are no 

longer being implemented.

• No ambient, unconditioned testing

• Combined environmental exposures

Cancelled Changes

CUI

CUI
Pre-Decisional

112

V50 Ballistic Limit tests are great for measuring production variation 

but not necessarily for measuring armor protectiveness.

A meaningful V50...

• Must resolve to a value

• Cannot combine sizes

• Cannot combine shot locations

• Would require ~320 plates to be of high value

Current procedures do not uphold any of these requirements and, therefore, are 

worthless for quality control and protection verification

Removal of V50 Testing

CUI

CUI
Pre-Decisional

113

Why change the LAT AQL?

Old:

• The old PD used the following AQLs:

• XSAPI Ballistics: no 1st shot complete system penetrations (CC) and second shot CCs held to an 

ANSI Z-1.4 2008 Special Inspection Level “S-4” AQL of 15%

• ESAPI Ballistics: no 1st shot complete system penetrations (CC) and minor defects held to an ANSI Z1.4 2008 Special Inspection Level “S-4” AQL of 10%

• XSBI Ballistics: no 1st shot complete system penetrations (CC) and second shot CCs held to an ANSI 

Z-1.4 2008 Special Inspection Level “S-3” AQL of 15%

• ESBI Ballistics: no 1st shot complete system penetrations (CC) and minor defects held to an ANSI Z1.4 2008 Special Inspection Level “S-3” AQL of 10%

• Non ballistics: General Inspection Level II AQL 4%

New: 

• The new PD uses ANSI/ASQ Z1.4-2008 Special Inspection Level III throughout, except during ballistic 

testing where a more stringent sample size is used with the same accept/reject criteria.

• Reduces Government risk during small batch production

• Maintains consistency throughout 

• Uses the longstanding office standardized defect limits by classification:

• Maximum AQL of 4 for critical defects,

• Maximum AQL of 10 for major defects.

• Maximum AQL of 25 for minor defects.

New Acceptable Quality Limit (AQL) – Why?

CUI

CUI
Pre-Decisional

114

Tells you how to test it

• Type, class, threat, plate sizes, shootpacks, shot 

locations, conditioning

Tells you how to evaluate the results

• Type, class, threat, condition, LCL

Main Ballistic Matrix

CUI

CUI
Pre-Decisional

115

OLD

Reference velocity tolerance: +50 ft/s -0ft/s

Fair hit criteria:

NEW

Reference velocity tolerance: Higher value of ± 30 ft/s 

or ± 1.25% 

Fair hit criteria:

• Use fair velocity impacts to calculate first shot Backface

Deformation (BFD) UTL

• Use both first and second shot fair velocity impacts to 

calculate second shot BFD UTL

• When a contingency sample is used to get another shot 2 

value and the first shot 1 is valid, the second shot 1 does not 

count for record. This follows the principle of the first valid 

data is what counts. In accordance with PdM SPE policy, test 

variance shall not cause a circumstance to expose a vendor to 

additional or less risk through testing them until they fail or 

pass.

Ballistic Test Operating Procedures (TOP)

CUI

CUI
Pre-Decisional

116

OLD

• BFD measured on all shots during FAT Part A 

• Various threats

Acceptance Criteria: Pass/fail

• FAT:

• Part A acceptance based off minor and critical 

defect quantities across multiple threats. 

Other portions use a 90/90 UTL on first shot 

and 80/90 UTL on second

• >= 62.0 mm = critical ; >= 58.0 mm = 

minor

• Part B acceptance based off a 90/90 UTL on 

first shot and 80/90 UTL on second

NEW

• Against primary threat of interest for the plate 

variant

• UTL must be less than 58.0 mm

Acceptance criteria:

• FAT: Pass/fail for meeting a 58.0 mm BFD UTL

Backface Deformation (BFD) FAT

CUI

CUI
Pre-Decisional

117

OLD

TOP 10-2-210B

• BFD measured on all shots during LAT

Acceptance Criteria: Pass/fail

• LAT: 80/90 UTL on first shot and 70/90 UTL on 

second

NEW

TOP 10-2-210C

• Against primary threat of interest for the plate 

variant

Acceptance criteria:

• LAT: evaluated using AQLs

Backface Deformation (BFD)

CUI

CUI
Pre-Decisional

118

OLD

Ballistic penetration protection (CC, CP, PP): 

• Minor vs critical based off threat, type of 

penetration, and BFD results. 

• ESAPI FAT Part A: Reject on 17 minors, 1 critical

• ESBI FAT: Minor defect reject rate varies per threat

Non-ballistic protection: 

• ESAPI & ESBI FAT: reject on 1 critical, minor defect 

reject rate uses General Inspection Level II AQL 4%

NEW

Ballistic penetration protection (CC, CP, PP): 

• Not defined in terms of “defects”

• Acceptance using LCL

Non-ballistic protection: 

• Acceptance criteria uses LCLs shown below

• Workmanship defect classifications are largely 

unchanged. 

• Drawing compliance expanded to minor, major, 

critical

• Fungus resistance expanded to minor, major, 

critical

• Magnetic influence expanded to major and critical 

• Flammability expanded to minor, major, critical

• Spall penetration included as a minor (under 

discussion)

Defect Classifications - FAT 

CUI

CUI
Pre-Decisional

119

OLD

Ballistic penetration protection: 

• Minor vs critical based off threat, type of 

penetration, and BFD results. 

• ESAPI ballistic acceptance criteria:

• ESBI ballistic acceptance criteria: 

Non-ballistic protection: 

• Reject on 1 critical, minors use General Inspection 

Level II AQL 4.0

NEW

Ballistic penetration protection (CC, CP, PP): 

• Acceptance using AQL 

Non-ballistic protection: 

• Acceptance criteria uses Special Inspection Level 

III AQL

Notes: [1] This sampling method is more stringent than the minimum required by 

3.1.2.1. Per ANSI/ASQ Z1.4-2003 (R2018), the sample size is three with an accept 

value of zero noted defects and a reject value of one noted defect when using Special 

Inspection Level III and an AQL of 4.0. This more stringent sampling method of eight 

with the same accept and reject criteria is selected on purpose to further reduce 

Government risk during small batch production. 

Defect Classifications – LAT 

CUI

CUI
Pre-Decisional

120

OLD NEW

Crown-Edge – against primary threat of interest 

for the plate variant

• No 3rd shot (no Government reference)

• Durability/impacted plates NOT shot at crack. 

Will be shot wherever they fall per the 4 

patterns

• Added verbiage to ensure equal distribution 

between left and right edge

Crown-Edge 

• Government reference 

3rd shot (Part A)

• Durability/impacted 

plates shot at crack

Shot Patterns – Type I (Torso)

CUI

CUI
Pre-Decisional

121

Example of primary threat matrix

New Shot Patterns

CUI

CUI
Pre-Decisional

122

Second shot pattern is done against the non-primary threats under extreme heat,

cold, and saltwater.

Utilizes 2 concepts:

1. Interrogate entire allowable surface

2. Random Shot Pattern Generator

Original Proposed Idea: Envelope shot pattern - cancelled

• Edge spacing doesn’t change

FAQ: What if Vendor 1 and Vendor 2 have two different FAT shot patterns? Doesn't this 

open the door for protests? • No, the shot patterns are in the contract.

• HOWEVER, we agree it would be less optimal and not necessary. PdM SPE and Aberdeen Test Center (ATC) will work 

procedures to include the following: For any set group of contracts, ATC will run the generators once and apply the result to

all vendors for FAT 1. If any Vendor has a FAT 2, ATC will run the generators again and apply the result to all vendors for 

FAT 2 (for if or when other submit second FATs) and so forth.

New Shot Pattern – Type I (Torso)

CUI

CUI
Pre-Decisional

123

OLD NEW

Corner, edge, middle 

• Primary threat of interest:

• Shot locations assigned in table 

• Non-primary threats

• Shot locations assigned using random 

shot generators

• Alternate between pattern A and pattern B

• One edge shot, opposite non-edge shot

New Shot Patterns – Type II (Side) 

CUI

CUI
Pre-Decisional

124

Example of 

primary threat 

matrix

Example of 

non-primary 

threat matrix 

with random 

shot generator

New Shot Patterns – Type II (Side)

CUI

CUI
Pre-Decisional

125

Plate Threat

Shot 

Sequence 

#

Total # of 

Shots

System 

P(nCC) LCL 

(90% 

Confidence)

P(nCP) LCL 

(90% 

Confidence)

Type I

Class I

(ESAPI)

Other threat 1 12 Max 75% 50%

2 12 Max 60% 40%

Other threat 1 22 Min 90% 60%

Primary threat 1 65 Min 90% 70%

2 65 Min 70% N/A

Other threat 1 12 Max 75% 60%

2 12 Max 60% 40%

Type II

Class I

(ESBI)

Other threat 1 12 Max 75% 50%

Other threat 1 22 Min 90% 60%

Primary threat 1 65 Min 90% 70%

Other threat 1 12 Max 75% 50%

Factor Shots Accep

t Reject LCL

First Shot

All 65

3 CC 4 CC 90/90

14 CP 15 CP 70/90

Extreme Heat 17 2 CC 3 CC 71/90

Extreme Cold 16 2 CC 3 CC 70/90

All Exposures 32 2 CC 3 CC 84/90

Size 8 1 CC 2 CC 59/90

Pathfinder-S 32 2 CC 3 CC 84/90

MSV B-100 33 2 CC 3 CC 84/90

Edge 33 2 CC 3 CC 84/90

Crown 32 2 CC 3 CC 84/90

Each Exposure 8 1 CC 2 CC 59/90

Second 

Shot

All 65 14 CC 15 CC 70/90

Extreme Heat 17 5 CC 6 CC 58/90

Extreme Cold 16 5 CC 6 CC 56/90

All Exposures 32 10 CC 11 CC 59/90

Size 8 2 CC 3 CC 46/90

Pathfinder-S 32 10 CC 11 CC 59/90

MSV B-100 33 10 CC 11 CC 60/90

Edge 33 10 CC 11 CC 60/90

Crown 32 10 CC 11 CC 59/90

Each Exposure 8 2 CC 3 CC 46/90

Type I, Class I (ESAPI) Primary 

Threat FAT acceptance criteria.

Probability of No Penetration Requirements.

Environmental Conditioning

CUI

CUI
Pre-Decisional

126

• Petroleum, Oils, and Lubricants (POL) and DEET resistance

• F-24 soaks

• Oil (Certificate of Compliance (CoC))

• DEET (CoC)

• Saltwater

• Altitude

• Temperature shock

• Vibration

• Durability

• Extreme Cold

• Extreme Heat

• Weathering resistance

• Sand and rain resistance (NEW)

We are currently investigating which conditions will be included. Hypothesizing 

including 4-6 of the above, rather than all of them. The remaining conditions may 

require a CoC. PdM SPE will be collecting input from users on environmental 

conditions of most concern. 

Environmental Conditioning

CUI

CUI
Pre-Decisional

127

OLD

F-24 (Jet Aviation Fuel): Immersion for 2 hours 

DEET and Oil: Immersion for 2 hours

NEW

F-24 (Jet Aviation Fuel): Immersion for 5-10 min 

DEET and Oil: CoC evaluation

Plate Count

Test DEET Oil F-24 Total

Part A B A B A B

ESAPI 

FAT

1 0 1 8 1 8 19

ESBI FAT 1 0 2 0 2 0 5

Plate Count

Test F-24 Total

ESAPI 

FAT

8 8

ESBI 

FAT

8 8

Acceptance Criteria

Test Shots Accept Reject LCL

ESAPI 

FAT

First shot 8 1 CC 2 CC 59/90

Second 

shot

8 2 CC 3 CC 46/90

ESBI 

FAT First shot 8 1 CC 2 CC 59/90

Acceptance Criteria: 

• Part A acceptance based off minor and critical 

defect quantities across multiple threats. Other 

portions use a 90/90 P(nP) LCL

• Part B acceptance based off V0 LCL

DEET, Oil, and F-24 (Jet Aviation Fuel) 

CUI

CUI
Pre-Decisional

128

OLD NEW

Thickness Variation

Requirement:

• Limit the range of thickness to no more than 15% of 

the average thickness (per plate)

• No change to measurement locations

Acceptance Criteria

• Each measurement beyond the range = 1 Major 

defect

• Evaluated using defect table 

Edge material thickness

Requirement: 

• Limit the thickness to no more than 0.1 in

• FAT: Measure 12 samples of edge material of 6 in 

or more

• LAT: CoCs showing in process inspections 

sufficient to affirm compliance

Acceptance Criteria: 

• Pass/fail

Thickness variation

Requirement:

• Cannot exceed 1 in

• Difference between any thickness measurement 

cannot exceed 0.130 in 

Acceptance Criteria: 

• Thickness out of tolerance – critical defect

Edge material thickness

Requirement: none

Acceptance Criteria: none

Thickness

CUI

CUI
Pre-Decisional

129

OLD NEW

Requirement:

• No more than the maximum allowable (width or 

height) per the drawing

• No change to measurement locations

Acceptance Criteria:

• 90/90 UTL for FAT (pass/fail)

• 80/90 UTL for LAT (pass/fail)

Requirement:

• Cannot exceed specifications in drawings 

Acceptance Criteria: 

• Under tolerance – critical defect

• Over tolerance – minor defect

Critical Width and Height

CUI

CUI
Pre-Decisional

130

OLD

NEW

Requirement:

• New thresholds: 7% (T) & 30% (O) lighter than 

legacy (using mass, not Areal Density (AD))

Acceptance Criteria

• FAT& LAT: pass/fail

Requirement:

• Not defined for torso plates

Acceptance Criteria: 

• Over threshold – critical defect

Mass

CUI

CUI
Pre-Decisional

131

OLD

Acceptance Criteria: 

• Minors and criticals use general inspection level II 

AQL 4.0

Internal Workmanship 

NEW

CUI

CUI
CUI

Pre-Decisional 

132

OLD

Visual and x-ray inspection

NEW

Visually examine all test samples

• Second visual external examination after 

Temperature Cycle followed by Weathering 

Conditioning (TCW) environmental conditioning and 

durability

132

External Workmanship

CUI CUI

CUI
CUI

Pre-Decisional 

133

OLD

• Visual inspection 

Acceptance Criteria: 

• Shade bar, shaded parts, spots, stains – minor 

defect

NEW

• Confirm CoC

• Visually match shade of 10% of all submitted 

samples

• Under artificial daylight and incandescent lamplight

Acceptance criteria:

• Any sample noted as not a good match – minor 

defect

• Evaluated using defect table

133

Shade

CUI

CUI
CUI

Pre-Decisional 

134

OLD

MIL-STD-810 Test Method 508.8

• >= 80% synthetic materials with proven natural 

fungal resistance, no test

• <80%, test

• Place sample of each material in test 

chamber for 28 days

• Evaluate fungal growth

Acceptance Criteria: 

• <= grade of 3 = pass

• > grade of 3 = fail

NEW

MIL-STD-810 Test Method 508.8

• >= 90% synthetic materials with proven natural 

fungal resistance, no test

• <90%, test 8 end item samples (same samples as 

durability)

Acceptance criteria:

• Growth rating of 1 = minor defect

• Growth rating of 2 or 3 = major defect

• Growth rating of 4 = critical defect

134

Fungus Resistance

CUI

CUI
CUI

Pre-Decisional 

135

OLD

• Test with magnetic and lensatic compasses

Acceptance Criteria: Pass/fail

• Needle deviates = critical defect

NEW

4.4.1.8 of MIL-PRF-10436N

• Random 10% of all FAT samples

• See PD for more info

135

Acceptance criteria:

• Each compass error > 40 mils = major defect

• All three targets record a compass error > 40 mils 

= critical defect

Magnetic Influence

CUI

CUI
CUI

Pre-Decisional 

136

OLD

• Confirm Hard Armor Plate Insert (HAPI) design 

material is non-hazardous

Acceptance Criteria: Pass/fail

NEW

• Confirm HAPI design package is non-hazardous

• Test 20 samples for effective radiation dose

• Contact for 25 hours

• Findings greater than 50 mrem fail

Acceptance criteria:

• Pass/fail

136

Non-hazardous and Neutrally Reactive

CUI

CUI
CUI

Pre-Decisional 

137

OLD

Flammability (FAT & LAT): observe during all ballistic 

testing 

Elevated temperature flammability (FAT) : 250 oF

for 10 min

Acceptance Criteria: Pass/fail for combustion, 

explosion, dripping, or melting

NEW

Ballistic flammability (FAT & LAT): Observe during 

all resistance to penetration testing

Elevated temperature flammability (FAT)

• After ballistic testing

• Take all extreme heat samples 

• Subject to 260°F for 11 min

Acceptance criteria:

• Melting = minor defect

• Dripping = major defect

• Combustion = critical defect

• Explosion = critical defect

• Evaluated using defect table

137

PdM SPE is re-evaluating this aspect. We 

trialed the test after ballistic testing and it is 

clunky. We are thinking about moving this 

test before Extreme Heat (same samples), 

then return to ambient and then do the 

Extreme Heat soak and ballistics.

Flammability

CUI

CUI
CUI

Pre-Decisional 

138

OLD

• Loose verbiage

• Areal Density section states “material shall 

not cause interference with Non-Destructive 

Test Equipment (NDTE)

• ESBI FAT requires 3 samples for NDTE

Acceptance Criteria: Pass/fail

NEW

Automated Inspection System (AIS) User Manual 8.2 

(2 Jun 16)

• Test all samples 

Acceptance criteria:

• Qualitative evaluation of NDTE compatibility 

• Fully compatible - pass

• Partially compatible - pass

• Indeterminate compatibility - pass

• Partially interfering - fail

• Fully interfering - fail

138

NDTE Interference

CUI

CUI
CUI

Pre-Decisional 

139

OLD

• Box configuration of aluminum alloy witness 

sheets

• Acceptance criteria:

• Perforations counted as government 

reference

NEW

TOP 10-2-210C, section 4.6

• Each sample with observed spall = 1 minor defect

Acceptance Criteria

• Evaluated using defect table

139

Spall Protection

CUI

CUI
Pre-Decisional 

 Added Table of Contents.

 Lined up Sections 3 and 4 such that nearly all have an exact analog in 

numeric order (e.g., 3.3.4 Durability corresponds with 4.3.4 Durability).

 Added paragraph hyperlinks from table of contents to all paragraphs, 

back and forth between Section 3 to all relevant Section 4, and on all 

pages to return to contents. 

 Standardizes Appendices: A = FAT Grading and Scoring, B = LAT 

Grading and Scoring, C = Changes and Modifications, D = PdM, E = 

Threat Codes, F = Alternative Sampling Strategies. Anything after F is 

fair game to be PD specific. Removed exclusion for no metallic 

components

140

Other Changes (1 of 2)

CUI

CUI
Pre-Decisional 

 Added Types and Classes (similar to helmet PDs). This provides another tool 

for describing the VTP and for logistically managing it.

 Changed XSAPI acronym to improve overall security and support changing 

threat codes.

 Standardized size abbreviations to all have the following format AB-C.

 Included long-standing defect classification definitions to help increase 

consistency of application.

 Included long standing production variation requirements which were historically 

contained in Statement of Work (SoW) and FAT approval memorandums. This 

prevents future procurements by other DoD entities from procuring products 

with higher rates of variation.

 Separates Requirements into Critical Safety and Not to allow for an update to 

the Production Gap Policy with references to Critical Safety Testing that is 

currently not possible.

 Corrects misuse of terms “V0” and “V50”

141

Other Changes (2 of 2)

CUI

CUI