<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE dita
  PUBLIC "-//OASIS//DTD DITA Composite//EN" "ditabase.dtd">
<dita xmlns:ditaarch="http://dita.oasis-open.org/architecture/2005/"
      domains="(topic task)                            (topic concept)                            (topic concept glossentry)                            (topic concept glossgroup)                            (topic reference)                            (topic troubleshooting++task) (topic task)                            (topic abbrev-d)                            a(props deliveryTarget)                            (topic equation-d)                            (topic hazard-d)                            (topic hi-d)                            (topic indexing-d)                            (topic markup-d)                            (topic mathml-d)                            (topic pr-d)                            (topic relmgmt-d)                            (topic sw-d)                            (topic svg-d)                            (topic ui-d)                            (topic ut-d)                            (topic markup-d xml-d)                            (topic task strictTaskbody-c)   "
      ditaarch:DITAArchVersion="1.3">
   <concept id="DFARS_PGI_3-303.2"
            outputclass="5"
            ditaarch:DITAArchVersion="1.3"
            class="- topic/topic concept/concept ">
      <title class="- topic/title ">
         <ph props="autonumber" class="- topic/ph ">3-303.2</ph> Data evaluation phase (steps 2-14).</title>
      <conbody class="- topic/body  concept/conbody ">
         <p outputclass="List1" class="- topic/p ">(a) Data evaluation is crucial to the whole review procedure. It involves determination of the adequacy of the technical data package and the Government's rights to use the data for acquisition purposes.</p>
         <p outputclass="List1" class="- topic/p ">(b) The data evaluation process may be divided into two stages:</p>
         <p outputclass="List2" class="- topic/p ">(1) A brief but intensive analysis of available data and documents regarding both technical matters and data rights, leading to a decision whether to proceed with screening; and</p>
         <p outputclass="List2" class="- topic/p ">(2) If the decision is to proceed with screening, further work is necessary to produce an adequate technical data package, such as research of contract provisions, engineering work on data and drawings, and requests to contractors for additional data.</p>
         <p outputclass="List1" class="- topic/p ">(c) The steps in this phase are—</p>
         <p outputclass="List2" class="- topic/p ">(1) <i class="+ topic/ph hi-d/i ">Step 2.</i> Are full Government rights established by the available data package? Evidence for an affirmative answer would include the identification of Government drawings, incorporation by reference of Government specifications or process descriptions in the public domain, or reference to contract provisions giving the Government rights to data. If the answer is negative, proceed to step 3; if positive, proceed to step 6.</p>
         <p outputclass="List2" class="- topic/p ">(2) <i class="+ topic/ph hi-d/i ">Step 3.</i> Are the contractor's limitations of the Government's rights to data established by the available data package?</p>
         <p outputclass="List3" class="- topic/p ">(i) The questions in step 2 and 3 are not exclusive. The incorporation in a drawing of contract provisions reserving rights to the manufacturer, either in the whole design or in certain manufacturing processes, would establish a clear affirmative answer to step 3 where there is substantiating Government documentation. Parts not in this group shall be retained for further processing (see step 20). Data rights that cannot be substantiated shall be challenged (see DFARS Part 227, validation procedures).</p>
         <p outputclass="List3" class="- topic/p ">(ii) In the case of clear contractor ownership of rights, proceed with steps 4 and 5.</p>
         <p outputclass="List2" class="- topic/p ">(3) <i class="+ topic/ph hi-d/i ">Step 4.</i> Are there bases for competitive acquisition without using data subject to limitations on use? This question requires consideration, for example, of the possibility of using performance specifications or substitution of military or commercial specifications or bulletins for limited elements of the manufacturing process. The use of sample copies is another possibility.</p>
         <p outputclass="List2" class="- topic/p ">(4) <i class="+ topic/ph hi-d/i ">Step 5.</i> Can the Government buy the necessary rights to data? This is a preliminary question to the full analysis (in steps 20 and 21 below) and is designed primarily to eliminate from further consideration those items which incorporate established data restrictions and for which there are no other bases for competitive acquisition nor is purchase of rights possible or feasible.</p>
         <p outputclass="List2" class="- topic/p ">(5) <i class="+ topic/ph hi-d/i ">Steps 6 and 7.</i> Is the present technical data package adequate for competitive acquisition of a reliable part? </p>
         <p outputclass="List2" class="- topic/p ">(6) <i class="+ topic/ph hi-d/i ">Steps 8 and 9.</i> Specify omissions. The question in steps 6 and 7 requires a critical engineering evaluation and should deal first with the physical completeness of the date—are any essential dimensions, tolerances, processes, finishes, material specifications, or other vital elements of data lacking from the package? If so, these omissions should be specified. A second element deals with adequacy of the existing package to produce a part of the required performance, compatibility, quality, and reliability. This will, of course, be related to the completeness of data. In some cases, qualified engineering judgment may decide that, in spite of apparently complete data, the high performance or other critical characteristics of the item require retention of the present source. If such decision is made, the file shall include documentation in the form of specific information, such as difficulties experienced by the present manufacturer in producing a satisfactory item or the existence of unique production skills in the present source.</p>
         <p outputclass="List2" class="- topic/p ">(7) <i class="+ topic/ph hi-d/i ">Steps 10 and 11.</i> Can the data be developed to make up a reliable technical data package? This implies a survey of the specified omissions with careful consideration to determine the resources available to supply each missing element. Such resources will vary from simple referencing of standard engineering publications to more complex development of drawings with the alternatives of either obtaining such drawings or developing performance specifications. In some cases, certain elements of data are missing because they have been properly restricted. If, however, there has been no advance substantiation of the right to restrict, the part should be further researched. If the answer to this question is negative, proceed to step 12; if positive, proceed to step 13 or 14.</p>
         <p outputclass="List2" class="- topic/p ">(8) <i class="+ topic/ph hi-d/i ">Step 12.</i> If the answer to the question in steps 10 and 11 is no, which condition is the prime element in this decision, the lack of data or the unreliability of the data? Specific documentation is needed to support this decision.</p>
         <p outputclass="List2" class="- topic/p ">(9) <i class="+ topic/ph hi-d/i ">Step 13 and 14.</i> Estimate the time required to complete the data package. In those cases where the data package is found inadequate and specific additions need to be developed, an estimate of the time required for completion must be made in order to determine if breakout of the part is feasible during this review cycle and to estimate at what point in the remaining life of the part the data package could be available.</p>
      </conbody>
   </concept>
</dita>
