What is the appropriate scope of work for evaluating item criticality?
The services sometimes have good reason to tighten CSI designations as a result of certain discoveries during operations when it comes to reprocurement and/or replenishments. Your cognizant Service Engineering Support Activity (ESA) can provide any information if any adjustments have been made to formerly non-CSIs. As far as NAVAIRINST 4200.25D goes, paragraph 6.a (1) seems to be very straight-forward for replenishment parts (i.e. “Criticality determinations for each new replenishment item shall be established by the cognizant NAVAIR BDE prior to initial supportability analysis to allow adequate support planning for CAIs (including CSIs). During initial provisioning or approval of a design change notice, NAVICP shall validate that the criticality determination has been accomplished and is accurately documented. The Integrated Material Manager (IMM) shall ensure the criticality determination (CAI or CSI) is recorded in all appropriate databases.”). I’m not sure what would lead anyone to believe that only replenishment parts would be reviewed when it comes to aviation safety. Any NEW part intended for installation on an aircraft should also be reviewed despite "the workload."
Open full Question Details
Safety is paramount and there is no substitute nor a good reason to relax it. Obviously, aviation safety introduces a whole new set of design factors (and risks). While many MIL-STNDS have been revoked, safety standards have always predominated to guarantee the utmost safety for our warfighters. NAVAIRINST 4200.25D is still a very good instruction to guide the appropriate scope for evaluating item criticality.