Explainer
TM Validation and Verification Explained
The Short Answer
Who Proves It, and Who Checks It
Validation is the contractor's job; verification is the Government's. Both are quality gates for a defense technical manual, and both usually sit between a finished draft and an accepted deliverable. Contract language is where they are defined, usually through the TMCR and the contractor's quality-assurance plan, so the details below are what a representative specification and the standard data item descriptions say, not a rule that applies to every program.
- Validation: the contractor proves it
- A contractor quality-assurance responsibility. The contractor checks the manual against engineering source data and against the actual equipment, corrects what it finds, and certifies the result. In the Navy specification discussed below, all data must be validated before the Government accepts it.
- Verification: the Government checks it
- The formal process through which the Government determines the accuracy, quality, and usability of a manual the contractor has already validated. It runs under Government control, often with the people who will use the manual, and the contractor supports it when the contract says so.
- In-process reviews: the checks along the way
- Reviews the Government convenes while the manuals are being written, before either event. They look at source data, the content plan, compliance with the contract requirements, and (for electronic manuals) how the content displays and behaves.
What a Specification Says
An Example From the Navy
MIL-PRF-85337B(AS), dated 11 April 2012, is a Naval Air Systems Command performance specification for technical manual quality assurance. It states that it applies to all technical manual procurements when referenced in the contract, and that other DoD departments and agencies may use it. It is a clear statement of the division of labor, which is why it is worth reading even if your program cites something else.
It makes validation a contractor responsibility, carried out for every manual, change, and revision as the TMCR and the quality-assurance plan specify, with all data validated before Government acceptance. Descriptive, schematic, and wiring data are validated against engineering source data. Operating and maintenance procedures are validated against the system or equipment by actual demonstration, and malfunctions are not introduced into the equipment for validation unless specifically required. It also says the contractor is responsible for validating what its subcontractors and vendors prepare.
Verification, in the same document, is the formal process through which the Government determines the accuracy, quality, and usability of contractor-validated manuals. It happens under Government jurisdiction when the TMCR and the quality-assurance plan specify it. The contractor may serve as the verification recorder and help perform tasks. Afterward the contractor dispositions each recorded comment and corrects the discrepancies, the Government reviews the dispositions, and the contractor prepares a certificate that all recorded discrepancies and deficiencies have been corrected or resolved. Final acceptance still follows the terms of the contract.
The MIL-STD-40051 series is the usual home for Army manual content and format; Revision E, dated 25 March 2025, replaced the separate -1D and -2D parts. For where the standards sit relative to each other, see which MIL-STD applies to a technical manual. Whatever your standard says about content, the events that test it are defined in the contract documents, so read the TMCR and the data items it cites.
The Paperwork
The DI-TMSS Data Items Involved
Five Data Item Descriptions in the DI-TMSS series cover the quality-assurance records. They are the documents a CDRL cites to turn the events above into deliverables; the CDRL mechanics are in what a CDRL is.
- DI-TMSS-81817, TMQA Program Plan
- The contractor's quality-assurance plan for the manuals: process control, organization, record keeping, quality reviews, a summary of the validation approach, how the contractor will support Government reviews and the verification effort, and a classification of major and minor defects. Submitted for Government review and acceptance before development.
- DI-TMSS-81818, Validation Plan
- Which manuals are validated, where and when, who does it, what equipment and next-higher assemblies are needed, which methods apply (review against source data, comparison to the equipment, demonstration on the equipment), any proposed fault simulations, and how findings are recorded and dispositioned. It also names any combined validation and verification events the contractor recommends.
- DI-TMSS-81819, Validation Certificate
- The contractor's certification that the manual is accurate and complete, with a remarks and exceptions block for anything that could not be validated. The form has signature lines for a Government validation witness and the contractor's publications quality-assurance manager.
- DI-TMSS-81820, Verification Discrepancy/Disposition Record
- The contractor's response to every documented verification finding: the record identifies the manual, contract, TMCR number, and period of verification, and lists each discrepancy by number and paragraph, figure, or table, with its disposition.
- DI-TMSS-81821, Verification Incorporation Certificate
- The contractor's statement that all discrepancies and deficiencies recorded during verification have been corrected or resolved in accordance with the contract and TMCR.
The older text of these DIDs is Navy-originated, and each ties its forms to the TMCR number. Contracts can tailor a data item in the CDRL remarks, so the version and the tailoring on your contract control, not this summary.
The Events
In-Process Reviews, Validation, Verification
In-process reviews. The Government convenes these as it sees fit while the manuals are under development, and the contractor supports them and gives access to materials and intermediate products when the contract says so. In the Navy specification, they cover source data, the content plan, TMCR compliance, readability, and for electronic manuals how content is presented and how the viewer functions. For S1000D manuals, the first review checks items such as the data module requirements list, data module codes, schema versions, and graphics references. Problems found here are cheap; the same problems found at verification are rework on a manual you believed was finished. See what a DMRL is for the S1000D side.
Validation events. Dated, located, and staffed in the validation plan. People from the contractor work through the manual with the equipment or a representative setup, record what they find, correct it, and certify the result. The certificate has room for exceptions, so a portion that could not be validated is disclosed instead of hidden, and it carries a signature line for a Government validation witness.
The verification event. Government personnel, often the eventual users, follow the procedures as written. Every point where the manual and the equipment disagree, or where a step is unclear, unsafe, or unusable, becomes a recorded finding. The contractor then returns the discrepancy record with a disposition for each, corrects the manual, and delivers the incorporation certificate.
By Service
Army and Navy Practice
Navy. The specification above is the NAVAIR example, and it applies only when a contract references it. Check which specification and revision your contract actually cites.
Army. A 2017 Army AL&T article said Army regulation AR 25-30 then required technical manual verification to be 100 percent hands-on by Soldiers. It reported that verification took from two weeks to a year depending on the system, usually needed about five Soldier test users, and was scheduled through the Army's Test Schedule and Review Committee. It also described approved proposals to allow less than 100 percent hands-on verification and to use government civilians, pending policy acceptance. The regulation has been updated since; read the current version and your contract before you plan staffing. In 2020, the Army's Ordnance Training Detachment-Sill ran Army verifications of two radar systems, one virtually over about two months, and corrected procedures in IADS4 as it went. To see how that viewer shapes what you deliver, read what IADS is.
Other services. Programs differ, and the contract is the authority. If you work to an Air Force or other service requirement, take the event definitions from your TMCR and data items rather than from the two examples above.
Getting Ready
How to Prepare
- Read the TMCR and the quality-assurance plan requirements together, and write down which events the contract actually calls for, in what order, and what each must produce. Contracts differ on whether verification is required at all.
- Fix the configuration. Validation needs hardware of the right configuration and support equipment; where you need government furnished equipment, request it early and in writing.
- Plan the methods per section of the manual: source-data review for descriptive and wiring content, demonstration on the equipment for procedures. If fault simulation is the only safe way to prove a troubleshooting procedure, say so in the validation plan.
- Set up the discrepancy log before the first review. Number every finding, tie it to a paragraph, figure, or table, and decide who dispositions it and by when, so the record is a by-product of the work rather than a reconstruction.
- Settle supplier handoffs. The contractor validates its subcontractors' data too, so agree how supplier content gets to the validation team in time.
- Staff the verification support: a recorder, people to assist with tasks, and engineers who can answer a finding the same day. Slow dispositions hold up the incorporation certificate and, with it, acceptance.
These steps belong in the bid as well as the project plan. The event count, the equipment access, and the reject loop are schedule and labor, which is why the TM contract review checklist asks about every one of them before pricing. For the scoping side, see how technical manual work is scoped. For the specific ways deliverables get sent back, see why technical manual deliverables fail.
Shakewell supports contractors through verification: preparing manuals for the event and triaging the deficiencies it records.
FAQ
Questions We Hear
What is the difference between validation and verification of a technical manual?
Who does it and against what. Validation is the contractor proving the manual against source data and the actual equipment. Verification is the Government's formal determination of accuracy, quality, and usability for a manual the contractor has already validated. Contracts usually require both, in that order, with different people and different records.
Who performs verification?
The Government, or someone under its control. In the Navy quality-assurance specification used as the example here, verification runs under Government jurisdiction and the contractor may be asked to serve as recorder and to help perform tasks. In the Army, published accounts describe Soldiers executing the procedures. Your contract says who participates on your program.
Which data items cover validation and verification?
The Navy-originated DI-TMSS series covers them: 81817 for the quality-assurance program plan, 81818 for the validation plan, 81819 for the validation certificate, 81820 for the verification discrepancy and disposition record, and 81821 for the verification incorporation certificate. Which ones your contract orders, and at what version, is listed in its CDRL; read the current text in ASSIST. Our CDRL explainer shows how a data item gets onto a contract.
What is a verification discrepancy record?
The contractor's written disposition of each finding from the verification event. Each entry identifies the paragraph, figure, or table, states the discrepancy, and records the disposition, usually a correction to the manual. The Government reviews the dispositions, and the incorporation certificate that follows says they have all been resolved.
How long does government verification take?
It depends on the system. A 2017 Army AL&T article put Army verification at two weeks to a year, with about five Soldier test users, scheduled through the Army's test resourcing process, and it described policy proposals to reduce the hands-on requirement. Army programs in 2020 ran verifications of about ten days and about two months. Treat these as history and check the current regulation and your contract before scheduling.
Can validation and verification be combined?
Sometimes. The Navy specification lets the Government authorize a combined validation and verification, in which case the Government takes control of the effort. When it is held at an operational or Government site, the contractor still validates separately first and incorporates those comments before a separate verification. A validation plan can recommend combined events, but the Government decides.
Get In Touch
Plan the Gates Before You Reach Them
Send us the TMCR and the data items your contract cites. We will lay out the review, validation, and verification events they imply, and what each one needs from your team.