Checklist
The TM Contract Review Checklist
Most technical manual overruns are signed, not authored — they enter at contract review, in the citation nobody pinned and the tailoring nobody read. Sixteen checks before you price the work. Print this page and take it to the reading.
The Checklist
Sixteen Checks Before You Price
The Citation
- Every cited standard is listed — and its role understood. MIL-STD-40051 (which part?), S1000D via MIL-STD-3031, MIL-STD-38784 as a style layer — they answer different questions, and contracts mix them.
- The exact revision letter and change notice are pinned. A "/2C" citation means Part 2 at Revision C, not the current revision. You owe what is cited, and the delta between revisions is real scope.
- The data item descriptions are read, not just listed. The DIDs carry the deliverable's actual requirements; the standard tells you how, the DID tells you what.
- Precedence is settled where citations conflict. When the standard, the DID, and the statement of work disagree, the contract's order-of-precedence clause decides — find it before the dispute does.
The Scope
- The tailoring is explicit — which requirements apply, which are waived. Selective application is how these standards are meant to be used; un-tailored scope inflates the estimate, unnoticed waivers deflate the deliverable.
- Maintenance levels and coverage are bounded. Operator through depot is a different manual set than operator and field — and depot work brings DMWRs and NMWRs with their own requirements.
- Content selection aligns with the maintenance concept. For 40051 work the manual's work packages must be consistent with the MAC; content selected against a stale maintenance concept is rework in waiting.
- Graphics requirements are specific. Formats, line weights, hotspotting, and delivery of illustration source — the expensive surprises in TM work are disproportionately graphical.
The Deliverable
- Every output owed is listed — and sourced from one authoring effort. Page-based, IETM, or both: producing them as separate products doubles the change burden for the life of the program.
- Government-furnished DTDs and stylesheets are in hand, at the cited revision. Validation runs against the government's schemas for the contracted revision — authoring before obtaining them is authoring on assumptions.
- Delivery format and transmission are defined. How the data physically moves — media, repository, packaging — is a requirement, not a detail, and it changes by program.
- Post-delivery revision obligations are understood. TMs live through sustainment. Who makes changes, on what cycle, and at whose cost belongs in the price, not in the surprise.
The Acceptance
- You know each verification event and what it examines. In-process reviews, validation, and verification are distinct gates with distinct audiences — schedule and staff for all of them.
- "Compliant" is defined operationally. DTD-valid, style-conformant, and technically accurate are three different tests; find out which failures block acceptance.
- Validation logistics are agreed. Hands-on validation against the equipment needs access, schedule, and support the contractor rarely controls — negotiate it early.
- Rework turnaround expectations are on paper. Comment cycles are where TM schedules die; agreed turnaround windows on both sides keep the end date honest.
The standards behind the citations each have a reference page here — MIL-STD-40051, MIL-STD-3031, MIL-STD-38784 — and if the citation points at S1000D, the next document to open is the S1000D program start checklist.
Get In Touch
Reading a Contract?
We review TM contract citations, tailoring, and DIDs before our clients price them — because the cheapest rework is the kind that never gets signed.