| Project | Product revision | Sheet revision | Prepared by | Date | Target market / jurisdiction | Decision being prepared | Sheet | Lead | Item ID | Question | Evidence to record | Answer / assumption | Explanation | Status | Evidence / exact revision / URL and date | Owner | Next action | Reviewer / review date | Not-applicable reason | Source guidance URLs |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Basic | C1 | 1 | Sample preparation utility | 2026-10-24 | U.S. adults; Wisconsin illustrative base | Next private feasibility gate | What the prototype needs to prove | The prototype role | PROTOTYPE-01 | Which question is this prototype answering? | Appearance, usability, fit, mechanism, strength, life, process or customer acceptance; list what it cannot demonstrate. | First question: does Capture door meet Door remains latched in 100 dry capture cycles on each of 10 concept units? | Scenario proposal; no observations or approvals inferred. First question: does Capture door meet Door remains latched in 100 dry capture cycles on each of 10 concept units? | estimate — unvalidated | data/products/basic/; concept C1; no external evidence | Sam Reed | Collect the evidence requested in this question before its dependent gate; target 2026-12-15 | Not reviewed — no review date | Applicable planning question; any unchosen route is explicitly described in answer | nasa-verification; cpsc-small-business; nasa-validation |
| Basic | C1 | 1 | Sample preparation utility | 2026-10-24 | U.S. adults; Wisconsin illustrative base | Next private feasibility gate | What the prototype needs to prove | The prototype role | PROTOTYPE-02 | What is the exact configuration? | Model/drawing/BOM revision, materials, deviations from production, build method and sample identifiers. | Basic C1 concept; 10 mechanical surrogate units plus isolated software rigs where applicable; no units built | Scenario proposal; no observations or approvals inferred. Basic C1 concept; 10 mechanical surrogate units plus isolated software rigs where applicable; no units built | estimate — unvalidated | data/products/basic/; concept C1; no external evidence | Sam Reed | Collect the evidence requested in this question before its dependent gate; target 2026-12-15 | Not reviewed — no review date | Applicable planning question; any unchosen route is explicitly described in answer | nasa-verification; cpsc-small-business; nasa-validation |
| Basic | C1 | 1 | Sample preparation utility | 2026-10-24 | U.S. adults; Wisconsin illustrative base | Next private feasibility gate | What the prototype needs to prove | The prototype role | PROTOTYPE-03 | How will we judge success before testing? | Requirement ID, method, numerical/observable acceptance criterion, environment, equipment, calibration where needed and planned sample size rationale. | Acceptance written before testing in test-matrix; all numerical limits proposed, not approved | Scenario proposal; no observations or approvals inferred. Acceptance written before testing in test-matrix; all numerical limits proposed, not approved | estimate — unvalidated | data/products/basic/; concept C1; no external evidence | Sam Reed | Collect the evidence requested in this question before its dependent gate; target 2026-12-15 | Not reviewed — no review date | Applicable planning question; any unchosen route is explicitly described in answer | nasa-verification; cpsc-small-business; nasa-validation |
| Basic | C1 | 1 | Sample preparation utility | 2026-10-24 | U.S. adults; Wisconsin illustrative base | Next private feasibility gate | What the prototype needs to prove | The prototype role | PROTOTYPE-04 | Is the test safe and representative? | Foreseeable hazards, setup limits, operator competence, exposure safeguards, realistic users/conditions and specialist or lab involvement where needed. | Surrogates first, safe fixtures and stop rules; no live-animal or outdoor flight protocol approved | Scenario proposal; no observations or approvals inferred. Surrogates first, safe fixtures and stop rules; no live-animal or outdoor flight protocol approved | estimate — unvalidated | data/products/basic/; concept C1; no external evidence | Sam Reed | Collect the evidence requested in this question before its dependent gate; target 2026-12-15 | Not reviewed — no review date | Applicable planning question; any unchosen route is explicitly described in answer | nasa-verification; cpsc-small-business; nasa-validation |
| Basic | C1 | 1 | Sample preparation utility | 2026-10-24 | U.S. adults; Wisconsin illustrative base | Next private feasibility gate | What the prototype needs to prove | The prototype role | PROTOTYPE-05 | What happened, including failures? | Raw measurements, units, photos, observations, anomalies and deviation from method. Separate measured from simulated and predicted performance. | No tests run, failures observed or passes recorded; test-results explicitly says Not run | Scenario proposal; no observations or approvals inferred. No tests run, failures observed or passes recorded; test-results explicitly says Not run | estimate — unvalidated | data/products/basic/; concept C1; no external evidence | Sam Reed | Collect the evidence requested in this question before its dependent gate; target 2026-12-15 | Not reviewed — no review date | Applicable planning question; any unchosen route is explicitly described in answer | nasa-verification; cpsc-small-business; nasa-validation |
| Basic | C1 | 1 | Sample preparation utility | 2026-10-24 | U.S. adults; Wisconsin illustrative base | Next private feasibility gate | What the prototype needs to prove | The prototype role | PROTOTYPE-06 | What can we conclude, and what remains unproven? | Verification: meets specified requirements. Validation: serves intended users/use. State sample and prototype limits, owner of failures, required changes and retest before a release claim. | Only planning completeness can be assessed; no performance, welfare, RF or production conclusion | Scenario proposal; no observations or approvals inferred. Only planning completeness can be assessed; no performance, welfare, RF or production conclusion | estimate — unvalidated | data/products/basic/; concept C1; no external evidence | Sam Reed | Collect the evidence requested in this question before its dependent gate; target 2026-12-15 | Not reviewed — no review date | Applicable planning question; any unchosen route is explicitly described in answer | nasa-verification; cpsc-small-business; nasa-validation |
Sample — fictitious company. All numbers and people are invented scenario assumptions. This is draft concept paperwork; no physical testing, customer evidence, certification, filing or sign-off has occurred.