IPC International Community magazine an association member publication
Issue link: https://iconnect007.uberflip.com/i/1544398
76 I-CONNECT007 MAGAZINE I APRIL 2026 ment Plan by a Technical Review Board, demon- strated manufacturing capability, and ongoing lot acceptance testing. Manufacturers who achieve certification are listed on the QML, which defense contractors and military OEMs rely on when select- ing suppliers for new programs. In short, MIL-PRF-31032 is not a paperwork for- mality. It is the structural backbone of how the DoD ensures its PWB supply base is capable, verified, and trustworthy. Why This Matters The DLA has been understaffed for years, as most of the seasoned auditors have retired, and replac- ing the decades of tribal knowledge with new personnel has been difficult, if not problematic. Many of my clients have had their qualifications and ongoing certifications delayed for months due to this qualified resource shortage. The proposed cancellation comes amid domestic PCB manufac- turing being a recurring concern for supply chain resilience and national security. The United States has watched its share of global PCB production erode substantially over decades, with most commercial board fabrica- tion now concentrated in Asia. The QML program, anchored by MIL-PRF-31032, has been one of the key mechanisms for ensuring that a known-good, U.S.-based defense supplier base is main- tained and continually verified. Without the specification or without a successor framework of equivalent rigor, several important questions arise. Will the QML for PWBs still exist, and who will manage it? What perfor- mance benchmarks will procure- ment activities use when writing contracts for military PCBs? How will legacy programs still citing MIL-PRF-31032 or MIL-PRF-55110 (which predates 31032 and remains in use on certain older platforms) be affected? Perhaps most urgently, what happens to manufacturers who have invested substantially in achieving and maintaining QML certification if the specification underpinning that certification is withdrawn? The 30-Day Clock The memorandum, signed by Muhammad Akbar, chief of the Active Devices Branch, makes clear that the comment period was short and the con- sequences of silence were significant. Lack of response by April 3, 2026, could have been con- strued as concurrence with cancellation. Military review activities were instructed to route com- ments through their custodians in time for consoli- dated departmental replies, meaning internal DoD coordination timelines are effectively even tighter than the 30-day window suggests. For industry, this was the critical window to act. Manufacturers currently on the QML, defense prime contractors who specify QML-certified boards in their programs, and industry associations with equities in defense electronics have already T H E R I G H T A P P ROAC H