Data Center Design
Customer-Furnished Materials: An Installation Readiness Checklist
Installation readiness depends on approved materials being available for the specific task, not just a delivery total. Reconcile the customer-furnished item, required part, quantity, condition observation and allocated location. Keep shortages and proposed substitutions under the customer’s designated decision process.
Define the material boundary before the field window
Name who buys the items, coordinates delivery, receives them, controls stock and resolves shortages. An installation package can depend on customer-furnished equipment, rails, fasteners, cable assemblies and other specified accessories without including their purchase or supply. Confirm that allocation in the agreed scope.
Review the exact purchased configuration and applicable OEM contents list. NVIDIA’s DGX B200 documentation identifies networking cables as separately supplied. Do not generalize that example to every system, or assume that a server carton contains every part required by the site installation plan.
Assign material actions, decisions and record returns separately
A customer-furnished responsibility matrix should explain who supplies an input, who performs the agreed action, who can decide an exception and who receives its record. Writing customer or installer against an entire material package leaves those functions ambiguous. Use named parties or functions that actually exist in the engagement; one organization may hold several roles, but that does not make their decisions interchangeable.
Complete the matrix below with the project’s actual names, scope references and return records. For example, the appointed purchasing owner may resolve an order or delivery question while the designated design or OEM authority decides whether a proposed alternate satisfies the applicable requirement. The stock custodian can report an allocation without authorizing a technical substitution. The installation lead can report the actual item used without deciding title transfer, warranty or acceptance of the whole system.
For an unresolved case, ask for a specific return. If the custodian reports an available carton but its contents were not observed, ask which identity and observation records support the requested task; do not turn the carton receipt into a confirmed contents count. If a supplier suggests another part, retain the proposal and send its applicability question to the nominated decision owner. If that owner approves only one task, carry only that scope into the requirement and allocation record. These are information and responsibility boundaries, not instructions to perform physical work.
The agreed scope and the organization’s actual authority determine the assignments. This original matrix does not create purchasing delegation, custody obligations, legal risk allocation or a right to accept or reject goods. Those commercial or legal decisions require their own appropriate owners. A missing role stays an unresolved input rather than silently becoming the physical installer’s responsibility.
Scroll the table horizontally on smaller screens.
| Function to assign | Action or input to define | Decision boundary and record return | Source |
|---|---|---|---|
| Requirement and configuration owner | Issues the applicable equipment, part, quantity/unit, task or position and source revision; identifies the actual technical authority where different. | Returns a clarified or revised requirement when identity, configuration or applicability conflicts. A received item does not revise that requirement by itself. | Planning analysis |
| Appointed purchasing owner and supplier | Identify who orders or supplies each line, the established delivery reference and the person responding to a shortage or item-identity request. | Keep supplier information, organizational purchasing approval and technical suitability decisions separate. The matrix places no order and offers no Leviathan purchasing or resale commitment. | Planning analysis |
| Receiving function | Provides the agreed receipt and accessible observation record, identifying the package or item and the limits of what was observed. | Returns a mismatch or condition question under the authorized process. Receipt alone does not establish hidden contents, suitability, ownership or completed installation. | Planning analysis |
| Stock or staging custodian | Maintains the agreed location, reservation, allocation, exception and release records for the identified units. | Reports the actual available allocation and unresolved items; cannot resolve an unapproved substitute merely because it is on hand. | Planning analysis |
| Nominated technical disposition owner | Assesses the actual proposed item or changed requirement within the applicable equipment, design or OEM authority and project process. | Returns an identifiable decision with its affected tasks, conditions and source issue. No authority or approval is created by naming the role in this worksheet. | Planning analysis |
| Workfront release and installation functions | Identify who authorizes the defined work, who acknowledges the material return, and who records actual-used items after the agreed task occurs. | Material release, work authorization, physical completion and required acceptance remain distinct. The record should not claim a task or result that did not occur. | Planning analysis |
| Record recipient and closeout owner | Specify who reconciles task, requirement, allocation, change and actual-used records, and who receives any open-item return. | Retains unresolved exceptions and the correct recipient. Receipt of a complete file set does not settle warranty, return rights, liability or system acceptance. | Planning analysis |
Original fillable responsibility framework. Replace function names with the actual parties, scope references and authority established for the engagement. It is not a legal responsibility allocation, procurement authorization or evidence of actual assigned resources.
Allocate parts to released tasks
Connect material readiness to the cable schedule, rack elevation or other released work package. A part can be present onsite but reserved for another cabinet, inaccessible under the site process or still awaiting an identity decision. Record availability for the actual task instead of subtracting a warehouse total from the entire project requirement.
Keep the approved part identifier and unit of issue visible. A kit, a pair and an individual piece are different counting units. For serialized equipment, retain the asset reference in the authorized record. For bulk material, use the agreed lot or stock reference where relevant; do not invent a traceability standard.
Prepare a workfront staging return for customer cables
For customer-furnished fiber and copper materials, prepare a staging request against the released tasks before treating a group of cartons as a ready workfront. Identify the actual assemblies or material lines, their required units, allocated tasks and source issues. A shared description such as fiber, copper or networking accessories is not a sufficient pick list. Keep different specified parts and units distinguishable even when they serve the same workfront.
Ask the responsible equipment or material owner which product instructions and site arrangements govern the actual packaging, storage, environmental conditions, handling and later release. Identify the applicable document and the person resolving a missing input. This section does not supply those conditions or a physical staging method. It does not authorize opening a sealed package, reeling cable, placing protection, rearranging stock or handling an assembly. If the actual instructions or permitted activity are unresolved, the staging return should show that gap.
Use the existing allocation and exception records as the underlying item record. Add a workfront view that tells the receiving or stock custodian what is being requested and tells the installation lead what is actually available under the project process. Do not create a second quantity ledger that can drift from the same units. Retain the staging location or custody reference through the authorized project record rather than exposing asset or location details in a public inquiry.
A staging return is useful when it distinguishes the named part at a recorded location from a unit released and available for the intended task. It should also distinguish an identified sealed package from contents that were actually observed. The worksheet below organizes those returns; the existing EX-M05 example continues to govern shortage and substitution arithmetic. Neither a completed worksheet nor movement to a staging area clears unrelated design, access, handling or technical prerequisites.
Scroll the table horizontally on smaller screens.
| Staging input | Request from the responsible owner | Return without inventing readiness | Source |
|---|---|---|---|
| Released workfront demand | Task or connection IDs, required part and unit, quantity and the applicable schedule or material-list issue. | Identify the same demand and the exact issue used; a changed route or part requirement returns to its owner. | Planning analysis |
| Item identity and packaging basis | Exact product or assembly reference, supplied package identification and applicable manufacturer document or contents reference. | State what is identified and what remains sealed, unobserved or unclear. A carton label is not a completed internal count or condition inspection. | Planning analysis |
| Product and site conditions | The actual applicable packaging, storage, environmental and handling requirements, their document issues and responsible qualified or site owners. | Record the source or the missing decision. Do not fill the gap with one generic fiber or copper rule, or record conformance that was not established. | Planning analysis |
| Allocation and location | The agreed item or lot reference where used, existing reservation, workfront allocation and authorized custodian/location record. | Confirm whether the requested units are allocated here, reserved elsewhere, not located or inaccessible under the current process; do not count one unit twice. | Planning analysis |
| Exceptions affecting the request | Existing shortage, identity, condition or proposed-substitution references and the scope of each responsible disposition. | Keep each unresolved item out of the available count under that process. One approved alternate does not close a different hold. | Planning analysis |
| Release and later reconciliation | Who can release stock to the named task, who acknowledges the return, and how actual-used, unused and returned items will be reconciled. | Separate an item allocation, stock release, completed installation and accepted work. Retain a later change against the same task and source issue. | Planning analysis |
Original material-coordination worksheet, not a warehouse system, physical storage or handling procedure, product approval, custody guarantee or permission to start work. Actual conditions and methods must come from the applicable owners and sources.
Use a readiness and exception record
The example below shows the questions to resolve before dispatching a task. Quantities and identifiers are hypothetical. It does not define contractual acceptance, title transfer or a warranty remedy.
Scroll the table horizontally on smaller screens.
| Item/task | Required evidence | State or decision | Source |
|---|---|---|---|
| Cabinet C2 mounting package | Released elevation; approved rail/accessory identifiers | Available and allocated, or named shortage | Planning analysis |
| Link L-08 cable assembly | Approved part and length; scheduled endpoints | Supplied identifier agrees, or mismatch recorded | Planning analysis |
| Substitution proposal | Actual supplied part; original requirement; owner review | Pending, approved with reference, or rejected | Planning analysis |
| Visible delivery concern | Authorized observation and receiving reference | Hold/disposition under customer process | Planning analysis |
| Release to installation | Resolved prerequisites and responsible acknowledgement | Specific task released; unrelated work not inferred | Planning analysis |
Original illustrative planning record. Values and identifiers are examples, not a customer record, engineering design or acceptance standard.
Keep a shortage from becoming an undocumented substitution
Illustrative example: the customer has three approved cable assemblies for four scheduled links. Record the affected link and missing exact part, then ask the procurement/design owner to resolve it. Do not install a different media type or length option on the assumption that one unused item is close enough.
If the owner proposes a replacement, retain its exact identifier and approval reference. Ask whether endpoint compatibility, route, documentation or acceptance requirements change. Release the affected task only when the required decision is available; other independently released work can proceed under its own scope.
Worked example: eight delivered units leave two task requirements unresolved
Fictional package EX-M05 has eight identified installation tasks, EX-L01–EX-L08, each requiring one individual assembly with approved reference PART-Q under input revision R03. Workfront A contains EX-L01–EX-L04; workfront B contains EX-L05–EX-L08. These labels and quantities explain allocation only. They describe no actual cable type, compatible product, topology, quantity standard or installation method.
The receiving record shows seven PART-Q units and one different reference, PART-R. Four Q units are allocated to A and two to B without an open material hold in this fictional record. The seventh Q unit is held under condition question H-01, while R is proposed as a substitute under S-01. The eight-unit delivery total therefore contains six allocated Q units, one held Q unit and one unapproved alternate.
A has its four specified units allocated on this material record. B has only two of its four specified units available without a material hold; the other two task requirements remain unresolved. Do not declare the whole package ready because eight units reached the site, or reassign A’s units to B without recording the changed allocation. Material availability is only one prerequisite: this example does not establish the design release, site access, handling authorization or permission to start either workfront.
Scroll the table horizontally on smaller screens.
| Received group | Quantity / unit | Material status | Effect on the named task | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| PART-Q allocated to A | 4 individual assemblies | Allocated to EX-L01–EX-L04; no open material hold in this example | Four material requirements have their specified units allocated. Other work-release prerequisites remain separate. | Planning analysis |
| PART-Q allocated to B | 2 individual assemblies | Allocated to EX-L05–EX-L06; no open material hold in this example | Only two of B’s four material requirements are covered at this review point. | Planning analysis |
| Seventh PART-Q unit | 1 individual assembly | Condition question H-01; no disposition releasing this unit | Do not count it as available for EX-L07 while the material hold remains open. | Planning analysis |
| Different delivered PART-R | 1 individual assembly | S-01 proposed alternate for EX-L08; approval pending | Receipt does not establish an approved replacement or release EX-L08. | Planning analysis |
Original fictional arithmetic: 4+2+1+1=8 received units; 4+2=6 specified units allocated without a material hold; 1+1=2 task requirements unresolved. The unit of issue is one individual assembly throughout. No actual inspection result, compatibility or installation readiness is certified.
Give the substitute a decision with a defined scope
A substitution record should preserve the current requirement, the actual proposed item, the affected task IDs and the missing decision. Identify the design, equipment/OEM or other approval owner relevant to the real change. A supplier’s statement, similar description or available stock is an input for that owner; it does not by itself establish that the substitute is suitable or authorized.
Continue fictional EX-M05 with a later decision: the nominated design owner approves PART-R for EX-L08 only, recorded as S-01 and released in R04. The example assumes that the owner has made its required assessment; it supplies no technical basis or compatibility conclusion. Carry that narrow decision to the requirement and allocation records without turning it into permission to replace Q everywhere. H-01 and EX-L07 remain unresolved.
NASA’s configuration-management guidance distinguishes proposed changes, approved changes and their implementation status. That general document-control principle supports preserving the decision trail. NASA does not approve this substitute, prescribe the worksheet below or establish the customer’s authority, acceptance criteria or commercial obligations.
References: [N5]
Scroll the table horizontally on smaller screens.
| Record element | Entry in the example | What it does not establish | Source |
|---|---|---|---|
| Previous requirement | R03: PART-Q for EX-L08 | Do not overwrite the original basis to match what arrived. | Planning analysis |
| Proposed alternate | PART-R, proposed for EX-L08 under S-01 | A proposal is not an approval or a product-equivalence finding. | Planning analysis |
| Later authorized change | Named design owner approves PART-R for EX-L08; R04 records that limited change | No general interchangeability, approval for every other task or OEM endorsement follows. | Planning analysis |
| Remaining material question | EX-L07 still lacks a released unit while H-01 remains open | The substitute decision does not close the independent condition hold. | Planning analysis |
| Actual use | Installation and the actual-used item record remain pending in this example | A released requirement and allocated unit are not evidence of completed installation. | Planning analysis |
After the fictional R04 decision, B has two allocated Q units and one approved R unit for three of its four tasks; EX-L07 remains unresolved. This is documentary arithmetic, not a technical substitution review, actual approval, contractual disposition or field method.
Carry each material decision into the next task record
Reconcile the task list, allocation record and open material decisions at the same revision. In the example, report A’s four allocated units, B’s two Q allocations and approved R allocation, and the one unresolved B task. Keep H-01’s owner and next disposition visible. A shortened summary saying substitute approved would conceal which task still lacks material.
When the actual physical work is separately authorized and completed, record the item used against the task or position, with the applicable approved change reference. Keep a proposed item, an allocated item and an installed item distinguishable. Return, replacement, disposal and warranty decisions follow their own authorized commercial process; this article does not determine title, liability, a remedy or whether the supplier must accept an item back.
A useful clarification request is: “For EX-M05, confirm the exact items allocated to each task, the status and owner of H-01, and the tasks covered by S-01/R04. Identify the remaining material requirement without treating the delivery total or substitute approval as a full work release.” Share the real records through authorized project channels rather than attaching private asset or order details to a public inquiry.
- Retain the requirement and its unit of issue separately from received quantities.
- Show allocation to actual task IDs, including any reservation for another workfront.
- Keep an item with an unresolved condition or identity decision out of the available count.
- Record the substitute’s exact identity, affected task and authorized decision reference.
- Do not let one resolved substitution close a different shortage or condition hold.
- Carry the actual-used item and approved revision into the installation record after the work occurs.
Build an accessory manifest around the equipment task
For client-furnished rails, mounting hardware and rack accessories, give each equipment task a parent mounting-package reference. Then list the constituent items and separately ordered accessories that the actual approved configuration requires. An outer carton labelled rail kit identifies a delivered package; it does not tell the reader which contents were identified, counted or allocated to that equipment task. Keep a kit, its constituent pieces and any separate accessory as linked records rather than adding them into one undifferentiated delivered total.
Start with the applicable equipment and kit documentation, the customer's released item list and the supplied package identifiers. NVIDIA's DGX B200 rack-mount chapter separately identifies screws and washers and an included printed template. That is a product-specific documentation example, not a hardware list to transfer to another server or a statement that every kit has the same contents. Use the exact purchased configuration and source issue to establish what this task requires. [N6]
The checklist below asks for identity and document evidence. It does not select hardware, determine rail fit or authorize anyone to open a package, fit a part or perform an inspection. If the required documentation or identity is unavailable, record the question and its owner instead of filling the gap from appearance.
References: [N6]
Scroll the table horizontally on smaller screens.
| Manifest group | Record from the actual requirement | Return from the supplied package | Source |
|---|---|---|---|
| Equipment and parent kit | Task/position, equipment model or configuration, required mounting-kit reference and applicable document issue. | Delivered kit/package reference and receiving record; identify any unresolved difference without declaring compatibility. | Planning analysis |
| Mounting members and associated pieces | The exact kit contents list and any role or side identifiers that the applicable source actually uses. | Which listed components were identified, the observation or supplier record used, and which remain unconfirmed. Do not invent a universal pair or piece count. | Planning analysis |
| Fasteners, washers and retainers | Specified pack/component references and their documented roles within the parent kit; the unit is a pack, set or piece as actually defined. | Match the named package reference to its parent kit. A loose, unlabelled pouch remains an identity question until its basis is returned; no size, torque or substitution is inferred. | Planning analysis |
| Separately specified accessories | Only accessories actually requested for this configuration, such as a named cable-management or support accessory; identify whether included in the kit or a separate line. | Distinct supplied reference, quantity/unit and allocation. Presence of an unrelated accessory does not fill a missing required line. | Planning analysis |
| Instructions and supplied templates | Applicable OEM/kit document reference and any template or other kit document the actual contents list requires. | Document issue and identifiable supplied item or authorized source; a generic instruction sheet does not establish applicability. | Planning analysis |
| Material condition and scope of observation | The requested receiving/identity record and the person responsible for unresolved questions. | State what was observed or supplied as documentary evidence, including sealed/unopened contents that were not counted. Packaging identity is not an internal condition finding. | Planning analysis |
Original documentary checklist. The actual product/configuration and agreed scope determine the required items and evidence. It is not an OEM bill of materials, engineering fit review, handling method or acceptance standard.
Work a kit carton and loose fastener pouch through the checklist
Fictional EX-ACC13 has two equipment tasks. E1's released material list calls for mounting kit K-A and a separately listed accessory AC-A. E2 calls for mounting kit K-B, with no AC-A line. K-A's contents list identifies fastener pack F-A, while K-B's list identifies F-B. These invented references explain parent/child identity only; they are not actual products, required quantities or a finding that either kit fits any equipment or rack.
Both main kit cartons have matching external package references. The receiving record also contains one loose pouch with no traceable F-A identifier, no located AC-A item, and an identifiable F-B package whose internal contents were not observed within the recorded receiving scope. The two main carton receipts therefore leave different questions. E1 needs a source-based identity return for its fastener pack and a disposition for its separately required accessory. For E2, the record must distinguish the identified F-B package from any unperformed contents observation; it must not silently report a missing component or a complete internal count.
This example does not ask the recipient to open, measure, try or install anything. It shows what the material coordinator can send back to the appointed supplier, record custodian and responsible project owner so that each unknown receives the appropriate return.
Scroll the table horizontally on smaller screens.
| Required line | Available record | Precise unresolved question | Requested documentary return | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| E1 / K-A mounting kit | External K-A reference recorded; its contents list is identified. | The parent package is identified, but that fact does not resolve F-A or separate AC-A. | Retain K-A as the parent reference and keep its constituent and separate-accessory records visible. | Planning analysis |
| E1 / F-A constituent pack | Loose pouch recorded; no traceable F-A identity in the supplied record. | Identity is unresolved. Do not count the pouch as confirmed F-A or declare a technical mismatch from appearance. | Ask the supplier/custodian for the exact pack identity and its traceable link to K-A, or record that it cannot be established. | Planning analysis |
| E1 / AC-A separate accessory | No located AC-A item in the allocated receiving record. | The separately required line remains unaccounted for; K-A's outer carton receipt does not close it. | Ask the responsible material owner to locate the specified item or return the named shortage/disposition. Do not invent a replacement. | Planning analysis |
| E2 / K-B and F-B package | K-B and F-B external references identified; F-B internal contents not observed. | Package identity and unperformed contents observation are different states. Do not report a counted internal quantity that the record does not contain. | State the actual observation boundary and ask the responsible owner what further documentary or separately authorized review is required. | Planning analysis |
Wholly fictional records and requirements. Two matched main carton references do not certify two complete mounting packages. No actual shortage, component count, condition, compatibility, verification or field authorization is established.
Return accessory questions with the parent kit reference
Return each accessory question with the equipment task, parent kit, required component or separate line, applicable source issue and the actual evidence received. Identify whether the next return is a supplier identity clarification, a missing-item location, a project-owner disposition or the record of a separately authorized observation. Those are different requests. A photograph or supplier statement can be recorded as an input without converting it into a verified contents count or an installation approval.
For EX-ACC13, a useful request is: “For E1/K-A, identify whether the loose pouch is the specified F-A and provide the traceable source; locate or disposition the separate AC-A line. For E2/K-B, confirm the F-B record's observation boundary and identify any further review required.” If a return resolves one question, update only that item and preserve the source. An F-A identity clarification does not deliver AC-A, and a correct package identifier does not prove its unobserved contents.
The resulting accessory manifest complements the allocation and substitution records already described above. It tells the next owner which kit and accessory identities are supported and which inputs remain unresolved. Rail/rack fit, fastening specifications, loads, service access, actual condition and work release still require their applicable OEM/site sources and responsible qualified review. This checklist supplies none of those technical conclusions, purchasing commitments or permissions.
Carry the actual installed item into the handoff
Record the item used against the link or equipment position, including any approved change. Keep unused, returned, damaged and still-unresolved items distinct from installed quantities. A delivery receipt should not be reused as evidence that a part was installed in its intended location.
Leviathan can discuss physical installation and agreed material-readiness records for customer-furnished equipment. Handling and lifting requirements remain subject to actual site conditions, available equipment, qualifications and authorized scope. Materials procurement, electrical installation and full system commissioning are not added by this checklist.
References: [L3]
Common planning questions
Does a delivery count establish installation readiness?
No. Reconcile identity, required accessories, allocation, approved instructions and outstanding holds for the specific work package.
Who approves a substitute cable or rail kit?
The project must name the responsible customer/design/OEM owner as applicable. The installer should record the mismatch and approval reference rather than infer equivalence.
Can an eight-unit delivery satisfy eight tasks when some items are held or different?
The total alone cannot establish that. Reconcile the exact requirement, unit, task allocation and material status. In fictional EX-M05, eight delivered units include one held unit and one unapproved alternate, leaving only six specified units allocated without a material hold. Site and technical work release remain separate.
Does approval of a substitute for one link approve it for the whole project?
Use the scope of the actual authorized decision. The fictional S-01/R04 approves PART-R for EX-L08 only; it does not establish general interchangeability or resolve H-01 for EX-L07. Preserve the affected task IDs and the approving owner’s reference rather than infer a broader authorization.
Does an approved material change prove the substitute was installed?
No. Preserve the released requirement, allocation and actual-used record as different states. Record the installed item and change reference after separately authorized work is completed. This documentary trail does not establish technical compatibility, performance, a warranty remedy or acceptance of unrelated work.
Does a correctly labelled rail-kit carton establish that every required accessory is ready?
It identifies a parent package, not every constituent or separately ordered line. Reconcile the actual contents list, component or pack identities, separately specified accessories and the scope of any recorded observation. Keep unconfirmed contents and missing independent lines explicit.
Can a loose fastener bag be counted as the required mounting hardware?
Only a traceable item identity and applicable source can support that documentary entry. Record an unlabelled or unassigned bag as an unresolved identity question and request the responsible supplier/owner's return. Appearance alone does not select a fastener, approve a substitute or establish fit or safe use.
Which rack accessories belong on the client-furnished checklist?
List the items required by the actual released equipment/configuration and kit documents, distinguishing included constituents from separately specified accessories. Do not assume every installation needs the same cable-management, support or other accessory. Record the exact reference, unit, task allocation, source and unresolved decision for the lines that actually apply.
Can fiber and copper materials share one workfront staging list?
A workfront view can include both if each actual part, unit, task allocation, source issue and exception remains identifiable. It must not replace their applicable product and site conditions with one generic handling or storage rule. This article provides the coordination fields, not those physical methods.
Does naming a receiving or staging owner give that party authority to approve a substitute?
No. Receiving observations, stock allocation, technical disposition and purchasing decisions are separate functions. Name the actual authorized decision owner and retain the affected-task scope and record. One party may perform several roles only where the engagement actually establishes them; the worksheet grants no authority.
Primary sources
- [N4] NVIDIA DGX B200: system introduction and network portsChecked 2026-10-14. DGX B200-specific physical/logical port mapping and cable information. Do not transfer this mapping to other systems or infer their shipped contents.
- [L3] Leviathan rack-and-stack scopeChecked 2026-10-14. Agreed installation of customer-furnished equipment/materials. Purchasing, supply and specialist handling are not assumed.
- [N5] NASA Systems Engineering Handbook — 6.5 Configuration ManagementChecked 2026-10-19. General distinction between proposed/approved changes and implementation/status records only. Not a data-center standard, product-substitution approval, customer authority, technical method, procurement authorization or NASA endorsement.
- [N6] NVIDIA DGX B200 Service Manual — rack-mount kit document and contents referencesChecked 2026-10-19. Only DGX B200 chapter references to screws/washers associated with its kit and an included printed template support the documentation example. No hardware counts, torque, loads, fitting, lifting, replacement/installation steps, generic compatibility, purchased-order completeness or Leviathan OEM qualification is adopted. The accessory checklist and EX-ACC13 are original documentary analysis and fiction.