Eligibility

Participation in the NIPHLE Annual Design Competition is encouraged for all individuals or teams in government, industry, and academia who feel they have made a valuable contribution in the fields of packaging, handling, or logistics. Participation is not limited to NIPHLE members.

---

 Categories

1 Long-Life Packaging Usually featuring: Complex design, specialized engineering/testing, emphasizes shipping and protection during long-term storage, frequently reusable	2006 Winning Entry PACKAGING FOR LOW SIGNATURE AMRORED CAB BRIAN HAKALA – Packaging Engineer ANDREW SILECCHIA – Packaging Engineer VIRGINIA HENRY – PKG. SPEC STEWART & STEVENSON SERIVCES, Sealy, TX DON MARKS – Packaging Specialist ADVANCED INTERNATIONAL SERIVCES JAMES RUSSELL - Packaging Sepcialist US ARMY TACOM, Warren, MI
2 Short-Life Packaging Usually of simpler design, lower engineering/equipment investment, emphasizes protection in the shipping environment	2006 Winning Entry BULK PACKAGING OF PRIMED CARTRIDGE CASES BABU SRINIVASAN – Group Manager ADI, LTD - LAND ORDNANCE, Benalla, VIC, Australia
3 Material Handling Device Automated or manual Any size load Safer / more efficient handling Auxiliary equipment	2006 Winning Entry T-56 QECQ SHIPPING & STORAGE CONTAINER ROBERT STEEL – Project Engineer CHRIS LEISER – Engineer IVAN STANKE – Program Manager KEVIN COWLEY – Team Leader RICK ARTER – Supervisor NAVICP-PHS&T, Philadelphia, PA– Program Manager
4 Computer Software Program / System Free standing systems Multi-client Quality / economy in task results	2006 Winning Entry DOD HAZMAT COMPUTER BASED TRAINING GERALD BOYD – Environmental Protection Specialist NAVICP, Mechanicsburg, PA LINDA McCARTHY – Packaging Specialist DDC, Mechanicsburg, PA MARY REINHARDT – Instructional Development Specialist JOHN DiSLAVO – Multi-Media Specialist DLA TRAINING CENTER, St. Louis, MO WILL DOZIER – Sr. Instructional Designer FPMI SOLUTIONS – San Antonio, TX

 Membership in NIPHLE is welcomed and encouraged.  For information, please contact:

NIPHLE
niphle@dejazzd.com
570-523-6475 (Phone) • 570-523-0606 (Fax) • TOLL FREE 1-866-464-7453

---

Procedure for Entry

Entry submission packages must be comprised of the following:

1.

A completed NIPHLE ENTRY FORM (Click for editable form EntryForm) Please include as an e-mail attachment with your entry or include on a submitted CD (See below for submission options).

2.

An electronic document (Microsoft Word preferred) containing: A.  A clear, summary DESCRIPTION of the ENTRY (package, handling device or the software program).  The summary is to include the design objectives, results of testing, usage to date, distribution experience, or any other information that will fully describe the value your entry brings. This summary ideally should not exceed 500 words and should be the first page of the submission document. B. Individual statements specifically addressing each of the listed JUDGING CRITERIA (see below). These statements ideally should not exceed 50 words on average per judging criteria C. PHOTOGRAPHS or other GRAPHICS depicting key aspects of the entry and/or its use should be 4" x 6" (minimum) with short explanatory captions. They may be included (embedded) in the main electronic file or attached separately in a commonly used format (.pdf, .jpeg, .html, etc.)

Complete entry submission packages must be received by March 5, 2007.

The completed entry documents may be sent as an e-mail attachment to: niphle@dejazzd.com
with a copy to jimayres@sbcglobal.net or on a CD mailed to:

NIPHLE 2006 DESIGN COMPETITION
177 Fairsom Court
Lewisburg, PA 17837-6844

The ENTRY FEE of $100 (except for full-time students) may be paid in either of the following ways:

The entry description, supporting data, and all photographs become the property of NIPHLE and will not be returned to the entrant.

NIPHLE reserves the right to publish any and all entry materials.

To further emphasize NIPHLE’s commitment to education and training, added encouragement is being offered to full-time Students as follows:

James Ayres	248-631-5726 or e-mail: jimayres@sbcglobal.net
Richard Owen	570-523-6475 (Phone) • 570-523-0606 (Fax) • TOLL FREE 1-866-464-7453 or e-mail: niphle@dejazzd.com

---

Judging Criteria

Please be as descriptive as possible on the following topics.  Elaborate on your answers each in a separately titled paragraph in the order the criteria are presented for your category. Note that some criteria relate to specific categories, and if not applicable, need not be addressed.  The questions for each topic are intended for clarification and should not limit the description of your entry.

General Overview/Value Added (All categories)
What innovations place this entry “head and shoulders” above other solutions?  What value does the design add to the system?  How?

Design Integrity and Difficulty (All categories)
What feature is unique to the design or program?  How is the new design or program better than the one previously used?  Why is the design or program better than alternative solutions?

Environmental Impact (categories 1, 2)
Does the design minimize materials usage?  Are components of the package reusable, recyclable, and/or biodegradable?

Transportability (categories 1, 2)
What considerations in the shipping environment are taken into account by the new short- or long-life package design?  How does the package facilitate transport in the various modes?

Ease of Use and/or Handling (categories 1, 2, 3)
Is the package or device “user friendly?”  How are ergonomic factors considered and factored into the design?

Product Protection (categories 1, 2)
What has been the performance experience with the short- or long-life package in the various packaging, handling, storage and transportation (PHS&T) phases?  What deficiencies in a previous design have been overcome?

Materials (categories 1, 2, 3)
Do the materials used minimize the special knowledge or equipment needed to fabricate the package or construct the device?

Economy (All categories)
How does the new package, device or system reduce labor, weight, cube or materials? Is there a reduction in the cost of material used or in the total life cycle costs, including transportation cost?  How does the program or system reduce labor cost or response time or increase productivity, accuracy, or efficiency?

Distribution/Procurement (categories 1, 2, 3)
How does the design reflect consideration of the distribution plan requirements?  Is the package or device easily procured from conventional sources?

Control Systems (categories 1, 2, 3)
How are proven technologies and tools (e.g.: bar codes, scanners, computers, or microprocessors) applied to enhance the design effectiveness?

Safety (category 3 - categories 1 & 2 optional)
How does the design address OSHA, EPA, DOT, and other safety requirements/provisions and reflect concern for the user?

Ease of Use/Technical Expertise (category 4)
Is the program or system “user friendly?”  Please include screen examples to show how user experience/needs are considered.

Quality (category 4)
How has the quality/accuracy of information been improved as a result of the new program or system?

Utility (category 4)
Is the program/system available to and usable by both industry and government?  Does it have broad application potential?

Procurement (category 4)
Is the basic software for the program or system available from conventional sources?

---