+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Mars Exploration Rover (MER) Project                                  |
|                                                                       |
| Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP)                                 |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+

Paper copies of this document may not be current and should not be
relied on for official purposes. The current version is in the MER
Project Library at
[http://mars03-lib.jpl.nasa.gov](http://mars03-lib.jpl.nasa.gov/), in
the Controlled Documents and Records folder.

October 30, 2000

![](media/image1.pct){width="1.625in" height="0.5972222222222222in"}

Jet Propulsion Laboratory

California Institute of Technology

Prepared by:

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Margaret Lam, Software Quality Assurance

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Kelly Moran, Hardware Quality Assurance

Approved:

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Tom Ramsey, Mars Program Quality Assurance Group Supervisor/ MER Lead

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Phillip Barela, Quality Assurance Office Manager

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Mark Boyles, Mission Assurance Manager

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Mark Adler, Mission Systems Manager

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Richard Cook, Flight Project Manager

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Pete Theisinger, Project Manager

CHANGE LOG

  ---------- ------------------- --------------------------- ----------------
  DATE       SECTIONS CHANGED    REASON FOR CHANGE           REVISION

  10/16/00   ALL                                             INITIAL RELEASE

  10/30/00   Pages 6, 11, 14-17, Updated "will" to "shall".  A
             19-22, and 33.                                  

                                                             

                                                             

                                                             

                                                             

                                                             

                                                             

                                                             

                                                             

                                                             

                                                             

                                                             

                                                             

                                                             
  ---------- ------------------- --------------------------- ----------------

> **[Table of Contents]{.underline}**

**[SECTION I]{.underline}** [6](#section-i)

**1.** **SCOPE** [6](#scope)

1.1. Introduction [6](#introduction)

1.2. Purpose [6](#purpose)

1.3. Applicability and Source [7](#applicability-and-source)

**[SECTION II]{.underline}** [8](#section-ii)

**2.** **APPLICABLE DOCUMENTS** [8](#applicable-documents)

2.1. General [8](#general)

2.2. Governing Specifications [8](#governing-specifications)

**[SECTION III]{.underline}** [11](#section-iii)

**3.** **ORGANIZATION** [11](#organization)

3.1. JPL Quality Assurance Organization
[11](#jpl-quality-assurance-organization)

3.2. Project Quality Assurance Representative
[11](#project-quality-assurance-representative)

**[SECTION IV]{.underline}** [13](#section-iv)

**4.** **QUALITY ASSURANCE PROGRAM** [13](#quality-assurance-program)

4.1. Initial Quality Planning [13](#initial-quality-planning)

4.1.1. Review of Project Documents [13](#review-of-project-documents)

4.1.2. Pre-Procurement Activity [13](#pre-procurement-activity)

4.2. Design and Development Control
[13](#design-and-development-control)

4.2.1. Training and Certification [14](#training-and-certification)

4.3. Change Controls [14](#change-controls)

4.4. Contractor Surveillance [14](#contractor-surveillance)

4.5. Procurement Controls [15](#procurement-controls)

4.5.1. Procurement Documents Controls
[15](#procurement-documents-controls)

4.5.2. Raw Material Controls [16](#raw-material-controls)

4.6. Receiving Inspection [16](#receiving-inspection)

4.6.1. Sampling Inspection [16](#sampling-inspection)

4.7. Electronic Parts Inspection [17](#electronic-parts-inspection)

4.8. Processing, Fabricating, Assembly, Test, and Inspection Control
[17](#processing-fabricating-assembly-test-and-inspection-control)

4.8.1. Manufacturing, Inspection and Test Planning
[17](#manufacturing-inspection-and-test-planning)

4.8.2. Inspection [18](#inspection)

4.8.3. Stamp Controls [19](#stamp-controls)

4.8.4. Critical Processes [19](#critical-processes)

4.8.5. Workmanship Standards [20](#workmanship-standards)

4.8.6. Metrology controls [20](#metrology-controls)

4.8.7. Controlled Storage [20](#controlled-storage)

4.8.8. Handling, Packaging, Shipping and Storage Controls
[20](#handling-packaging-shipping-and-storage-controls)

4.8.9. Record Maintenance [20](#record-maintenance)

4.8.10. Controlled Records [20](#controlled-records)

4.8.11. Nonconforming Material Control
[21](#nonconforming-material-control)

4.8.11.1. JPL Material Review Board. [21](#jpl-material-review-board.)

4.8.11.2. Contractor Material Review Board.
[21](#contractor-material-review-board.)

4.8.12. Acceptance Test Verification [21](#acceptance-test-verification)

4.8.13. Preparation of Test Procedures/Specifications
[22](#preparation-of-test-proceduresspecifications)

4.8.14. Environmental Testing [22](#environmental-testing)

4.8.15. Functional and Acceptance Electrical Testing
[22](#functional-and-acceptance-electrical-testing)

4.8.16. Post-Test Hardware Inspection
[23](#post-test-hardware-inspection)

4.9. Ground Support Equipment [23](#ground-support-equipment)

4.10. System Level Integration and Test Activities
[23](#system-level-integration-and-test-activities)

4.11. End Item Data [24](#end-item-data)

4.12. Hardware Requirements/Certification Reviews (HRCRs)
[24](#hardware-requirementscertification-reviews-hrcrs)

4.13. Launch Operations Support [25](#launch-operations-support)

4.14. Government Property Controls [25](#government-property-controls)

**[SECTION V]{.underline}** [26](#section-v)

**5.** **SOFTWARE QUALITY ASSURANCE SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS AND
ACTIVITIES**
[26](#software-quality-assurance-specific-requirements-and-activities)

5.1. Software Quality Assurance WBS Structure
[26](#software-quality-assurance-wbs-structure)

5.2. Software Development Process Standard
[26](#software-development-process-standard)

5.3. Software Class vs. Software Documentation
[27](#software-class-vs.-software-documentation)

5.4. Reviews [27](#reviews)

5.5. Software Quality Assurance Activities by Project Phases
[27](#software-quality-assurance-activities-by-project-phases)

5.5.1. Formulation Phase [28](#formulation-phase)

5.5.2. PDR Phase [28](#pdr-phase)

5.5.3. CDR Phase [28](#cdr-phase)

5.5.4. Testing & Validation Phase [29](#testing-validation-phase)

5.6. Project Software Quality Assurance Independent Assessment and IV&V
Recommendation
[30](#project-software-quality-assurance-independent-assessment-and-ivv-recommendation)

5.7. Software Safety Hazard Analysis
[30](#software-safety-hazard-analysis)

5.8. Software FMECA and Software Fault Tree Analysis
[31](#software-fmeca-and-software-fault-tree-analysis)

5.9. Software Delivery Review [31](#software-delivery-review)

**[SECTION VI]{.underline}** [33](#section-vi)

**6.** **QUALITY ASSURANCE APPLICATIONS ENGINEERING**
[33](#quality-assurance-applications-engineering)

6.1. General [33](#general-1)

6.2. NASA Electronic Parts and Packaging (NEPP)
[33](#nasa-electronic-parts-and-packaging-nepp)

6.3. Optical Alignment [33](#optical-alignment)

**[SECTION VII]{.underline}** [34](#section-vii)

**7.** **LESSONS LEARNED** [34](#lessons-learned)

7.1. General [34](#general-2)

**[GLOSSARY]{.underline}** [35](#glossary)

# **[SECTION I]{.underline}**

# **SCOPE**

##  Introduction

This Quality Assurance Plan details the Quality Assurance requirements
and activities to be implemented during the design, fabrication, test,
and delivery of the Mars Exploration Rover (MER). The intent of this
Plan is to minimize risk by the astute allocation of resources, made
available by the JPL Office of Quality Assurance (506), while staying
within the constraints of cost, schedule, and acceptable levels of risk.
The Mars Exploration Rover (MER) Project Implementation Plan (which
includes the MER Mission Assurance Plan), JPL D-19620, is the governing
document for all JPL Safety and Mission Assurance Directorate (SMAD)
activities involving program hardware and software. This quality plan
conforms to the requirements of the Project Implementation Plan and
provides further detail on the approach to be used in support of that
effort.

##  Purpose

> This plan defines the detailed quality assurance requirements and
> activities to be implemented during the formulation, design, build,
> assemble and test (DBAT) phases of the MER Project.
>
> Personnel responsible for implementing this plan shall provide any
> remedial and preventive measures that are necessary to assure the
> delivery of acceptable flight hardware. Provisions of this plan are
> applicable to all participating JPL Technical Divisions, JPL partners,
> contractors and/or suppliers. Specific guidance for individual
> contractors and suppliers shall be determined jointly by a MER
> engineering, procurement and quality representative, and shall be
> documented in accordance with JPL's product delivery system
> requirements. Any changes to this plan shall have the approval of the
> management of the JPL Office of Quality Assurance, Section 506.
>
> This Plan recognizes the following elements as essential for an
> effective Quality Assurance program:
>
> \- Early technical documentation review by Quality Assurance
> Engineering
>
> \- Concurrent engineering
>
> \- Planning and management of the quality effort and the definition of
> quality tasks
>
> \- Early involvement of Quality Assurance Engineering at suppliers
> prior to Contract/Purchase Order Award
>
> \- Provisions for the detection and correction of deficiencies that
> could result in unsatisfactory quality

##  Applicability and Source

> All quality task elements that pertain to flight, Non-flight, Test,
> and Ground Support Equipment are governed by this Plan. The contents
> of this Plan represent the application of selected quality
> publications and specifications identified in Section II.
>
> JPL's quality system is currently certified to the requirements of ISO
> 9001 "Model for Quality Assurance in Design/Development, Production
> and Installation". The policies, procedures and processes necessary to
> ensure that the MER Project's products conform to customer
> requirements are listed in JPL's Define and Maintain the Institutional
> Environment (DMIE) on-line system. In the event of a conflict between
> this plan and any information listed in DMIE, the DMIE Waiver Process
> shall be followed. This Plan does NOT take precedence over any
> Category-A document requirements called out in DMIE. In the event of
> any changes to the Quality Assurance Documents referenced by this
> plan, the QAR shall assess their impact to MER and either (1) agree
> with the change and implement, or (2) take exception and create a MER
> specific document, approved by 506 Office Manager, reflecting the
> process as it applies to MER. ISO 9001 quality program principles
> shall apply to the activities called out in this plan.
>
> The quality assurance activities defined in this plan shall be
> accomplished and/or validated by JPL.
>
> Contractor quality assurance activities shall be defined and
> controlled by contractor quality assurance plans, which either
> pre-exist or are prepared in accordance with the appropriate
> procurement documents. The JPL Quality Assurance Representative (QAR)
> for any procurement, shall review and approve any required contractor
> quality documentation.
>
> The source of authority for the requirements given in this document is
> the Design, Build, Assemble, and Test Process Policy, which may be
> found in the DMIE Information System.

# **[SECTION II]{.underline}**

# 

# **APPLICABLE DOCUMENTS**

##  General

> All hardware and software using this Quality Assurance Program Plan
> shall adhere to the quality requirements called out in this Plan, and
> the following specifications or their approved equivalents.

## Governing Specifications

> The latest issues of the listed documents are applicable to and
> complement the contents of this Plan:

+--------+------------------------------+------------------------------+
|        | ###### Internat              |                              |
|        | ional Standards Organization |                              |
+--------+------------------------------+------------------------------+
| > ISO  | > Quality Systems            |                              |
| > 9001 |                              |                              |
+--------+------------------------------+------------------------------+
| #      | ###### JPL Standards         |                              |
+--------+------------------------------+------------------------------+
| > 9    | > Standard Environmental     |                              |
| 00-434 | > Testing Facilities and     |                              |
|        | > Practices                  |                              |
+--------+------------------------------+------------------------------+
| > DMIE | > JPL Project Software       |                              |
| >      | > Quality Assurance Planning |                              |
|  44452 | > Policy                     |                              |
+--------+------------------------------+------------------------------+
| > JPL  | > JPL Flight Systems Safety  |                              |
| >      | > Requirements               |                              |
|  D-560 |                              |                              |
+--------+------------------------------+------------------------------+
| > JPL  | > JPL Standard for           |                              |
| >      | > Electro-Static Discharge   |                              |
| D-1348 | > (ESD) Control              |                              |
+--------+------------------------------+------------------------------+
| > JPL  | > The JPL Software           |                              |
| > D    | > Development Process        |                              |
| -15378 | > Description                |                              |
+--------+------------------------------+------------------------------+
| > JPL  | > Software Development       |                              |
| > D    | > Principles for Flight      |                              |
| -17868 | > System                     |                              |
+--------+------------------------------+------------------------------+

+----------------+-----------------------------------------------------+
| #              | **[JPL Specifications]{.underline}**                |
+----------------+-----------------------------------------------------+
| > JPL D-8208   | > Spacecraft Design and Fabrication Requirements    |
|                | > for Electronic Packaging and Cabling              |
+----------------+-----------------------------------------------------+
| > JPL D-19272  | > MER Environmental Requirements Plan               |
+----------------+-----------------------------------------------------+
| > JPL D-19494  | > MER Contamination Control Plan                    |
+----------------+-----------------------------------------------------+
| > JPL D-19640  | > MER Review Plan                                   |
+----------------+-----------------------------------------------------+
| > JPL D-19641  | > MER Configuration Management Plan                 |
+----------------+-----------------------------------------------------+
| > JPL D-TBD    | > MER Critical Item Transportation Plan             |
+----------------+-----------------------------------------------------+
| > JPL D-TBD    | > MER Software Management Plan                      |
+----------------+-----------------------------------------------------+
| > JPL D-TBD    | > MER Flight Software Development and Management    |
|                | > Plan                                              |
+----------------+-----------------------------------------------------+
| > JPL D-TBD    | > MER Mission System Development and Management     |
|                | > Plan                                              |
+----------------+-----------------------------------------------------+
|                | ###### Quality Assurance Procedures                 |
+----------------+-----------------------------------------------------+
| > QAP 11.0     | > Electronic Parts Quality Assurance Activities     |
+----------------+-----------------------------------------------------+
| > QAP 11.11    | > EPQA Receiving / Kitting                          |
+----------------+-----------------------------------------------------+
| > QAP 11.3     | > Survey of Flight Microelectronic and              |
|                | > Electromagnetic Part Suppliers                    |
+----------------+-----------------------------------------------------+
| > QAP 11.7     | > Surveillance of Flight Electronic Parts Screening |
|                | > Vendors                                           |
+----------------+-----------------------------------------------------+
| > QAP 12.1     | > Project Office QA Representative Task Description |
+----------------+-----------------------------------------------------+
| > QAP 13.11    | > Procedure for use of the Quality Assurance Alert  |
+----------------+-----------------------------------------------------+
| > QAP 13.21    | > QA Document Center (QADC)                         |
+----------------+-----------------------------------------------------+
| > QAP 23.2     | > NASA and JPL Quality Assurance Training and       |
|                | > Certification Cards                               |
+----------------+-----------------------------------------------------+
| > QAP 30.41    | > Quality Requirements, Division 35 On-Lab          |
|                | > Activities, Flight Projects & Experiments         |
+----------------+-----------------------------------------------------+
| > QAP 30.42    | > Quality Assurance Survey of Flight Printed Wiring |
|                | > Board Suppliers                                   |
+----------------+-----------------------------------------------------+
| > QAP 39.3     | > Quality Assurance Assessment of External          |
|                | > Suppliers                                         |
+----------------+-----------------------------------------------------+
| > QAP 41.3     | > Survey of Manufacturers & Distr. Of High          |
|                | > Reliability Externally                            |
|                | >                                                   |
|                | > Threaded Fasteners                                |
+----------------+-----------------------------------------------------+
| > QAP 43.14    | > Resident/Itinerant QA Personnel Activities at     |
|                | > Contractors Facilities                            |
+----------------+-----------------------------------------------------+
| > QAP 52.1     | > QA Support of Application of Polymeric Materials  |
|                | > to Flight Hardware                                |
+----------------+-----------------------------------------------------+
| > QAP 53.2     | > Inspection of Electronic Subassemblies &          |
|                | > Assemblies & Cables                               |
|                | >                                                   |
|                | > Fabricated at JPL                                 |
+----------------+-----------------------------------------------------+
| > QAP 61.10    | > Handling, Movement, Storage and Shipment of       |
|                | > Critical Flight Project Hardware                  |
+----------------+-----------------------------------------------------+
| > QAP 61.11    | > QA Inspections of JPL Shipments                   |
+----------------+-----------------------------------------------------+
| > QAP 61.25    | > QA Requirements for Proof Loading, ID and         |
|                | > Documentation of S.E. Furnished by Division 35    |
+----------------+-----------------------------------------------------+
| > QAP 61.4     | > Detail mechanical Part and Assembly Serialization |
+----------------+-----------------------------------------------------+
| > QAP 64.2     | > Quality Assurance Requirements for Mechanical     |
|                | > Inspection                                        |
+----------------+-----------------------------------------------------+
| > QAP 71.0     | > Quality Assurance Responsibilities for ATLO       |
+----------------+-----------------------------------------------------+
| > QAP 81.1     | > Procedure for On-lab Operations Support           |
|                | > Electronic Inspections                            |
+----------------+-----------------------------------------------------+
| > QAP 121.1    | > QA Support of On-Lab Hardware (Sub-assembly,      |
|                | > Assembly, &                                       |
|                | >                                                   |
|                | > Spacecraft Level) Test Activities                 |
+----------------+-----------------------------------------------------+
| > QAP 131.1    | > Hardware Review and Certification Review          |
+----------------+-----------------------------------------------------+
| > QAP 141.10   | > Procedure for Use of the JPL Inspection Report    |
|                | > Form JPL 1898                                     |
+----------------+-----------------------------------------------------+
| > QAP 141.11   | > Instructions for Use of the Assembly and          |
|                | > Inspection Data Sheets                            |
|                | >                                                   |
|                | > (AIDS)                                            |
+----------------+-----------------------------------------------------+
| > QAP 144.1    | > Quality Assurance Material Review Board Action    |
+----------------+-----------------------------------------------------+
| > QAP 144.2    | > Control of Nonconforming Product                  |
+----------------+-----------------------------------------------------+
| > QAP 161.1    | > Inspection Stamp Control and Usage                |
+----------------+-----------------------------------------------------+

+-------------------+--------------------------------------------------+
|                   | ###### JPL Forms                                 |
+-------------------+--------------------------------------------------+
| > 1898            | > Inspection Report (IR)                         |
+-------------------+--------------------------------------------------+
| > 1898-1          | > Inspection Report Continuation Page            |
+-------------------+--------------------------------------------------+
| > 2916            | > Assembly and Inspection Data Sheet (AIDS)      |
+-------------------+--------------------------------------------------+
| > 2916-1          | > Assembly and Inspection Data Sheet             |
|                   | > Continuation Page                              |
+-------------------+--------------------------------------------------+
| > 2683            | > Environmental Test Authorization and Summary   |
|                   | > (ETAS)                                         |
+-------------------+--------------------------------------------------+

> These QAP's and many of the other documents previously listed are
> listed in JPL's DMIE Information System. They are located on the web
> at: [http://dmie](http://dmie/).

# **[SECTION III]{.underline}**

# 

# **ORGANIZATION**

## JPL Quality Assurance Organization

> JPL Quality Assurance is the responsibility of the Office of Quality
> Assurance, Section 506. The Manager of the Office of Quality Assurance
> reports directly to the Director for the Safety and Mission Assurance
> Directorate. The MER project shall have a Lead Hardware Quality
> Assurance Representative (QAR) and a Lead Software Assurance
> Representative (SAR) for supporting the MER Project in the
> implementation of this plan. The QAR and SAR shall report
> administratively and functionally within the JPL Office of Quality
> Assurance.

## Project Quality Assurance Representative

> The JPL Manager of the Office of Quality Assurance JPL QA shall
> appoint, with the project's concurrence, a QAR. The QAR shall support
> the project in the implementation of the Quality Assurance Program per
> QAP 12.1.
>
> The QAR shall receive direction regarding the allocation of resources
> and overall quality assurance policies from the project. Work
> Agreements (WA's) documenting the project specific QA tasks shall be
> generated and modified as necessary during the project life cycle.
>
> The QAR shall be responsible for:
>
> a\. Establishing and implementing the Quality Assurance Requirements.

b.  Preparing Quality Assurance Plans.

c.  Managing the Project Quality Assurance Budget

d.  Coordinating all system and subsystem Quality Assurance activities.

e.  Preparing quality requirements for implementation at JPL
    contractors.

f.  Implementing JPL Quality Assurance Mandatory Inspection Points.

g.  Performing internal, partner, and supplier technical risk
    assessments and product evaluations prior to awarding
    contracts/purchase orders.

h.  Participating in contract award activities, including fact-finding
    and negotiations.

i.  Reviewing and approving the contractor Quality Assurance Program
    Plans.

j.  Reviewing and approving contractor workmanship standards and
    critical processes.

k.  Reporting quality status and associated issues/concerns.

l.  Investigating quality problems and recommend quality improvement
    actions.

m.  Organizing vendor pre and post-award surveys.

n.  Reviewing procurement documentation for appropriate quality
    assurance controls.

o.  Conducting supplier audits and evaluations per the applicable QAPs.

p.  Conducting Source inspections and participating in reviews at
    contractors' facilities.

q.  Assuring all facilities utilized for and all personnel performing
    flight hardware fabrication and testing are properly certified.

r.  Participating in all Project Hardware Requirements Certification
    Reviews (HRCRs) and Support Equipment Certification Reviews (SECRs).

s.  Participating in Manufacturing Readiness, Test Readiness and
    Pre-ship Reviews.

# **[SECTION IV]{.underline}**

# 

# **QUALITY ASSURANCE PROGRAM**

## Initial Quality Planning

### **Review of Project Documents**

> Quality planning shall begin with participation by Quality Assurance
> personnel in the review and generation of inputs to the governing
> project requirement documents.

### **Pre-Procurement Activity**

> The Office of Quality Assurance shall support the implementation of
> the procurement phase by participation in the following areas of
> activity:
>
> Review procurement documentation, including Requests for Proposals
> (RFP's), Statements-Of-Work (SOW's), Procurement Requisitions and
> Equipment Specifications to ensure appropriate quality provisions and
> clauses are defined, including Contractor End-Item-Data-Package
> requirements
>
> Provide the technical divisions and the procurement divisions with
> information concerning contractor quality system capabilities derived
> from previous and current quality efforts.
>
> Ensure contractor Quality Plan compliance to procurement requirements.
>
> Perform Vendor Surveys at potential suppliers per the applicable
> QAP(s) listed:

-   QAP 11.3 , Survey of Flight Microelectronic and Electromagnetic Part
    Suppliers

-   QAP 30.42, Quality Assurance Survey of Printed Wiring Board
    Suppliers

-   QAP 39.3, Quality Assurance Assessment of External Suppliers

-   QAP 41.3, Survey of Manufacturers and Distributors of High
    Reliability Externally Threaded Fasteners

## Design and Development Control

> Quality Assurance personnel shall participate in preliminary and
> critical design reviews, pre-environmental test reviews, hardware
> certification reviews and/or pre-shipment acceptance reviews, when
> required by the project QA Work Agreement.
>
> Quality Assurance personnel shall review and approve (signature block
> on drawings) all MER Top Assembly and Mechanical Interface Control
> Documents (MICDs).

### **Training and Certification**

> Personnel performing hands on fabrication, assembly and inspection of
> flight hardware shall be trained and certified to the requirements of
> D-8208, or contractor equivalent document. Quality Assurance shall
> verify that all certifications are current and valid (Ref. QAP 23.2).

## Change Controls

> Change control shall be accomplished in accordance with the applicable
> Project Configuration Management Plan. Unless otherwise specified by
> the contract, the Project Change Control requirements should be flowed
> down to contractors. This document shall be controlled using the
> procedures set forth in the MER Project Configuration Management Plan,
> PD 420-1-102 (JPL D-19641)
>
> Quality assurance shall participate in change control by:

a.  Reviewing and approving all drawing changes.

b.  Reviewing software system requirement changes after initial baseline
    is completed

c.  Maintaining master red-line drawing sets, when necessary

d.  Verifying all approved changes are properly incorporated/implemented

e.  Verifying product as-built configuration

> Documents pre-released or not released shall be written-up in the
> Electronic IR system. Redlined drawings shall be maintained and
> controlled in accordance with JPL D-19641, MER Configuration
> Management Plan.
>
> Upon request from the Project, the SAR shall perform configuration
> process assessment. The SAR shall ensure all software system
> configurations under test are properly identified and controlled.

## Contractor Surveillance

> JPL Quality Assurance Engineers shall be assigned on a resident or
> itinerant basis at each contractor facility, as required. The
> activities shall include, but are not limited to:

a.  Monitoring and auditing contractor quality assurance activities to
    assure compliance with the JPL approved contractor Quality Assurance
    Plan and Contract Statement-of-Work and Workmanship Standards (Ref.
    QAP 43.14).

b.  Participating in contractor hardware design reviews.

c.  Establishing and performing JPL mandatory hardware and documentation
    inspections at the contractor facility utilizing contractor
    inspection procedure flow plans, and instructions approved by JPL.

d.  Monitoring Acceptance Test activities.

e.  Participating in the disposition of nonconforming material and
    acting as "Government Representative" on contractor Material Review
    Boards (MRB), \[JPL QA is a designated NASA Quality Representative\]
    \[Ref. QAP 43.14\].

f.  Performing final inspection at the contractor facility prior to
    hardware delivery to JPL.

g.  Verifying the accuracy and completeness of the contractor End-Item
    Data Package (EIDP).

h.  Preparing a Final Electronic Inspection Report or JPL Form 1898,
    reflecting the hardware and documentation status.

i.  Reviewing and approving Supplier critical processes.

j.  Participation in scheduled management meetings at the contractor
    facility.

k.  Participation in supplier Fabrication/Manufacturing Readiness
    Reviews.

l.  Status reporting back to the JPL Office of Quality Assurance and
    designated Project personnel.

m.  Monitoring the Government Source Inspection (GSI) delegation, if
    required.

## Procurement Controls

> When parts or materials have their inspectable attributes covered and
> cannot be adequately inspected at JPL, or when they are determined to
> be critical processes for high-risk items, source inspection shall be
> performed at the supplier's facility. Records of inspection and tests
> performed at source shall be maintained as part of the Hardware End
> Item Data Package (EIDP).

### **Procurement Documents Controls**

> JPL Quality Assurance shall review procurement documentation such as
> contracts, Purchase Orders, Statements-of-Work (SOW), Contract Data
> Requirements List (CDRL), Data Requirement Description (DRD) and
> specifications. Typically, each Contract has a set of CDRL's and
> DRD's. Two CDRL's and DRD's apply to Quality Assurance. They are
> Contractor QA Plan (including ESD Plan) and End Item Data Package
> (EIDP) requirements.

### **Raw Material Controls**

> Suppliers of raw materials are required to supply certifications
> indicating that materials being provided are in compliance with the
> requirements of the procurement documents. Reports of tests required
> to determine conformance to applicable specifications and drawings are
> required when requested by the cognizant hardware engineer or quality
> engineer, and shall be included as required deliverable documentation.
>
> When necessary, these reports are verified by source inspection or by
> independent tests performed in addition to the supplier reports. When
> raw material is found to be non-compliant, it shall be tagged and
> segregated from acceptable material. An Inspection Report shall be
> generated and dispositioned prior to the material being released.

## Receiving Inspection

Receiving inspection shall be performed on all flight-received materials
and hardware to ensure that JPL procured hardware is compliant. The
cognizant engineer is responsible for notifying Quality Assurance upon
receipt of flight materials and hardware.

JPL policy requires the reporting of discrepant deliveries within five
(5) days of delivery. The hardware cognizant engineer (or their
delegate) shall notify quality assurance of the receipt of flight
hardware, support equipment that interfaces with flight hardware, or
customer furnished equipment to arrange for inspection to be performed.

Quality Assurance responsibilities include the following:

a.  Inspection of incoming hardware for compliance to applicable
    drawings, specifications, and/or other documentation specified by
    the contract or purchase order.

b.  Documenting, segregating, and obtaining disposition of
    non-conforming hardware and/or material.

c.  Maintaining a system to control the use and accuracy of all tools,
    gauges, jigs and fixtures used for the inspection and acceptance of
    mechanical hardware at JPL.

d.  Generating the necessary documentation required to certify hardware
    acceptance.

### **Sampling Inspection**

> Sampling inspection shall be applied only to standard hardware (e.g.,
> nuts, bolts, etc.) and will be based on the sampling tables of
> MIL-STD-105. Determination of the appropriate sampling plan and its
> application shall be determined by the designated technical personnel
> and approved by the Project QAR.

## Electronic Parts Inspection

Precap inspections shall be performed on all hybrid assemblies and, when
requested by cognizant hardware engineers or required by the project QA
Work Agreement, on microcircuits procured for use on the MER project.
Inspection requirements and acceptance criteria shall be included in
purchase orders and contract statements of work.

Electronic parts inspection shall be performed per QAP's 11.0 and 11.11.

## Processing, Fabricating, Assembly, Test, and Inspection Control

Flight hardware or material shall have documented evidence of Quality
Assurance acceptance; anything less shall be considered nonconforming.
Preliminary Material Review Board action or project waiver shall be
required for nonconforming hardware or material. All processes used in
the fabrication of flight hardware shall be qualified in accordance with
NASA, JPL, or contractor equivalent requirements. Qualification of
processes shall be performed by the cognizant technical organization and
reviewed by JPL Quality Engineering. Quality Assurance Activities shall
include:

a.  Approval of Flight Assembly and Inspection Data Sheets (AIDS) \[Ref.
    QAP 141.11\]

> b\. Review and approval of Top Assembly and Mechanical Interface
> Control Drawings
>
> c\. Review of manufacturing procedures
>
> d\. Performance of ESD Surveys

e.  Participation in Operations and Facility Safety Surveys (Ref. JPL
    D-560)

f.  Participation in Transportation Surveys

g.  Test witnessing and/or surveillance

h.  Flight hardware configuration changes

i.  Final acceptance of hardware or material

### **Manufacturing, Inspection and Test Planning**

> When manufacturing assembly or test procedures have not been
> generated, the Assembly and Inspection Data Sheet (AIDS) (Forms 2916 &
> 2916-1), shall be used for hardware fabrication, assembly and testing
> at JPL (Ref. QAP 141.11). Specific assembly instructions, inspection
> criteria and techniques shall be defined, including inspection points.
> Contractors shall use equivalent planning that provides clear and
> concise instructions defining detailed assembly instructions,
> inspection points, inspection criteria, and any special techniques
> requested for assembly operations. QA shall review and approve
> manufacturing and test planning prior to their implementation.

### **Inspection**

> All protoflight and flight hardware shall be inspected to released
> drawings, specifications, and approved workmanship standards, unless
> otherwise specified by Project documentation. Unreleased documents
> shall be documented on an Electronic Inspection Report or contractor
> equivalent. Redlined documents, if permitted by the Project, shall be
> maintained in accordance with the Project Configuration Management
> Plan.
>
> Mechanical flight hardware shall have 100% dimensional inspections
> performed unless otherwise specified in the Project Implementation
> Plan and/or the Project Work Agreement (Ref. QAP 64.2).
>
> For MER Engineering Model hardware, JPL QA shall perform a one-time
> precap workmanship inspection.
>
> All reduced inspection programs shall be approved by the project
> Quality Assurance Representative. Hardware subjected to a reduced
> inspection program without the written approval of the Project QA
> Representative shall be considered non-compliant, and documented on an
> Electronic Inspection Report, or contractor equivalent.
>
> All protoflight and flight hardware and materials shall be inspected
> at the level necessary to:

a.  Assure mechanical and physical dimensions and conditions are
    compliant to the applicable Top Assembly and /or Mechanical
    Interface Control Drawings (MICDs).

b.  Assure workstations and areas in which protoflight or flight
    hardware is present meet the Electrostatic Discharge (ESD)
    requirements as defined in JPL D-1348, or approved contractor
    equivalent.

c.  Assure the Project Configuration Management Plan and hardware
    traceability requirements are met.

d.  Assure the Project Safety Plan requirements are met, per JPL D-560.

e.  Assure training and certification requirements as defined in JPL
    D-8208 and are compliant.

f.  Assure workmanship compliance.

g.  Assure applicable handling, packaging, and storage requirements are
    documented and complied with.

h.  Assure applicable handling and operating constraints have been
    identified and adhered to.

i.  Assure that flight hardware documentation accompanies the flight
    hardware during any transportation activities.

### **Stamp Controls**

> Inspection stamps on the applicable documentation that accompanies the
> hardware indicate inspection status of hardware. Quality Assurance
> Stamp Control is maintained by the Quality Assurance Documentation
> Center (Ref QAP's 13.21 and 161.1).

### **Critical Processes** 

> Controls, including written procedures, shall be established over
> processes for which the uniform quality of articles or materials
> cannot be assured solely by inspections or tests. These processes
> include, but are not limited to:

a.  Plating

b.  Anodizing

c.  Radiography

d.  Ultrasonics

e.  Magnetic Particle Inspection

f.  Liquid Penetrant Inspection

g.  Heat Treating

h.  Welding

i.  Die Attachment

j.  Wire Bonding

k.  Soldering

l.  Polymeric Applications

m.  Cleaning Applications

> Critical processes shall be reviewed by JPL Quality Engineering. Those
> procedures contained in JPL Document D-8208 shall be utilized to the
> degree that they provide for the necessary processes. If processes are
> needed, which are not contained therein, new processes shall be
> prepared and approved prior to process implementation. See Section VI
> of this plan for additional support regarding new processes.
>
> All processes used in the fabrication of JPL flight hardware shall be
> qualified in accordance with NASA and JPL requirements. Qualification
> of processes shall be performed by the cognizant technical
> organization and approved by the Office of Quality Assurance (506).

### **Workmanship Standards**

> The quality of workmanship on JPL flight hardware shall meet or exceed
> the requirements of JPL D-8208, or approved equivalent (Ref. QAP's
> 52.1, 53.2, and 81.1).

### **Metrology controls**

> All electrical, electronic, linear, mechanical, optical, temperature
> and vacuum/pressure equipment used to determine or verify product
> conformance/acceptability shall be subject to
> calibration/certification. All equipment shall be within the valid
> calibration period at the time it is used for determination of product
> conformance/acceptability. All test equipment calibration on the MER
> Project shall be controlled in accordance with JPL's ISO 9001
> institutional policies and procedures.

### **Controlled Storage**

> JPL flight hardware shall be maintained in controlled storage areas.
> The storage areas shall have the necessary environmental and ESD
> controls required to meet project requirements. Access shall be
> controlled and limited to those persons involved in fabrication, test
> and quality assurance tasks.

### **Handling, Packaging, Shipping and Storage Controls**

> All handling, packaging, shipping, and storage shall be performed per
> the applicable Quality Assurance and JPL institutional policies and
> procedures (Ref. QAP 61.10).
>
> All equipment or material, whether experimental, flight-type, or
> ground support equipment, shall be submitted to Quality Assurance
> prior to shipment, to assure the receiver that JPL has complied with
> conventional packing and shipping practices (Ref. QAP 61.11).

### **Record Maintenance**

> Quality Assurance shall assist engineering in maintaining records that
> provide evidence of inspections, tests, as-built, configuration and
> hardware status during all phases of fabrication, assembly,
> integration, and test. All records shall be readily accessible for
> audit review. The records shall clearly identify the hardware to its
> assigned project. These records shall become part of an End Item Data
> Package to be retained for support of the Hardware Certification
> Review. The End-Item Data Package shall be reviewed by Quality
> Assurance for completeness.

### **Controlled Records**

> All Quality Assurance Controlled Records shall be controlled per the
> applicable QAPs.
>
> All other institutional controlled records shall be controlled per JPL
> institutional policies and procedures, the Product Delivery System or
> the applicable project documentation.

### **Nonconforming Material Control**

> A closed-loop system for identifying documenting, controlling, and
> correcting nonconformances shall be implemented per QAP 144.1 and
> 144.2, or contractor approved equivalents. When an article or material
> does not conform to applicable engineering design documentation (e.g.,
> drawings, specifications, etc.), it shall be identified as
> nonconforming, segregated from acceptable articles (to the degree
> practicable), held for further action and the nonconformance
> documented. At JPL, nonconformances shall be documented on a JPL
> Electronic Inspection Report (Ref. QAP 141.10). At contractors,
> nonconformances shall be documented on Inspection Report equivalent
> forms. Each nonconformance shall be reviewed, dispositioned, and
> corrective and preventative action taken to prevent recurrence of
> similar discrepancies.
>
> Project Quality Assurance personnel shall maintain status of all
> nonconformances.

#### **JPL Material Review Board.**

> In the event that JPL Engineering and Project Quality Assurance
> personnel are unable to reach concurrence on an IR disposition, a
> Material Review Board team shall be composed in accordance with QAP
> 144.1.
>
> Members of the MRB may consult with other organizations and personnel
> as required to arrive at optimum decisions.
>
> Dispositions that may be made include all those applicable to initial
> dispositions and any other the MRB may elect.

#### **Contractor Material Review Board.**

> Provisions for documenting, dispositioning, and mitigating major and
> minor nonconformances, as defined in the glossary, shall be included
> in contractor Quality Assurance Plans and/or the contract Statement of
> Work. Contractor Quality Assurance personnel shall ensure effective
> corrective and preventative actions are implemented. All contractor
> MRB's shall be in accordance with (QAP) 43.14. JPL Engineering and
> Quality Assurance representatives shall be a member of all contractor
> MRB's. The JPL Quality Assurance Representative shall obtain the
> concurrence of the JPL Engineering Representative prior to approving
> any recommended dispositions or vice versa. In cases where the JPL
> Quality Assurance and Engineering Representatives cannot agree on a
> disposition, a JPL MRB shall be convened. All contractor
> nonconformance reports shall become a part of the hardware's
> End-Item-Data Package (EIDP).

### **Acceptance Test Verification**

> Quality Assurance shall, as required by the Project QA Work Agreement,
> support the implementation of functional acceptance and environmental
> test programs.
>
> JPL Quality Assurance Representatives, where required by the Project
> QA Work Agreement or requested by JPL engineering, shall monitor
> subsystem, and system-level environmental tests. The following
> specific Quality Assurance activities shall be implemented to verify
> that testing is performed in compliance with the established project
> test program requirements.

### **Preparation of Test Procedures/Specifications**

> Quality Assurance shall verify that (Ref. QAP 121.1):

a.  The detail test procedures identify the applicable project test
    requirements.

b.  All applicable specifications and procedures have been properly
    authorized prior to use, and all deviations/waivers from the
    specifications and procedures are authorized.

### **Environmental Testing**

> Quality Assurance shall ensure that (Ref. JPL D-19272, 900-434, and
> QAP 121.1):

a.  The test area is controlled to the extent necessary to protect the
    test article from damage or degradation.

b.  Requirements governing safety, handling and storage, calibration,
    cleanliness, and environmental controls are being adhered to.

c.  Test equipment and support instrumentation are within current
    calibration cycles.

d.  Fixture evaluations, as evidenced by documentation, meet the
    requirements of the applicable specifications.

e.  The Environmental Test Authorization and Summary, (ETAS), JPL Form
    2683, has been approved, completed, and signed by the required
    Project personnel.

f.  That test readiness review checklists have been completed, if
    required, and all action items have been closed or dispositioned "Ok
    to Proceed".

g.  Facility, Operational, and ESD Surveys have been completed.

h.  Problem Failure Reports (PFRs) and Electronic Inspection Reports
    (EIRs), or the contractor equivalent of both forms, are initiated
    when required and within the required time frame.

### **Functional and Acceptance Electrical Testing**

> Quality Assurance shall monitor flight hardware functional and
> electrical acceptance testing performed at all levels of assembly and
> shall ensure that:

a.  Authorized test procedure is available and in use.

b.  Test data and acceptance criteria are documented.

c.  Test equipment is within its current calibration cycle.

d.  Safety, hardware handling and required storage provisions are in
    effect.

e.  ESD precautions are being adhered to.

f.  The test area is controlled to the extent necessary to protect the
    hardware and personnel safely.

g.  Contamination control and environmental control requirements are
    being adhered to.

h.  Procedural and specification changes are properly documented.

i.  Problem/Failure Reports (P/FRs) are initiated for any noted test
    anomalies, when required.

### **Post-Test Hardware Inspection**

> Post-Test Hardware Inspections shall be performed to detect and
> document the condition of the hardware after environmental testing,
> with emphasis on documenting discrepancies that may have resulted from
> the testing. The Project Environmental Requirements Engineer (ERE)
> shall review significant discrepancies to determine the retest
> requirements.

## Ground Support Equipment

Quality Assurance involvement in Ground Support Equipment (GSE) shall be
limited to the level necessary to assure:

a.  Flight Hardware interfaces, mechanical and/or electrical are
    compliant to requirements

b.  Current calibration of Electrical GSE

c.  Current proof-load of Mechanical GSE

d.  Cleanliness and contamination control requirements are compliant

e.  Proper and legible identification of the product

f.  Safety requirements are satisfied and potential hazards are
    identified

## System Level Integration and Test Activities

Experiment and/or Instrument System integration and test Quality
Assurance activities shall be performed in accordance with QAP 71.0.

## End Item Data

Hardware fabricated, assembled, and/or tested at JPL; or procured from a
contractor shall have a data package that contains pedigree sufficient
enough to validate the hardware as spaceflight worthy. End Item Data
Package requirements are called out in the Project Configuration
Management or Documentation Plans. Contractor End Item Data Package and
as-built requirements are defined in the contract Statement-of-Work, in
the Contract CDRL's/DRD's, or on the purchase orders. The minimum End
Item Data shall include, but not be limited to:

a.  As-built data as defined by the MER Configuration Management Plan.

b.  A complete listing of any open or unapproved documentation (such as
    Problem/Failure Reports, Inspection Reports, MRB's, etc.).

c.  Final Acceptance Test Data.

d.  Handling and Operating Constraints as defined by the MER Critical
    Item Transportation Plan (Ref. JPL D-TBD).

e.  Telemetry calibration data, if applicable

f.  Contractor Certificate of Compliance

g.  Requirements Compliance Verification Matrix

## Hardware Requirements/Certification Reviews (HRCRs)

Quality Assurance personnel shall participate in and support Hardware
Requirements and Certification Reviews (HRCRs). Specifically, Quality
Assurance personnel shall be responsible for the accomplishment of the
following (Ref. QAP 131.1):

a.  Assure submittal to the Hardware Requirements and Certification
    Review Board of supporting data that reflects the complete quality
    history of the hardware, which includes inspection status,
    configuration verification, and Material Review Board (MRB)
    activities.

b.  Assure identification to the Hardware Requirements and Certification
    Review Board of any and all discrepancies that arise from incomplete
    certification and/or deliverable documentation requirements.

c.  Identification of any waivers, deviations or exceptions to
    established project requirements.

d.  Indication, by signature, on the Hardware Requirements and
    Certification Review that the hardware meets the applicable
    requirements and a satisfactory certification has been obtained.

e.  Assure an Electronic Inspection Report has been generated which
    denotes inspection acceptance of the hardware or identifies any
    discrepancies and their dispositions.

f.  The MER Flight Systems Manager, or their designee shall determine
    project hardware that requires HRCR.

## Launch Operations Support

JPL Quality Assurance shall provide the necessary support, as determined
by the MER QA Work Agreement, to ensure a correct and safe integration
of MER Project deliverables with the Launch Vehicle. Quality Assurance
activities shall include, but not be limited to:

a.  Review and certification of transportation vehicles

b.  Post-transportation inspection

c.  Surveillance and monitoring to assure compliance to Spacecraft
    processing and testing procedures

d.  Performing and documenting necessary inspections

e.  Verification of completion of all required hardware and software
    integration testing

f.  Verification of compliance to procedures and requirements regarding
    Spacecraft/Payload in preparation for Launch Vehicle integration

g.  Participation in Launch Vehicle Integration Readiness Reviews

h.  Ensure Program Handling Constraints are clearly identified and
    complied with in integration procedures

i.  Monitoring and ensuring Spacecraft/Payload contamination control
    procedures are followed

## Government Property Controls

Government-furnished property shall be controlled in accordance with
JPL's ISO 9001 compliant institutional polices and procedures.

Contractors responsible for JPL Government furnished property shall
control it in accordance with the applicable contract Statement-of-Work
requirements.

# **[SECTION V]{.underline}**

# **SOFTWARE QUALITY ASSURANCE SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS AND ACTIVITIES**

## Software Quality Assurance WBS Structure

For the Mars Exploration Rover (MER) Project, Software Quality Assurance
is being performed on both Flight System and Mission System (Ground
Software), within two separate WBS line items.

The Flight System Software Quality Assurance WBS includes software
quality services for Flight Software, and Spacecraft Performance
Analysis software. The Mission System Software Quality Assurance WBS
includes software quality services for Ground Data System (GDS) and
Mission System software elements. Each WBS account is governed by a
respective work agreement. The Work Agreements (WA) for both the Flight
and Mission Systems identify various SQA activities jointly agreed upon
to be performed based on criticality of software and percentage of
inherited code vs. new code.

## Software Development Process Standard

Software development organizations shall use the JPL Software
Development Process Description, D-15378 as their software development
guideline, and tailor the software development process to meet project
requirements, and constraints.

The tailored software development process shall be addressed in the
Flight System and Mission System Software Development/Management Plans.

The following key issues shall be addressed in the development plans:

a.  Project software development methodology

b.  Software development life cycle phases.

c.  Governing project standards and guidelines (i.e., design guidelines,
    interface specification standards, and coding standards.)

d.  Deliverables (documents and code)

e.  The types of review that the products are subjected to as a function
    of the product criticality

f.  Development test planning/test bed capability

g.  Software Quality Assurance

h.  Software Configuration Management

i.  Requirements Traceability

j.  Quality records

The SAR shall assure that the development team is following the defined
processes and standards.

## Software Class vs. Software Documentation

Depending on the software class, a set of standard documentation shall
be defined in the Flight System and Mission System Software Development
Plan. Refer to Appendix B of D-15378 for a recommended set of
documentation for software classes A, B, C and D.

## 

## Reviews

Class A and Class B software, as defined in the Project Software
Management Plan, shall undergo a structured Peer Review process, with a
defined set of objectives and the correct set of participants, as
defined in JPL D-19640, MER Project Review Plan.

Reviews shall be addressed in the Flight and Mission Software
Development Plan, SQA recommends the following software peer reviews be
held:

a.  Software Requirements Review

b.  Software Inheritance Review

c.  Software Design Review

d.  Critical Code Walkthrough

e.  Acceptance Test Plan/Procedures

Action Items/Defects resulting from Peer Review or Project Milestone
Review shall be tracked, and dispositioned.

The SAR shall participate in peer-reviews to the extent possible to
ensure adequacy, consistency and completeness of project
standards/guidelines, software requirements, design, code, test
plan/procedures/results.

## Software Quality Assurance Activities by Project Phases

This section provides an overview on software assurance activities by
project phases. The Software Assurance activity listed below is being
performed on Flight Software. A subset of SQA activities is being
performed on Mission System software, based on criticality of software,
refer to Work Agreement for more detail.

### **Formulation Phase**

-   Project SQA Assessment and IV& V Recommendations (Ref. section 5.6)

-   Preliminary QA Plan (SQA Section)

### **PDR Phase**

-   Software Requirements Analysis (for completeness and consistency)

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   Functional Requirements

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   Software Requirements, including derived requirements

-   Software Performance Requirements

-   Software Fault Protection Requirements

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   QA plan updated (SQA section)

-   Contractor Software SOW Review and Approval

-   Software Inheritance Checklist development in conjunction with
    Software Development Organization.

-   Identify Safety Critical Software from Safety Preliminary Hazard
    Analysis (joint effort with System Safety)

-   Support PDR Review

### **CDR Phase**

-   Support Software Design Reviews

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   Peer Reviews

-   Technical Software Design reviews

-   Software Inheritance Review

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   Perform Software Safety Hazard Analysis (Ref. Section 5.7)

-   Perform Software Failures Mode Effects Criticality Analysis (SFMECA)
    and/or Fault Tree Analysis (FTA) on selected critical software
    elements (Ref. Section 5.8)

-   Support Code Walk-thru Peer Reviews

-   Review Software Test Plan/Procedures/Results to ensure:

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   Stress testing is adequate.

-   Reuse software are tested in new environment, new interfaces...

-   Fault Protection Functions are adequately tested, including failure
    modes that are identified by FTA, and SFMECA.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   Requirements Traceability Matrix Verification

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   Software Requirements Vs Test Procedures/Cases

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   Support CDR Review

### **Testing & Validation Phase**

-   Test Procedure Reviews

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   Review Detailed Test Environment and Configuration

-   Review Detailed Test Procedures Vs Test Plans

-   Ensure correct requirements traceability exist between Software
    Requirements and Test procedures.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   Assure Test and Validation Process

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   Software Version under test is configuration controlled

-   Ensure Software Problem Failure Reporting Process is being used

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   Test Readiness Review

> \- Review and validate Functional Capability Statement
>
> \- Review and validate Functional Test Pass/Fail Criteria
>
> \- Review Anomaly/Problem Status (all major anomalies accounted for)
>
> \- Review Acceptance Test Plan and Test Procedures

-   Acceptance Test

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   Verify Acceptance Testing Configuration & Environment

-   Participate in Acceptance Testing

-   Review Test Results

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   Software Delivery Review (Ref. Section 5.9)

## Project Software Quality Assurance Independent Assessment and IV&V Recommendation

The Software Quality Assurance Organization shall perform an assessment
of Project software, and recommend appropriate levels and mix of
Software Quality Assurance and/or NASA IV&V Facility activities
according to the JPL Project Software Quality Assurance Planning Policy,
DMIE-44452.

The level of NASA IV&V Facility support recommended for a project will
be a risk-based decision that takes into account:

a.  Risks to mission success.

b.  Project resources (e.g. MER S/W development resources).

c.  Software safety hazards.

d.  JPL onsite capabilities

e.  NASA IV&V Facility unique capabilities and resources

f.  JPL Software Quality Assurance capabilities and resources

The assessment will use a set of pre-defined criteria/checklist to
assess software development processes and products through out the
software life cycle. The result of the assessment will contain a list of
risk items, with mitigation actions/activities corresponding to each
risk item.

## Software Safety Hazard Analysis 

The Software Quality Assurance organization shall perform a Software
Systems Safety/Hazards Analysis. This analysis shall be performed on
software that is used as a part of a system that possesses the potential
of directly or indirectly causing:

1.  Damage to the Project system that adversely impacts mission success.

2.  Harm to humans.

3.  Damage to property external to the system.

After the Project Safety Engineer generates a Preliminary System Safety
Hazard Analysis, the project will determine the allocation of safety
controls to either hardware or software. As software controls become
more clearly defined, software safety hazard analysis shall be performed
to identify individual modules that are safety-critical.

The SAR shall assure the implementation and verification of
safety-critical components are properly performed, and that the software
will execute within a system context without contributing to hazards.
Specifically, the SAR shall assure the software won't affect system
safety in the following two ways:

1.  It can't produce output values and timing that lead the system to a
    hazardous state.

2.  It can't fail to recognize or handle hardware failures that it's
    required to control or respond to.

## Software FMECA and Software Fault Tree Analysis

Software Failure Modes Effect and Criticality Analysis (SFMECA) and/or
software Fault Tree Analysis (FTA) will be performed on selected project
software elements. Specific elements will be determined based on their
mission criticality, safety-criticality identified by Safety Preliminary
Hazard Analysis, and Mission Fault Tree Analysis.

## Software Delivery Review

When the software product is ready for delivery, a software delivery
review, or software review/certification requirement review (SRCR) shall
be held. The software delivery review policies and procedures, can be
tailored based on software criticality, and according to MER Project
Review Plan. The software delivery review and a set of deliverables
shall be addressed in Flight and Mission System Development Plan.

The purpose of the delivery review is to evaluate the readiness of the
software product for delivery to a customer, or transition to a
subsequent phase. The SRCR form shall be used to certify the acceptance
of the delivery product.

The software release/delivery package will contain the following:

1)  As-built product identification, including:

    a.  Identification of software release by program id, phase,
        version, date, and build.

    b.  Operating system name and version

    c.  Programming language name, compiler name, and version.

    d.  Supporting development environment name and version (if any)

2)  A Release Description Document (RDD) or equivalent which contain:

    a.  Functional Requirements/Capabilities of this build

    b.  Instructions or user manual to install and configure the
        software application, including special test equipment software
        which are required to support the primary software application
        (if any)

    c.  Lists of all software deliverables in this build, including
        special test equipment software (if any)

3)  List of dates and versions of all required documents (under CM
    control).

4)  A list of all open/closed anomalies or liens against this delivery.
    All red-flag anomalies should be closed prior to this delivery
    review.

5)  Verification test procedures/results. For ClassA/B software,
    Acceptance Test Plan/Procedures/Report shall be provided.

6)  Verification Test Matrix against software requirements.

At the end of the delivery review, the review board should be able to
conclude that:

a.  The products to be delivered have been adequately tested to ensure
    that all requirements have been met.

b.  The product, associate documentation and special test equipment are
    ready for delivery.

c.  A plan exists for closing all remaining problems, waivers, or liens.

d.  The receiving organization is ready to accept delivery.

e.  The SRCR form is completed with all required signatures.

# **[SECTION VI]{.underline}**

# 

# 

# **QUALITY ASSURANCE APPLICATIONS ENGINEERING**

## General

The Quality Assurance Applications Engineering Group within Office 506
is actively involved in the research and development of advanced
packaging techniques. Part of the group's charter is to support Quality
Assurance personnel in the area of electronic packaging designs and
their associated materials, processes, and qualification thereof.

This group provides technical counseling and acts as a liaison between
the JPL technical divisions. One of the roles this group serves is to
ensure that designs created by our Suppliers/Industry partners and
within JPL are to the quality level prescribed by the Project and by
institutional requirements.

The Quality Assurance Applications Engineering Group shall review
qualification plans, materials selection, manufacturing processes, and
design details relating to electronic packaging. This group works
closely with the technical divisions within JPL, other NASA centers, and
industry around the world to solicit expertise and assist in solving
electronic packaging problems and development.

## NASA Electronic Parts and Packaging (NEPP)

The NASA Electronic Parts and Packaging program may be used to assist in
the reliability assessment for the fusion of new technology (electronic
parts packaging) on the MER project.

## Optical Alignment

Optical Metrology personnel, office 506 shall review and approve all
plans and procedures when optical metrology or alignment activities is
required. The review shall include all alignment activates at JPL and
contractor facilities. The review shall focus on determining that the
best technical approach is used to meet the project goals. If it is
determined that JPL Optical Metrology personnel is required to
participate, their involvement shall be as described in the guidelines
of the applicable QAPs.

# **[SECTION VII]{.underline}** 

### 

# **LESSONS LEARNED**

# 

## General

Quality Assurance personnel shall take advantage of the JPL and NASA
Lessons Learned, and utilize the information to benefit projects.
Lessons learned data can be found at URL:
[[http://llis.nasa.gov/]{.underline}](http://llis.nasa.gov/).

\**Paper copies of this document may not be current and should not be
relied on for official purposes. The current version is in the DMIE
Information System at* http://dmie*.*

# **[GLOSSARY]{.underline}**

**[AIDS]{.smallcaps}** - [Assembly Inspection and Data
Sheet]{.smallcaps}

[**EPQA** - Electronic Parts Quality Assurance]{.smallcaps}

[**ETAS** - Environmental test authorization and summary]{.smallcaps}

[**GFP** - Government-Furnished Property (any Property supplied by the
Government in Accordance with the Provisions of the Statement of
Work)]{.smallcaps}

[**GSE** - Ground Support Equipment (Equipment Especially Developed to
Assist in Handling or Operating Flight Equipment]{.smallcaps}

[**EIR** - Electronic Inspection Report]{.smallcaps}

##### 

[**KSC** - Kennedy Space Center]{.smallcaps}

[**Major Nonconformance** A Discrepancy or Defect which Effects Fit,
Function, Performance, Reliability, or Safety of the
End-Item]{.smallcaps}

[**Micd** - Mechanical Interface Control Drawings]{.smallcaps}

[**Minor Nonconformance** A Discrepancy that Does Not Effect Fit,
Function, Performance, Reliability, or Safety of the End
Item.]{.smallcaps}

[**MER** - Mars Exploration Rover]{.smallcaps}

[**MRB** - Material Review Board]{.smallcaps}

[**Non-flight Articles** Articles not specifically Designated for Actual
Space Flight, but Which are Otherwise Similar to the Flight
Articles]{.smallcaps}

[**PDS** - Product Delivery System]{.smallcaps}

[**PFR -** Problem/Failure Report]{.smallcaps}

[**QAP -** Quality Assurance Procedure]{.smallcaps}

[**QAR -** Quality Assurance Representative]{.smallcaps}

[**SAR -** Software Assurance Representative]{.smallcaps}