ed %no u

DEPARTMOIT OF THE AIR FORCE

SAFSP

Air Ports Unit Post Oilloo. Los, Angeles 45. Odiforola

faa

MEMORANDUM FOR DR. McMILLAN

13 January 1964

SUBJECT: Management Aspects, Program 162

This package contains the information you wanted concerning

the several management aspects of Program 162.

It is presented in the following order:

Tab A. Organization Charts

SAFSP (overt)

SAFSP (covert)

SSD

SCF

(5) Operational Information Flow

Tab B. Disposition of Agena vehicles

Tab C. ECP #LH-194-62 pertaining to implementation

of ABC program changes

Tab D. Systems documentation; Summary history

of Configuration Control Board management

arrangement

Tab E. Pertinent contractual work statements

a. The relationship between Progrpaid Agena D

Program Office:

. In addition, the following requested information is furnished

As requirements become firm, Prog orzas

D office (as well as other support agencies; i.e.,

BTL) of need dates and quantities. If operational

requirements have not changed significantly since

the prior order, no special arrangements are required. Significant changes in program requirements (i.e., large increase in

payload weight, increased thrust for booster) require more

Rana

,

: : ••

*Pa. rT 47J a

Control System
r • • ••• •

• ••

Lodthood hi..•=a-e7. Corp, - Miss lios and Space Divis

mon= TECIINICU. DI?c=

• NO.

p^ffift •• 41.• - 2

•

1. Tao purpose of this Technical X.-octive is to

.

2. Jratificatiou

...tr.."' I f f

%/••nnnAiDateL. Us.

1.167.4.7.0

lum
Mgmt Aspects, Prile.111V •-• - ......., _.

I Atch

detailed negotiation with the Agena D office to establish the

Agena D configuration which will be supplied to the program.

At the Agena D subsystem level, there is a continual

technical relationship between of the two offices. For

example. technical personnel ogram must be aware

of and evaluate Agena D engine° change proposals from a

mission standpoint. Additionally, a continuing coordination is

required to insure that program peculiar equipment is integrated

into the Agena D production process as early as it is economically

and technically sound to do so.

b. The relationship between Advanced Projects Facility

(Skunk W esident Agency Officer (Col Murphy), and 

ProgrDe 

Woilo

The AP facility is a product of the covert nature of the

gram. Here camera and recovery assemblies are integrated

in a payload package compatible with the program Agena D configuration. Because of the covert nature of this facility, it is

necessary to provide contractual coverage for this facility through

Agency contract channels.

lopik

, This facility is technically not responsive to the SSD

grant director until all CCB members approve of technical

c =vs.

Colonel Murphy, as an Agency-assigned Air Force

officer, is responsible for control of the camera operation per

directives received from the DNRO operations activity. In

addition, he is a CCB member. The AP facility is a convenient

covert facility in which Colonel Murphy's camera operation

programming activities can take place and for this reason his

group has historically been housed at the AP facility.

4. If you desire further information I can fill in over the Ky-9.

Also, we intend to cover this subject in greater detail with you

•

Major General, USAF

Director, Special Projects

Et.r.ige I41E1 .riettr _ ni ZwiStira

v 0.1 nn •.:1 vi • 7.

• • .4
!tut aft

Cmtrol System

cit ",." "*

• .1 I.

sw. 6. 1.=

fa a

A.,4441/ .01/

In response• to the question "What directives and guidance are

furnished to contractors and support agencies in order to conduct

the 162 Program?" the following is submitted as examples of the

types of directives -that are issued, doe repared, and plans

and procedures established to conduc ogram. This discussion is divided into two parts, the g a summary description of the over-all documentation scheme employed on the overt side,

exclusive of the direction provided to the contractor as part of the

basic contracts, and the usual amendments which become part of the

contracts file. The second part of the description is a memorandum

for Dr. McMillan from General Greer, which summarizes the history

and the operation of the Configuration Control Board, which is the

principal method of providing the contractor with directives in the

black. While not covered in this memorandum, the other means by

which black instructions are provided to both the contractor and

supporting agencies is by covert TWX link and oral instructions.

The description following in regard to overt documentation has been

based on the usual documentation prepared for any space system activity, and it is designed to cover in a very broad way the program

definition phase, the planning phase, the establishment of requirements documents, companion support plans, the development of

specification test plans, test objectives, operational requirements

supporting documents, and the feedback of the results and evaluations of test activity into the system.

Flight test documentation is either general (that is, applying to the

total program) or specific (for each test). Although the formal

requirements have changed over the past several years, the basic

document controlling generation of reports, directives and orders

is SSD Manual 80-1, 6 April 1962. Air Force 375 series regulations

are ir..Cuential in much of the reporting process. Individual documentation or range-users handbooks are published by the two major

national ranges. SSD has in effect several exhibits (61-49 and 61-50,

for instance) which detail preparation processes. Specific and

individual agreements covering program peculiar items also influence

general requirements.

3. The attached chart lists the major directive and directed reports

and orders involved in a flight test operation. Roman numerals

z.long the left margin identify categories of reports (or directives).

Brie:: explanations covering the preparation responsibility, timing

and purpose of each entry are provided on following sheets. Each

paragraph of explanation is keyed to a basic Roman number entry

on the main chart.
rz I, •

If I: ir1\i. br.,-b4

4. Part two of this response is contained in General Greer's

memorandum cited in paragraph I above; which is attached.

.1 •

:;;;;.,

:17.112

C2'.1•71
MAIMS 

Centre( rem-

. • e

•

PIJOIIT 17:71.

1 [Or -17M-7:17.:7-D

31 1 DEVELOI MIXT Llitiiil'iLOPO:;r0 it Y. , : F:4 PArKAOK PLAN U. SYrrfli:4 PA(K/M1 PROORN4 I

7 4--

III 1 STSTY.N l'ilVP NAN I - PRBLTNINIARY SUP PORT JUN STATEMFRT Or RAEUL CAPABILITY 

47

--4 4, . •

11S01.11TER ORBIT

IV 1141V.:311.. IX.Xantarr IDUPPOttr PTAIZ;)

RC 141-ItI 81? PLAN ref PLAN I SPT PLAN .1 sr? PLAN) 

PAYLOAD 011BITAL T RICOVIERY :1 (BOMIXR

....-7---.....

/ r

I /

an • ...... veta-rasananova r• tar, • - r+wer-easr.r •-•,--mns r, I r•-•irsnwnrast s ••n•n•-•.• •••••-•n••••.vrs...,,em.ms.117, s .•-; eTrras..,6.1•• n••••••••• n

/ ALL DUCUZ41. 11n ABOV,E

s

 THIS 

a LIRE ARK PitiTARED (XXR/AND REV1S6D AL; 1,11.:CFAZARY.

/ ALL/DOCUMEKW .•ELOW TRY; 1.1M? ARE ?IR.:PARED itirxr.vi WALLY FOR •ACR 1•11(31T. .• .1.-.., , - er as • 1L :C: re anurra-ase-- --amas=4:. :mss ri.,-.^aarsumworm..=-scn-t-r...=--ssm.11.411•Famillamt

V I SYS71.1: Well i

OBJECTIVIa; I i

i

V3 i

Om mna. ttvEs;

LAUNCH

OPS ORDER

[ OiTB] 7

I OPS ORM

mammy

011; ORM

V3 3

VIII

IX

OPi.NAT.1 ORAL RLO,11.1 RI gEN /1

=MIMS 

EMQtAll or ORAL REM Va 

I 

(PROCEDUR}.3

DOCUICNIS) 
11111

Control SIstrim

Haut

L. •

.• ••

0 Ca% P 10185c

Flight Test Documentation

The GOR, SOB. or equivalent are basic requirements

documents originated by a higher headquarters and passed to

AFSC (SSD/Program Office).

A Development Plan, Proposed System Package Plan, or

System Package Program is prepared by the program office 24

months before the proposed initial launch. If a contractor selection

process has earlier been completed, the prime or SETD contractor

generally will have a considerable hand in its preparation..

a. The Program Office (with SETD participation) prepares

24 months in advance of initial launch a Planning Estimate. It

serves to alert support offices and agencies to impending program

requirements.

a. The System Test Plan is prepared by the Program

Office (or by the SETD with Program Office guidance) 20 months

in advance of initial launch. It specifies the general philosophy

of the flight test program and serves as basic policy guidance for

later documents and ibr conduct of the program itself.

III. b. A Prelin-Anary Support .?la n, based on the Planning 

Estimate and other available program documents, is required

23 months before initial launch (and within 30 days of receipt of

the Planning Estimate) is prepared by the Satellite Control Office

and Satellite Recovery Office of SSD, with advice and assistance

from the Program Office; it includes general performance requirements, milestones, and cost estimates.

c. The lead range, on receipt of the Planning Estimate,

begins preparation of the National Range Commander's Statement 

of Capability, which is due about 28 months before first launch.

Further refinement is based on the Development or Program 

Package Plans.

a. The Recuirernents Document ( which may be either a

unified or a composite document) includes a resume of Payload 

(or Program Peculiar) Requirements, Booster (or Standard Launch

Vehicle) Requirements, Orbit Requirements, and Recovery Re9uiremerits. If a composite document, it is prepared by the SETD contractor, reviewed by the Program Office, and published by the
•

neNC C

"k-4+

.4•

responsible range. Input is obtained from program and•launch

vehicle offices of SSD, as appropriate. The document, or individual documents serving the same purpose, must be available

15 or 20 months in advance of initial launch.

- -

b. Based in part on Requirements Documents, Support

Plans (which are individual documents) are prepared for Payload 

(Program Peculiar), Boost (or SLV), Orbit, and Recovery activities. Preparation should be complete 12 months before initial

launch. The SETD contractor, with the participation of the responsible range (and affected wings) and the Program Office, provides

inputs. Actual preparation is the responsibility of SSD's Satellite

Control Office (Orbit Support), Satellite Recovery Office (Recovery

Support), and the range (Payload or Program Peculiar Item Support).

All support plans require review and approval by the program

director. Revisions, on which contractual action may be based, are

relatively frequent.

The foregoing documents constitute the sum of general guidance

provided for a specific flight test program. AU are required at least

a year in advance of a planned initial launch.

The System Test Objectives document is prepared by the

SETD contractor and the Program Office three months before each

scheduld launch. It serves to alert supporting agencies to specific

test objectives and defines general bases for evaluating results after

the launch. (Tab annexes to a single document may be used instead

if fligh:-to-flight test objectives are relatively constant.)

03orational Reouirerr.ent Documents, which must be

available at least a month earlier than a programmed launch, are

prepared in two parts (one covering launch, the other orbit and

r.ocovery) by the responsible wings (6594, 6595 or 6555) and are

submitted to the national range which is concerned. They define

in. greater detail the elements of the Requirements Documents.

VII. Three specific and detailed sets of documents must

prepared in the period ranging from two to eight weeks before

:arch launch. They arc based on guidance derived from the

Sv.ster.s. Test Objectives and Operational Requirements documents.

NM. a. Test Directives, needed from one to two months before

a launch, include Launch. Orbit and Recovery Test Directives (or

equivalent operations orders). The individual directives are

prepared by the responsible wings (6594, 6595 or 6555) for launch

an:: orbit operation an:: by the 6594th Recovery Control Group for

recovery.

. .

• .:•,.• , • . • • Coat St: m
 C. "

. • .

Su: • • •

VV. b. Operation b.-1 Directives, prepared by the range,- are

issued two weeks before each launch. The only required program

office input is the Operational Requirements Document.

c. A variety of procedures documents r-,...zaffbe required ..

by either the range or the launch wing. Countdown, range safety,

pad safety, and flight termination (destruct) are typical subjects.

As appropriate, they are prepared by the SETD or subcontractor,

the wings, and by the program (and individual project) offices.

If required, they generally are due a month or more in advance

of a specific launch date.

Within 20 days after completion of the specified operation,

a Final Launch Report, Orbit Evaluation Report, and Recovery

Evaluation Report must be prepared by the responsible wing (with

contractor assistance, as appropriate) for submission to the program

office.

IX. A flight Test Engineering Analysis prepared by the SETD

contractor is due in the program office at a specified date after

the conclusion of an individual test operation, generally 40 days.

The report is a detailed analysis of all aspects of the operation;

thertfore, it generally includes inputs from subcontractors or

associates.

3

Eanfrit 

f: • 111111, ,

e.:
Del

• -. % m a...

r •

•

13 January 1964

MEMORANDUM FOR DR McMILLAN

SUBJECT: Summary History of the Configuration Control

Board Management Arrangement

response to your request to me during my visit on 5 December

in regard to some background on the CCB, 1 have assembled the

following facts for your information.

1. Backaround.

The early CORONA management arrangement (1958-1960)

can be described in the following fashion. The contract structure

was composed of Lockheed as prime weapon system contractor on

the overt side to the Air Force. Lockheed was also under contract

to the agency as a system integrator for payload integration with ITEK

and FCIC as black subcontractors to Lockheed. FCIC was responsible

for camera construction, while ITEK conducted the camera subsystem

and calibration tests. At that time, both the Air Force and the agency

had respectively overt and covert contracts with GE for various pOrtions

of the re-entry body work. The Air Force portion at this time was

concerned with bio-medical experiments and was principally employed

as a cover.

On the government side, Colonel F. C. E. Oder was the Air

Force manager at the worlcing level under General Ritland, while Mr.

Bissell retained the responsibility for major technical and policy

decisions associated with system development. Program progress

was generally reviewed and reported to a group composed of Purcell,

Land and President's Scientific Advisory Committee, and

Bissell the CIA, and Dr. Herbert York of ARPA. General

:Lifland a. eneral Schriever occasionally participated.

c. 7.raen the program wa to ARPA as part of the

original cover scheme, Capta *, was transferred from

Colonel Oder's shop at BMD to act e payload coordinator for the

CIA on tIle ARPA staff. Due to Colonel Oder's involvement in the

SENTRY/SAMOS activity, he elected to visibly get out of the program,

:Lnd Colonel Red Sheppard was appointed CORONA Director at BMD.

Subsequently, Colonel Sheppard was replaced by Colonel Paul Worthrnan.

f: n• ,..31

• .1 s e .8 *up L.• r,; ime

7:-.;01.1

Lzi:sidisa

Ws:Li

 ,hit,

 •
The record indicates that the CIA (Bissell) objected to the

FCIC/ITEK arrangement and in May of 1960 proposed that both

these contractors become associate contractors to LMSD. During

the period May 1960 to September 1960, the contract and rnana.gement

structure was the subject of considerable discussion and various

proposals.

In September 1960, shortly after the first CORONA success,

ITEK induced Land to propose an improved CORONA camera directly

to the President. This proposal was the outgrowth of various recommendations on the part of both ITEK and FCIC for product improvement

and camera re-design. The first of these re-designs was the C1 camera

which had been a general product improvement of the basic C instrument.

The proposal which Dr. Land took to the President was substantially a

new design which had grown out of the work done by ITEK and FCIC

independently to improve the basic C instrument.

f. The competitive attitude which evolved between FCIC and ITEK

was basically the result of the agency's dis e contract

structure noted above. In fact, the agent asked

for separate proposals on an improved in ach contractor.

For this reason, the ITEK C111 proposal, which Dr. Land sponsored,

eliminated FCIC from the contract structure. ITEK got "verbal

approval'' on the C111 from Land, who cited Eisenhower as the authority,

and Mr. Bissell did not challenge this arrangement.

2. Creation o: the CCB.

The creation of the CCB was an outgrowth of the negotiations

which took place with the initiation of the MURAL system. The decision to undertake the MURAL camera configuration was basically made

by Mr. Bissell.

Historically, the undertaking of a new development task was -

accompanied by a re-appraisal of management arrangements and

woridng relationships. The actual agreement for the establishment

of a CCB occurred at a meeting of 4 April 1961, in which the principal

negotiator Charyk and Mr. Bissell, with Colonel Worthman

and Colon sent. This meeting was the culmination of a

munber of sa s and counter-proposals, which included a varic ..y

of contractual and management arrangements. Dr. Charyk had taken

the position, which ultimately proved to be the case, that Lockheed

should be given a system engineering function with ITEK as an

r 7 

:.1

1.

a
ea re 41: r.,!"Fle L. -i.

"

023855-64

associate contractor. Further, Dr. Charyk had expressed a desire

to keep the system engineering/technical direction responsibility in

the Air Force. As a result of his desire, the MAD volunteered to

assume the over-all SETD function, and on 29 April 1961, the CIA

agreed to this arrangement.

Apparently there was some hope at that time that at the conclusion of the C111 effort, then consisting of approximately two payloads, the M effort might be established as a separate program. If

this condition had occurred, and in view of the Air Force SETD

responsibility for M, it appeared to some that a clear definition of

program responsibility would be relatively easy. However, when the

M system was subsequently incorporated into the original program,

the M arrangements were, by osmosis, diffused through CORONA.

I would like to point out that it was during the same time

period that negotiations were in progress for the establishment of

the first version of the ismo charter. During this period, a rather

tenuous relationship mdsted between the CIA and SAFMS. The NRO

was pressing for a clear definition of responsibilities and authorities

in the reconnaissance area, but due to the sensitive relationships

between the principz.l parries, the hope that the MURAL Program

might evolve into a separate system, the acceptance by the CIA of

an AF SETD responsibility, and the many other problems existing

at the time, it was decided not to drive the CORONA issue to a clear

conclusion.

In June of 1961, the AF SETD contract was issued to Lockheed

in the black, which established the Air Force, specifically the AF

Space Systems Division, as the responsible agency for systems

engin nical direction of the MURAL effort. This contrac 708, was written under my contracting authority.

The 10 o per ormance covered by this contract was April 1961 to

October 1962. These arrangements were subsequently modified during

March and April of 1962 to more clearly define functions and responsibilities of the SETD activities.

Clauses were inserted into the associate contractors' contracts which, by inclusion, obligated the associate contractors to

perform contractually under the terms of the SETD agreement

in the basic Lockheed contract.

3

1.

EL'; zai •&% " "

Ildi iIII

C21:01
is ..•

r..1 .#4

11411 I'. IA"

Deltib55-64

The CCB'.s relationship to the SETD contract evolved as a

matter of inter-government working expediency. Contractually, the

contractors were responsible to me and to the Contracting Officer

whose contract was'afected by SETD decisions.. The only place

that the CCB appears in the contractual documents is on the form or

cover sheet for a technical directive, wherein a space is provided

for AFSSD/LMSD coordination.

As the result of the 4 April meeting mentioned above and

various understandings growing out of negotiations, the CORONA/

MURAL CCB, by mutual agreement, consisted of a CIA representative from Headquarters (technical), a CIA representative from the

field for operational considerations (Colonel Murphy), and the then

BMD people from the Discoverer Program Office, initially only one

person. Captain A. Johnson. Subsequent an observer

status by a representative from SAFMS (

when, again by mutual agreement of all parti

made a voting member.

1. At this point it might be well to define SETD as it was interpreted for the purposes of these arrangements. System engineering

and technical direction for the program (the word program was

interpreted to mean black payload matters) was the responsibility of

the AF Space Systems Division. Lockheed was contracted with to

provide specified system engineering and technical direction over

associate contractors which included the following functions:

Determination of system requirements and establishment

of performance specifications.

Recommend to the government required research,

development and experimentation to achieve established objectives.

(3) With approval, establish design specifications, test

specifications, engineering analysis, reports, procedures and

specifications, system evaluation, subsystem and component

development, preparation and coordination of technical directives,

e stablishment of program milestones, master schedule, status

reporting, system integration, establishment of interfaces, reliability, associate contractors' work statements, qualification and

Lcceptance tests of associate contractors deliverable items, etc.

4

1.4) ...11 •

. .....

System
r

k r

Ili

_

ie.

• *li." 1111p5-64

The CCB function under this concept was to control payload configuration, act as the internal government coordinating organization, be approval authority over all technical directives issued by

the contractor which affected payload, and serve as coordinating

and review group for items not within the scope of the contract.

j. The LMSD established within the covert area (Advanced

Projects) a SETD group which, under the direction of the CCB,

had authority to issue orders to the associate contractors; however,

the associate contractors had to have approval of the CIA Contracting

Officer in matters which involved changes in scope of work, costs,

or delivery schedule changes.

3. CCB Operation.

Management of the ARGON Program fell into the same general

pattern as CORONA//viUR ►L, with the establishment of the COB concept. initially the ARGON arrangements had been defined in July of 1959.

At that time it was agreed that the BMD/LMSD arrangements for CORONA

be essentially the same as those for ARGON. The principal difference

existed in the fact that over-all technical guidance on the ARGON payload

was provided by DDR.S.:E. At the time the CCB for ARGON was established, a DDR&E representative was added to the ARGON Board. The

first such representative was Mr. Ray Adcock.

With the establishment of the LANYARD Program in April of

192, Dr. Charyk proposed and the CIA (Scoville) agreed that I would

be responsible for all technical management aspects of LANYARD,

includinz payloads; that the COB system of MURAL would be continuac:; that the CIA would 'continue to have responsibility for mission

planning and camera on-orbit operations. Further, the CIA would be

responsible for program security, covert contracting and extending

the CORONA teletype net to include all LANYARD participants. In my

development plan for the conduct of the LANYARD Program I established, to the best of my knowledge, the first formal description of the

CCB in a government document. This description is attached. Contractually, this was implemented in substantially the same fashion as the

MURAL SETD contract, with the exception that Lockheed was given a

systems engineering responsibility, rather than a systems engineering

.nd technical direction responsibility.

5

.t• •" •

re; ..•.; • AMP

Vaal %stem
•• • t • • '01 &

. •i• A J I. • . :!

655-C4

c. In. October of 1962, as a matter of convenience and working

expediency from a contractual viewpoint, I transferred the administradon of the SE contract for

Officer stationed here (Mr.

contract was modified as in

URAL to the CIA Contracts

At that time the CORONA/MURAL

of LANYARD to give Loc"

systems engineering role only. This contract was identifie 42,

with a period of performance from October to June of 1963. -

tract was renewed by Letter Contract on 1 July 1963 to run to 30 June

1964, and is due f Lion in the immediate future. This document is identified ant 2 is the Statement of Work,

Exhibit A, which rt 2 and has been carried on under

the Letter Cont:Del28. , in a similar fashion, Attachment

3 has been include as a carry over from the old contract to the Letter

Contract. This is the operating procedure for system engineering and

technical direction dated 10 June 1963. This document is a somewhat

detailed description of the operation of the TD function by the contractor,

and responsibilities of the CCB. References to the CCB in the contractual document are again quite minimal. These are CCB approval of

TDs in paragraph 333. 3; initiation of TDs in paragraph V. Z; and the

provision for AF CCB signatures on the TD authorization sheet.

Major General, USA..?

Director, Program A

3 Atchs

1q

•

.;Vttetam

ta woman
r• • '":1 •

"

•

•

•

•

 • .

.° • •U

t..'

• ad

..3 . • ri

xr.:0 :As U 111166;) ,64

POLL01= IS MC731,CTZ FRCe. PROORAX CONCZT DOCUMENT AT 2

TO S.AFSP iad:CARAIOXIM TO DR. CHARM:
„ r 11.1.121;

•

Utter Contracts/al

E."-1V.TZYZ:T GP VOX<

The contractor shall accomplish System Engineering for the

Government as defined herein. The contractor shall igplement

TeChnical Direction (SETD) of researdh, development, prod.uction

mad testing by associate contractors in assigned programs. The

associate contractors are:

(1) Itek Laboratories

G.E., USVD

Lockheed Missiles and Space Company

Such other associate an subcontractors as may be

contractua1ly assigned.

P=ICT1'0=

The Contractor shall perform the folloving System Engineering

functions:

ate one system requirements and establish performance

specifications for assig:ed progriv-s through studies and

ate4ses.

Becommeti to the Government required research, development

and experimentation programs required to achieve objectives

of assigned programs.

Lnalyme and reccmmend rev-Ironer= for Design Control Specifications, Acceptance Test Specifications, ml . isinseritg Analysis

Reports and. onher related reports, procedures ayl specifications.

The Associate Contractors Shall present all such documents,

including revisions thereto, to SEID or =vim The Contractor

sill use recommendations thereon zo the . Government.

Evaluate system, zUbsystan and component development and test

programs and prepare recommendations as required.

Prepare and coo:di:lace Technical Directives in accordance vith

System:Engineering and Technical Direction Procedures incorporated into this docunent by reference.

Co=luct cactinuinz evaluation of system, subsystems and equipment

na La-n=ine degra:. compliance with all functional

C

•Zr% :•.- 1 7: 5

r • ••••I t04 4.0%3 m•lbLa

7 •n• •• tit% aro,

,!• • t

'

•

ttr4 Q

10. •••• •
and operational requirements. The Contractor stall prepare

and submit reports and recomengations for system design

*prove:ante hs required.

Establish proms milestones and. maintain a master provers

schedule.

Evaluate and report prwaz status to the Government.

Perform technical evaluation of requests from Associate

Contractors for design or performance waivers on components,

subsystems, and. itrn equipment, and ground support equipnent.

Submit recomnendations to the Government regarding approval

of proposed waivers.

Evaluate and provide recommendations to Associate Contractors

in the integration of subsystems, operating procedures and

platts, tests and test operations.

Review and evaluate designs of Associate Contractors to assure

=ad• interchangeability and compatibility of associated

subsystems and evir-ont.

Review and evaluate reliability programs established by

Associate Contractors to assure consistency, quality and

adequacy of effort.

review Associate Contractors' work statements to assure

fra.:14.1= -= of technical performance requirements.

Witness qualification and acceptance tests of the Associate

Contractors' deliverable eni items, participate in the evaluation

of the test data and make recomnerdations thereon to the

Government. •

Review Associate interne: Engineerplg Change Orders to

determine if interface treble= exist. •

•

Such other functions as AYSSD may direct.

I. PM= OP PIT3OVKKOZ L.= EYZORT.

The period of perfornance will be from 1 NoveMber 1962 through

June 1963. The level of efforts is sdbject to negotiations

with the Contracting Officer.

-2-

.5E i% Tit'77:1 3A;4

Ca.(1;;Ai.

r 
• : '•

(7\ r. 

L AL

•

IV. PROCMXTMS

• The Contractor shell perfo= the above tasks in accord. _a

W

ngt with

Sys' ay.= - ring aid. Technical Direction ProcedurDelete Ai885 'NW dated 3 • 2), incorporated. herein by reference. •

•

-3-

r:1; r .7% !i: r, ZeP1
•

••••••••••n."11 I v..p ftlii111 51:klift ,

— • a • a .— :::•• .`: . •

••

•

c . 7., yrspriwa 

-Am/ am rt. •n ••• 11,

•

•

•

•

aCC.7.^1.13.3

g 11.14,

eveogrotra

Lan,FMTION

10.1.11=3 3.963

•

n••

•
•

••n•• • .• ••• •••••• ••••• 1•11/Wfant

•

TABLE OF CCMENTS

MCTION • TOPIC

I OP.J&TIVE 1

PURPOSE 2

=MI= 3

IV • 1-2FT. DIOS

V TECHNICAL DIRECTIVES • 6

VI ORGAL.12ATIGN 7

CCCOZTIZST. ACTIONS 9

Teehaieal Directives 9

Preparatien & Card nation of

..Tarapo sod Tee'.-zden1 reaoction • 9

FIGLIF2 1

."117.7" 2

.72G:73 3

MG=1

Release of Porzal Toe.mical Directives 11

Distribution of TD Er.elocures 11

E. Air Po co Document Used is Lieu of TD 22

P. Contractor Acoeptarze of a TD 12

Non-Lecaptenee 12

Suporooding Technical Direction 13

SETD T -` e...aniee.1 Directive Plow Chart

. Dept. 62-63 T.D. Flow Diat746 15

T.D. Authorization Sheet 16.

T.D. 2nd sheet 17
S

P.)! In ”13

L tma 3855,64

•

• • ••••• k•• r: • " " " "n"

•

I. .071,M3717r: 

2his document is in two parts: ?art I outlines the viarking relation-

.

ships and proceduros to be folioyed in implemmating.Syztems Enzineering and 2echnical Direction (SEM) of research, development, prodtctien

and toot of Vas Program; Part XI describes the MSC organization that

is established to accomAish Syztoms Engineering and outlines man/ of

the pertinent INSC internal and =procedures for accomplishing the

over-all STD task. • •

•

P€14.64-A-L-1:11-11:4""1"14.96- 1,..traP..:..
••••• ". • • • .•• • :•••••.1t CI 4.18. *85 5. 64

•

•

PU.VO.S3 ••••n•••••••••n•n 4, • .) • •

lir ?ores ,Systers Division (.17SSL) has the responsibility for Systw..s

Enzimeering and Teo!=ical Dirostion (S3TD) tor the Prod and has

contracted. with L:•5C to perf.orm the Systems Engineering tenotions.

127C (S.F..) 1.1.11 perform thece f.unctions is acoordnace with the procede es ovtained in this dom.:rant.

9
855-64

0'6 r -

y OM %Pe f

• •

III. D.S7ZTITICCS 

1. System Enqinearinr,

The promise of applying science and technology to to study and

planning of an over-all satellite mapping systan,.whoreby hardware

designs are made compatible with system deeir.s. Detailed analysis

of components or proceares which affect the interfaces maybe

required for the pro ram. SS also includes scheddlings reviewing

•

Q.A. procodUres and Latocration activities, witneseing acceptance .

test and =sking recommendatiams regarding acceptance of Associate

Contractor equipment.

Technical Direction.

The process by which AFSSD exercises supervision of technical

aspects of the or of associate NefaSSD contractors in accordance with 11447SSD approved procedures, for the purpose of unifying

the contractor efforts and inzurind over-all technical adequacy.

3. Technical tx-ect4ves.

Documaats which initiate Technical Direction to associate contractors..

Technical Directives rust be approved by SSD. If the operational

configuration is affected, the T must be approved by tae cca:•

If contract is affected, the TD mist be approved by the Contract- .

. ..

ing Cfficar or his repreientativa. (Ufa: to Fie. 1.)

4. Associate Um:recta:.

. •

A concern holding a. contract with Ilq/AnSD in which provision is

made for supervision of the contractor's efforts by SETD.

•

carol 4Me."I

nnn•

adraaY

-3-

•
ez A

u"Lnit

Vi b.41 d•• ::•• • ori.. r.%.11.•

N. '..:EMIT.r.:1S.

1. Technical Direction ntatin!!.

a. Pnracse. Tichnical (TD) meetings are conducted to review

prowess and to dofir.o action required by the associato

contractor(s) cr S. Doaisions reached at those matins.:

aro confimaed necossa7.7 by the issuance of Technicsa

Directives or app.-opriato contractual dm:mutation with the

ap2.roval o ireSD and Hoadquartors. • •

. .

?.onresentation. ItS3, Fairchild Camera and Inst. Corp., •

Eastman Kodak, Headquarters and APSSD wL11 noraall, attoLd‘

Other appropriatia associato contractors and subcontractors .

conceracd with the Pro:7a.m will attend as =quested by AlISSD

or SE Associate cor.tractor/subcontractor participation will

be coordir.atod •c.i.th the ass:Gelato contractor concernod..

The shall be notified at 1c wet one rook prior to the

mootina of number and MXICS o: attendees.

• ?renaraticn. Mere shall be one TD =satins each month. :betin;,70 shall, be hold at Lr..W. and other appropriato associate

contractor locations as desisnatcd by APESD. The host Contractor shall be responsible or providirz all required :sac. ilitina

:Cr he nesting. Notiftcatics of appropriate subcontractors

and associate contractors of TD matins schedules and agendas

:hall be the responsibility of the SETD. Associate contractors

—.4

•
C. •-• . I.. Fop

114 MPJ.Bar".. iNa gai•

C. Continued -

may stibmit agenda items to the STD fdr inclusion on the

TD agenda.

d. Chair:tar:ship. The T1.1 mooting viii be chaL-od by MTD or

•

designated representative. For those TD meetings involving

more than one contractor, the meeting be separated into

sections.

11. Documsntatian. L•SC (SE) shall prepare Technical Direction

meeting su==aribs. Those su==arios will include a description of all action items and transcripts of agreements which

have been reached. Surzzaries shall be published within one

(1) =lend= Imek after tho TB =satins. Normally, Technical

Directives viii be issued as a result of TD meetings; however,

Technical Diractives may bo initiated, processed and issued

at av timo and action does not =id to unit :or discussion

at a 'IT, meetinz. Proposed Technical. Dirocttvos affecting the

associate contractors ==st be simod by the dosignxted easeelate contractor representative. This simaturo doac not,

indicate either approval or disapproval.

•

- 5 -

•

Lt
03855. 54

•• • pa

ff ri 3 I iu 

It 4. I.. e aI

• • 11

- .

•

4. TEMICAL DIMC".'IVES

Technical Directives ray be proposed by MD, Associate Contractor,

cad customer representatives in two ways, as follows:

Ter.:mica Directives will normally be handled at scheduled Technical Directive meetings. Proposed Technical Directives will be

reviewed, discussed and action directed. Sign-off of the TD szzmary will constitute the approval by APSSD. Based on TD meeting

o=4.-7 publication, SE will obtain signatures required for

release and distribute the TD. A Acct diagram of TD action through

the =di= of TD meetings is shown on Figure 1. .

• •

Technical Directives =y be proposed and initiated during normal

day to day activities duo to forzal or informal contact between

AnCS, Associate Contractors, and SE Contracior. SE will °cord:-

nate the proposed TD with Associate Contractors and subnit it for

approval. This coordtrz.tion raky be by the hand-carry method, Vas.

letter, or telephone (-.-ittin security /imitations). TWX messages

contain a statement identifying originator. SE will then

tos..alize the TD and obtain signaturca required for final release.

21. flow dims= of TD action as a result of claY by day activities

is shown on Figaro 2.

k.` •

"'"%r-a- 5 ..z • =!

yd. , • ,

. -

Ae. 4. 4 14 u a lb • P

"AP
--Cs-0-4-2—• Irir "•14-1"—tr.1.4".— w e-a:. a '6 1417

•

1111111111e R w4.tv

.

SZTD 

The Program SETS organization will accomplish System Engiaemaing,

integration, and Techlical Direction for the entire peleload

systen. Its fancticas Shall, include:

re crisis.

The SE Contractor Shill perform the following System Engineering

tun: time:

Determine system engineering requirements and establish syn.

tom performance specifications for Program.

Recommend to Customer required research, development and experircntmtionprezrams required to achiova program objectirea.

1..n:aytc and rec=nond requirements for. Design ControlSpecifiectionn, Acceptance Tont Speci:Lcaticnc, Enzinocrins Analysis

3eports and otior related reports, proceduree and specIficam.

tions. S3 Contractor &hall =vim: and evalaato all such documents, ir.cluding all revision: thereto, preparedlby Associate

Contractors and make recommendations so Eecdquarters and AFSSD.

Evaluate subsystem and componznt development and test programs

and prepare reconmendaticns as required.

Prepare and coordinate approved Technical Directives in moordance vith:SETD Procedures incorporated into this document by

re:crane°.

£2 Contractor :h .l prepare and adhat reports and repammeral=ticnz

is cydtax 6151471 improvements as 'regaired.

•

Establich program milostonca and maintain a master progran.
3855-64

1\.; 'car: • k Irj - p

141. **.n. rm.

••• ".• • • •

t.

schedule.

Evaluate and report program status to APBSD and CCB.

Perferm technical evaluation of requests tram Assoe.ato Contractors far dee.m: and performance waivers on end item equipe

•

 nt and submit reco=endations to Headquarters and AV= rsgarding approval of proposed waivers. This review shall oppky

to accpanents, subsystem and graced support equipment of

Program.

Evaluate and provide recommendations to Associate Contractors

for integration of subs:red:us, operating procedures and plans, '

estae and test operations,

11• Barley and evaluate c: r. igls of Associate Contractors to ass.r:o

interchanzembility and compatibility of associated subcyst= equipramt,

12. Roviear and evaluate =liability pro bar..s established by Aer.o-

•

ciate Contract= to assure consistency, quality, and cAcquncy

of effort.

Revict Associate Co=tridtori t work stato=nt to:assUre tu2a.U-

=znt of toc.ical portormance requirements.

Witt= accepts.= tests of ascociate contractor ss deiverable

cad items, participate in evaluation of acceptance test data,

and cake recommondatiens to ZPSSD and CC&

25. Rcviei ihictrzusl. orders to determine if interface

prob.1.=.5 exist.

Huth other functions ac SSD say.direct.

••••n•••

es 

e. t In

et .• t .0 . •*.

X

t

. • "
str.•:--+ •

ga. - • -tit a • &xi. 

'or urab•N• gol7

• 3. S

COMITY.7.NT ACTICNS 

•

Commitment actions for SETD will be formalized and processed as

follows:

Technical Directives.

The document used by HQ/AFSSD for contractual action with contractore is the Technical Directive (TD), shown as Figure 3.

Preparation and Coordinaticn of Pronosed Technical Directives (TD) 

Reference Para. V, TD's may be proposed,by Associate Contractors, , SE,

and RAMS% The originator prepares a TD draft on the "Proposed

Technical Directive," shown as Figure 4. The completed forms 4re

forwarded to SE. SE then: •

-•

Reviews scope and contents.

Revises proposed TD and Background Data Sheets (if required).

3. Distributes preliminary copies of the TD as required.

h. Coordinate Associate Contractor application in producing required

doc=entation to inplement TD release.

5. .Collect all support data and documentation for. presentation to

AFSSD.

a. Each proposed configuration change TD mill generally include

the following information:

(1) Reason for change, such as:

Reliability

Operational performance

• Maintainability

Required by interface considerations

Change in cost

Other

(2) Conplete description of change.

CS) Effect of change on (1) schedule or delivertes4

•

•

r. •

.• :
•

3855-64 • •••

•

•• • .4 • •

•

• (2) interface with other systems; (3) OSE; 14)

retrofit; (5) other.

(•) 'Effect of change on funds or contracts:.

Black coat and/Or contract scope.

Ehite cost and/Or contract scope.

.TD shall be proposed in accordance with existing SETD

procedures.

The change priority shall be designated as:

•

(1) Emergency action: involving safety or deficiencies

•

which coup result in personnel injury, equipment

damage, or operational curtailment of an impending,

•

launch.

(2) Priority action: involving deficiencies or conditions

lenient if uncorrected, will reduce the system effectiveness.

(3) Routine action: all other configuration changes.

.

•

•••n• •

; f '`‘

• .

C• •

4

,-

•n•• IS .4;1

•
6. • : • • ? • • "' r •-•

Vi. irm

•

IMP' Wm • s mime

6. Present the TB to AFSSD for review and signature. Changes

. •

in &proposed TD require re-coordination with prior approving

otfices'Ohly when the scope or intent is altered as determined

by SETD. Cost estimates must be accurate to provide a firm

basis for budgetary control. To establish a good cost estimate,

the SEv'in coordination with AFSSD personnel, reviews data

with the affected Associate Contractor prior to presentation

fOr signature.

C. Release of Formal Technical Directives.

Upon completion of coordination, the SE prepares the formal TD

for issue (Figure 3). The date of issue is no inserted until

signed and TD is ready for final release. Final sig ►-off authority

(or designated • representative) . is as fellows:

1: Systems Engineeringy.anager.

Dcptty Commander, Space Programs, AFSSD.

Contracting Officer (when scope or intent is altered).

The SE presents the formal TD with supporting papers to AFSSD for

final signature. The release date is then inserted on the TD and

distribution made. Ori::inal 7D and Eackground Dike Sheets are •

retained in the St 7D permanent file.'

D. Distrib-Aion of TD Enclosures.

When a TD contains an enclosure of the type which would be costly

or tune-consuming to dup",..icate for distribution, it will not be

nacos:airy to include a copy of such enclosure with each copy of the

In such cases, the following notation is made on internally

distributed.copies:

"A copy of the enclosare(s) is available in the SETD file

• for reference.w
•

f". 052 • ttr 

era h. 5.•••:".•:1•• SP3855.34

•

E. Air Force Document Used in Lieu of D.

During coordination of a proposed TO, the AFSSD coordinating'

office may lidicate by comment that the TD will be covered by

an Air Force document (contract supplement, etc.) instead of a

formal 70. The proposed TD is typed into final form except

that:

I. It is addressed to the A?SSD office.

The first paragraph identifies the contractor and the action

•

requested. •

The last paragraph requests that the Contracting Officer's

representative furnish copies of tharesulting contractual

document to SE (LMSC), AFSSD offices, :old all contractors.

•• •

The ?D is presonted to the required Associate Contractor(s)•

and HQ/AFSSD offices for signature.

Contractor Accentence of a TD.

The associate contractor indicates acceptance of a TD by signature

and by itemizing on the TD form its effect upon the schedule and •

cost..

Non-Acceptance.

If a contractor does not approve a TD, the MTD takes action as

follows:

'The reasons given by the contractor are not acceptable -

AFCCB is notified to resolve.'

The reasons given by the contractor are acceptable to SETD

SETD publishes a memorandum notice to all pertinent partle

stating that the TD has been cancelled%

J. .•.•.0 "4.Z/7:o . •

•

f•

• •11., "Mit 2 .

, . • 1_

. .
4:

L .• • • e • -

Lf •••••• • • • • •••••

s.N.1.. •

•

. • •

H. Superseding Technics: Di.rection. .

When

▪

it becomes necessary to amend, modify or cancel technical.

direction contained in a formally issued TD, the SETD takes

action as follows:

The change alters the scope or basic intent of a TD this

procedure per paragraph as of b will be followed to resolve.

Initiate a now TD with definition of all affected TD's

defined.

VIM
k set.: s

S.R.T.D. TECHNICAL DIRECTIVE FLAW MAGIAN

•

7.1 855-64

RZYIEV—Establishwork I

statement, budget, spa.=

A all required sapportil

delcurmte. 

TO all relate

contractors

Prints

I

To SEM File.

2nd Orizinal.-Control

prints be issued

to Bqtrs and SSD as

Preliminary

T.D.

al Propared by Contractor,

S.E. or SSD

•

SE prepares two originals and prints as required (No. Assignment)

Formal T.D.

S.E. retains

two originals

SETT review and

anal.yu is.

Su.3--itted to SSD for.

prop*: sic.n-off.

1 

Mango in Scope or Opera)

tional Effect --- CO, •

SSD, Contr. Off. or Rep.

Sign-off. :'WT approval

OX by coordinationvith

CCB Chairman.

No ChLnzA in Scope

or Cperntioncl

Effect----SSD sign

vr•

Contrzetcr zign-off

and ver4i'y co -p..:ca

a

To affected Contractor

1st Original-...One set

of pr..Ints..

SE Final Distribution•

t ell .0. a is 12

• V • • •
;

I • ••••••

••• • ...

. •

:

.

*"..-

,r• •• Ary• 

•••• i•• o'••• an:: '014.01

C •• ,... •

...rye...

Oa/ ••• • • V••.. .

•

C •

-:........•••••

••• ••••• •••

.1

VC

...N.

• •• •••••••.•.•"%••

-

• •• •M. •n• .1111*. (...• .1.1 4. 4 •••1•••••••••• •••

.

I***

C.::..

•• • • • a .0.m...ft 1

. •

.:

.

''', :::::."

... ' • • .. .. •`.......1 my,•• ••••••

• •••• • •••• • ....a,. • • J.. • •• ••••••••••

•

....:.::11..7:: ral;*".`..::::: • . 1

. ...___:•• • . 1,-,.• ••• ...... ,• ••

••• • ••••• — ea* 4.0 ••• 6. am •••••••••• • •••• •••• iv 6.../

I

. .. ... • .. 1 reai r •n• 2 ..................5 :i : Z .:: S .r,, r

.:*"... :.• 17

i

......t. -0: .....$c:: i

•

...,..•..... •

I Tia,"•.......wala a. rt•

• ••• i

..• • . •••••••• n•••••••• I

n•••7n71 el.=11.10. MIMInOM11.1.01/MIP . .7.7..n••.... n••n. 7.. ....,...„=.1

I

ct*.p.i.z.z..

I

F --": --.7..; .:. 1.•.:.... .,... .

a • "ph •1r... .. • •••• • „, •• " 01.. !

n• 2 • t.....t• ... • ...

VI r•

.i. ..34,

.• .

. 1

I

• 1 1.....• • a :4 r ..02 . .. .

: .... ..,, ..• „ _ ,

1

i .. :." .. C:P• :.-:: r. - ez.1.-.1

I r - '"-•-...

•••

14 I

. nn••::::74..4.' I I

•

I 6

•

...• • 1

••

1

•

7.t • .•• at r••• I 1 ..... 1

•

••••••••n••n••n••••••: a *et .1. • •••••••••• — •••••• ••••n••• ...." i

••• " ••••••• ••• •:•••• •••• rte. .

•

••• . • • ••• ••• ••••••• •• ow. NJ .

• • ••• • • • i

•• • •• • • • .••••••• ••• •••••••• 1

•

••:. s T. • ••• • • 41.

••• deb •••••••• Jr i

I... i

•

‘0••)%;‘

•••n

. . . • • -

• •• - • • - -•• ••: •

•

V • • a • ••• • • .• ....Z. • • •

••••• • .• ••• • • • • • • •••••n••••••••

tl • .• • • • • • ...L.* •

•

z.:.

s•- 

Vv

• $

••-•

•

;•••• n• t • • • • 7 ..• • t

•• • • • . •

1•••••• ••••• •••• •• • •••••••••• Cm. •••• •n••••••••• •

; • • •••• • • •

•

•

a

•••••••••••1

N.,.

1•;.. :4.::........• ::..:*:.......: ::•••n

:• 7. ..." r. .. . . . ..7.... : :.• C..7 +c 3.::- ' ••n•n••

s

t •

c ::%4 0. . 7. 7 : .- ..... •

:

.

.:...:::•::-.,:.-.-*---'..---- ---- 1 -'-f . .

a

• .

.. • t • ..

••• •••••• • •.••••• ••• ••••• •••• •• • • •••

•••n••••••••••••••••• •

4

•

••• ...••••• •

••••••• •••••••••
T L ""*DLP _ 1...‘ (4\

""?.?..rriTOT n••n•

.

••%•• g oo • •••• •

?•• r •• •-orrt • rm. •••• • r:rm:rp 611• n•• ••:,:e.1 drat ••1.%•••••1 t6••• • n•••••..

•

T.D. NUMBE2 'All a ISSUE

•

Nare 1 OF . •

Mae Na.M.nn••n•••

•

Effectiviti Oast Bs:dr.:ate

.01aM401.• •Ia• gamme•• nn••

f

Lockhoe.1 Missiles to Spa co Co...•••n ••n., •

9 Sc 1.4 Ya2rw: aavO

A. ' vCC3 A...4 "Imcv1wV) "

•

; .

•

Data

aato 'Lad

mate

a INP••n••••••••••n •••• mo ••••••••• aa•• n••n•••0110a •••••••••••

•

This T.:). ..s,C4...en not) approved

?:1X Jr

TWO •

••••n 01,11rewro. •

..• • •

D

---)z.

siostoa le ora CA7,71.1.A.C.'"r%3 CF71C.2 • •

Subjeat to . a-..he "Cnangoo n Cir. • cis :km:anet at-ler iho

Contractor it directed to proceed with the work proacribta •cy this •

L'dontract:r.c 41:icer Loprczentativo

nnn•••n• 111.n .11••••••n••

31, Ar•••n•••?....r-----•-••...

=fact on Schedules • Dear.itive Contract Proposal to bo

S...btted date.

C.•n •••,...C..) VC thin Gonm-al Scope of

Contract 110

•

"act on Coot ler • 004. /•••„••••••

•

".• •1 •••• •

••• maw •

•
"

- 4.3 g Ian we • e" • tor N. •

Lod:heed Air=sf:. Corp. - 1 :

.1ssilos and Space ?85& c;

F3..OPOSED roa?...mvs

•

NC.

?ZS° 2

DA=.: .

1. The purpose of this Teehnica1 Diroctivo is to .

: .

•

2. Justi.f.tc.ation

•

}-0 1..n DL / NG V

-17- '