************************************************************************************* OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY OF DEFENSE (OSD) APPROVAL _______________________________________________ _________________________ Date Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense Systems Engineering (for MDAPs and MAIS Programs) [or designated SEP approval authority] SUBMITTED BY __________________________ Name Program Lead Systems Engineer __________ Date __________________________ Name Program Manager _________ Date concurrence __________________________ Name Lead/Chief Systems Engineer (Program Executive Office, System Center or Command) __________ Date __________________________ Name Program Executive Officer or Equivalent _________ Date component approval __________________________ Name Title, Office Component SEP Approval Authority __________ Date
should be used. If the contractor’s tool is acceptable, then this merely requires Government direct, networked access to that tool. Technical Risks and Mitigation Planning – Provide a risk cube (see Figure or a listing of the current system-level technical risks with: As-of date Risk rating Description Driver Mitigation status Expectations: Programs commonly use hierarchal boards to address risks and have integrated risk systems with their contractors, and their approach to identify risks is both top-down and bottoms-up. Risks related to technology maturation, integration, and each design consideration indicated in Table 4.6-1 should be considered in risk identification process. Figure 3.3-1 Risk Cube (mandated) (sample) Note: Include an as-of date – time sensitive figure Figure 3.3-2 Risk Burn-down Plan (optional) (sample) Note: Include an as-of date – time sensitive figure Technical Organization Government Program Office Organization - Provide planned program office organization structure (i.e., wiring diagram to illustrate hierarchy) with an as-of date and include the following elements: Legend, as applicable (e.g., Organization to the program office reports Program Manager (PM) Systems Engineer (LSE/CSE) Functional Leads (e.g., T&E, logistics, risk, reliability, software) Core, matrix, and contractor support personnel Field or additional Service representatives
Team Name Chairperson Team Membership (by Function or Organization) Team Role, Responsibility, and Authority Products and Metrics SE IPT Lead SE Program Office Platform Lead Mission Equipment Lead Weapons Lead Test Manager Logistics Manager SW Lead Production/Quality Manager Safety Lead Interoperability Rep. R&M Lead PEO and PM Service Representative OSD SE Key Subcontractor or Suppliers Role: IPT Purpose Responsibilities: Integrate all technical efforts Team Member Responsibilities Cost, Performance, Schedule Goals Scope, Boundaries of IPT Responsibilities Schedule and frequency of meetings Date of signed IPT charter and signatory Products: SEP/SEP Updates IMP/IMS Input Specifications Metrics: -Cost -Performance -Schedule XXX IPT XXX Lead Program Office Lead SE Mission Equipment Lead Weapons Lead Test Manager Logistics Manager SW Lead R&M Lead Production/Quality Manager Safety Lead Interoperability Rep. Key Subcontractor or Suppliers Role: IPT Purpose Responsibilities: Integrate all technical efforts Team Member Responsibilities Cost, Performance, Schedule Scope, Boundaries of IPT Responsibilities Schedule and frequency of meetings Date of signed IPT charter and signatory Products: Specification SEP input TES/TEMP input AS input Metrics: Technical Performance Measure (TPM) 1 TPM 2 Table 3.4.4-2 IPT Team Details (mandated unless charters are submitted) (sample)
Mapping Key Design Considerations into Contracts Name (Reference) Cognizant PMO Org Certification Documentation (hot link) Contractual Requirements (CDRL #) Description/Comments SE Tradeoff Analysis for Affordability (MS B) Provide the systems engineering trade-off analysis showing how cost varies as the major design parameters and time to complete are traded off against one another. The analysis will reflect attention to capability upgrades. The analysis will support MDA approval of an Affordability Requirement to be treated as a Key Performance Parameter (KPP) in the Acquisition Decision Memorandum. The analytical summary will include a graphic illustrating cost tradeoff curves or trade space around major affordability drivers (including KPPs when they are major cost drivers) to show how the program has established a cost-effective design point for those affordability drivers. Corrosion Prevention and Control (ACAT I only) CPCP (MS B & C) Describe how design will minimize impact of corrosion and material deterioration on system throughout system life Environmental Safety and Occupational Health (ESOH) PESHE NEPA Compliance Schedule (MS B & C) Describe how design will minimize ESOH by summarizing how program will integrate ESOH considerations into SE processes to include method for tracking hazards and ESOH risks and mitigation plans throughout the life cycle of system. Human Systems Integration (HSI) Summarize how HSI will be integrated within the SE processes, specifically addressing the operator and maintainer requirement allocation approach that accounts for total system performance. Item Unique Identification (IUID) IUID Implementation Plan (MS B & C) Describe how the program will implement IUID to identify and track applicable major end items, etc. Manufacturing Assess the manufacturing risk and readiness of all contributory processes and particularly those that are new or unproven in a full-rate production environment.
Open Systems Architectures Describe how open systems architectures will be incorporated into the program's design to enable affordable change, evolutionary acquisition, and interoperability. Program Protection and Information Assurance PPP (MS A, B & C) Describe how design will address safeguarding Critical Program Information (CPI) and provide countermeasures against hacking. Reliability and Maintainability3 RAM contract language1 RAM-C Report2 (MS A, B, & C) Describe how the program will implement and contract for a comprehensive R&M engineering program to include the phased activities in Table 4.6-2 and how R&M is integrated with SE processes. 4.6-1 Design Considerations (mandated) (sample) Table 4.6-1 Legend: Name – See DAG Chapter 4.4 for more comprehensive listing of design considerations; listed items are mandated by statute or policy and must be addressed. Others are at PMO’s discretion as appropriate for the system. Cognizant PMO Organization – Assigned IPT/WIPT/WG for oversight Certification – As appropriate, to include Technical Authority and timeframe Documentation – List appropriate PMO and/or contractor documents and hot link. Contractual Requirements – List contract clauses which the PMO is using to address the named topic. Description/Comments – As needed, to inform other PMO members and stakeholders 1 Relevant R&M sections of the Systems Specification, SOW/SOO, and Sections L and M 2 DoD RAM-C Report Manual, June 1, 2009 3 Programs operating under Space Systems Acquisition Procedures shall address Mission Assurance (MA) planning in the context of reliability and provide a description of MA activities undertaken to ensure that the system will operate properly once launched into orbit. Specifically, space programs will describe how the Mission Assurance process employed meets the best practices described in the Mission Assurance Guide (reference Aerospace Corporation TOR-2007(8547)-6018). This description should include program phase-dependent processes and planning for MA in the next phase of the program and the way program MA processes adhere to applicable policies and guidance. Also describe the launch and operations readiness process.