493-0000X_L1_Next-Magnetometer-SOW Rev-20230602.pdf

Effective Date: TBD

Expiration Date: TBD

Confirm with SWFO CM to verify that this is the correct version prior to use.

SWO Next L1 Series

Magnetometer (MAG) Statement of Work (SOW)

U.S. Department of Commerce (DOC)

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)

NOAA Satellite and Information Service (NESDIS)

National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA)

SWFO CMO

<Date>

Space Weather Next L1 Series (Next L1), Code 493 http://www.noaa.gov/ https://www.commerce.gov/

L1 Series Magnetometer SOW 493-L1 Series MAG SOW 0000XX, Revision -ii

Check the SWO CM tool Server at to verify that this is the correct version prior to use.

L1 Series Magnetometer SOW

Review/Signature/Approval Page Prepared by:

Gene Guerrero-Martin

SWO L1 Series

NASA GSFC, Code 493

Date

Reviewed by:

Approved by:___________________________

Tim Vansant

L1 Series Project Manager

NASA/GSFC, Code 493

Approved by:

Electronic Approval available on-line at:

iii

CM FOREWORD

This document is under SWO Program configuration control. Once this document is approved, SWO approved changes are handled in accordance with Class I and Class II change control requirements as described in the SWO Configuration Management Procedure, and changes to this document shall be made by complete revision.

In this plan, all mandatory actions (i.e., requirements) are denoted by statements containing the term “shall.” The terms “may” or “can” denote discretionary privilege or permission; “should” denotes a good practice and is recommended but not required; “will” denotes expected outcome;

and “are/is” denotes descriptive material.

Any questions should be addressed to:

SWO Configuration Management Office

NASA/GSFC

Code 493

Greenbelt, MD 20771 iv

Change History Log

Revision Effective Date Description of Changes

(Reference the CCR & CCB/ERB Approval Date) v

Table of Contents

1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Program Scope and Management

2 DOCUMENTS

2.1 Applicable Documents

2.2 Reference Documents

3 REQUIREMENTS PRECEDENCE

3.1 Terms and Definitions

4 WORK PERFORMED BY THE CONTRACTOR

4.1 Program Management Office

4.2 Resource Management

4.3 Visitor Badging

4.4 Configuration and Information Management

4.4.1 Documentation

4.5 Program Review Requirements

4.5.1 Kick-off Meeting

4.5.2 Reserved

4.5.3 Peer Reviews

4.5.4 Instrument Design Reviews

4.5.4.1 System Definition Review (SDR) /Systems Requirements Review (SRR)

4.5.4.2 Preliminary Design Review (PDR)

4.5.4.3 Critical Design Review (CDR)

4.5.4.4 Pre-Environmental Review (PER)

4.5.4.5 Pre-Storage/Pre-Shipment Review

4.5.5 Observatory Level Reviews

4.5.6 Project Management Reviews

4.5.7 Test Data Reviews

4.5.8 Technical Meetings

4.5.9 Subcontract Subsystem and Instrument Reviews

4.6 Schedule Management

4.7 Risk Management

5 SYSTEMS ENGINEERING

vi

5.1 Systems Management and Engineering

5.2 Observatory Interface and Accommodation

5.3 System Analysis and Allocations

5.4 Contamination Control and Analysis

5.5 Magnetic Control Plan

5.6 Special Engineering Analysis

6 FLIGHT MODEL (FM)

6.1 Design and Analysis

6.1.1 Instrument Design

6.1.2 Flight and Ground Test Software Development and Maintenance

6.1.3 Ground Processing Algorithms (GPA)

6.2 Parts Procurement, Fabrication and Subassembly Testing

6.2.1 Field Programmable Gate Array (FPGA) Design and Development

6.3 Integration and Test

6.3.1 Integration

6.3.2 Performance Verification and Design Qualification

6.3.2.1 Functional and Performance Testing

6.3.2.2 Structural and Mechanical Testing

6.3.2.3 Electromagnetic Compatibility Testing

6.3.2.4 Magnetic Properties Testing

6.3.2.5 Thermal Testing

6.3.3 Calibration

6.4 Logistics

6.4.1 Transportation and Handling

6.4.2 Storage

6.5 Post Delivery Support

6.5.1 Observatory Integration and Test Support

6.5.2 Launch Operations Support

6.5.3 Mission Operations Support

6.5.3.1 Delivery of FM and Operations Tools

6.5.4 End-to-End Test Support

6.5.5 Post-Launch Test Support

7 GROUND SUPPORT EQUIPEMENT (GSE)

7.1 Electrical Ground Support Equipment

vii

7.1.1 Electrical System Test Equipment (ESTE)

7.1.2 Magnetometer Emulator

7.1.3 Connectors

7.1.4 Other EGSE

7.2 Mechanical Ground Support Equipment

7.3 Ground Processing Development System (GPDS)

8 MISSION ASSURANCE

APPENDIX A ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS

APPENDIX B DEFINITIONS

Check the SWFO CM tool Server at https://swfowc.ndc.nasa.gov/SWFOWC/app/#ptc1/homepage to verify that this is the correct version prior to use.

1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Program Scope and Management

The L1 Series Mission is a high priority joint undertaking by the National Aeronautics and Space

Administration (NASA) and the Department of the Commerce, National Oceanic and

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). The L1 Series Mission will procure a minimum of two

(2) observatories that will provide NOAA with the continuity and resilience of solar wind data and coronal mass ejection (CME) imagery, which is the National Weather Service’s highest priority for space weather observations. The L1 Series Observatories are targeted to launch as individual primary payloads, December 2028, and July 2031.

This Statement of Work (SOW) defines those tasks necessary to design, analyze, develop, fabricate four (4) flight Magnetometer instruments.

The SOW also defines the tasks necessary to integrate, test, calibrate, evaluate and support launch and on-orbit check-out of two Magnetometer instruments, supply and maintain the instrument Ground Support Equipment (GSE), Ground Processing Algorithms, and support the

Mission Operations Center (MOC) at the NOAA Satellite Operations Facility (NSOF) through mission hand over to NOAA.

The period of performance for the base contract is from contract award through operational handover to NOAA of the final instrument plus fifteen (15) months (TBR), including successfully launched, post launch evaluation, calibration, data validation, and on-orbit anomaly investigations. The period of performance will also include storage of flight units. The first flight unit shall be delivered by February 2027, the second September 2029, the third February

2032, and the fourth September 2033.

The Magnetometer is part of the L1 Series of satellites which have a risk classification of C per

NPR 8705.4, Risk Classification for NASA Payloads.

The Contractor shall provide the personnel, materials, facilities and other resources to design, develop, deliver and support, including ground processing algorithm development, under the basic contract:

a. Four Magnetometer Flight Model (FM) Instrument, consisting of two (2) 3-axis sensors, associated electronics and harnesses between the various boxes, designated Flight Model-

1 through Flight Model-4 (FM-1, FM-2, FM-3, FM-4).

b. One Engineering Development Unit (EDU) Instrument, consisting of two (2) 3-axis sensors, associated electronics and harnesses between the various boxes

Check the SWFO CM tool Server at https://swfowc.ndc.nasa.gov/SWFOWC/app/#ptc1/homepage to verify that this is the correct version prior to

c. Spares and built up and tested sub-assemblies

d. Two sets of the Electrical System Test Equipment (ESTE)

e. Four Magnetometers Emulators

f. One Ground Processing Development Systems (GPDS)

g. All additional Solar Wind Plasma Sensor Mechanical and Electrical Ground Support

Equipment (MGSE and EGSE) called out elsewhere in this document

h. All remaining items and documents specified in contract documents

The Contractor shall also provide support to spacecraft integration and test, launch, and early mission operations under the basic contract for:

i. Flight Model FM-1 and Flight Model FM-2

The Contractor shall provide storage under the basic contract for:

a. Flight Model FM-3 and Flight Model FM-4

i. Will include physically storage solution, periodic check-out, cleaning, and calibration

Option 1: The Contractor shall provide support to spacecraft integration and test, launch, and early mission operations under an option for:

a. Flight Model FM-4

i. The Contractor support for FM-3 shall be proposed under the assumption that a different spacecraft host will be utilized.

The period of performance for Option 1 is from option award until operational handover to

NOAA of the final instrument plus fifteen (15) months.

Option 2: The Contractor shall provide support to spacecraft integration and test, launch, ground and early mission operations under an option for:

a. Flight Model FM-4

i. The Contractor support for FM-4 shall be proposed under the assumption that a different spacecraft host will be utilized.

The period of performance for Option 2 is from option award until operational handover to

NOAA of the final instrument plus fifteen (15) months.

Other Scope

The Contractor shall perform special studies relating to the development, implementation, characterization, qualification, and operation of the instruments as authorized by the

Government, and in accordance with Clause B.5 RATES FOR NON-STANDARD SERVICES.

Check the SWFO CM tool Server at https://swfowc.ndc.nasa.gov/SWFOWC/app/#ptc1/homepage to verify that this is the correct version prior to

Acceptance criteria for non-standard services will be specified in the associated DO or Task

Order.

Check the SWFO CM tool Server at https://swfowc.ndc.nasa.gov/SWFOWC/app/#ptc1/homepage to verify that this is the correct version prior to

2 DOCUMENTS

2.1 Applicable Documents

The documents listed in this section apply directly to the performance of the Magnetometer contract. These documents establish detailed specifications, requirements, and interface information necessary for the performance of the contract.

Magnetometer Requirements Specification, 493.1-0000X_SWFOL1-Mag-Spec_B

Instrument Mission Assurance Requirements Document (IMAR), 411.1-00005_NEXT L1—

IMAR.

Magnetometer Contract Deliverables Requirements List (CDRL), 411.1-00010_NEXT L1-

Mag-CDRL_A

NASA-STD-8719.13C NASA Software Safety Standard

NPR 7150.2B NASA Software Engineering Requirements

NASA Procedural Requirements (NPR) 8705.4, Risk Classification for NASA Payloads

2.2 Reference Documents

GOLD Rules, GSFC-STD-1000 (Rev G)

Check the SWFO CM tool Server at https://swfowc.ndc.nasa.gov/SWFOWC/app/#ptc1/homepage to verify that this is the correct version prior to

3 REQUIREMENTS PRECEDENCE

In the event of a conflict in requirements between this SOW and other documentation, the order of precedence shall be: SOW, Contract Deliverables Requirements List (CDRL), Magnetometer

Requirements Specification, Instrument Mission Assurance Requirements (IMAR) , and any other Applicable Documents.

The Contractor shall notify the Contracting Officer of any inconsistency in this SOW, including all attachments and applicable documents. Upon notification of an inconsistency, the Contracting

Officer will clarify which requirement takes precedence, and may modify the contract as deemed appropriate.

3.1 Terms and Definitions

For the purposes of the L1 Series MAGNETOMETER contract attachments, the following terms and definitions apply unless otherwise stated in a contract Attachment.

A requirement is identified by “shall”, a good practice by “should”, permission by “may” or

“can”, expected outcome or action by “will” and descriptive material by “is” or “are” (or other verb form of “to be”).

The term “TBS” (To Be Supplied) means that the Government will clarify or supply the missing information during the course of the contract. “TBR” (To Be Reviewed) means that the stated information will be reviewed for appropriateness by the Contractor and the Government and the value may be changed prior to final definition by the Government during the course of the contract. Until the value is changed or the “TBR” removed, the Contractor shall comply with the requirement as if the "TBR" notation did not exist. “TBD” (To Be Determined) indicates further research or analysis is needed to determine the information, during the course of the contract, with the final determination to be made by the Government. “TBP” (To Be Proposed) means the

Contractor proposes the information with the Offer submission for Government review and approval. All changes to resolve these “TBX” items will be done through a formal process of configuration change review, approval, and contract modification.

The terms “observatory” and “Observatory” refer to the spacecraft (or Spacecraft) bus fully or partially integrated with one or more flight instruments and is equivalent to the term

“observatory” used in the Rapid IV Contract.

The term “Government” represents the appropriate NASA and/or NOAA L1 Series management office or, where “the Government” is indicated as providing a function for or interface to the Spacecraft Contractor, the function or interface may be provided by

Government or Government L1 Series or support service contractors.

Check the SWFO CM tool Server at https://swfowc.ndc.nasa.gov/SWFOWC/app/#ptc1/homepage to verify that this is the correct version prior to

The terms “L1 Series Project Office”, “L1 Series Project”, and “Project” refers to the

Government L1 Series Project Office.

The terms “instrument team”, “instrument provider”, “instrument developer”, “instrument supplier”, and “instrument vendor” refer to the various instrument contractors and/or to

Government civil servant and Government support contractors interfacing with and or providing the instrument or data for the various instruments (to be revised based on instrument vendor selection).

The terms “Magnetometer”, “instrument”, “instruments”, refer to all flight model units of the

Magnetometer instrument, unless a shall statement specifically limits the requirement to certain

Flight Model units (i.e. FM-1, FM-2, FM-3, FM-4).

Check the SWFO CM tool Server at https://swfowc.ndc.nasa.gov/SWFOWC/app/#ptc1/homepage to verify that this is the correct version prior to

4 WORK PERFORMED BY THE CONTRACTOR

4.1 Program Management Office

The Contractor shall establish a Program Management Office (PMO) responsible for the leadership and overall direction of all phases of the work specified in this SOW.

The Contractor shall establish effective communication with the Government Project Office through the Contracting Officer's Representative (COR) that includes, but is not limited to, e-mail and telephone contact as necessary, weekly telecons with the Government Magnetometer team, and one-on-one contact between NASA and Contractor discipline engineers, to be coordinated by the COR.

The Contractor shall prepare, lead and provide minutes for weekly teleconferences with the

Government to discuss status, risks, issues, schedule and other business-related activities.

Once instrument integration and test (I&T) begins, the Contractor shall include the Government team in the Contractor’s regularly scheduled I&T meetings.

The Contractor shall establish a Subcontract Management and Control System to provide technical direction and effective sub-contract management utilizing schedule milestone controls.

The Contractor shall develop and maintain a Master Action Item Data Base (MAID), or spreadsheet, listing all Request for Actions (RFA) or Action Items from formal reviews, Government status reviews, internal technical reviews, peer reviews, all other reviews required by the contract, technical meetings, telecons, etc., listing author and origin (PDR, telecon, etc.) of the RFA, person responsible for closure, wording of the RFA, response, persons(s) authorizing final closure, due date, date closed, and a column for Government concurrence and comment.

The Contractor shall not delete closed action items from the MAID.

The Contractor shall retain all documents and test data for the life of the contract.

4.2 Resource Management

The Contractor shall establish, implement and maintain a comprehensive Resources

Management System (RMS) for planning, authorizing, and controlling the total resource effort for each Work Breakdown Structure (WBS) element, by instrument, and for providing timely and adequate visibility into manpower, materials, cost, schedule, travel, and subcontract performance.

The RMS shall be consistent with the contract WBS and provide timely and traceable incorporation of contract changes, and document the effect on the resource management baseline.

The contractor shall maintain and provide the WBS to the government once it is baselined and after any significant changes due to project changes or contract modifications.

The Contractor shall use Microsoft Project (latest version) as the scheduling tool for the generation and reporting of project schedules.

Check the SWFO CM tool Server at https://swfowc.ndc.nasa.gov/SWFOWC/app/#ptc1/homepage to verify that this is the correct version prior to

The Contractor shall define and implement a parts program for all flight and GSE parts that minimizes the risk of a schedule delay, in the event of a part or component failure, inadvertent damage, contamination, or by other plausible events or conditions and based on the Contractor’s historical experience, current practices, and lessons learned from similar Class C missions.

The Contractor shall provide private office space with a locking door, furniture, copier(s), facsimile machine(s), phones and high-speed internet access in the vicinity of the PMO for one

Government resident and one visiting representative.

The Contractor shall provide property management of NASA Government Furnished Equipment

(GFE) and GSE.

The Contractor shall deliver a Safety and Health Report.

Any major Sub-contractor that may be providing one or more of the Magnetometer

Subassemblies shall provide private office space, furniture, copier(s), facsimile machine(s), phones and high-speed internet access in the vicinity of the project office for one government representative.

4.3 Visitor Badging

The Contractor shall accommodate facility access and badging for L1 Series Project representatives throughout the life of the contract.

This shall include short term visitor badging for all Contractor-hosted meetings, Technical

Interchange Meetings (TIMs), Working Groups (WGs), and reviews, as well as long-term, unescorted badging for up to 6 Project representatives in order to accommodate long-duration visits (e.g. during integration and test [I&T]) and resident personnel.

If the Contractor requires training for entry into any facilities, the Contractor shall provide the necessary training to Project representatives. This training shall be provided in a timely manner.

The Contractor shall coordinate with the government for badging of Contractor personnel for access to NASA facilities as required for support of the contract.

4.4 Configuration and Information Management

The Contractor shall oversee and manage the generation, configuration control and distribution of all documents required by the contract.

The Contractor shall establish, implement, and maintain a government approved Configuration

Management System that provides Configuration Management control of configured items including all flight hardware and software, all GSE hardware and software, and all documentation developed under this contract, including drawings, procedures, plans, CDRLs, and program review materials.

Check the SWFO CM tool Server at https://swfowc.ndc.nasa.gov/SWFOWC/app/#ptc1/homepage to verify that this is the correct version prior to

The Contractor shall provide all documents called out in the CDRL plus all updates and revisions in accordance with the CDRL.

The Contractor shall produce, control and maintain contract documentation in accordance with the CDRL. The Government will establish and maintain a secure website, called the L1 Series

Portal. The Government will maintain a folder on the portal for Magnetometer only, accessible by the Contractor and selected government personnel, for document delivery and the exchange of information only.

The Contractor shall develop, implement and maintain a document and drawing tree.

The Contractor shall develop, implement and maintain a Software Configuration Management

System that provides baseline management and control of software requirements, design, source code, data and documentation.

The Contractor shall employ a source code version control tool to check in/check out current or previous versions of a source file.

The Contractor shall establish a Configuration Control Board(s) to review and approve changes to the flight design documentation, software, GSE and all controlled documents.

The Contractor shall submit Class I changes to the Government for approval before implementation of the change. (Class I changes affect an item’s fit, form or function.)

The Contractor shall submit Class II changes to the Government for concurrence with the classification. (Class II changes are changes to correct documentation or changes to hardware not otherwise defined as a Class I change.)

If GSFC determines that a Class II classification is incorrect the Contractor shall resubmit the change as a Class I change.

4.4.1 Documentation

The Contractor shall develop, produce, deliver, and maintain all documentation required by and in accordance with the L1 Series Magnetometer Contract Deliverables Requirements List

(CDRL)

The Contractor shall comply with applicable export control protocols: Export Administration

Regulation (EAR) or International Traffic in Arms Regulation (ITAR), as determined by the

NASA GSFC Export Control Office. The Contractor will appropriately mark information provided to the L1 Series Project that is subject to export control restrictions and will leave information unmarked that is not.

All efforts, including the performance of tests and analyses not otherwise explicitly stated in other parts of the SOW, but determined jointly by the Contractor and the Government to be mission critical, shall be performed and documented by the Contractor.

Check the SWFO CM tool Server at https://swfowc.ndc.nasa.gov/SWFOWC/app/#ptc1/homepage to verify that this is the correct version prior to

All documentation, data, and analyses generated for or applicable to the contract effort, whether formal or informal, deliverable or non-deliverable shall be made available to the Government and Government support Contractor’s upon request. This information shall be provided electronically through a Contractor provided web portal that provides Government document download capability.

4.5 Program Review Requirements

The Contractor shall provide the technical and administrative support for all program reviews and meetings.

The Contractor shall provide technical support to observatory system-level reviews, observatory integration and test reviews and mission operations reviews.

Unless otherwise stipulated, all reviews and meetings will be held at the Contractor's facility.

4.5.1 Kick-off Meeting

Approximately one month after award the Contractor shall prepare and conduct a Kick-Off

Meeting covering a line-by-line review of the contract schedule and clauses, SOW, Magnetometer Requirements Specification, IMAR, and CDRLs.

The Contractor shall provide their interpretation of each line item (“Shall.”)

The Contractor shall plan for a five-day review.

4.5.2 Reserved

4.5.3 Peer Reviews

The Contractor shall work with the Government to implement a program of periodic tabletop engineering and risk mitigation reviews (peer reviews) throughout the life cycle to identify and resolve concerns as they arise, and prior to formal, system level reviews.

Peer review teams shall be comprised of technical experts from the Contractor and the

Government with significant practical experience relevant to the technology and requirements to be reviewed.

The Contractor shall provide three days prior notification so that government representatives can prepare and be present.

4.5.4 Instrument Design Reviews

The Contractor shall prepare and conduct Instrument Design Reviews for the Independent

Integrated Review Team that will be chaired by the Government. The reviews will cover all

Check the SWFO CM tool Server at https://swfowc.ndc.nasa.gov/SWFOWC/app/#ptc1/homepage to verify that this is the correct version prior to aspects of flight and ground hardware, software and operations for which the Contractor has responsibility.

The Contractor shall conduct a dry-run chart flip-through via a telecon and/or WebEx for each design review, with the government Magnetometer team, 2 weeks prior to the review.

After each formal review, the Contractor shall document all RFA's with planned closure date in the MAID within 1 week of receipt.

Each dry-run and design review, (PDR, CDR, etc.) is not considered complete until approved by the Government. If the Government determines that a delta review is necessary, the Contractor shall conduct such review at a time to be mutually agreed-upon with the Government.

4.5.4.1 System Definition Review (SDR) /Systems Requirements Review (SRR)

The Contractor shall prepare and conduct an SDR/SRR after all requirements have been allocated to the subsystem level.

The Contractor shall plan for a two-day review, not including resolution of RFAs.

4.5.4.2 Preliminary Design Review (PDR)

The Contractor shall prepare and conduct a PDR at the conclusion of the preliminary design efforts and after testing the breadboard or brass board models of critical subassemblies/assemblies.

4.5.4.3 Critical Design Review (CDR)

The Contractor shall prepare and conduct a CDR prior to the start of manufacture of the FM hardware unless the Contractor requests and the Government concurs with an earlier start.

The Contractor shall plan for a two-day review, not including resolution of RFAs.

The contractor shall prepare and conduct a Delta-CDR for each flight model after the first unit.

The government may waive the requirement for a Delta-CDR if no changes have occurred.

4.5.4.4 Pre-Environmental Review (PER)

The Contractor shall prepare and conduct a PER prior to the start of environmental testing of each FM to establish the readiness of the system and to evaluate the environmental test plans and procedures.

Check the SWFO CM tool Server at https://swfowc.ndc.nasa.gov/SWFOWC/app/#ptc1/homepage to verify that this is the correct version prior to

4.5.4.5 Pre-Storage/Pre-Shipment Review

The Contractor shall prepare and conduct a pre-storage review prior to placement of the four

FMs (FM1, FM2, FM3, FM4) into storage at the Contractor's facilities.

The Contractor shall plan for a two-day pre-storage review, not including resolution of RFAs.

The Contractor shall prepare and conduct a pre-ship review prior to the shipment of instrument.

The Contractor shall plan for a two-day pre-ship review, not including resolution of RFAs.

4.5.5 Observatory Level Reviews

The Contractor shall provide technical support to all Observatory level and Mission reviews for each FM.

The Contractor shall support the Observatory level reviews, as required, by presentations and/or documentation; for example, an instrument overview or design summary, test and data evaluation summaries, etc.

4.5.6 Project Management Reviews

The Contractor shall prepare and hold once every two months Project Management Status

Reviews (PMSR).

The status reviews shall be held at the Contractor's facility through successful completion of the

CDR, then alternate between a government designated facility and the Contractor's facility.

Specific agenda items may be required by the Government.

4.5.7 Test Data Reviews

The Contractor shall prepare and conduct table-top test data reviews with government personnel on the overall instrument status and performance for each FM.

The Contractor shall conduct data reviews prior to the shipment of deliverable GSE.

The Contractor shall prepare and conduct reviews of the interim data following any instrument or system level performance verification or calibration test prior to the breakdown of any test setup to ensure collection of good data, and prior to the Pre-Storage and Pre-Shipment Reviews to determine readiness.

The Government reserves the right to attend all Test Data Reviews and requires 10 business days of advance notification.

4.5.8 Technical Meetings

The Contractor shall provide technical meetings and reviews as deemed necessary by the

Government for the purpose of discussing and/or resolving problems or items of interest.

Check the SWFO CM tool Server at https://swfowc.ndc.nasa.gov/SWFOWC/app/#ptc1/homepage to verify that this is the correct version prior to

4.5.9 Subcontract Subsystem and Instrument Reviews

The Contractor shall plan a series of subsystem reviews and document that plan as part of the

Program Management Plan.

The Contractor shall conduct PDR and CDR reviews of all major sub-systems whether these subsystems are provided by the Contractor or by a subcontractor.

Whether internal or external, sub-system reviews shall be chaired by the Contractor and conducted by personnel not directly responsible for design or procurement of the hardware under review. The Government reserves the right to attend these reviews and requires 10 business days of advance notification.

The Contractor shall document the minutes and action items that result from these reviews and make them available on the government website.

The Contractor shall conduct internal software reviews.

The Contractor shall conduct tabletop code walkthroughs; the Government reserves the right to attend and requires three business days advance notice.

4.6 Schedule Management

The Contractor shall establish, implement, and maintain a Magnetometer Instrument Schedule

(MAGIS). Each FM development and delivery shall be tracked in the schedule.

The Contractor shall present schedule status at the Program Management Status Reviews.

The Contractor shall obtain Government approval for Magnetometer Instrument Schedule changes that impact Deliverable Items or GFE delivery dates as defined in contract.

4.7 Risk Management

The Contractor shall implement and maintain a Risk Management Program addressing all programmatic, performance and reliability risks.

The Contractor shall evaluate, classify, and prioritize all identified performance, reliability and quality risks and assess their potential impact on cost and schedule.

The Contractor shall develop and implement risk management strategies, actions (mitigate, watch or research), and assign tasks and appropriate resources to manage and control the risks for each instrument.

The Contractor shall track all risks being mitigated on an ongoing basis; capture risk attributes and mitigation information by collecting data; establish performance metrics; examine trends, deviations and anomalies; and writing risk mitigation plans as necessary.

Check the SWFO CM tool Server at https://swfowc.ndc.nasa.gov/SWFOWC/app/#ptc1/homepage to verify that this is the correct version prior to

5 SYSTEMS ENGINEERING

The Contractor shall establish and maintain a Systems Engineering Program for directing, specifying and overseeing the design and technical development of the Magnetometer instrument, GSE, and ground algorithms.

The Magnetometer System Specification shall include derived requirements from the

Magnetometer Requirements Specification, the L1 Series IMAR, and the Magnetometer SOW.

The Contractor shall use a requirements traceability tool to demonstrate that the Magnetometer design meets all requirements.

5.1 Systems Management and Engineering

The Contractor shall perform all system studies, trades, risk assessments, and fault management strategy necessary to develop an instrument system design that meets the system performance specifications.

The Contractor shall flow-down the Magnetometer performance requirements into engineering functional requirements, detailed equipment and end item design requirements.

The Contractor shall ensure that all subsystems, both individually and in combination, meet the intended design and performance specifications and that the design specifications are sufficient to meet the mission life requirements.

The Contractor shall establish and maintain a System Performance and Environmental

Verification Program that demonstrates that the FM meets all mandated and derived performance requirements, and that the GSE meets all design and interface requirements and is safe to use with the flight hardware.

5.2 Observatory Interface and Accommodation

The Contractor shall coordinate with the observatory contractor and support technical interchange meetings to define the instrument accommodations and interfaces between instrument and observatory as well as instrument GSE to observatory GSE interfaces, and instrument GSE to NOAA GSE interfaces.

The Contractor shall assist in the development of the Magnetometer to Spacecraft (S/C)

Interface Control Documents (ICDs) specified in the Magnetometer specification.

The Contractor shall support the observatory implementation contractor in design and test of all instrument to observatory interfaces: mechanical, including the location of the Magnetometer instruments on the observatory, electrical, and thermal.

The Contractor shall support at their facility pre-delivery data and electrical power interface testing in coordination with the spacecraft vendor using a spacecraft vendor provided interface simulator.

Check the SWFO CM tool Server at https://swfowc.ndc.nasa.gov/SWFOWC/app/#ptc1/homepage to verify that this is the correct version prior to

5.3 System Analysis and Allocations

The Contractor shall conduct complete analyses of the technical requirements that fully establish and define budget allocations for all required performance and design parameters, including but not limited to, mass, power and volume allocations, alignment, magnetic cleanliness, contamination control, thermal, radiation, on-board processing resources, and data timeliness.

The Contractor shall maintain and control budgets (i.e. allocations and margins) for all instrument resources.

The Contractor shall conduct the analyses required to confirm the integrity of the instrument design, and to ensure that each instrument performance will be compliant with specifications over the operational design life.

The Contractor shall conduct analyses and simulations required to assure the combined subsystems function properly as an integrated unit.

The Contractor shall conduct data analysis and trending and maintain a trend database during instrument level testing, observatory level testing, post-launch operations, and mission operations in order to ensure stability of each instrument performance.

The Contractor shall conduct end-to-end analyses of the instruments to demonstrate the designs will meet all performance requirements.

The Contractor shall develop and maintain over the duration of the contract, a computer simulation(s) and models for these end-to-end Magnetometer system analyses.

The Contractor shall use a requirements management tool that interfaces with Dynamic Object-

Oriented Requirements Management System Next Generation (DOORS- NG) requirements management tool for the import/export of requirements and traceability linkages.

5.4 Contamination Control and Analysis

The Contractor shall establish a Contamination Control Program (CCP) and provide the resources necessary to assure that appropriate contamination control is exercised through all phases of instrument manufacture, build-up/assembly, integration and test, and observatory integration and test, launch site processing, and on-orbit operation. This includes assuring that

Magnetometer will not produce contamination that degrades companion instruments and spacecraft subsystem performance

Supplemental CCP documents shall be developed for cleanroom operations, contamination protocols, cleaning procedures, monitoring plans, vacuum bake out plans, I&T plans, launch site processing, and any contamination-related plans for the on-orbit phase.

The Contractor shall establish and document contamination allowances and budgets for performance degradation of sensitive surfaces, components, and thermal contamination-sensitive hardware such that, even when degraded by contamination within the stated allowance, the hardware will meet its end-of-life mission objectives.

The Contractor shall provide a mass transport analysis and a particle generation and redistribution analysis for the instrument.

Check the SWFO CM tool Server at https://swfowc.ndc.nasa.gov/SWFOWC/app/#ptc1/homepage to verify that this is the correct version prior to

For molecular contaminants, the contractor begins by choosing low TML/VCM materials, schedules bake-outs of parts, components, harnesses, etc., and performs a mass transport analysis for molecular contamination demonstrating that the Magnetometer is not a contamination source for the other more sensitive instruments (such as L1 Series CCOR).

For particulates, the contractor must demonstrate that they are not a source of particulate contamination. This would generally include choosing low particulate-generating, non-shedding materials and coatings, performing particulate testing and monitoring during each mission phase, and scheduling frequent cleaning/verification of Magnetometer surfaces.

The Contractor shall perform all cleaning that is required to maintain contamination at defined levels.

The Contractor shall report the status of all contamination control activities at Instrument Design

Reviews, technical meetings and PMSRs.

5.5 Magnetic Control Plan

The Contractor shall implement a magnetic control and verification program to track, manage/report and test to ensure that the instrument-generated magnetic fields do not exceed the field limits during each instrument operation.

The Contractor shall participate in the Government led magnetics control program.

5.6 Special Engineering Analysis

The Contractor shall conduct special engineering tasks and/or analyses relating to the development, implementation, and operation of the Magnetometer instruments, and ground systems as required and authorized by the appropriate contract clauses.

Check the SWFO CM tool Server at https://swfowc.ndc.nasa.gov/SWFOWC/app/#ptc1/homepage to verify that this is the correct version prior to

6 FLIGHT MODEL (FM)

The Contractor shall develop four Magnetometers Flight Models designated as FM1, FM2, FM3, and FM4 to fly on the L1 series missions.

The effort shall include fabrication, assembly, test, calibration, ground processing algorithm development, maintenance, storage (including cleaning and calibration verification after a TBD timeframe), delivery and post-delivery support through the end of the contract.

The first FM shall be functionally tested and environmentally tested to proto-flight qualification levels and durations as defined in the Magnetometers Requirements Specification to qualify the designs and procedures. After successful qualification of the first FM, subsequent units may be tested at acceptance levels if they are exact duplicates of the first flight instrument.

6.1 Design and Analysis

6.1.1 Instrument Design

The Contractor shall design the instrument to meet the performance and interface requirements.

To support and gain confidence in the design of critical and high-risk systems the Contractor shall perform subassembly/assembly level design and testing to verify expected performance prior to start of FM instrument fabrication.

The Contractor shall develop and maintain Assembly and Integration Procedures and Drawings.

The Contractor shall develop an Engineering Development Unit (EDU) to reduce, mitigate or retire critical subassembly or assembly risk. The EDU shall include fully functional parts and assemblies, fabrication, assembly, test, calibration, ground processing algorithms development and verification, maintenance, storage (including cleaning and calibration verification after a

TBD timeframe) plans, and techniques.

The EDU shall be functionally and environmentally tested to proto-flight qualification levels

(TBR) and durations as defined in the Solar Wind Plasma Sensor Requirements Specification to qualify the designs, procedures, planning, and verify requirements, and demonstrate ground processing algorithms.

The Contractor shall conduct life tests of all mechanisms and other critical assemblies as specified in the Magnetometer Requirements Specification.

The Contractor shall verify the expected performance of any design change before proceeding with fabrication of the changed article.

The Contractor shall ensure that all Magnetometer technologies achieve a Technology Readiness

Level (TRL) 6 by PDR.

Check the SWFO CM tool Server at https://swfowc.ndc.nasa.gov/SWFOWC/app/#ptc1/homepage to verify that this is the correct version prior to

The Contractor shall provide a list of any Magnetometer technologies that are below TRL 6 at the time of award.

6.1.2 Flight and Ground Test Software Development and Maintenance

The Contractor shall update and maintain all flight software, ground test software, processes, procedures and software tools required for support of the FM integration, test and verification program, and on-orbit operations in accordance with the Software Maintenance Plan.

The Contractor shall establish and maintain a Software Management Program to plan and document software development processes and procedures, software tools, reviews, resources, schedules and deliverables.

The contractor shall document and maintain under configuration control all software requirements in the Magnetometer Requirements Specification.

The contractor shall identify the person responsible for directing and managing the software assurance program and interfacing with government assurance personnel.

The contractor shall identify safety critical software per Appendix A of NASA-STD-8719.13

Software Safety Standard, or equivalent, with NASA/GSFC COR approval.

The Contractor shall assist the Government's software Independent Assessments, assess all review findings and recommendations, and implement corrective actions to address such findings and recommendations. Detailed justification and rationale shall be provided for any instances where the Contractor decided not to take corrective action on specific software design findings and recommendations.

The Contractor shall document the test approach and methodology in the Software Management

Plan for the software Verification and Validation in accordance with the L1 Series Instrument

MAR and deliver Acceptance Test Reports within 30 days of software release or within 30 days of test (whichever is sooner).

The Contractor shall design, develop, test and implement flight software and GSE ground test software for the FM.

The Contractor shall specify, design, review, develop, configuration control, and test the software component of firmware, consisting of computer programs and data loaded into a class of memory not dynamically modifiable by the computer during processing (e.g., Programmable

Read Only Memories, Programmable Logic Arrays, Digital Signal Processors, Field

Programmable Gate Arrays, etc.), in the same rigorous manner as the flight software.

The Contractor shall develop and maintain one Flight Software Development Environment

(FSDE), including hardware, software, procedures and associated documentation, to be used for the life cycle management, development and verification of the flight software at the Contractor's facility.

As needed, the Contractor shall develop and maintain a GSE Ground Test Software

Development System to be used for the life cycle management of the ground test software at the

Contractor's facility.

Check the SWFO CM tool Server at https://swfowc.ndc.nasa.gov/SWFOWC/app/#ptc1/homepage to verify that this is the correct version prior to

The Contractor shall classify each Computer Software Configuration Item (CSCI) in accordance with the software classifications definitions for Class A, B, C, D, E, F, G and H in Appendix D of NPR 7150.2B.

The Contractor shall maintain a Government approved tailoring compliance matrix against NPR

7150.2B requirements, including those accomplished by subcontracts, for each software classification/CSCI.

The Contractor shall implement the safety requirements of NASA-STD-8719.13C when a system or subsystem is determined to have safety critical software.

The Contractor shall provide Government insight into software design, development and test activities including monitoring integration and verification adequacy, trade study data, auditing the software design and development process, and participation in all software peer reviews and technical interchange meetings.

The contractor shall perform an analysis of unnecessary and/or unreachable code, as defined per

GSFC-STD-1000 (Rev G) Table 3.02-1, on the intended flight load for launch. The analysis shall identify all instances (areas) of unnecessary/unreachable code, the general functionality associated with the code, the reason each is intended to be left within the flight load, and the justification (e.g., mitigating action) that explains why the included code does not provide a risk to the mission.

The contractor shall ensure that SW functional/requirements and comprehensive performance verification/validation testing is performed by qualified testers that are independent of the SW designers and developers.

6.1.3 Ground Processing Algorithms (GPA)

The Contractor shall provide Ground Processing Algorithms (GPAs) to produce data to be compliant with the requirements specified in the Magnetometer Requirements Specification. The algorithms will be documented in a Ground Processing Algorithms Document (GPAD).

The Contractor shall develop, maintain and update GPAs for the MOC, National Centers for

Environmental Information (NCEI), and NOAA’s Space Weather Prediction Center (SWPC) for processing from Level 0 to Level 2. It is recommended that the source code should be in a language on NOAA’s operational baseline (e.g. Python is preferred by NCEI).

The Contractor shall conduct a comprehensive test and validation program of the GPAs and demonstrate that the algorithms can produce data that meets the requirements of the

Magnetometer Requirements Specification, all within the required data latency period.

The Contractor shall provide a copy of the GPA source code "as-run", and as-updated, for validation.

The Contractor shall participate in Technical Interchange Meetings with SWPC to define algorithm format, testing and other required support.

The Contractor shall support the implementation and testing of the GPA by SWPC.

The Contractor shall identify all discrepancies in the GPA acceptance test results.

Check the SWFO CM tool Server at https://swfowc.ndc.nasa.gov/SWFOWC/app/#ptc1/homepage to verify that this is the correct version prior to

The Contractor shall certify the implementation of their GPA once SWPC has successfully demonstrated acceptable performance using the delivered algorithm.

6.2 Parts Procurement, Fabrication and Subassembly Testing

The Contractor shall procure all parts required for the EDU, all four FM units, spares and all

GSE.

If it is necessary to procure parts due to long lead times or potential parts obsolescence prior to the CDR, the Contractor shall obtain the Government's consent prior to doing so.

The Contractor shall procure build-up, test and maintain a supply of spare parts and tested subassemblies, to minimize cost, mitigate schedule and performance risks caused by the launch schedule, part and sub-assemblies damage or shortages, for one spare flight instrument.

The Contractor shall provide and maintain assembled and tested spares of sub-assemblies to mitigate against and minimize schedule delays.

The Contractor shall procure and deliver to the observatory contractor, mating flight connectors for all electrical interfaces to the observatory for the FM.

The Contractor shall perform fabrication and assembly/subassembly testing of all flight hardware, life test items (if required) and needed spares.

The Contractor shall provide all harnesses between instrument subassemblies.

The Contractor shall provide all instrument mounting hardware (i.e., all kinematic mounts and any vibration isolation hardware) and thermal isolation hardware, if required.

The Contractor shall provide one flight and flight spare set of thermal blankets.

The Contractor shall provide and install the passive temperature sensors.

The Contractor shall perform safe-to-mate and signal characterization tests on all instruments and GSE prior to electrical mating. The Signal characterization tests will include as a minimum, polarity verification, pin out verification, continuity and other identifications needed to ensure proper harnessing/connections for the mate operation in questions. This definition is used multiple times in following sections.

6.2.1 Field Programmable Gate Array (FPGA) Design and Development

FPGAs and similar logic devices (ASICs, PLDs, etc.,) that are new or modified from a heritage application in accordance with design guidelines and development methodology contained in

500-PG-8700.2.7.A, Design of Space Flight Field Programmable Gate Arrays and 500-PG-

8700.2.8, Field Programmable Gate Array (FPGA) Development Methodology.

Re-used (i.e., unmodified) FPGAs may be evaluated under the Inherited Item Risk Assessment process (MAR DID 1-3).

Re-used FPGAs shall provide verification to the government that each re-used FPGA will work within its operating conditions (i.e., temperature range, voltage range(s) and TID) for GDC.

The Contractor shall develop the FPGA Development Plan (CDRL FW-1) for FPGA

Check the SWFO CM tool Server at https://swfowc.ndc.nasa.gov/SWFOWC/app/#ptc1/homepage to verify that this is the correct version prior to activities/processes for new or modified FPGAs.

The Contractor shall provide for the Government insight into verification, trade studies, auditing of the FPGA design and development process, and analyses methods and results for new or modified FPGAs.

The Contractor shall provide a FPGA Design Data Package (FW-2) for each new, modified, or re-used FPGA. At points determined by the Contractor in the approved FPGA

Development Plan, the vendor supplies the government with one or more FPGA Design Data

Packages for review to facilitate timely identification of any concerns. This normally occurs concurrent with simulations or testing when portions or all of the FPGA are mature enough to benefit from independent review. The final FPGA Design Data Package contains the flight versions of all files relevant to making and analyzing the FPGA, but preceding packages may contain subsets of relevant files.

The Contractor shall provide for one NASA independent peer review,…