Attachment A Draft_SOW_493.0-00XXX_SWO-Coronagraph-Phase A_Formulation_SOW_08242022_v3.pdf

Effective Date: TBD

Expiration Date: TBD

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

DRAFT

Space Weather Next (SW Next))

Coronagraph Phase A Study Statement of Work (SOW)

W

U.S. Department of Commerce (DOC)

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)

NOAA Satellite and Information Service (NESDIS)

National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA)

Space Weather Observations (SWO) Program

SWO CMO

<Date>

Released

Space Weather Observations Program Division, Code 490.0

493-xxxx, Revision –

SW Next Coronagraph Phase A SOW 490.0-XXXXX, Revision – ii

Check the SWFO CM tool Server at Windchill (nasa.gov)to verify that this is the correct version prior to use.

SW Next Coronagraph Phase A Study SOW

Review/Signature/Approval Page Prepared by:

TBD

SWO Instrument Systems Manager

NASA Goddard Space Flight Center

Reviewed by:

SWO Program System Engineer

Date

SWO Deputy Program Director

Chief, Project Management and Execution Division

NOAA NESDIS/OPPA

Approved by:

SW Next Project Manager iii

Check the SWFO CM tool Server at Windchill (nasa.gov)to verify that this is the correct version prior to use.

Electronic Approval available on-line at: Windchill (nasa.gov) iv

Check the SWFO CM tool Server at Windchill (nasa.gov)to verify that this is the correct version prior to use.

Preface

This document is under SWO Division configuration control. Once this document is approved, 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 490.0

Greenbelt, MD 20771 v

Check the SWFO CM tool Server at Windchill (nasa.gov)to verify that this is the correct version prior to use.

Change History Log

Revision Effective Date Description of Changes

(Reference the CCR & CCB/ERB Approval Date)

Rev - TBD This is the initial baselining of the document. The document will be placed under CM control upon receipt of all required approvals.

vi

Check the SWFO CM tool Server at Windchill (nasa.gov)to verify that this is the correct version prior to use.

Table of Contents

1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Top Level Summary of Work Required

1.2 Guiding Assumptions About the Eventual Flight Program

1.3 Study Milestones Schedule

1.4 Applicable and Reference Documents

2 TASKS

2.1 Trade Studies (needs update)

2.1.1 Seven (7) Year Mission Duration Trade Study

2.1.2 Contract Deliverables Requirements List (CDRL) Trade Study

2.1.3 Field Programable Gate Array (FPGA) Trade Study

2.1.4 Adaptability to Different Orbital Regimes

2.1.5 Manufacturability

2.2 Coronagraph Design Concept Development and Related Analyses (Needs Update)

2.3 Technology Assessment and Demonstration

2.4 Management Planning

3 REVIEWS, REPORTING, AND DELIVERABLE PRODUCTS

3.1 Status Meetings and Reviews

Kickoff Meeting

Monthly Progress Review (MPR)

Midterm Review (MTR)

Final Studies Review (FSR)

Final Report Package (FRP)

3.2 Contract Data Requirements List (CDRL)

Contract Deliverables Requirements List (CDRL) Trade Study

APPENDIX A ACRONYMS

List of Tables

Table 3-1. CDRLS

Check the SWFO CM tool Server at Windchill (nasa.gov) to verify that this is the correct version prior to use.

1 INTRODUCTION

The Space Weather Next (SW Next) Coronagraph shall be a Sun-pointing imaging instrument designed to accommodate the brightness range of the solar scene and detect transient and small local increases in solar coronal brightness associated with Coronal Mass Ejection (CME) plasma density pulses. The instrument must measure the coronal white light intensity as well as CME velocity, direction, width, and mass. A CME is an eruption of solar plasma that propagates at velocities of a few thousand kilometers per second outward into the heliosphere. To an observer on earth, an Earth-directed CME is viewed as a radially expanding circle of enhanced brightness centered on the Sun. The velocity of CMEs is obtained from two or more CME time-lapse images showing the radial expansion of the CME circle. A CME plasma density increase is observed by the detection of solar photons that are Thomson-scattered by coronal plasma electrons. The CME mass is proportional to the scattered photons.

The NOAA NESDIS has the responsibility to provide continuity of critical space-based space weather observations consistent with the goals outlined in the National Space Weather Strategy and Action Plan (https://www.sworm.gov/publications.htm). Design, development and deployment of satellite systems to meet this responsibility is through a joint NOAA/NASA

Space Weather Observations (SWO) Program Division within the Goddard Space Flight

Center’s Flight Projects Directorate. The SWO Program Division is exploring with industry partners the possibility to build subsequent coronagraph instruments.

NOAA and NASA acknowledge that there may industry interest to either collaborate in the use of compact coronagraph (CCOR) technology developed by Naval Research Laboratory (NRL) or to independently develop their own coronagraph technology.

Any industry partner that wishes to collaborate to use CCOR technology with NRL is required to be certified in the Joint Certification Program (JCP). The Joint Certification Program (JCP) certifies United States (U.S.) contractors for access to unclassified military technical data belonging to the U.S. Department of Defense (DOD). An active DD2345 "Military Critical

Technical Data Agreement" is required to access unclassified technical data with military or space application and may be required to partner with NRL. Any partnership with NRL, like any subcontracting agreement, is the sole responsibility of the industry partner; NOAA has no preference or preferred method of implementing the commercial Coronagraph development, other than to assure mission success, minimize cost, and mitigate schedule and risk.

It is anticipated that at the conclusion of this Phase A study any industry partner will be prepared to enter directly into a Systems Requirements Review approximately one month after

Implementation contract award followed by a Preliminary Design Review. The Government will consider a Contractor proposed pre-priced option for four (4) TBR) additional months of performance that mitigates technical, cost and schedule risk associated the Coronagraph design, development, and delivery, and includes the completion of this formulation study at a Preliminary

Check the SWFO CM tool Server at Windchill (nasa.gov) to verify that this is the correct version prior to use.

Design Review level readiness.

1.1 Top Level Summary of Work Required

The details of the deliverables are described in later sections. At the top level, the Government requires:

a) A Coronagraph Design that satisfies the baseline requirements defined in the SPEC and

IMAR. Suggested feedback to Coronagraph requirements, enhancements to the design beyond the baseline requirements will be entertained if they mitigate risk, schedule, cost, and can be implemented within the specified delivery timeline.

b) Feedback and an assessment of Coronagraph performance against requirements specified in the SPEC.

c) Trade Studies as specified in section 2.1 (TBR)

▪ Industry partner proposed trade study(s)

d) Technical Analysis as described in section 2.2

e) Notional Development Schedule as described in section 2.4

f) Cost Analysis as described in section 2.4

g) Technology Readiness Level (TRL) Assessment and a Technology Development Plan as described in section 2.3

h) Identification of Development Risks as defined in section 2.4

i) As applicable, performance of any work awarded for Technology Development and/or

Risk Mitigation effort(s)

j) Identification of hardware and software heritage assumptions as defined in section 2.3

1.2 Guiding Assumptions About the Eventual Flight Program

The Flight hardware development cost and schedule estimates shall be based on the following assumptions:

A. One (1) Engineering Development Unit (EDU).

a. That includes representative spacecraft mechanical and electrical interfaces

B. Two (2) Flight Units, plus parts for 2 more flight units to be procured concurrently, plus parts for sparing philosophy, with contractual options to build units 3 and 4; and a flight spare instrument philosophy to mitigate risk of issues identified late in the launch integration flow.

Deliveries as shown in the following notional schedule (all dates are for the Government

Fiscal Year).

Check the SWFO CM tool Server at Windchill (nasa.gov) to verify that this is the correct version prior to use.

MILESTONE DATE (assume 1st day of quarter)

Flight Contract Award Q2 FY24 (TBR)

Flight Model 1 Pre-Ship Review (PSR1) Q4 FY26 (TBR)

Launch 1 Planning Date Q4 FY28 (TBR)

Launch 2 Planning Date Q2 FY31 (TBR)

C. No Government Furnished Equipment (GFE) will be provided. If there is specific Government owned equipment which the contractor is proposing to use, then this equipment must be specifically identified, along with the benefit and verification of availability.

D. Mission Durations: See the SPEC. All requirements must be met at the End of Life.

The following instrument-level reviews are planned to be held for the first flight build:

SRR, IBR, PDR, CDR, PER, PSR. Subsequent flight builds will hold a PER and a

PSR. Review pre-requisites, content, and success criteria are documented in NPR

7123.1.

1.3 Study Milestones Schedule

The Contractor shall execute the study in accordance with the following milestone schedule.

Requirements and deliverables for these milestones are described in Section 3.

Milestone Schedule

Kickoff Meeting Within two weeks of award

Monthly Progress Reviews Kickoff + 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7 months

Mid-Term Review Kickoff + 4 months

Final Study Review Kickoff + 7.5 months

Final Report Package Kickoff + 8 months

Risk Mitigation Report (as applicable) Kickoff + 8 months

Technology Assessment and Development Report (as applicable)

Kickoff + 8 months

Check the SWFO CM tool Server at Windchill (nasa.gov) to verify that this is the correct version prior to use.

1.4 Applicable and Reference Documents

Reference Number Title

Applicable Documents

Draft_493-00XXX_SWO

COR 08242022

SW Next Coronagraph Specification (SPEC) Document (TBR)

4XX- COR-ICD-xx SW Next Coronagraph Interface Document (TBS)

4XX-COR-TBD-00xx SW Next Coronagraph General Interface Requirements Document

(TBS)

Draft_493.0-

00XXX_SWO IMAR

NEXT 08242022

SWO Instrument Mission Assurance Requirements (TBR)

Draft_493-

000XX_SWO_COR-

CDRL 08242022

SW Next Coronagraph Contract Deliverables Requirements List

(CDRL) (TBR)

GPR 7120.4D GSFC Guideline for Performing Risk Assessments

Reference Documents

CCSDS 120.0-G-2 CCSDS Informational Report Concerning Lossless Data Compression, Green Book, April 2013

CCSDS 120.1-G-2 CCSDS Informational Report Concerning Image Data

Compression, Green Book, February 2015

CCSDS 121.0-B-3 CCSDS Recommended Standard for Lossless Data Compression, Blue Book, August 2020 NPR 7123.1 NASA Systems Engineering Process and Requirements

SP-2016-6105 NASA Systems Engineering Handbook

Check the SWFO CM tool Server at Windchill (nasa.gov) to verify that this is the correct version prior to use.

2 TASKS

The Contractor shall analyze the Coronagraph requirements, perform trade studies to justify design decisions, develop a conceptual design for the Coronagraph, and perform all other tasks as specified below.

2.1 Trade Studies

The Contractor shall perform the following trade studies and report on the results at the Midterm and

Final reviews.

2.1.1 Seven (7) Year Mission Duration Trade Study

The Contractor shall study the 7-year mission duration contemplated for the SW Next L1 mission, including risks, opportunities, cost and schedule trades. (CDRL 1).

2.1.2 Contract Deliverables Requirements List (CDRL) Trade Study

The Contractor shall study the proposed CDRL document for the Coronagraph Instrument implementation, including risks, opportunities, cost and schedule trades. (CDRL 2).

2.1.3 Field Programable Gate Array (FPGA) Trade Study

The Contractor shall perform a trade study on FPGA’s to be used within their Coronagraph design. Include risks, opportunities, cost and schedule trades along with redundancy (including Triple

Modular Redundancy (TMR)) and rationale. (CDRL 3)

2.1.4 Adaptability to Different Orbital Regimes

The Contractor shall study the suitability and adaptability of the Coronagraph instrument design to be hosted on space platforms in different orbital regimes including in Earth geosynchronous orbit, at Earth-Sun Lagrange Point 1, and at Earth-Sun Lagrange Point 5.

2.1.5 Manufacturability

The Contractor shall study the manufacturability of the Coronagraph instrument, identifying complex parts, systems, and opportunities to mitigate and reduce complexity, cost and schedule. (CDRL 5)

2.1.6 Instrument Mission Assurance Requirements (IMAR) Trade Study

The Contractor shall study the proposed IMAR document for the COR Instrument implementation, including risks, opportunities, cost and schedule trades. (CDRL 4).

Check the SWFO CM tool Server at Windchill (nasa.gov) to verify that this is the correct version prior to use.

2.1.7 Contractor Proposed Trade Study & Pre-Priced Option

The Government will consider Contractor proposed Trade Studies and a pre-priced option for four (4) (TBR) additional months of performance that mitigates technical, cost and schedule risk associated the Coronagraph design, development, and delivery, and includes the completion of this formulation study at a Preliminary Design Review level readiness.

Milestone Schedule

Optional MPR #1 One month after 7-month milestone review

Optional MPR #2 Option MPR #1 + 1 month

Optional MPR #3 Option MPR #2 + 1 month

Optional MPR #4 Final Report Option MPR #3 + 1 month

2.2 Coronagraph Design Concept Development and Related Analyses

The Contractor shall develop a Coronagraph design concept and perform associated engineering analyses to justify design parameters, tolerances, design/performance margins, and associated budgets.

Included in this study shall be a discussion(s) on technical redundancy requirements and cost and schedule mitigation(s) to provide a Preliminary Design Review (PDR) level output at the end of this formulation effort. (CDRL 7)

The Contractor shall provide a quantitative comparison of the Coronagraph performance against the performance requirements in Section 3 of the SPEC. (CDRL 8)

The Contractor shall provide a summary of compliance to the Level 3 requirements (SPEC and

IMAR), including initial engineering analyses showing compliance to environmental requirements.

(CDRL 9)

The Contractor shall review all requirements listed as "TBR" and either concur or suggest new requirement values. (CDRL 11).

The Contractor shall quantify potential cost, schedule, and risk impacts of any suggested requirements changes. (CDRL 11)

The Contractor shall analyze the performance of the instrument concept including the development of a preliminary radiometric model and uncertainty budgets to achieve the required SNR. (CDRL 16)

The Contractor shall describe the systems approach to meeting all navigation requirements in the

SPEC. Such descriptions, including a preliminary error budget, will span relevant flight hardware characteristics, operational aspects, and ground processing. (CDRL 13)

Check the SWFO CM tool Server at Windchill (nasa.gov) to verify that this is the correct version prior to use.

The Contractor shall describe the algorithms to be used on the ground system for decompression (if needed) and processing to data Level 1b, as described in the SPEC. (CDRL

14)

The contractor shall review zones of reduced data quality (ZRDQ) and provide stray light mitigation concept. (CDRL 15)

The Contractor shall describe a reliability approach (planned redundancy, parts selection, etc.) to meet the SPEC required reliability for the specified lifetime. (CDRL 20)

The Contractor shall identify single-point failures and fault critical elements. As part of this analysis the

Contractor will describe the fault tolerant/graceful degradation features of the design. (CDRL 21)

The Contractor shall develop a Master Equipment List (MEL). The MEL will document the mass, power, and TRL of each major sub-component. A template for the MEL will be provided by the

Government. (CDRL 22)

The Contractor shall provide descriptions of any simulation and analytical tools used in the assessment of the design and/or performance, including the heritage and validation of the tools. (CDRL 23)

2.3 Technology Assessment and Demonstration

The Contractor shall assess the technology readiness of all components of the instrument design.

(CDRL 24)

If applicable, the Contractor shall provide a detailed Technology Development Plan (TDP), including a schedule, explaining how all technologies will achieve TRL 6 by the instrument PDR. If the study effort includes Technology Development effort, the TDP and associated schedule will clearly identify all of the work covered by the Technology Development. (CDRL 25)

The Contractor shall develop an EDU Model Philosophy and Plan that describes test plans, schedule, and cost of development for an end-to-end Engineering Development Unit and a test regime proposed by the Contractor. (CDRL 27)

The Contractor shall document the flight hardware and software heritage as well as any relevant differences between the claimed heritage and the proposed design (for example, on-orbit environment, mission duration, requirements, etc.). (CDRL 28)

2.4 Management Planning

The Contractor shall identify and rank risks to the development of the Coronagraph and describe associated mitigations. The likelihood and criticality of risks will be ranked on a 5x5 matrix per GPR

Check the SWFO CM tool Server at Windchill (nasa.gov) to verify that this is the correct version prior to use.

7120.4D. The Contractor will identify alternate implementation paths for all high-risk items.

(CDRL 29)

If the study effort includes Risk Mitigation effort, the Contractor shall implement the Risk

Mitigation effort under contract, brief the status of this effort at the reviews described in section

3, and provide a final report detailing the work completed, associated results, and the level to which the risk has been mitigated. (CDRL 30)

The Contractor shall define a Sparing Philosophy approach for procuring and maintaining an adequate supply of spare parts and subassemblies to minimize cost, schedule, and performance risks caused by part damage or shortages. (CDRL 26)

The Contractor shall develop an implementation phase schedule. The Contractor will assume that the parts for the 4 Flight models and any spare hardware needed for sparing philosophy will be procured at the same time. The schedule will show the following major instrument reviews: SRR, IBR, PDR, CDR, MRRs, TRRs, PER, and PSR, achievement of TRL6, development of the instrument physical model(s), long-lead (> 1 year) procurements, I&T and V&V activities, and the top three critical paths. The schedule will identify any flight hardware procurements that are started ahead of the completion of the EDU (or equivalent). (CDRL 3).

The Contractor shall suggest dates for the contract starts and other milestones that will minimize the overall cost and minimize the developmental risks. The schedule required to meet the program level milestones is shown in section 1.2 under item b. (CDRL 31)

The Contractor shall suggest dates for the FM3 and FM4 contract starts, deliveries, and other milestones that will minimize the overall cost and minimize the developmental risks to FM1 and FM2. The nominal PSR dates and Launch Planning Dates (LPDs) for these units are as follows: (CDRL 32).

Mission PSR (Gov. FY) LPD (Gov. FY)

FM3 Q2 FY32 (TBR) Q3 FY34 (TBR)

FM4 Q2 FY35 (TBR) Q3 FY37 (TBR)

The Contractor shall provide a parametric cost estimate for the development and production of four flight model instruments, any spare hardware needed for sparing philosophy, and the engineering model recommended in the EDU Model Philosophy & Plan (see section 2.3). The costs will be separately identified for each model, flight unit, required GSE (ground support equipment), and technology development(s) and organized by WBS element. The costs will be shown phased by Government fiscal year. The Contractor will state what parametric model was used in the analysis and provide any inputs to the model beyond the MEL (section 2.2), describing the heritage of the model. (CDRL 33)

Check the SWFO CM tool Server at Windchill (nasa.gov) to verify that this is the correct version prior to use.

3 REVIEWS, REPORTING, AND DELIVERABLE PRODUCTS

The Contractor shall perform the reviews and reporting tasks and provide deliverable products as specified below. The Contracting Officer's written determination that Government requests for action

(RFA's) or requests for information (RFI's) regarding the deliverable reviews and products have been closed out will constitute acceptance of the deliverable.

3.1 Status Meetings and Reviews

Kickoff Meeting

The Contractor shall support a kickoff meeting within 2 weeks of the Authorization to proceed to provide a team introduction, summary of the proposed work for the study, proposed study schedule, and a high-level introduction to the initial Coronagraph design concept. The Contractor will plan for a 2-hour virtual meeting. The Contractor will deliver a soft copy of the Kickoff chart set 24 hours prior to the meeting.

(CDRL 34)

Monthly Progress Review (MPR)

The Contractor shall present the results of the work performed since the previous MPR and discuss relevant technical and programmatic issues and findings. The topics expected to be covered are listed in the

CDRLs table in section 3.2. The MPRs will be planned as 4-hour virtual meetings. The Contractor will deliver a soft copy of the MPR chart set 24 hours prior to the meeting. (CDRL 35)

Midterm Review (MTR)

The Contractor shall present a summary of the results of the work performed for the Midterm Review. This review will be held at the NASA Goddard Space Flight Center, pending travel restrictions. The Contractor will plan on a one-and-a-half-day review. The topics expected to be covered are listed in the CDRLs table in section 3.2. The Contactor will deliver a soft copy of the MTR chart set 72 hours prior to the meeting. (CDRL 36).

Final Studies Review (FSR)

The Contractor shall present a summary of the results of the work performed for the Final Study Review.

The Contractor will plan on a one-and-a-half-day review at the Contractor’s facility. If possible, the

Government will travel to attend the review in-person, pending travel restrictions. The topics expected to be covered are listed in the CDRLs table in section 3.2. The Contractor will deliver a soft copy of the FSR chart set 72 hours prior to the meeting. (CDRL 37).

Check the SWFO CM tool Server at Windchill (nasa.gov) to verify that this is the correct version prior to use.

Final Report Package (FRP)

The Contractor shall deliver any CDRLs that were not delivered and approved by the Government

Contracting Officer (CO) prior to the FSR or any CDRLs requiring updates in the Final Report Package. The

Contractor will address any open action items remaining after the FSR in the Final Report Package. The FRP will be delivered within 2 weeks after the FSR. (CDRL 38)

3.2 Contract Data Requirements List (CDRL)

The Contractor shall deliver the data products specified in the following table

Update as Necessary (UAN)

Table 3-1. CDRLS

ID Deliverable/Task Deliverable

Format

Kickoff MPR MTR FSR FRP SOW

Ref

1 Seven (7) Year Mission

Duration Trade Study

Briefing Charts Status Prelim Final UAN 2.1.1

Contract Deliverables

Requirements List

(CDRL) Trade Study

Briefing Charts Status Prelim Final UAN 2.1.2

3 Field Programable

Gate Array (FPGA)

Trade Study

Briefing Charts Status Prelim Final UAN 2.1.3

4 Adaptability to Different

Orbital Regimes

Briefing Charts Status Prelim Final UAN 2.1.4

5 Manufacturability Briefing Charts Status Prelim Final UAN 2.1.5

6 IMAR Trade Study Briefing Charts Status Prelim Final UAN 2.1.6

Check the SWFO CM tool Server at Windchill (nasa.gov) to verify that this is the correct version prior to use.

7 Coronagraph Design Briefing Charts

+ Models

Status Prelim Final UAN 2.2

8 Predicted performance

vs. SPEC

Briefing Charts Status Prelim Final UAN 2.2

9 Level-3 Requirement

Compliance

Spreadsheet Status Prelim Final UAN 2.2

10 Vendor Proposed

Trades/Pre-priced option

Briefing Charts Status Prelim Final UAN 2.1.7

11 Suggested values for TBRs Briefing Charts Status, final answer by 3rd

MPR

UAN UAN UAN 2.2

12 Reserved

13 Navigation Approach Briefing Charts Status Prelim Final UAN 2.2

14 Level 1b

Algorithm

Description

Briefing Charts Status Prelim Final UAN 2.2

15 Straylight Mitigation

Concept

Briefing Charts Status Prelim Final UAN 2.2

16 Radiometric Performance and Uncertainty Budgets

Briefing Charts

+ Model +

Budget

Spreadsheets

Status Prelim Final UAN 2.2

17 Reserved

18 Reserved

19 Reserved

20 Reliability Approach Briefing Charts Status Prelim Final UAN 2.2

21 Single-Point Failures &

Fault Critical Elements

Briefing Charts Status Prelim Final UAN 2.2

22 MEL Spreadsheet Status Prelim Final UAN 2.2

Check the SWFO CM tool Server at Windchill (nasa.gov) to verify that this is the correct version prior to use.

23 Analytical Tools, Simulations, and Models

Briefing Charts Status Final UAN UAN 2.2

24 TRL Assessment Briefing Charts Status Final UAN UAN 2.3

25 Technology Development

Plan (As required)

Briefing Charts Status Prelim Final UAN 2.3

26 Sparing Philosophy and

Plan

Briefing Charts Status Prelim Final UAN 2.4

27 EDU Model Philosophy

& Plan

Briefing Charts Status Prelim Final UAN 2.3

28 Heritage Assessment Briefing Charts Status Final UAN UAN 2.3

29 Risk Assessment Briefing Charts Status Prelim Final UAN 2.4

30 Risk Mitigation Effort (if applicable)

Briefing Charts Status SU SU UAN 2.4

31 Flight Implementation

Schedule

MS Project +

Briefing

Charts

Status Prelim Final UAN 2.4

32 Options Schedule MS Project +

Briefing

Charts

Status Prelim Final UAN 2.4

33 Flight Cost Estimate Spreadsheet Status Prelim Final UAN 2.4

34 Kickoff Meeting Briefing Charts Charts due 24 hours before

3.1.1

35 MPR Charts Briefing Charts 24 hrs before

MPR

3.1.2

36 MTR Charts Briefing Charts 72 hrs before

MTR

3.1.3

37 FSR Charts Briefing Charts 72 hrs before

FSR

3.1.4

Check the SWFO CM tool Server at Windchill (nasa.gov) to verify that this is the correct version prior to use.

38 FRP NA 2

wks post

FSR

3.1.5

Check the SWFO CM tool Server at Windchill (nasa.gov) to verify that this is the correct version prior to use.

Appendix A Acronyms

A/D Analog-to-Digital

ACS Attitude Control System

ADC Analog to Digital Converter

AR Acceptance Review

CDR Critical Design Review

CDRL Contract Data Requirement List

CO Contracting Officer

CSCI Computer Software Configuration Item

DNB Day-Night Band

EDU Engineering Development Unit

EOL End of Life

ESD Electro-Static Discharge

ENOB Effective Number of Bits (ADC)

ESTE Electrical System Test Equipment

FM Flight Model

FOR Field of Regard

FRP Final Report Package

FSDE Flight Software Development Environment

FSR Final Study Review

GFE Government Furnished Equipment

GIRD General Interface Requirements Document

GPR Goddard Procedural Requirements

GSE Ground Support Equipment

GSFC Goddard Space Flight Center

IBR Integrated Baseline Review

NASA National Aeronautics and Space Administration

NOAA National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

NPR NASA Procedural Requirements

IBR Integrated Baseline Review

IMAR Instrument Mission Assurance Requirements

INR Image Navigation and Registration

IR Infrared

K Kelvin kHz Kilohertz km Kilometers

LMX GEO-XO Lightning Mapper

LRD Launch Readiness Date m meters

MAT Mission Allowable Temperature

Mbps Mega-bits-per-second

MEL Master Equipment List

Check the SWFO CM tool Server at Windchill (nasa.gov) to verify that this is the correct version prior to use.

MLI Multi-Layer Insulation

MMD Mean Mission Duration

Check the SWFO CM tool Server at Windchill (nasa.gov) to verify that this is the correct version prior to use.

MPR Monthly Progress Review

MRR Manufacturing Readiness Review

MTF Modulation Transfer Function

MTR Mid-Term Review mW Milliwatt

NASA National Aeronautics and Space Administration

NEDN Noise Equivalent Delta Radiance

NEDT Noise Equivalent Delta Temperature

NIST National Institute of Standards and Technology

NOAA National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

NOL Non-Operating Limits

NOT Non-Operating Temperature

NPR NASA Procedural Requirements

OAT Outgassing Allowable Temperature

OT Operating Temperature

PDR Preliminary Design Review

PER Pre-Environmental Review

PORD Performance and Operation Requirements Document

Qx FYz Quarter x of Fiscal Year z

PSR Pre-Shipment Review rad Radian

RFA Request for Action

RFI Request for Information

RMS Root Mean Square

SNR Signal-to-Noise Ratio

SOW Statement of Work sr Steradian

SRR System Requirements Review

SU Status Update

S/W Software

TBD To Be Determined

TBR To Be Reviewed

TBS To Be Supplied

TDI Time Delay and Integration

TDP Technology Development Plan

TM Thermal Margin

Tmin Minimum Scene Temperature

Tmax Maximum Scene Temperature

TRL Technology Readiness Level

TRR Test Readiness Review

UAN Update as Necessary

UIID Unique Instrument Interface Document um Micrometers (Microns) urad Microradian

WBS Work Breakdown Structure

ZRDQ Zones of Reduced Data Quality

Check the SWFO CM tool Server at Windchill (nasa.gov) to verify that this is the correct version prior to use.