Enclosure 1 - DRAFT LISA Flight FRS SOW.pdf

LISA FRS SOW LISA-SOW-XXXX, Revision - Draft Effective Date: 14 June 2024

Check FPD BCI Document Management Guidance to verify that this is the correct version prior to use

400-FORM-0002 (4/16/2014)

LISA

Frequency Reference System (FRS)

Statement of Work (SOW) Review/Signature/Approval Page

Prepared by:

Approved by:

Electronic Approval available on-line at:

i

Preface This document is a Laser Interferometer Space Antenna (LISA) Configuration Management (CM)-controlled document. Changes to this document require prior approval of the applicable Configuration Control Board (CCB) Chairperson or designee. Proposed changes shall be submitted to the LISA CM Office (CMO), along with supportive material justifying the proposed change.

Questions or comments concerning this document should be addressed to:

LISA Configuration Management Office Mail Stop 440 Goddard Space Flight Center Greenbelt, Maryland 20771 ii

Change History Log

Revision Effective Date Description of Changes (Reference the CCR & CCB/ERB Approval Date)

Draft 14 June 2024 Initial release per LISA-iii

Table of TBDs/TBRs/TBSs

Item No. Location Summary Individual/ Organization

Action

Due Date iv

1 Table of Contents

1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background

1.2 Scope

1.3 Related Documentation

1.3.1 Applicable Documents

1.3.2 Reference Documents

2 REQUIREMENTS

2.1 Management

2.1.1 Project Management

2.1.2 Government Insight

2.1.3 Reviews and Meetings

2.1.3.1 Major Reviews

2.1.3.1.1 FRS Reviews

2.1.3.1.2 Mission Level Reviews

2.1.3.2 Engineering Peer Reviews

2.1.3.3 Other Reviews and Meetings

2.1.3.1.3 Scheduled Weekly Teleconferences

2.1.3.1.4 Monthly Project Status Reports and Reviews

2.1.3.1.5 Technical Exchange Meetings and Working Groups

2.1.3.1.6 Status and Planning Meetings

2.1.4 Access to Controlled Facilities

2.1.5 Risk Management

2.1.6 Resource Management

2.1.7 Configuration Management

2.1.8 Pedigree and Inheritance

2.1.9 Lessons Learned Reporting

2.2.1 Requirement Analyses, Derivations, and Allocations

2.2.2 Interface Definition, Verification and Control

2.2.3 Design and Performance Verification

2.2.4 Trending

2.2.5 Models

2.2.5.1 Mechanical Models

2.2.5.2 Finite Element Models

2.2.5.3 Thermal Models

2.2.5.5 Models – General

2.2.6 Units

2.3 Mission Assurance

3 FRS DEVELOPMENT

3.1 Design Engineering

3.2 Trade Assessments

3.3 FRS Design Updates

3.3.1 FRS Electronics and Electrical Systems Design

3.3.2 FRS Structure Design

v

3.3.3 FRS Mechanisms Design

3.3.4 FRS Thermal System Design

3.3.5 This item intentionally left blank. ................................. Error! Bookmark not defined.

3.3.6 FRS Integration and Test Planning

3.4.1 Fabrication, Modification, Assembly, and Test

3.4.2 Integration and Test

3.4.2.1 Integration

3.4.2.2 Environmental and Performance Testing

3.4.2.3 Integration of the FRS and LMP [UPDATE/REVIEW]

3.5 FRS Operations Support

3.5.1 Operational Procedures and Documentation

3.5.2 Command and Telemetry Database Support

3.5.3 Training Support

3.6 Packaging, Handling, Storage, and Transportation

3.7 Delivery, Checkout, and Acceptance

3.8 Ground Support Equipment

3.8.1 Mechanical Ground Support Equipment

3.8.2 Electrical Ground Support Equipment

3.9 Shipping, Storage, and Purge Equipment

3.10 Spares

3.11 Engineering Development Units

4 POST-DELIVERY SUPPORT

5 CONTRACT DELIVERABLES REQUIREMENTS LIST AND GOVERNMENT

FURNISHED EQUIPMENT

APPENDIX A ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS

List of Figures

Figure 1. Lasers in the LISA constellation. There will be 12 LHs and 3 FRSs in the constellation.

1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background

The measurement of gravitational waves will yield a revolutionary new perspective on our universe, which has been intensely studied using electromagnetic waves in many wavelength bands. Recently, gravitational waves generated by the merger of a pair of roughly 30 solar mass black holes were detected by the ground-based LIGO network, nearly 100 years after Albert Einstein unveiled the General Theory of Relativity. Ground-based observatories have since released a catalog of almost 100 events from the first three observing runs, and more are expected. Gravitational waves are created during events such as supermassive black hole mergers, collisions between two black holes that are millions, or even billions, of times bigger than our Sun. These collisions are so powerful that they create distortions in Spacetime, known as gravitational waves. Gravitational waves could also come from other distant systems including smaller, stellar mass black holes orbiting supermassive black holes, known as Extreme Mass Ratio Inspirals (EMRIs). A space-based gravitational wave observatory will enable access to a rich array of astrophysical sources in the measurement band from 0.1 mHz to 1.0 Hz, and nicely complement observations from ground-based detectors which target higher frequencies.

The mission to accomplish this is the European Space Agency’s Laser Interferometry Space Antenna (LISA) [Danzmann and LISA Consortium, “The Gravitational Universe,” https://arxiv.org/abs/1305.5720 (2013), https://www.cosmos.esa.int/web/lisa].

There are many astrophysical phenomena that are either very dim or completely invisible in any form of light that astronomy has relied on for 400 years. Gravitational waves are a powerful new probe of the Universe that uses gravity instead of light to take measure of dynamical astrophysical phenomena. Studying gravitational waves gives enormous potential for discovering the parts of the universe that are invisible by other means, such as black holes, the Big Bang, and other, yet unknown, objects. LISA will complement our knowledge about the beginning, evolution, and structure of our universe.

LISA consists of three spacecraft (S/C) arranged in a triangular configuration and separated by

2.5 million kilometers in an Earth-trailing orbit. Each spacecraft relays laser beams between the other two spacecrafts, and the signals are combined to search for gravitational wave signatures coming from distortions of Spacetime.

Similar to how objects moving on the surface of a pond produce ripples and waves, merging massive compact binaries in Space distort the fabric of Spacetime and produce gravitational waves. Some of these gravitational wave events will cause the three LISA S/C to shift slightly with respect to each other, as they "ride the gravitational waves.” This produces a characteristic pattern in the combined laser beam signal that depends on the location and physical properties of the source. These signals are extremely small and require a very sensitive instrument to detect.

LISA measures gravitational radiation by precisely monitoring the tiny change in the proper distance between pairs of freely falling proof masses. These masses are separated by millions of kilometers and, using a laser heterodyne interferometric technique, the change in their proper separation is detected to ~10 pm over timescales of 1000 seconds, a fractional precision of better than one part in 1020. Lasers are essential for the implementation of this precision displacement measurement.

The gravitational wave spectrum covers a broad span of frequencies. LISA operates in the low frequency range, between 0.1 mHz and 1.0 Hz (compared to LIGO's frequency of 10 Hz to 1000 Hz). The difference means that the waves LISA is looking for have a much longer wavelength, corresponding to objects in much wider orbits and potentially much heavier than those that LIGO is searching for, opening the detection realm to a wider range of gravitational wave sources.

One of NASA’s contributions to the LISA partnership with ESA is to supply the laser head (LH) that transmits the 1.064-micron coherent laser light. To measure picometer-level length change over 2.5-million km with the low received power, the LH must be extremely quiet in terms of noise (intensity, frequency, and phase noise). Also, the LH must be able to operate over a long period to cover the full LISA mission lifetime: over 12 years from ground operations to launching and to potential extended missions.

The LH is based on a main oscillator power amplifier (MOPA) architecture that has a nominal output power of ~2 Watts continuous wave operation meeting intensity, frequency, and radio frequency (rf) differential phase noise and lifetime requirements as summarized in Table 1 below.

Table 1. Laser requirements for LISA.

Power (W) λ (nm) Intensity Noise

(/√Hz) Frequency

Noise (Hz/√Hz)

Differential Phase Noise

(rad/√Hz) Lifetime (Years in space)

2.0 1064.5 10-4 (at 10-3 Hz) 10-8 (at 107 Hz)

300 (at 10-2 Hz) 5 (at 100 kHz)

6x10-4 (at 10-2 Hz)

Cruise - 1.5 1.75 yrs.

Nominal Science Op - 5 4.5 yrs.

Extended Science Op - 6 yrs.

Each S/C contains two reference test masses, to which the S/C is controlled by the drag-free control system. Each S/C also contains one (1) laser system (LS), which is composed of two (2) laser assemblies (LAs) and one (1) frequency reference system (FRS), which is a highly stable optical cavity that serves as a laser frequency (thereby length) reference (Figure 1). Each arm is illuminated by the LA, which contains two (2) LHs for redundancy. One of the two LHs in the LA is a cold spare. As a result, there will be twelve (12) LHs in the whole constellation, while six (6) of them will be active at any given time. There are three (3) FRSs in the constellation.

Only one of them is used as a frequency reference and is frequency-locked to one of the six (6) active LHs at a given time. The other five lasers are offset phase-locked to the reference laser as transponder lasers, acting as an amplifying mirror at the far spacecraft. Each LH consists of a LOM and a laser electronics module (LEM).

Figure 1. Lasers in the LISA constellation. There will be twelve (12) LHs and three (3) FRSs in the constellation.

The SOW pertains to the FRS, which is used for frequency stabilizing the MOPA laser. The frequency stabilization is established using the Pound-Drever Hall scheme (Reference - Applied Physics B, 31(1983)97) where a small amount of light from the main oscillator (MO) injects into the FRS Optical Reference Cavity (FRS-O). The laser has requirements that allow precision laser interferometry, including laser frequency tuning and low frequency and intensity noise.

The conceptual block diagram of a single LH to FRS is shown below. This diagram shows the laser subsystem broken into parts. The block diagram shows the essential elements and optical and electrical interfaces between the LOM, LEM, FRS optics (FRS-O), and FRS electronics (FRS-E). The FRS shall be capable of frequency stabilization and control of all 4 LHs in a LS, but only one LH will be selected to frequency lock to the FRS.

Figure 2. FRS conceptual block diagram for a single LH to FRS configuration. The flight design for the FRS shall be scaled to meet the redundancy approach and switch to any of the 4 LHs on a spacecraft.

The FRS, which consists of the FRS-O and FRS-E; Bill of Material (BOM); and information gained, particularly the lessons learned during the FRS technology development, will be provided to the Contractor as reference material. However, the Contractor should not assume that direct access to, or provision of, these units will be available. This procurement will be for the development and build of the following flight unit FRSs:

• One (1) Engineering Model (EM) FRS-E (electronics only including the chassis, power distribution card and control electronics)

• One (1) Qualification Unit (QM) (should be capable of becoming Protoflight Units)

• Three (3) Flight Model (FM) Units

• One (1) Flight Spare (FS) Unit

• One (1) Flight Spare (FS) Unassembled Kit that could be used for full FRS assembly at a later date.

1.2 Scope

The scope of this FRS Statement of Work (SOW) includes all efforts and responsibilities for the personnel, services, materials, equipment, and facilities necessary to build and test various FRS models during development. The various models under development for this SOW shall include the Engineering Model (EM) FRS-E for form factor and performance verification, the FRS (FRS-E and FRS-O) Qualification Model (QM) for environmental qualification and testing up to the qualification (Q) levels, the FRS Flight Model (FM) and FRS Flight Spare (FS) for testing up to the acceptance (A) levels for performance verification of the FRSs under relevant environment to meet LISA requirements. The contractor shall repair, refurbish, and modify all FRSs, after delivery, in the event the FRS models failed to meet performance. The Contractor shall also provide on-site technical support at NASA Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC) and/or European Space Agency (ESA) facilities on an as-needed basis.

The Government procured, tested, and qualified the FRS to Technology Readiness Level (TRL)6 under a previous development contract. The BOM, TRL6 FRS-O and FRS-E design and analysis, and test procedures and reports developed will be part of the data package available for the Contractor. The Contractor shall review the BOM used in the FRS design. The Contractor shall take responsibility in procuring, testing, and qualifying components that meet or exceed the requirements of the parts in the BOM for the FRS build.

The Contractor shall review and modify the FRS design as necessary, fabricate, assemble, test, verify per approved plan and deliver one (1) EM FRS-E, one (1) QM FRS, three (3) FM FRS, one (1) FS FRS, and one (1) FS Kitted FRS and provide post-delivery support for the integration and test program for the LISA mission. An Engineering Development Unit TRL6 FRS, has been created by the Government to demonstrate feasibility, and compliance with the LISA TRL6 demonstrator requirements. Design details, models, and analysis shall be provided to compare against requirements and tolerances for the LISA program. The final selection of material and design will be made by no later than the Preliminary Design Review (PDR). In addition, the Contractor shall assemble, test, and verify the performance of the Engineering Model (EM) FRS- E when tested with a Government provided EDU TRL6 FRS-O by PDR. The Contractor shall demonstrate the redundancy implementation by designing, building and testing a breadboard optical switch to integrate with the FRS-O and demonstrate switching to multiple lasers for locking and stabilization. The Contractor shall develop and demonstrate proficiencies on operating different Ground Support Equipment (GSE) to verify and validate the FRS performance. The Contractor shall assume that the Government will provide at least one (1) GSE laser suitable for testing and verifying the FRS performances and requirements.

For the FRS-E Field Programmable Gate Array (FPGA) design, development, and verification, the Contractor shall meet the following requirements:

• The Contractor shall design, develop, review and test all spacecraft (including

Subcontractor) 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.

• The Contractor shall develop the FPGA Development Plan (CDRL FW-1) for FPGA activities/processes for new or modified FPGAs.

• The Contractor shall provide for 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 an 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, prior to programming the flight parts (pre-burn review) for each new, modified or re-used FPGA design.

• The Contractor shall provide for at least one additional NASA independent peer review per revision of each modified FPGA. This review may be concurrent with testing of the flight candidate design, but sufficiently prior to programming the flight design to accommodate possible design revision and re-test, based on the review results. The Contractor may provide updated intermediate FPGA Design Data Packages for review as agreed with the government.

The Contractor shall provide all personnel, facilities, equipment, material, and services necessary to produce the EM, QM, flight and spare FRSs to meet LISA performance requirements. Prior to building the first flight unit, the Contractor shall demonstrate that all the processes are in place to build all FRSs to meet the LISA FRS requirements through the completion, environmental qualification, and performance verification of the QM FRS, and shall have this completed by the Critical Design Review (CDR). The Contractor shall verify and validate all FRS requirements by

CDR.

Notional schedules for the PDR and CDR shall be twelve (12) and twenty-four (24) months after the start of the contract.

The Contractor shall provide a plan for the qualification program of the flight FRS design, this plan shall include a test program for the engineering development unit to address any issues carried over from the technology development program and include the design and testing of the flight redundancy implementation.

The Contractor shall support Integration and Testing (I&T) of the FRSs at GSFC upon delivery.

This support shall include, but not limited to, FRS acceptance testing, integration of the FRS in the laser system, laser system testing, and life testing for full performance evaluation of the FRS.

Further, I&T of the FRSs to the scientific instrumentation will be conducted at the ESA LISA Spacecraft’s Prime Contractor facility, location to be determined. The Contractor shall support observatory level activities including, but not limited to, integration and test, verification and validation, and calibration conducted by the ESA LISA Spacecraft Prime at their facilities.

Additionally, the Contractor shall develop a plan for flight FRS production and provide a Life Cycle Cost (LCC) estimate. This plan should include all required facilities, personnel, materials, services, tests, and equipment to complete the EM, QM, FMs, and FS within the required delivery schedule. This plan shall also include a spares philosophy at the FRS component level, as required.

The Contractor shall review/or deliver drawings, specifications, reports and plans, optical, electrical, and mechanical models, manuals, and other specified data in accordance with the Contract Data Requirements List (CDRL) as outlined in Attachment (TBD).

The Contractor shall provide documentation and perform other tasks in accordance with the requirements of this SOW and the applicable documentation referenced herein.

This FRS SOW specifies the Contractor requirements for performing all development activities through launch and on-orbit verification, validation, and calibration. In the event of any differences between this document, the FRS SOW, and other contractual documents, including in the FRS Specification (FRSS, LISA-SPEC-XXXX), the FRS Contract Data Requirements List (FRS CDRL), and the LISA Mission Assurance Requirements (MAR), the FRS SOW will take precedence. The overall hierarchy is (1) FRS SOW, (2) FRSS, (3) FRS CDRL, and (4) LISA

MAR.

The work described in this SOW is not all of equal importance or weight. The term "shall" designate the most important weighting level; that is, mandatory. Any deviations from these contractually imposed mandatory items require the approval of the Contracting Officer. A lesser term, "should," designates attributes that the Government values, but which are subject to tradeoff decisions. Such attributes may render the deliverable item more valuable to the Government, but the absence of such attributes does not render the item unacceptable.

“shall” statement Must complete, meet, or exceed the task, requirement, or specification.

“will” statements Actions the Government must complete or deliver.

“should” statements Non-mandatory provision or goal subject to tradeoff decisions. No deliverable items and not subject to verification.

1.3 Related Documentation

The latest versions of all documents below should be used. LISA documents can be obtained from the LISA TDMS System.

Applicable Documents

The following documents are referenced within this document and are directly applicable or contain policies or other directive matters that are binding for the performance of the contract.

These documents establish detailed specifications, requirements, and interface information necessary for the performance of the contract. In the event of conflicting requirements between this SOW and the Applicable Documents, the Contractor shall immediately notify the GSFC Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR) that there is such a conflict and request direction from the Government as to how to proceed.

For traceability, the Contractor shall trace down only one level for each Applicable Document:

any applicable documents within the documents listed are considered as applying directly to the performance of the FRS contract. For example, the LISA MAR (LISA-RQMT-XXXX) lists NASA Procedural Requirements (NPR) 7150.2 as an applicable document. Therefore, NPR

7150.2 is an applicable document with respect to this SOW. However, the documents listed in Section P.4 of NPR 7150.2 are not considered Applicable Documents for the purposes of this

SOW.

Document Number Title LISA-LIST-XXXX FRS Contract Data Requirements List (CDRL) LISA-SMA-REQ-0010 LISA Mission Assurance Requirements (MAR) LISA-SOW-XXXX FRS Statement of Work (SOW) LISA-RQMT-XXXX FRS Requirement (FRSR)

Reference Documents

The following documents are referenced herein and amplify or clarify the information presented in this document. These documents are not binding on the content of this document.

Document Number Title

MIL-HDBK-217 Reliability Prediction of Electronic Equipment NASA-STD-5001B Structural Design and Test Factors of Safety for Spaceflight

Hardware NASA-STD-5020 Requirements for Threaded Fastening Systems in Spaceflight

Hardware NPD 7120.4 NASA Engineering and Program/Project Management Policy NPR 7120.5 NASA Space Flight Program and Project Management Requirements GPR 7120.3 Management of Principal Investigator Mode Missions GPR 7120.4 Risk Management GPR 7123.1 Systems Engineering GSFC-STD-1000G Rules for the Design, Development, Verification and Operation of

Flight Systems GSFC-STD-1001A Criteria for Flight and Flight Support System Lifecycle Review GSFC-STD-7000A General Environmental Verification Standard (GEVS) for GSFC

Flight Project Programs and Projects 540-PG-8700.2.1.C Design of Dollies, Stands, and Spacecraft Shipping Containers

LISA Laser Technology Readiness Assessment and Development Plan

LISA Laser Contamination Control Plan (CCP) LISA Laser Materials and Processes Implementation Plan (MPIP) LISA Laser System Interface Requirements Document (IRD)

2 REQUIREMENTS

2.0-A The Contractor shall design, develop, fabricate, modify, assemble, integrate, and test the hardware described in this SOW in compliance with the applicable documents listed in Section 1.3.1.

2.0-B For non-hardware support aspects of this SOW, the Contractor shall provide the following necessary to accomplish the described support:

• systems and discipline engineering

• expert personnel

• travel

• reports and documentation

• software or software changes

• ground support equipment

• operations

2.0-C The Contractor shall deliver to the Government one (1) Engineering Model (EM), one

(1) Qualification Model (QM), Three (3) Fight Models (FMs), one (1) Flight Spare (FS) and one (1) Flight Spare Kit that is fully verified and characterized to be compliant with the requirements of this contract.

2.0-D The Contractor shall seek advanced written authorization from GSFC in accordance with CDRL No.: SE-1 Title: Configuration Change Requests, Deviations, and Waivers for deviations from this SOW (including requirements contained in Applicable Documents of Section 1.3.1).

2.0-E The Contractor should utilize industry-standard practices and methodologies for design, fabrication, assembly, integration, and testing when appropriate and applicable with the intent of cost or schedule savings to the Government. In areas where the Contractor proposes to implement an industry-standard practice or methodology that deviates from this SOW, or the supporting applicable documents, the Contractor shall document the pragmatic savings and seek concurrence at the time of the contract award and only act upon when approved by the Government.

2.1 Management

2.1-A The Contractor shall manage all aspects of this contract effort to ensure that the contract requirements, including technical and programmatic, are met or exceeded. In further detail, this includes management of the administrative and technical direction, schedule control and reporting, financial control and reporting, Government property reporting and control, subcontract performance, configuration management and documentation, and other required reporting efforts.

2.1-B The Contractor shall coordinate, schedule, and document the activities of the pertinent engineering groups contributing to the SOW tasks.

2.1-C The Contractor shall be responsible for traceability and reporting of all its subcontractors’ cost, schedule, and technical performance.

2.1-D The Contractor shall analyze the FRS functional, performance, interface, mission assurance, and verification requirements as specified in the FRS Specification (LISA- SPEC-XXXX) and referenced documents, in the context of the above assumptions, and define subsystem requirements and design concepts to the degree required to proceed with design, build, test, and delivery of the EM, QM, flight and flight spare FRSs.

2.1-E The verification of requirements shall not invalidate previously verified requirements.

Project Management 2.1.1-A The Contractor shall maintain a project office to manage the technical activities and resources of the project.

2.1.1-B The Contractor shall appoint a Project Manager (PM) to direct and manage the FRS project. The Contractor’s Project Manager is responsible for the overall technical performance, resource management, and schedule management of the contractual effort and all subcontracts. The Contractor’s designated Project Manager will report to a level of company management appropriate to ensure prompt resolution of all problems. For costing purposes, the duration of Project Management should be until on-orbit checkout and commissioning.

2.1.1-C The Contractor shall prepare a Project Management Plan, and a Final Report in accordance with items CDRL No.: PM-12 Title: Project Management Plan, and CDRL No.: PM-5 Title: Final Report, respectively.

2.1.1-D The Contractor shall prepare a Work Breakdown Structure (WBS) Dictionary in accordance with CDRL No.: PM-14 Title: Work Breakdown Structure (WBS) Dictionary in which the Contractor shall define how the Contractor plans to organize, plan, and report on the work being conducted.

2.1.1-E The PM shall be the principal point of contact for GSFC in matters pertaining to the contract effort.

Government Insight 2.1.2-A The Contractor shall open to Government attendance all Contractor and subcontractor internal data, reviews, audits, meetings, fabrication, integration, tests, and other activities within the scope of the contract. For access and insight activity, “Government” includes Government personnel and Government Contractor personnel. The intended duration is nominally short and would tie to single events yet could span multiple events or an entire phase. The Government intends to provide an on-site representative from Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA) or other Government quality representatives. The Contractor shall provide office space and the necessary support for the Government on-site representatives, as required.

2.1.2-B The Contractor shall notify the Contracting Officer when applicable and the

Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR) of the activities in 2.1.2-A in sufficient time (nominally five working days) to permit meaningful Government participation. The size and attendance of those activities should be proportional to the notification time.

2.1.2-C The Contractor shall allow and enable the use of Non-Disclosure Agreements

(NDA) with Government contractors where appropriate.

2.1.2-D It is the understanding of the Government that a few essential internal documents and procedures are highly proprietary. In some cases, the Contractor can withhold the methodology in an individual step of the design, fabrication, assembly, or test in benign and low risk situations. The withholding of information of a methodology will be handled on a case-by-case basis, which defines the size of an individual step, and access may involve a subset of the individuals listed above as “Government.” The Contractor cannot withhold information related to the output or result of a methodology or procedure. The Contractor cannot withhold methodology or procedural information from a Failure Review Board (FRB).

2.1.2-E The Contractor shall report technical information in compliance with CDRL No.:

SE-2 Title: Contractor-Generated Internal Technical Information.

Reviews and Meetings The reviews listed in this section should not be considered a comprehensive set of reviews for the Contractor’s program. Additional reviews that the Contractor deems necessary to successfully execute the program may be conducted at the Contractor’s discretion.

2.1.3-A The Contractor shall notify the Government at least ten working days in advance of lower-level Contractor subsystem reviews and Contractor-initiated TEMs to allow the Government time to attend the review as part of its insight activities.

2.1.3.1 Major Reviews

All major Mission-level reviews will be convened, and review boards appointed and chaired by the Government.

2.1.3.1-A At all reviews, including FRS, Payload, and Mission-level, the Contractor shall support and demonstrate compliance with the review as stated in the FRS-CDRL.

The FRS-CDRL references the GSFC success criteria for reviews, Criteria for Project Flight Critical Milestone Reviews (GSFC-STD-1001), as applicable to spaceflight systems, with some tailoring as appropriate.

2.1.3.1-B The Contractor shall respond as required to action items assigned by the Government.

2.1.3.1-C The Contractor shall prepare and present their portion of these reviews, as appropriate, ensuring that content is complete and accurate.

2.1.3.1-D When the Contractor is hosting, the Contractor shall provide space, high-speed data connections to the Internet, and facility services for personnel with-in the scope of the review or meeting.

2.1.1.1.1 FRS Reviews

2.1.3.1.1-A The Contractor shall host, prepare, and present the following reviews and provide review packages in accordance with the CDRL and GSFC-STD- 1001A:

FRS - System Requirements Review (FRS-SRR) – CDRL No.: RE-1 Title:

FRS-System Requirements Review (FRS-SRR) Data Package FRS - Preliminary Design Review (FRS-PDR) - CDRL No.: RE-2 Title: FRS-

Preliminary Design Review (FRS-PDR) Data Package FRS - Critical Design Review (FRS-CDR) - CDRL No.: RE-3 Title: FRS-

Critical Design Review (FRS-CDR) Data Package FRS – Manufacturing Readiness Review (FRS-MRR) - (CDRL No.: REX-

Title: FRS-Manufacturing Readiness Review (FRS-MRR) Data Package)

FRS – Test Readiness Review (FRS-TRR) - CDRL No.: RE-X Title: FRS- Pre-Environmental Review (FRS-TRR) Data Package

FRS - Pre-Environmental Review (FRS-PER) - CDRL No.: RE-4 Title: FRS- Pre-Environmental Review (FRS-PER) Data Package

FRS - Pre-Shipment Review (FRS-PSR) - CDRL No.: RE-5 Title: FRS-Pre- Shipment Review (FRS-PSR) Data Package

2.1.3.1.1-B The Government will convene and appoint the review board for all major

FRS-level reviews.

2.1.3.1.1-C The Contractor shall invite the Government to all FRS reviews that are chaired by the Contractor.

2.1.3.1.1-D The Contractor shall assume that each FRS review requires three days to complete with roughly 35 people from the Government.

2.1.3.1.1-E The Contractor shall conduct one dry-run of all FRS Reviews with the

Government approximately four weeks in advance of the review to allow for sufficient feedback to the review.

2.1.3.1.1-F The Contractor shall be prepared to host and work with the Government project and review team an additional day following all reviews to discuss and address issues raised and actions assigned at the reviews.

2.1.1.1.2 Instrument Level Reviews

2.1.3.1.2-A The Contractor shall prepare and present in-person material at each of the following Mission Level reviews:

Instrument Preliminary Design Review (MPDR) Instrument Critical Design Review (MCDR)

2.1.3.1.2-B The Contractor can assume four (4) supporting Instrument Level Engineering

Peer Reviews per Instrument-Level Review.

2.1.3.1.2-C The Contractor shall prepare their portion of the above Instrument Level reviews in accordance with CDRL No.: RE-6 Title: Inputs to Instrument Level Reviews Data Package. The Government leads the Instrument Level reviews and presents the majority the material.

2.1.3.1.2-D The Contractor shall respond to action items as requested by the Government within 30 calendar days.

2.1.3.1.2-E The Contractor shall participate in dry runs of all Instrument-Level Reviews and supporting Peer Reviews with the Government approximately three weeks in advance of the review(s). The Contractor can assume one dry-run per Instrument-Level Review and one dry-run for supporting Peer Reviews. The Contractor can assume that the Instrument-level reviews will take four days and that dry-runs will take two days of Contractor support. The Contractor can assume all Instrument Level Reviews will take place at a GSFC site. The Contractor may support dry-runs in-person or by teleconference and electronic web interface for presentation materials, assuming that the Contractor has electronic services compatible with those of the Government. For estimating purposes, the Contractor should assume five people attending each Instrument Level review.

2.1.3.2 Engineering Peer Reviews

2.1.3.2-A The Contractor shall define and implement a set of robust and comprehensive Engineering Peer Reviews (EPRs) for the hardware and software subsystems of the FRS commensurate with the scope, complexity and acceptable risk of the product, the maturity of the FRS design, and the extent of and risk associated with any differences from the original assembly.

2.1.3.2-B The Contractor shall submit the Engineering Peer Review Plan in accordance with

CDRL No.: PM-6 Title: Engineering Peer Review Plan.

2.1.3.2-C The Contractor shall conduct the peer reviews in accordance to the plan and the

CDRL No.: RE-7 Title: Engineering Peer Reviews and Data Packages. The Contractor should assume this to be on order with the number of engineering disciplines supporting the FRS for each phase.

2.1.3.3 Other Reviews and Meetings

2.1.3.3-A In addition to the established meetings required in this section, the Contractor shall support routine informal meetings and telecons with the Government as necessary and outlined below.

2.1.1.1.3 Scheduled Weekly Teleconferences

2.1.3.3.1-A The Contractor shall participate in a weekly management telecon with the LISA Project Office to communicate programmatic and technical progress and plans of the overall contract effort. The Contractor and Government should share meeting minutes, including the action item log, and other documentation as required. The minimum Contractor attendance will consist of the Contractor Project Manager and Systems Manager, or the appropriate technical lead managers as required based on the agenda.

2.1.3.3.1-B The Contractor shall provide detailed status, description of issues, and schedule updates for each major element of the contract.

2.1.1.1.4 Monthly Project Status Reports and Reviews

2.1.3.3.2-A The Contractor shall support the Monthly Project Status Reviews (MPSRs), including a presentation package, in accordance with CDRL-PM-1: FRS Monthly Project Status Reviews (MPSR) - Monthly Technical Exchange Meetings (MTEM) and CDRL-PM-2: LISA Monthly Project Status Review

(MPSR).

2.1.3.3.2-B The Government will conduct the MPSR at the Government Project Office, and it can be supported remotely by the Contractor.

2.1.1.1.5 Technical Exchange Meetings and Working Groups

2.1.3.3.3-A The Contractor shall host and participate in an FRS Monthly Technical

Exchange Meetings (MTEM) to discuss technical, programmatic, or other FRS work. The MTEM is nominally a two-day face-to-face meeting with the Government FRS Management Team and other project personnel as needed at the Contractor’s facility and/or the Government facility.

2.1.3.3.3-B The Contractor shall coordinate with the FRS Management Team to set the agenda.

2.1.3.3.3-C The Contractor shall support the MTEM, including a presentation package, in accordance with CDRL-PM-1: FRS Monthly Project Status Reviews (MPSR)

- Monthly Technical Exchange Meetings (MTEM).

2.1.3.3.3-D The Contractor shall participate in Government-led working groups. Planned

Government-led working groups requiring FRS Contractor participation include, but are not limited to, a (1) Calibration and Characterization group,

(2) a systems engineering group, (3) an FRS-to-instruments interface group,

(4) an FRS-to-Spacecraft interface group, (5) an Observatory Integration and Test (I&T) group, (6) a mission operations group, (7) launch and early orbit planning group, (8) integrated mission timeline group, (9) mission readiness test group, (10) simulation/rehearsal group, (11) a safety working group, (12) a reliability working group, and various mission assurance working groups as specified in the MAR. The level of activities of each group would follow the project life cycle with-in their area of the project.

2.1.1.1.6 Status and Planning Meetings

2.1.3.3.4-A The Contractor shall notify and allow the Government access to Contractor status and planning meetings, including daily stand-ups and tag-ups.

Access to Controlled Facilities

2.1.4-A The Contractor shall obtain all required access authorizations and submit any paperwork required for the Contractor to access Government controlled facilities, such as the Mission Operation Center (MOC), and other facilities, which may require the Contractor to obtain necessary NDAs.

2.1.4-B The Contractor shall allow access by the Government, or its representatives, to all

Contractor facilities used by FRS, subject to and in accordance with appropriate security controls. All NASA personnel will be U.S. persons with the understanding that certain facilities are limited to U.S. citizens only.

Risk Management

2.1.5-A The Contractor shall implement a risk management program in support of the FRS, as per NASA applicable documents.

2.1.5-B As part of the risk management program, the Contractor shall prepare and submit a plan in accordance with CDRL No.: PM-13 Title: Risk Management Plan, for comparison and inclusion in the LISA Risk Management Plan.

2.1.5-C The Contractor shall summarize and present the top FRS risks in accordance with

CDRL No.: PM-1 Title: FRS Monthly Project Status Reviews (MPSR) - Monthly Technical Exchange Meetings (MTEM) and Presentation Materials, that can be included as part of the Monthly Status Review Presentation.

Resource Management

2.1.6-A The Contractor shall establish, implement, and maintain a comprehensive resource management system for planning, authorizing, and controlling the FRS resources effort for each task and for providing timely and adequate visibility into manpower and schedule performance.

2.1.6-B The Contractor shall adhere to the Contractor’s standards for the resource management system in accordance with CDRL NO.: PM-9 Title: Integrated Program Management Report (IPMR).

2.1.6-C The Contractor shall implement an Earned Value Measurement System (EVMS).

2.1.6-D The Contractor shall provide an Earned Value System Management Plan in accordance with CDRL No.: PM-7 Title: Earned Value Management System (EVMS) Plan, CDRL No.: PM-8 Title: Financial Reports, and CDRL NO.: PM-9 Title: Integrated Program Management Report (IPMR). The EVMS may be implemented in accordance with the Contractor’s standard plans and policies, provided it includes use of the Monthly Contractor Financial Management Report NASA Form (NF533).

2.1.6-E The Contractor shall provide Financial Reports and Integrated Program

Management Reports (IPMRs) to the Government in accordance with the CDRL No.: PM-1: Title: FRS Monthly Project Status Reviews (MPSR) - Monthly Technical Exchange Meetings (MTEM), and the Contractor’s standard policies and procedures.

2.1.6-F The Contractor shall conduct an Integrated Baseline Review (IBR) at the

Contractor facility and present data in accordance with CDRL No.: RE-9 Title:

FRS Integrated Baseline Review. The IBR occurs within the first 180 days after contract award and as needed after the significant exercise of contract options or 60 calendar days after a substantive funding or work scope realignment.

2.1.6-G The Contractor shall obtain approval from the Government prior to changing the

EVMS baseline and provide all approved Budget Change Requests (BCRs) and Baseline Control Logs upon request from the GSFC project office.

2.1.6-H The Contractor shall provide technical data to support the Government’s development and updating of the Project Cost Analysis Data Requirement (CADRe) in accordance with CDRL NO.: PM-4 Title: CADRe Data.

2.1.6-I The Contractor shall establish, implement, and maintain an integrated scheduling system consistent with their corporate procedures and documented in a schedule management plan. This plan shall explain the schedule reserve strategy and burn down approach.

2.1.6-J The Contractor shall provide and maintain an IMS in accordance with CDRL No.:

PM-3 Title: Integrated Master Schedule (IMS), and CDRL NO.: PM-9 Title:

Integrated Program Management Report (IPMR).

2.1.6-K The Contractor shall identify critical procurements of long lead materials and items that must be procured in order to support the FRS schedule.

Configuration Management 2.1.7-A The Contractor shall perform configuration management (CM) in support of the

FRS project.

2.1.7-B The Contractor shall develop and deliver the Hardware and Software Configuration

Management Plan in accordance with CDRL No.: PM-11 Title: Hardware and Software Configuration Management Plan.

2.1.7-C The Contractor shall notify the Government of Configuration Control Board (CCB) meetings and allow Government participation at all CCB meetings.

2.1.7-D The Contractor shall maintain configuration of flight hardware and software throughout all phases of the Contract.

2.1.7-E The Contractor shall perform and document configuration verification as parts and assemblies are incorporated into higher-level assemblies and at major Project milestones.

2.1.7-F The CM system shall have a change classification and impact assessment process that results in Class I and Class II Configuration Change Requests (CCRs) being forwarded to the LISA Project in accordance with CDRL No.: SE-1 Title:

Configuration Change Requests, Deviations, and Waivers and CDRL No.: SE-8 Title: Configuration Item (CI) Identification List and Computer Software Configuration Items (CSCI).

2.1.7-G For any flight item that is found to be non-compliant with the requirements of the contract, and is not reworked to be compliant, or is not replaced with a compliant item, the Contractor shall disposition as described in the MAR.

2.1.7-H The Contractor shall prepare and provide, as a minimum, the following documents under configuration control:

1. CCB status, reported at the MPSR in accordance with CDRL No.: PM-11 Title:

Hardware and Software Configuration Management Plan.

2. Engineering Drawings in accordance with CDRL No.: SE-5 Title: Engineering

Drawings.

3. The Configuration Item Identification List (CIIL) and the Computer Software

Configuration Items (CSCIs) in accordance with CDRL No.: PM-11 Title:

Hardware and Software Configuration Management Plan. For configuration control, computer software includes: files that define firmware (i.e. VHDL), Ground Support Equipment (GSE) software, analysis software or scripts used in hardware verification, and similarly related software.

2.1.7-I The Contractor shall quantify substantive potential cost impacts of requirements changes at the FRS level, and as appropriate, qualify substantive potential cost impacts at the Payload level. The Contractor is encouraged to propose alternative approaches to defining the performance requirements or other requirements modifications at the FRS-IBR or other MTEM meetings preceding FRS- SRR/SDR, CCRs, or sooner to allow the Government time to analyze the proposed requirement modifications and provide feedback at the review.

Pedigree and Inheritance The Government recognizes that the FRS in large part includes existing design, documentation, material, and hardware from an earlier development. The pedigree process provides the project with detailed understanding of the history and state of the existing material and hardware. The inheritance is the process of incorporating the existing hardware into the LISA Mission, and is encapsulated in the standard development and project life-cycle review process. The Government recognizes the state of the hardware and GSE being supplied to the Contractor and deems it applicable for use on LISA, based on agreed upon conditions with the Contractor. These agreements are made during the FRS Pedigree and Inheritance Review process for the inherited hardware.

2.1.8-A The Contractor shall work with the Government’s Project FRS-Pedigree Review Board (PFRS-PRB), and their recommendations and liens for the development of FRS. Remediation by the Contractor of the Government Furnished Equipment (GFE) supplied inherited hardware to the requirements of this contract is considered in-scope to this contract.

2.1.8-B The Contractor shall report on items, including inherited hardware, that are expected to experience degraded performance within 120 months of on-orbit operation.

2.1.8-C The Contractor shall qualify, and calibrate, if necessary, all inherited GSE and/or

System Test Equipment (STE) to support the FRS.

2.1.8-D If re-qualification of inherited GSE is not possible, the Contractor shall inform the

Government to jointly determine an alternative solution.

2.1.8-E The Contractor shall inform the Government when the inherited hardware requires remediation for the LISA project as a method to mitigate cost and schedule impacts.

Lessons Learned Reporting

2.1.9-A The Contractor shall report lessons learned throughout the project life-cycle.

2.1.9-B The Contractor shall report lessons learned at each of the reviews defined in

Section 2.1.3 and consistent with GSFC-STD-1001A or an equivalent system approved by the Government.

2.1.9-C The Contractor shall participate in a 1-hour lessons learned meeting with the

Government within 1 month after each of the following milestone reviews: FRS- CDR, FRS-PER, and FRS-PSR. The purpose of the meetings is to discuss and capture lessons learned since the last meeting, lesson context and driving events/decisions, and recommendations. The Government will facilitate these lessons learned meetings and the Government will compile an interim lessons learned report following each meeting.

2.1.9-D The Contractor shall review and provide comments/edits to the Government-generated lessons learned interim reports.

2.2 SYSTEMS ENGINEERING

2.2-A The Contractor shall perform systems engineering to support all FRS-related activities during all stages of development.

2.2-A.1 For costing purposes, the Contractor shall consider the duration of Systems

Engineering to be until on-orbit checkout and commissioning, with reduced support after the delivery and acceptance to GSFC.

2.2-B The Systems Engineering effort shall include, but is not limited to, analysis of technical requirements, functional and performance allocation of derived requirements, traceability, definition and maintenance of all interfaces, verification of all defined, allocated, and derived requirements, systems analyses, risk management support, tradeoff analyses and trade studies, hold peer reviews, and management of systems budgets.

2.2-C This effort shall include but not be limited to the following specific activities:

1. Providing technical direction and oversight throughout all phases of the program.

2. Leading and supporting all peer reviews, project milestones, gateway and launch reviews, and program status reviews as defined in Section 2.1.3.

3. Performing all necessary FRS-level trades and risk assessments necessary to ensure the success of any design or manufacturing changes as a result of parts obsolescence, parts or materials aging, Government Industry Data Exchange Program (GIDEP) or other known parts reliability issues, or any other changes made to the original FRS design.

4. Performing all necessary coordination and analyses required to interface the FRS to a simulated S/C LISA laser mounting platform (LMP) subject to the Interface Control Document (ICD) documents above, as described in the CDRL No.: SE-11 Title: Inputs to the Interface Control Document(s).

5. Preparing documentation and providing necessary support for reviews defined in Section 2.1.3.

6. Performing systems engineering and analysis prior to FRS delivery and in support of FRS and instrument tests at the Observatory level, the launch site, and Observatory commissioning.

7. Supporting system level technical exchange meetings as defined in Section 2.1.3.1.5, including technical…