Attachment 9 - RMWT LEO GEPs DD2794 CSDR Plan.xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 105 KB Posted
- Solicitation number
- FA240126R0003
- Issued by
-
Department of the Air Force
About this file
This file is a Compliance and Security Data Requirements (CSDR) Plan in spreadsheet format for the Resilient Missile Warning Tracking (RMWT) Low Earth Orbit (LEO) Ground Entry Points (GEPs) contract. The CSDR Plan outlines the compliance, security, and data management requirements that contractors must follow throughout the contract performance period. It serves as a planning document that establishes the framework for how the contractor will manage security protocols, data handling procedures, compliance verification activities, and reporting mechanisms to ensure adherence to Department of the Air Force and Space Development Agency standards for this space-based missile warning system infrastructure project.
The document functions as a reference guide and compliance checklist for contractors responding to solicitation FA240126R0003, providing detailed requirements across multiple compliance domains including security clearances, facility certifications, information technology security controls, data protection measures, and contractor responsibility standards. This CSDR Plan is a mandatory attachment to the RFP package and must be understood and incorporated into the contractor's proposal approach and performance plan. The specific compliance requirements detailed in this spreadsheet directly impact how contractors will structure their operations, staffing, facilities, and systems to support the GEP site operations at multiple globally dispersed locations.
View the file
Other files
Show all 14
On GovTribe
Work with this file
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
DD Form 2794, Pg 1 (METADATA)
| FA240126R0003 ATTACHMENT 8 | |
| COST AND SOFTWARE DATA REPORTING PLAN | OMB No. 0704-0671 |
| The public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 57 hours per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing the burden, to Department of Defense, Executive Services Directorate (0704-0671). Respondents should be aware that notwithstanding any other provision of law, no person shall be subject to any penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information if it does not display a currently valid OMB control number. |
PLEASE DO NOT RETURN YOUR COMPLETED FORM TO THE ABOVE ORGANIZATION.
| 1a. PROGRAM NAME | |
| SDA RMWT LEO GEPs | |
| 1b. PHASE/MILESTONE (check all that apply) | |
| Pre-A | |
| A | |
| X | B |
| C-LRIP | |
| C-FRP | |
| O&S | |
| 1c. PRIME MISSION PRODUCT | |
| Resilient Missile Warning Tracking (RMWT) Low Earth Orbit (LEO) Ground Entry Points (GEPs) | |
| 1d. ACQUISITION CATEGORY (ACAT) | |
| Pre-ACAT | |
| ACAT I (MDAP) | |
| ACAT IA (MAIS) | |
| ACAT II | |
| ACAT III | |
| X | Other |
| 2. COMMODITY TYPE | |
| Space System | |
| 3. PLAN ITERATION TYPE | |
| X | INITIAL |
| REVISION | |
| 4. CURRENT SUBMISSION DATE (YYYYMMDD) | |
| 20260410 | |
| 5. LAST APPROVED PLAN DATE (YYYYMMDD) |
| 6a. GOVERNMENT PLAN POINT OF CONTACT (POC) NAME (Last, First, M.) |
| Thomas, Mitchel Maj. |
| 6b. ADDRESS (Include ZIP Code) |
| 6c. TELEPHONE NUMBER (Include Area Code) | |
| 571-372-4116 | |
| 6d. E-MAIL ADDRESS | |
| mitchell.r.thomas6.mil@mail.mil | |
| 7. PLAN TYPE | |
| GOVERNMENT | |
| X | CONTRACT (PRIME) |
| CONTRACT (SUB) | |
| 8. PLAN GOVERNMENT PREPARING ORGANIZATION | |
| Space Development Agency | |
| 9a. CONTRACTOR NAME/ADDRESS | |
| i. REPORTING ORGANIZATION NAME | |
| TBD | |
| ii. DIVISION NAME | |
| TBD | |
| iii. LOCATION | |
| TBD | |
| iv. CONTRACTOR BUSINESS DATA REPORT (CBDR 1921-3) REQUIREMENT: | |
| X | CBDR REQUIRED FOR THIS ORGANIZATION |
| 9b. CONTRACT NUMBER (List all that apply, separated by commas) | |
| TBD (AF-26-D-C1) | |
| 9c. APPROPRIATION (check all that apply) | |
| X | RDT&E |
| PROCUREMENT | |
| O&M | |
| FMS | |
| WCF | |
| OTHER | |
| 10a. APPROVED PLAN NUMBER | |
| AF-26-D-C1 | |
| 10b. APPROVED PLAN REVISION NUMBER |
| 10c. APPROVED PLAN REQUIREMENTS | |
| X | AT COMPLETION COSTS FOR STANDARD FUNCTIONAL CATEGORIES (FlexFile or Legacy) |
| X | AT COMPLETION COSTS FOR RECURRING/NONRECURRING (FlexFile only) |
| X | TECHNICAL DATA REQUIRED |
| 10d. COST REPORT TYPE | |
| X | FLEXFILE |
| LEGACY DD 1921 SERIES |
DD FORM 2794 (PAGE 1), METADATA, MAY 2024 PREVIOUS EDITION IS OBSOLETE
mailto:joseph.w.mcnamee2.civ@mail.milmailto:mitchell.r.thomas6.mil@mail.mil DD Form 2794, Pg 2 (REPORTING)
| COST AND SOFTWARE DATA REPORTING PLAN | COST, SOFTWARE, & TECHNICAL DATA REPORTING/EARNED VALUE MANAGEMENT CO-PLAN | |||||
| 11. WORK BREAKDOWN STRUCTURE (WBS) | 12. COST | 13. TECHNICAL DATA | ||||
| a. WBS | ||||||
| CODE | b. WBS | |||||
| LEVEL | c. WBS ELEMENT NAME | a. ACTUALS TO | ||||
| DATE (ATD) | b. LEGACY | |||||
| 1921-1 | c. LEGACY | |||||
| 1921-2 | d. LEGACY | |||||
| 1921-5 | e. EAC/FAC | |||||
| (See item 10d) | a. QUANTITY | b. SRDR | ||||
| FORMATS | c. |
MAINT. &
REPAIR
PARTS
| i. QUANTITY | ||
| DATA | ii. GFE |
QUANTITY
| 1.0 | 1 | RMWT LEO GEPs | X | X | |
| 1.1 | 2 | GEP SEIT/PM | X | X | |
| 1.1.1 | 3 | GEP Systems Engineering | X | X | |
| 1.1.2 | 3 | GEP Assembly, Integration and Test | X | X | |
| 1.1.3 | 3 | GEP Program Management | X | X | |
| 1.2 | 2 | Dual Ka/S-Band Antenna | X | X | |
| 1.2.1 | 3 | Antenna SEPM | X | X | |
| 1.2.2 | 3 | Antenna Assembly, Integration and Test | X | X | |
| 1.2.3 | 3 | Antenna Support Equipment | X | X | X |
| 1.2.4 | 3 | (Program) Change Management | X | X | X |
| 1.2.5 | 3 | Supply Chain Management | X | X | X |
| 1.2.6 | 3 | Program Managers | X | X | X |
| 1.2.4 | 3 | Pedestal | X | X | X |
| 1.2.5 | 3 | Radome | X | X | X |
| 1.2.6 | 3 | Aperture | X | X | X |
| 1.2.7 | 3 | Feed | X | X | X |
| 1.2.8 | 3 | Waveguide/Coax/Cabling | X | X | X |
| 1.3 | 2 | Optical Communication Assembly (OGT) | X | X | |
| 1.3.1 | 3 | OGT SEPM | X | X | |
| 1.3.2 | 3 | OGT Assembly, Integration and Test | X | X | |
| 1.3.3 | 3 | OGT Support Equipment | X | X | X |
| 1.3.4 | 3 | Structure/Outerbarrel/Cover | X | X | X |
| 1.3.5 | 3 | Mirrors/Optics | X | X | X |
| 1.3.6 | 3 | Aft Optics and Bench | X | X | X |
| 1.3.7 | 3 | Alignment Sensors/Calibration | X | X | X |
| 1.4 | 2 | Radio Frequency (RF) Electronics Band | X | X | |
| 1.4.1 | 3 | RF Electronics SEPM | X | X | |
| 1.4.2 | 3 | RF Electronics Assembly, Integration and Test | X | X | |
| 1.4.3 | 3 | RF Electronics Support Equipment | X | X | X |
| 1.4.4 | 3 | RF Electronics | X | X | X |
| 1.4.5 | 3 | Ka-band Modem | X | X | X |
| 1.4.6 | 3 | S-band Modem | X | X | X |
| 1.4.7 | 3 | Optical Modem | X | X | X |
| 1.5 | 2 | Timing | X | X | |
| 1.5.1 | 3 | Timing Subsystem SEPM | X | X | |
| 1.5.2 | 3 | Timing Subsystem Assembly, Integration and Test | X | X | |
| 1.5.3 | 3 | Timing Subsystem Support Equipment | X | X | X |
| 1.5.4 | 3 | Receiver | X | X | X |
| 1.5.5 | 3 | GPS Antenna | X | X | X |
| 1.5.6 | 3 | Frequency and Timing Generator | X | X | X |
| 1.5.7 | 3 | Amplifier and Distribution | X | X | X |
| 1.6 | 2 | Baseband Network | X | X | |
| 1.6.1 | 3 | Baseband Network SEPM | X | X | |
| 1.6.2 | 3 | Baseband Network Equipment Assembly, Integration and Test | X | X | |
| 1.6.3 | 3 | Baseband Network Support Equipment | X | X | X |
| 1.6.4 | 3 | Baseband Network Equipment | X | X | X |
| 1.7 | 2 | Monitor and Control Hardware | X | X | |
| 1.7.1 | 3 | Monitor and Control Hardware SEPM | X | X | |
| 1.7.2 | 3 | Monitor and Control Hardware Assembly, Integration and Test | X | X | |
| 1.7.3 | 3 | Monitor and Control Hardware Support Equipment | X | X | X |
| 1.7.4 | 3 | Monitor and Control Equipment | X | X | X |
| 1.8 | 2 | GEP Software | X | X | |
| 1.8.1 | 3 | GEP Software SEPM | X | X | |
| 1.8.2 | 3 | GEP Software Assembly, Integration and Test | X | X | |
| 1.8.3 | 3 | GEP Software Support Equipment | X | X | X |
| 1.8.4 | 3 | Signal and Data Processing Software | X | X | |
| 1.8.5 | 3 | Monitor and Control Software | X | X | |
| 1.8.6 | 3 | Network Software | X | X | |
| 1.8.7 | 3 | Other GEP Software 1…n | X | X | |
| 1.9 | 2 | GEP Site Preparation | X | ||
| 1.9.1 | 3 | GEP Site Preparation SEPM | X | X | |
| 1.9.2 | 3 | GEP Site Preparation Support Equipment | X | X | X |
| 1.9.3 | 3 | GEP Site Graded Land and Trenching | X | X | |
| 1.9.4 | 3 | GEP Site Roads | X | X | |
| 1.9.5 | 3 | GEP Site Antenna and Utility Pads | X | X | X |
| 1.9.6 | 3 | GEP Site Retaining Walls/Fencing | X | X | X |
| 1.9.7 | 3 | GEP Site Utilities | X | X | |
| 1.9.8 | 3 | GEP Site Survey | X | X | |
| 1.10 | 2 | GEP Communications Shelter | X | ||
| 1.10.1 | 3 | GEP Communications Shelter SEPM | X | X | |
| 1.10.2 | 3 | GEP Communications Shelter Assembly, Integration and Test | X | X | |
| 1.10.3 | 3 | GEP Communications Shelter Support Equipment | X | X | X |
| 1.10.4 | 3 | GEP Communications Shelter Foundation and Sub Structure | X | X | |
| 1.10.5 | 3 | GEP Communications Shelter Superstructure and Finishing | X | X | |
| 1.11 | 2 | Communications Shelter Fit Out | X | ||
| 1.11.1 | 3 | Comm Shelter Fit Out SEPM | X | X | |
| 1.11.2 | 3 | Comm Shelter Fit Out Assembly, Integration and Test | X | X | |
| 1.11.3 | 3 | Comm Shelter Fit Out Support Equipment | X | X | X |
| 1.11.4 | 3 | Comm Shelter Heating Venting and Air Conditioning (HVAC) | X | X | X |
| 1.11.5 | 3 | Comm Shelter Power Conditioning/UPS | X | X | X |
| 1.11.6 | 3 | Comm Shelter Network Wiring/Cable Trays | X | X | X |
| 1.11.7 | 3 | Comm Shelter Back-up Generator | X | X | X |
| 1.11.8 | 3 | Comm Shelter Computer Flooring | X | X | X |
| 1.11.9 | 3 | Comm Shelter Fire Protection | X | X | X |
| 1.11.10 | 3 | Comm Shelter Security System | X | X | X |
| 1.11.11 | 3 | DISA and Ground System Contractor Comm Shelter Fit-out Support | X | X | X |
| 1.12 | 2 | GEP System Test and Evaluaton | X | ||
| 1.12.1 | 3 | GEP Developmental Test and Evaluation (Site Sell Of (SSO), Network Integration (NI), GEP Site Controller (GSC), Site Acceptance Test (SAT), SysOps) | X | X | |
| 1.12.2 | 3 | S-band and Ka-band Compatibility Test (SKCT) Support | X | X | |
| 1.12.3 | 3 | Optical Ground Terminal (OGT) Interoperability Test (OIT) Support | X | X | |
| 1.12.4 | 3 | End-to-end (E2E) with FlatSat Test Support | X | X | |
| 1.13 | 2 | Training | X | X | |
| 1.14 | 2 | Peculiar Support Equipment | X | X | |
| 1.14.1 | 3 | S-Band and Ka-Band Compatibility Test (SKCT)/End-to-end (E2E) Ground Support Equipment (GSE) | X | X | X |
| 1.14.2 | 3 | OIT Appproved Development Unit (ADU) | X | X | X |
| 1.15 | 2 | Contractor Logistics Support (CLS) | X | ||
| 1.15.1 | 3 | GEP Maintenance and Sustainment | X | X | |
| 1.16 | 2 | Industrial Facilities | X | X | |
| 1.17 | 2 | Initial Spares and Repair Parts | X | X | X |
| 1.18 | 2 | Packaging, Handling, Storage, and Transportation (PHS&T) | X | X |
Subtotal Cost
| Reporting Contractor G&A |
| Reporting Contractor Undistributed Budget |
| Reporting Contractor Management Reserve |
| Reporting Contractor FCCM |
| Total Cost |
Reporting Contractor Profit/Loss or Fee
| Total Price | |
| DD FORM 2794 (PAGE 2), REPORTING, MAY 2024 |
DD Form 2794, Pg 3 (EVENTS)
| COST AND SOFTWARE DATA REPORTING PLAN | |||||||
| 14. CSDR SUBMISSION EVENTS | |||||||
| a. | |||||||
| EVENT ID | b. | ||||||
| DATA REPORT(S) | c. | ||||||
| SUBMISSION EVENT NAME | d. | ||||||
| REPORT CYCLE | e. AS OF DATE | f. DUE DATE | |||||
| (YYYYMMDD) | (YYYYMMDD) | ||||||
| 1 | Cost and Hour Report (FlexFile), Quantity Data Report | Initial Cost Report (30 Days after Contract Award) | Initial | 20260501 | 20260701 | ||
| 2 | Technical Data Report | Initial Technical Data Report (30 Days after Contract Award) | Initial | 20260501 | 20260701 | ||
| 3 | Cost and Hour Report (FlexFile), Quantity Data Report | Annual Report #1 | Interim | 20270501 | 20270701 | ||
| 4 | Technical Data Report | Annual Technical Report #1 | Interim | 20270501 | 20270701 | ||
| 5 | Cost and Hour Report (FlexFile), Quantity Data Report | Annual Report #2 | Interim | 20280501 | 20280701 | ||
| 6 | Technical Data Report | Annual Technical Report #2 | Interim | 20280501 | 20280701 | ||
| 7 | Cost and Hour Report (FlexFile), Quantity Data Report | Annual Report #3 | Interim | 20290501 | 20290701 | ||
| 8 | Technical Data Report | Annual Technical Report #3 | Interim | 20290501 | 20290701 | ||
| 9 | Cost and Hour Report (FlexFile), Quantity Data Report | Annual Report #4 | Interim | 20300501 | 20300701 | ||
| 10 | Technical Data Report | Annual Technical Report #4 | Interim | 20300501 | 20300701 | ||
| 11 | Cost and Hour Report (FlexFile), Quantity Data Report | Final Report | Final | 20310501 | 20310701 | ||
| 12 | Technical Data Report | Final Technical Report | Final | 20310501 | 20310701 | ||
| DD FORM 2794 (PAGE 3), SUBMISSION EVENTS, MAY 2024 | PREVIOUS EDITION IS OBSOLETE |
DD Form 2794, Pg 4 (REMARKS)
| COST AND SOFTWARE DATA REPORTING PLAN |
| 15. REMARKS |
A. In addition to the direction provided in the associated CSDR Data Item Descriptions (DIDs) and the CSDR Manual (DoDM 5000.04), the following instructions, requirements, and considerations found on this page/worksheet shall be utilized when collecting data and preparing CSDR submissions. This CSDR Contract plan is intended to capture costs associated with the contract number(s) listed in block 9.b, irrespective of contract type (e.g., firm-fixed price, cost-plus fixed fee) or CLIN structure, including Over and Above, Advance Procurement, Long Lead Materials, Multiyear Procurement, Inter-Division or Inter-Company Work Orders (IWOs), Foreign Military Sales (FMS), Warranty, etc.
B. CSDR PLAN REMARKS & PREPARATION INSTRUCTIONS
1. Costs reported against this CSDR plan shall be cumulative in nature (i.e., each submission shall report any and all costs incurred on and prior to the submission's "AS OF DATE" (block 14.e)).
i. WBS Element Names (block 11.c) Ending with "1...n (Contractor Shall Specify)": The contractor shall extend and specify (i.e., include additional WBS elements determined by the contractor) in order to provide additional insight into the contractor's technical approach or design. The additional WBS elements shall be developed in accordance with the WBS guidelines included in MIL-STD-881F (or latest version).
ii. The contractor may extend any WBS element in accordance with guidelines included in MIL-STD-881F (or latest version). Any changes to WBS, Order/Lot, End Item, and/or Period of Performance must be reported to the government prior to submission or immediately, with revised CSDR Plan, must be approved by the CSDR Plan approval authority.
C. SUBMISSION EVENTS & DATES
1. Deliverable Preparation Instructions by AS OF and DUE Dates: All CSDR deliverable "AS OF DATE[S]" and "DUE DATE[S]" listed in blocks 14.e and 14.f are identified for planning purposes only. Submission dates are subject to change and are determined in accordance with the event drivers as identified below:
i. All "DUE DATE" requirements are equal to the "AS OF DATE" plus 60 calendar days. If the calculated "DUE DATE" does not fall on a regular business day, the "DUE DATE" will be the next regular business day on the contractor's accounting calendar.
ii. "Final" Submission Events must meet both of the following two conditions:
Condition 1: The final end item(s) has been delivered and accepted by the government (e.g., as evidenced by a completed DD-250) or higher tier contractor in the case of a subcontractor, and Condition 2: 95% or more of all ATD costs associated with the Subtotal, G&A and FCCOM have been incurred relative to all costs the reporting entity expects to incur for each and every Order/Lot (defined in Item 4 of Data Group B) associated with the contract Subtotal, G&A, FCCOM and UB.
iii. If the Contract period of performance is extended by more than six months, or if the scope of work is modified to include work not otherwise covered by the CSDR Plan, the government may modify the CSDR Plan to require additional submission events and add additional WBS elements in order to ensure the accurate and complete collection of cost data associated with the modified contract.
D. COST & HOUR REPORT (FLEXFILE)
1. The Reporting Entity is required to provide unit or sublot (specify) reporting for any given Order/Lot and End Item as outlined in block 18 of the DD Form 2794.
2. The checkmarks for EAC/FAC in column 12e at the WBS level shall be reported as "Forecast at Completion" (FAC). The Forecast At Completion (FAC) required here is not subject to the standards established in ANSI/EIA-748 guideline #27 (Estimate at Complete); therefore, the FAC does not need to be, but may be, derived from Industry Earned Value Management (EVM) processes.
3. WBS Definitions & Remarks (Data Group C) must match the technical content, cost content, and work content of each end item (see Block 17) for all WBS elements for each Cost and Hour (FlexFile) submission. The WBS Definitions & Remarks shall contain a disclosure statement detailing any differences between the CSDR reporting methodology and the reporting entity's Cost Accounting Standards. WBS Definitions & Remarks shall include a section detailing how parts are procured under this contract and any limitations of the parts procurement cost data or allocation of cost data for the WBS element.
4. The reporting entity must maintain and update WBS Definitions & Remarks throughout the life of the contract, IAW DI-FNCL-82162, if changes to the WBS occur, the reporting entity shall annotate and track changes by adding the "As of Date" of the submitted FlexFile report and indicate the changes to the WBS Definitions.
5. Order/Lot: Block 16 Orders/Lots is meant to capture the discrete Delivery Orders/Task Orders exercised on the contract. If a Delivery Order/Task Order is exercised on the contract and the CSDR plan has not been updated, it is the Reporting Entity's responsibility to still submit the dollars and hours in the FlexFile tagged to the appropriate Delivery Orders/Task Orders. The CSDR plan will be revised accordingly to include all exercised Delivery Orders/Task Orders.
6. End Items: Block 17 of this CSDR Plan is meant to capture the discrete hardware end items that are DD-250'ed, ordered, procured, or exercised (as applicable) on the contract. If an End Item is DD-250'ed, ordered, procured, or exercised (as applicable) on the contract but is not listed in block 17, the contractor shall submit the dollars and hours in the Cost and Hour Report (FlexFile) and the quantity information in the Quantity Report tagged using the name of the End Item utilized on the contract. The CSDR Plan will be updated to include the appropriate End Item name in block 17, after report submission, if required.
i. The "Common" end item tag shall be used to report costs and hours which are not incurred or directly attributable to an individual end item. For example, overarching program management costs and hours that are required, independent of the type or quantity of end items on contract would be tagged against the "Common" end item. Common hardware (i.e., identical/homogeneous part numbers) procured and integrated into multiple end items shall utilize the end item tag for the prime product they were integrated onto and shall not be tagged with the "Common" end item.
E. TECHNICAL DATA REPORT
1. Include only UNCLASSIFIED/CUI information in Technical Data Report deliverables submitted to CADE. Notify the Government if any values associated with the Technical Parameter Requirements are classified.
F. RESOURCE DISTRIBUTION TABLE (RDT)
1. Submissions of the Resource Distribution Table (RDT) are required under the following conditions:
i. An RDT shall be delivered no later than seven calendar days before the "CSDR Readiness Review". Prepare this submission of the RDT in accordance with the RDT Instructions on the CADE website at FAC/EAC value.This copy of the RDT will be used during the "CSDR Readiness Review" in order to identify which subcontractors will be required to provide CSDR reporting via electronic submission of deliverables directly to CADE and which subcontractors may qualify for a CSDR direct reporting subcontractor waiver.
ii. The contractor must notify the government program office immediately of the contractor identifying that a subcontractor who, at the time of initial subcontractor award, was not anticipated to qualify for direct subcontractor CSDR reporting via electronic submission of deliverables directly to CADE but is subsequently anticipated to meet the CSDR direct reporting subcontractor threshold value due to changes to scopes of work, end-item design, subcontractor/supplier, or subcontract price changes since initial contract award (unless the newly identified subcontractor has already been issued a subcontractor reporting waiver associated with this contract).
G. RELATIONSHIP/USE OF COST ACCOUNTING STANDARDS (CAS)
1. The contractor shall follow the accounting procedures specified in its latest approved CAS Disclosure Statement and with any clauses or requirements included in the contract. As part of the CSDR Readiness Review, the contractor shall identify any aspect(s) of its latest approved CAS Disclosure Statement which preclude or inhibit compliance with this CSDR Plan. The contractor shall identify any deviations from its CAS disclosure statement it intends to utilize to prepare CSDR submissions.
2. The contractor shall provide a description of significant accounting systems or CAS changes and how those changes effect the latest CSDR deliverable or the ability to compare CSDR deliverables provided before/after the accounting system/CAS revision. The contractor shall provide the description within the submission remarks of the FlexFile deliverable.
H. CSDR READINESS REVIEW
1. The contractor shall host a CSDR-RR with the Government's Cost Working Group Integrated Product Team (CWIPT) IAW DFARS 242.503-2(b) and DoD Manual 5000.04 (CSDR Manual). The purpose of the CSDR-RR is to review the contract's CSDR requirements and assess how the Contractor's accounting system satisfies the CSDR requirements found in DODM 5000.04 and this CSDR Plan. Reference the CADE website for instructions and additional information: https://cade.osd.mil/csdrreportingguidance/dd2794.html
2. The contractor and CWIPT will also review the initial submission of the "Resource Distribution Table (RDT)", in order to finalize which subcontractors will be required to provide CSDR reporting and electronic submission of deliverables directly to Cost Assessment Data Enterprise (CADE), and which subcontractors may qualify for a CSDR direct reporting subcontractor waiver.
3. The CSDR-RR shall be held within 60 days of contract award or the start of work meeting on a date mutually agreed to by the CWIPT and the contractor.
I. CONTRACT-SPECIFIC REMARKS
1. Kratos shall flow down CSDR requirements to the following subcontractor(s): Peraton, Inc.
J. SPACE-SPECIFIC DEFINITIONS
1. The definitions are intended for application to all levels of integration, or WBS indenture, within the ground system: parts, materials and labor; hardware components, subassemblies, major assemblies and end items ("boxes"); computer software configuration items (CSCIs) and components (CSCs); and subsystems, system segments, and the system as a whole.
2. General Definitions
i. Acquisition costs for development of the ground system are classified as nonrecurring irrespective of the milestone, phase or gate of the overall program or the WBS element in question. So NRE costs include initial development, upgrades, and improvements to hardware, software and facilities that make up the system. Thus, requirements definition, design, engineering analyses, development hardware and software, development testing, and development support hardware and software are nonrecurring efforts.
ii. Acquisition costs for production of ground operations and processing centers (GOPCs), Ground Entry Points (GEPs), along with associated facilities, and components thereof; for spares; and for replicated spacecraft components used in ground testing and simulators are classified as recurring. Costs for installation of previously developed software in ground stations are recurring. Similarly, costs for acquisition and installation of commercial off-the-shelf software (COTS) for operational use in ground stations are recurring.
iii. Operations and Support (O&S) costs for development of concepts, procedures, training materials and simulators are classified as nonrecurring. Costs for system operation and maintenance, including training, are recurring.
iv. Nonrecurring (NRE) general examples which apply to hardware, software, facilities and O&S include: initial development of spacecraft, GOPCs, GEPs and other system segments, elements, interfaces; support equipment used for development; software development; development of upgrades and improvements (despite magnitude)
v. Recurring (REC) general examples: Ground hardware production and installation; Construction of operational ground facilities; installation of developed and COTS software in GOPCs and GEPs; replicated space hardware in GOPCs and GEPs; spares for spacecraft, GOPCs and GEPs; test equipment, software and procedure maintenance; and system operation and maintenance
vi. The software definitions apply to ground station operational software, development software, and ground test software for development and production. Ground support equipment (GSE) is addressed below. It is usually treated separately from assembly, integration and test for cost collection and estimating purposes.
3. Space Hardware Related Definitions
i. Nonrecurring Cost:
Requirements definition, engineering design & analysis;
Manufacturing tooling, fixtures and procedures;
Development units (breadboard, engineering, qual), including parts and materials;
Handling and test support equipment, simulators;
Development, qualification and life testing;
Development and production test procedures;
Engineering support for development unit fabrication, assembly & tests;
Redesign, rework and retest to correct design flaws;
Maintenance of tooling and unit test equipment until first launch
ii. Recurring Cost:
Hardware production units (proto-flight, flight, spare);
Production unit parts & materials, assembly and testing;
Setup for fabrication, assembly and test;
Engineering support for production unit fabrication, assembly & tests;
Spare parts, materials and subassemblies for production units;
Rework and retest due to workmanship problems;
Maintenance of designs and production procedures;
Maintenance of tooling and unit test equipment after first launch;
Refurbishment (of both qual and proto-flight units)
4. Software Related Definitions
i. Nonrecurring Cost:
Development of delivered operational S/W;
Software test procedures;
Software configuration management, quality assurance & documentation;
Support for/conduct of first-time software I&T with hardware and subsequent higher level I&T;
Test, development support and space vehicle production support S/W: develop. and maint. up to 1st launch;
Commercial S/W licenses for development facilities and ground station development support;
Fixing deficiencies and developing enhancements in Ground and flight software from installation up to IOC
ii. Recurring Cost:
Installation and check-out of developed S/W in ground stations;
If first-time S/W I&T is performed at ground station, then it is NRE;
Maintenance of S/C production & test support S/W after first launch;
Acquisition of stand-alone and bundled COTS S/W in operational system;
Maintenance of flight S/W (usually embedded in acquisition contracts)
5. Systems Engineering Related Definitions
i. Nonrecurring Cost:
Requirements definition, allocation and flow-down;
Specifications and ICDs - initial development & maintenance until all TBDs and TBRs are removed;
Top level design trade-offs and system definition;
Analyses and simulations of system performance and effectiveness, mission assurance, reliability,availability, maintainability, survivability, security, safety, EMI/EMC, radiation, survivability, contamination control, human engineering, autonomy and fault management;
Operations concept development;
Technical direction and configuration control during development;
Risk management though CDR;
Mass, power, link margin & reliability budgets -- initial development & maintenance until design complete;
Processing time & memory budgets;
Development, production, verification, risk management, training and security plans;
Parts, materials and processes - establishing procedures, etc.;
Product assurance development tasks;
Requirements verification through design completion, including demonstrations and IV&V;
Technical change management (RFIs, ECPs, etc.) -- NR tasks supporting changes, handling nonrecurring-only changes;
Design Integration -- mechanical, electrical, thermal, facilities;
Functional and physical configuration audit (FCA/PCA) support;
System documentation
ii. Recurring Cost:
Maintenance of specs, ICDs, plans & budgets -- after all TBDs and TBRs are removed;
Performance, S/W maintenance productivity metrics;
Analysis updates;
System configuration control after design completion;
Mass, power, link margin & reliability budgets - supporting production;
Support for production testing, rehearsals and operational test and evaluation;
Product assurance;
Requirements verification after design completion;
Launch readiness reviews, support for product acceptance;
Technical change management (RFIs, ECPs, etc.) -- supporting recurring portions of changes and recurring- only changes
6. Assembly Integration & Test (AI&T) Related Definitions
i. Nonrecurring Cost:
Development, qualification and life testing - all levels and system segments;
Development and acceptance test plans and procedures;
Development, qualification and life test analysis and reports;
I&T for correcting software problems prior to IOC
ii. Recurring Cost:
Space vehicle assembly, integration and acceptance testing;
Acceptance test analysis and reports;
Integration and test of previously-developed software -in GOPCs, GEPs
7. Program Management Related Definitions
i. Nonrecurring Cost:
Management activities applied to/associated with NRE efforts - top level program management, project control and planning, business/financial mgmt, subcontract mgmt, product effectiveness, computer support;
Procedures and infrastructure establishment - Cost accounting, configuration & data management, parts & material acquisition, security, facilities
ii. Recurring Cost:
Management activities applied to/associated with REC efforts
8. Expanded Ground Support Equipment Definitions
i. Nonrecurring Cost:
Concept of operations and maintenance development;
Operations & maintenance procedure development;
Development of training materials, simulators and aids;
Initial ILS analysis and data;
Upgrades/changes to above associated with: Major redesigns, capability increments Recapitalization, operating system changes
ii. Recurring Cost:
System operation costs - operations, training, systems engineering & management staff;
Hardware maintenance & recapitalization;
Software maintenance - including COTS license costs;
Software modifications/fixes after IOC;
Reproduction and updating of technical data and manuals;
Procurement/production of hardware spares;
Rehearsals and initialization of space vehicles
9. Pre-Operations Support Definitions
i. Pre-Operations Maintenance 1..n (Specify):
These elements contain all the resources related to the pre-operations (Pre-Ops) maintenance (software updates) of Software. This function begins with the acceptance of the Software elements and ends with the start of Operations.
ii. Pre-Operations Mission Support:
These elements include all the resources required for the operation of the Space or Ground system prior to turn-over. Includes, for example:
a. On-orbit testing; routine monitoring of Space or Ground system equipment health and status
b. Fault detection
c. Anomaly investigation and resolution. (The Mission Support period typically begins after installation and a specified time prior to launch and ends when the Space Vehicle achieves initial operational capability.)
DD FORM 2794 (PAGE 4), REMARKS, MAY 2024 PREVIOUS EDITION IS OBSOLETE
DD Form 2794, Pg 5 (SCOPE DEF)
| COST AND SOFTWARE DATA REPORTING PLAN | |||||
| INTRA-CONTRACT SCOPE REPORTING DEFINITION | |||||
| 16. ORDERS/LOTS | |||||
| a. ID | b. NAME | c. PHASE/MILESTONE | |||
| BY | Base Year | B | |||
| OY1 | Option Year 1 | B | |||
| OY2 | Option Year 2 | B | |||
| OY3 | Option Year 3 | B | |||
| 17. END ITEMS | |||||
| a. ID | b. NAME | ||||
| C | Common | ||||
| GEP1…n | Ground Entry Point 1…n | ||||
| 18. UNIT/SUBLOT REPORTING AND UNIT SEQUENCING REQUIREMENTS | |||||
| a. ORDER/LOT ID | b. END ITEM ID | c. UNIT/SUBLOT REPORTING | |||
| (X if applicable) | d. UNIT SEQUENCING |
(X if applicable)
DD FORM 2794 (PAGE 5), INTRA-CONTRACT SCOPE, MAY 2024
DD Form 2794, Pg 9a (TECH RQTS)
| COST AND SOFTWARE DATA REPORTING PLAN - TECHNICAL PARAMETER REQUIREMENTS | ||||||||||
| TECHNICAL PARAMETER REQUIREMENTS | ||||||||||
| 29. WBS | ||||||||||
| ELEMENT CODE | 30. WBS ELEMENT NAME | 31. ITEM TYPE | 32. TECHNICAL PARAMETER | |||||||
| a. PARAMETER NAME | b. UNIT OF MEASURE | c. UNIT OF MEASURE QUALIFIER | d. REPEATABLE | e. DEFINITION | f. REMARKS | |||||
| 1.0 | RMWT LEO GEPs | Milestone Date | Contract Award | Date | ||||||
| 1.0 | RMWT LEO GEPs | Milestone Date | System PDR | Date | ||||||
| 1.0 | RMWT LEO GEPs | Milestone Date | System CDR | Date | ||||||
| 1.0 | RMWT LEO GEPs | Ground | Factory Locations | List | ||||||
| 1.0 | RMWT LEO GEPs | Ground | GEP Locations | List | ||||||
| 1.0 | RMWT LEO GEPs | Ground | Testbed Locations | List | ||||||
| 1.3.1 | OGT SEPM | Staff | Staffing - Level | Full Time Equivalent (FTE) | Staff size. | |||||
| 1.3.1 | OGT SEPM | Staff | Staffing - Profile | Descriptor | Denotes if the cited staff size is expressed as peak staffing or average of the time period | |||||
| 1.3.1 | OGT SEPM | Staff | Duration | Days | Total duration (in calendar days) of activity. Confirms Start Date and End Date inputs. | |||||
| 1.3.1 | OGT SEPM | ProgMgmt | Frequency of Government Program Reviews | Quantity | Reviews per Year | The Frequency of Government Program Reviews in the contract. | ||||
| 1.3.1 | OGT SEPM | ProgMgmt | Number of Contract Line Item Number (CLIN)s | Quantity | CLINs | The number of Contract CLINs in the contract. | ||||
| 1.3.1 | OGT SEPM | ProgMgmt | Number of Subcontractors | Quantity | Subcontractors | The number of major subcontractors/suppliers in the program. | ||||
| 1.3.1 | OGT SEPM | ProgMgmt | Number of Customer Stakeholders | Quantity | Stakeholders | The number of customers and stakeholders that may require management accommodation. Stakeholders consist of any group or organization with a related or subsequent responsibility that is directly related to the outcome of an action or result. Generally speaking they can influence the outcome or are the recipient of the results. The range of personnel selected to participate as stakeholders is based on the outcome and processes involved. Typical stakeholders are: users or operators, acquisition commands, test communities, depots, manpower, personnel & training communities, maintainers, and suppliers | ||||
| 1.3.1 | OGT SEPM | ProgMgmt | Number of CDRLs | Quantity | CDRLs | The number of Contract Data Requirements List items for which the CRS element staff is responsible. | ||||
| 1.3.1 | OGT SEPM | SysEng | Number of Requirement Document - "Shalls" | Quantity | Shalls | YG | The number of requirements cited in the system's requirements documents. | |||
| 1.3.1 | OGT SEPM | SysEng | Number of Platforms - Integrated | Quantity | Platforms | The number of platforms (e.g. aircraft) on which the system will be qualified. | ||||
| 1.3.2 | OGT Assembly, Integration and Test | IAT&CO | Number of Electrical Connections | Quantity | Electrical Connections | The number of electrical and electronic connections at this level of assembly. | ||||
| 1.3.2 | OGT Assembly, Integration and Test | IAT&CO | Number of Mechanical Connections | Quantity | Mechanical Connections | The number of mating surfaces, fasteners, or other non-electrical attach points at the level of assembly. | ||||
| 1.3.2 | OGT Assembly, Integration and Test | IAT&CO | Number of Interface Control Documents (ICD) | Quantity | Documents | The number of specification documents describing interfaces between elements within the system, as well as between the system and external entities. | ||||
| 1.3.3 | OGT Support Equipment | Heritage | New Design | Percent | Heritage: The extent of the item's design that is new using a 0-100% scale with the following guidelines: - 0%-10% Existing design. Build-to-print or previously qualified design solution, TRL is expected to be high (e.g. TRL 9). - 10%-40% Minor design change. No change to form, fit, function of the solution. May result from parts obsolescence and/or producibility enhancements. Considers updates to configuration drawings and test procedures as necessary. Includes any design reviews and changes to engineering/prototype/qualification models as needed. Anticipate the design will be qualified by similarity or analysis. TRL is expected to be high (e.g. TRL 8-9.) - 40%-70% Moderate design changes. Solution derived from previously qualified design. Includes updates to configuration drawings and test procedures. Includes design reviews, modified tooling & test equipment, and engineering/prototype/qualification models needed to qualify the modified design. TRL is expected to be moderately high (e.g. TRL 7-8). - 70%-100% Major redesign or new design to meet derived requirements. New form, fit, and function solution. Includes design reviews, tooling & test equipment, and engineering/prototype/qualification models needed to qualify the design. This range suggests a significant design effort - TRL may be in the 5-7 range. Note for all designs lower than TRL-6, significant technology maturation may be required over and above the effort outlined above. | |||||
| 1.3.3 | OGT Support Equipment | Heritage | Predecessor System | Descriptor | The year of the predecessor system | |||||
| 1.3.3 | OGT Support Equipment | PhysicalOther | Material Mix 1...n | Percent of Total Weight | Material Name | Y | List of primary materials comprising the item by percent of total weight. (Cite one or more materials as applicable) | |||
| 1.3.3 | OGT Support Equipment | PhysicalOther | Quantity Next Higher Assembly | Quantity | Units | Number of units of this item to be assembled into its parent assembly. | ||||
| 1.3.3 | OGT Support Equipment | PhysicalElec | Volume | Cubic Inches | Physical volume of the item. | |||||
| 1.3.3 | OGT Support Equipment | PhysicalElec | Weight | Pounds | Weight of the item. | |||||
| 1.3.3 | OGT Support Equipment | PhysicalElec | Weight - Structural | Pounds | The item's mechanical/structural weight. | |||||
| 1.3.3 | OGT Support Equipment | PhysicalElec | Weight - Electronics | Pounds | The item's electronics weight. | |||||
| 1.3.3 | OGT Support Equipment | PhysicalElec | Power - Maximum Consumption Rate | Kilowatts | Maximum rate of power consumption by the item. | |||||
| 1.3.4 | Structure/Outerbarrel/Cover | Heritage | New Design | Percent | Heritage: The extent of the item's design that is new using a 0-100% scale with the following guidelines: - 0%-10% Existing design. Build-to-print or previously qualified design solution, TRL is expected to be high (e.g. TRL 9). - 10%-40% Minor design change. No change to form, fit, function of the solution. May result from parts obsolescence and/or producibility enhancements. Considers updates to configuration drawings and test procedures as necessary. Includes any design reviews and changes to engineering/prototype/qualification models as needed. Anticipate the design will be qualified by similarity or analysis. TRL is expected to be high (e.g. TRL 8-9.) - 40%-70% Moderate design changes. Solution derived from previously qualified design. Includes updates to configuration drawings and test procedures. Includes design reviews, modified tooling & test equipment, and engineering/prototype/qualification models needed to qualify the modified design. TRL is expected to be moderately high (e.g. TRL 7-8). - 70%-100% Major redesign or new design to meet derived requirements. New form, fit, and function solution. Includes design reviews, tooling & test equipment, and engineering/prototype/qualification models needed to qualify the design. This range suggests a significant design effort - TRL may be in the 5-7 range. Note for all designs lower than TRL-6, significant technology maturation may be required over and above the effort outlined above. | |||||
| 1.3.4 | Structure/Outerbarrel/Cover | Heritage | Predecessor System | Descriptor | The year of the predecessor system | |||||
| 1.3.4 | Structure/Outerbarrel/Cover | PhysicalOther | Material Mix 1...n | Percent of Total Weight | Material Name | Y | List of primary materials comprising the item by percent of total weight. (Cite one or more materials as applicable) | |||
| 1.3.4 | Structure/Outerbarrel/Cover | PhysicalOther | Quantity Next Higher Assembly | Quantity | Units | Number of units of this item to be assembled into its parent assembly. | ||||
| 1.3.4 | Structure/Outerbarrel/Cover | PhysicalStruc | Weight | Pounds | Weight of the item. | |||||
| 1.3.4 | Structure/Outerbarrel/Cover | PhysicalStruc | Length | Inches | The length of the item. | |||||
| 1.3.4 | Structure/Outerbarrel/Cover | PhysicalStruc | Diameter | Inches | The diameter of the item. | |||||
| 1.3.4 | Structure/Outerbarrel/Cover | PhysicalStruc | Height/Thickness | Inches | The height/thickness of the item. | |||||
| 1.3.4 | Structure/Outerbarrel/Cover | PhysicalStruc | Height | Inches | Height of aircraft from ground to heighest point | |||||
| 1.3.4 | Structure/Outerbarrel/Cover | PhysicalStruc | Vertical Stabilizer Height | Inches | The distance from the top of the fuselage to the tip of the vertical stabilizer | |||||
| 1.3.4 | Structure/Outerbarrel/Cover | PhysicalStruc | Horizontal Stabilizer Span | Inches | Distance from one tip to tip of the horizontal stabilizer | |||||
| 1.3.5 | Mirrors/Optics | Heritage | New Design | Percent | Heritage: The extent of the item's design that is new using a 0-100% scale with the following guidelines: - 0%-10% Existing design. Build-to-print or previously qualified design solution, TRL is expected to be high (e.g. TRL 9). - 10%-40% Minor design change. No change to form, fit, function of the solution. May result from parts obsolescence and/or producibility enhancements. Considers updates to configuration drawings and test procedures as necessary. Includes any design reviews and changes to engineering/prototype/qualification models as needed. Anticipate the design will be qualified by similarity or analysis. TRL is expected to be high (e.g. TRL 8-9.) - 40%-70% Moderate design changes. Solution derived from previously qualified design. Includes updates to configuration drawings and test procedures. Includes design reviews, modified tooling & test equipment, and engineering/prototype/qualification models needed to qualify the modified design. TRL is expected to be moderately high (e.g. TRL 7-8). - 70%-100% Major redesign or new design to meet derived requirements. New form, fit, and function solution. Includes design reviews, tooling & test equipment, and engineering/prototype/qualification models needed to qualify the design. This range suggests a significant design effort - TRL may be in the 5-7 range. Note for all designs lower than TRL-6, significant technology maturation may be required over and above the effort outlined above. | |||||
| 1.3.5 | Mirrors/Optics | Heritage | Predecessor System | Descriptor | The year of the predecessor system | |||||
| 1.3.5 | Mirrors/Optics | PhysicalOther | Material Mix 1...n | Percent of Total Weight | Material Name | Y | List of primary materials comprising the item by percent of total weight. (Cite one or more materials as applicable) | |||
| 1.3.5 | Mirrors/Optics | PhysicalOther | Quantity Next Higher Assembly | Quantity | Units | Number of units of this item to be assembled into its parent assembly. | ||||
| 1.3.5 | Mirrors/Optics | PhysicalStruc | Weight | Pounds | Weight of the item. | |||||
| 1.3.5 | Mirrors/Optics | PhysicalStruc | Length | Inches | The length of the item. | |||||
| 1.3.5 | Mirrors/Optics | PhysicalStruc | Diameter | Inches | The diameter of the item. | |||||
| 1.3.5 | Mirrors/Optics | PhysicalStruc | Height/Thickness | Inches | The height/thickness of the item. | |||||
| 1.3.5 | Mirrors/Optics | PhysicalStruc | Height | Inches | Height of aircraft from ground to heighest point | |||||
| 1.3.5 | Mirrors/Optics | PhysicalStruc | Vertical Stabilizer Height | Inches | The distance from the top of the fuselage to the tip of the vertical stabilizer | |||||
| 1.3.5 | Mirrors/Optics | PhysicalStruc | Horizontal Stabilizer Span | Inches | Distance from one tip to tip of the horizontal stabilizer | |||||
| 1.3.5 | Mirrors/Optics | Optics | Aperture - Optics | Inches | The aperture is the opening of a lens's diaphragm which light passes. Specify the aperture of the guidance optics by its diameter. | |||||
| 1.3.5 | Mirrors/Optics | Optics | Number of Curved Elements | Quantity | Elements | The Seeker's Number of Curved Optical Elements. | ||||
| 1.3.5 | Mirrors/Optics | Optics | Number of Flat Mirrors | Quantity | Flat Mirrors | The Seeker's Number of Flat Optical Elements. | ||||
| 1.3.5 | Mirrors/Optics | Optics | Field of View | Degrees Angular | The Seeker's Field of View. | |||||
| 1.3.6 | Aft Optics and Bench | Heritage | New Design | Percent | Heritage: The extent of the item's design that is new using a 0-100% scale with the following guidelines: - 0%-10% Existing design. Build-to-print or previously qualified design solution, TRL is expected to be high (e.g. TRL 9). - 10%-40% Minor design change. No change to form, fit, function of the solution. May result from parts obsolescence and/or producibility enhancements. Considers updates to configuration drawings and test procedures as necessary. Includes any design reviews and changes to engineering/prototype/qualification models as needed. Anticipate the design will be qualified by similarity or analysis. TRL is expected to be high (e.g. TRL 8-9.) - 40%-70% Moderate design changes. Solution derived from previously qualified design. Includes updates to configuration drawings and test procedures. Includes design reviews, modified tooling & test equipment, and engineering/prototype/qualification models needed to qualify the modified design. TRL is expected to be moderately high (e.g. TRL 7-8). - 70%-100% Major redesign or new design to meet derived requirements. New form, fit, and function solution. Includes design reviews, tooling & test equipment, and engineering/prototype/qualification models needed to qualify the design. This range suggests a significant design effort - TRL may be in the 5-7 range. Note for all designs lower than TRL-6, significant technology maturation may be required over and above the effort outlined above. | |||||
| 1.3.6 | Aft Optics and Bench | Heritage | Predecessor System | Descriptor | The year of the predecessor system | |||||
| 1.3.6 | Aft Optics and Bench | PhysicalOther | Material Mix 1...n | Percent of Total Weight | Material Name | Y | List of primary materials comprising the item by percent of total weight. (Cite one or more materials as applicable) | |||
| 1.3.6 | Aft Optics and Bench | PhysicalOther | Quantity Next Higher Assembly | Quantity | Units | Number of units of this item to be assembled into its parent assembly. | ||||
| 1.3.6 | Aft Optics and Bench | PhysicalStruc | Weight | Pounds | Weight of the item. | |||||
| 1.3.6 | Aft Optics and Bench | PhysicalStruc | Length | Inches | The length of the item. | |||||
| 1.3.6 | Aft Optics and Bench | PhysicalStruc | Diameter | Inches | The diameter of the item. | |||||
| 1.3.6 | Aft Optics and Bench | PhysicalStruc | Height/Thickness | Inches | The height/thickness of the item. | |||||
| 1.3.6 | Aft Optics and Bench | PhysicalStruc | Height | Inches | Height of aircraft from ground to heighest point | |||||
| 1.3.6 | Aft Optics and Bench | PhysicalStruc | Vertical Stabilizer Height | Inches | The distance from the top of the fuselage to the tip of the vertical stabilizer | |||||
| 1.3.6 | Aft Optics and Bench | PhysicalStruc | Horizontal Stabilizer Span | Inches | Distance from one tip to tip of the horizontal stabilizer | |||||
| 1.3.6 | Aft Optics and Bench | Optics | Aperture - Optics | Inches | The aperture is the opening of a lens's diaphragm which light passes. Specify the aperture of the guidance optics by its diameter. | |||||
| 1.3.6 | Aft Optics and Bench | Optics | Number of Curved Elements | Quantity | Elements | The Seeker's Number of Curved Optical Elements. | ||||
| 1.3.6 | Aft Optics and Bench | Optics | Number of Flat Mirrors | Quantity | Flat Mirrors | The Seeker's Number of Flat Optical Elements. | ||||
| 1.3.6 | Aft Optics and Bench | Optics | Field of View | Degrees Angular | The Seeker's Field of View. | |||||
| 1.3.7 | Alignment Sensors/Calibration | Heritage | New Design | Percent | Heritage: The extent of the item's design that is new using a 0-100% scale with the following guidelines: - 0%-10% Existing design. Build-to-print or previously qualified design solution, TRL is expected to be high (e.g. TRL 9). - 10%-40% Minor design change. No change to form, fit, function of the solution. May result from parts obsolescence and/or producibility enhancements. Considers updates to configuration drawings and test procedures as necessary. Includes any design reviews and changes to engineering/prototype/qualification models as needed. Anticipate the design will be qualified by similarity or analysis. TRL is expected to be high (e.g. TRL 8-9.) - 40%-70% Moderate design changes. Solution derived from previously qualified design. Includes updates to configuration drawings and test procedures. Includes design reviews, modified tooling & test equipment, and engineering/prototype/qualification models needed to qualify the modified design. TRL is expected to be moderately high (e.g. TRL 7-8). - 70%-100% Major redesign or new design to meet derived requirements. New form, fit, and function solution. Includes design reviews, tooling & test equipment, and engineering/prototype/qualification models needed to qualify the design. This range suggests a significant design effort - TRL may be in the 5-7 range. Note for all designs lower than TRL-6, significant technology maturation may be required over and above the effort outlined above. | |||||
| 1.3.7 | Alignment Sensors/Calibration | Heritage | Predecessor System | Descriptor | The year of the predecessor system | |||||
| 1.3.7 | Alignment Sensors/Calibration | PhysicalOther | Material Mix 1...n | Percent of Total Weight | Material Name | Y | List of primary materials comprising the item by percent of total weight. (Cite one or more materials as applicable) | |||
| 1.3.7 | Alignment Sensors/Calibration | PhysicalOther | Quantity Next Higher Assembly | Quantity | Units | Number of units of this item to be assembled into its parent assembly. | ||||
| 1.3.7 | Alignment Sensors/Calibration | PhysicalElec | Volume | Cubic Inches | Physical volume of the item. | |||||
| 1.3.7 | Alignment Sensors/Calibration | PhysicalElec | Weight | Pounds | Weight of the item. | |||||
| 1.3.7 | Alignment Sensors/Calibration | PhysicalElec | Weight - Structural | Pounds | The item's mechanical/structural weight. | |||||
| 1.3.7 | Alignment Sensors/Calibration | PhysicalElec | Weight - Electronics | Pounds | The item's electronics weight. | |||||
| 1.3.7 | Alignment Sensors/Calibration | PhysicalElec | Power - Maximum Consumption Rate | Kilowatts | Maximum rate of power consumption by the item. | |||||
| 1.8.2 | GEP Software Assembly, Integration and Test | SoftwareNonSRDR | New Code - Human Generated | SLOC | Actual to Date | The delivered size of the product developed that is human generated. | ||||
| 1.8.2 | GEP Software Assembly, Integration and Test | SoftwareNonSRDR | New Code - Auto-Generated | SLOC | Actual to Date | The delivered size of the product developed that is auto-generated. | ||||
| 1.8.2 | GEP Software Assembly, Integration and Test | SoftwareNonSRDR | New Code - Human Generated | SLOC | Estimate at Complete | The delivered size of the product developed that is human generated. | ||||
| 1.8.2 | GEP Software Assembly, Integration and Test | SoftwareNonSRDR | New Code - Auto-Generated | SLOC | Estimate at Complete | The delivered size of the product developed that is auto-generated. | ||||
| 1.8.2 | GEP Software Assembly, Integration and Test | SoftwareNonSRDR | Reused Code - Actual to Date | SLOC | Actual to Date | Code from external sources (government-furnished or otherwise) that is included and reused without modification. | ||||
| 1.8.2 | GEP Software Assembly, Integration and Test | SoftwareNonSRDR | Reused Code - Estimate at Complete | SLOC | Estimate at Complete | Code from external sources (government-furnished or otherwise) that is included and reused without modification. | ||||
| 1.8.2 | GEP Software Assembly, Integration and Test | SoftwareNonSRDR | Reused Code - AAF% | SLOC | Adaptation Adjustment Factor (AAF) - top-level percentage of effort of adapting the reused code to the new system relative to a line of new code. | |||||
| 1.8.2 | GEP Software Assembly, Integration and Test | SoftwareNonSRDR | Modified Code - Actual to Date | SLOC | Actual to Date | Modified code is defined as pre-developed code that can be incorporated in the software component with a significant amount of effort, but less effort than required for a newly developed code. | ||||
| 1.8.2 | GEP Software Assembly, Integration and Test | SoftwareNonSRDR | Modified Code - Estimate at Complete | SLOC | Estimate at Complete | Modified code is defined as pre-developed code that can be incorporated in the software component with a significant amount of effort, but less effort than required for a newly developed code. | ||||
| 1.8.2 | GEP Software Assembly, Integration and Test | SoftwareNonSRDR | Modified Code - AAF% | SLOC | Adaptation Adjustment Factor (AAF) - top-level percentage of effort of adapting the modified code to the new system relative to a line of new code. | |||||
| 1.8.3 | GEP Software Support Equipment | SoftwareNonSRDR | New Code - Human Generated | SLOC | Actual to Date | The delivered size of the product developed that is human generated. | ||||
| 1.8.3 | GEP Software Support Equipment | SoftwareNonSRDR | New Code - Auto-Generated | SLOC | Actual to Date | The delivered size of the product developed that is auto-generated. | ||||
| 1.8.3 | GEP Software Support Equipment | SoftwareNonSRDR | New Code - Human Generated | SLOC | Estimate at Complete | The delivered size of the product developed that is human generated. | ||||
| 1.8.3 | GEP Software Support Equipment | SoftwareNonSRDR | New Code - Auto-Generated | SLOC | Estimate at Complete | The delivered size of the product developed that is auto-generated. |
This is the start of the file's text. The full file is on GovTribe.
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .