Attachment_A_SOW_Amend_0002.pdf

STATEMENT OF WORK

(SOW)

For

T-1A Avionics Modification Program

(AMP)

DATE: 8 SEPTEMBER 2016

REVISION NUMBER: 1

PREPARING ORGANIZATION: AFLCMC/WLZW TINKER AFB OK 73145

ii

Table of Contents Table of Contents .......................................................................................................................................... ii

Introduction

1.1 Background

1.2 Scope

Applicable Documentation

2.1 General

2.2 Government Documents

2.2.1 Specifications, Standards, and Handbooks

2.2.2 Other Government Documents, Drawings, and Publications

Program Requirements

3.1 Hazardous Material

3.2 Government Property Management, Salvage and Disposal

3.3 Data Rights

3.4 Meeting Support

3.4.1 System Requirements Review (SRR)

3.4.2 System Function Review (SFR)

3.4.3 Preliminary Integration Review (PIR)

3.4.4 Critical Integration Review (CIR)

3.4.5 Test Readiness Review (TRR)

3.4.6 Functional Configuration Audit (FCA)

3.4.7 System Verification Review (SVR)

3.4.8 Production Readiness Review (PRR)

3.4.9 Physical Configuration Audit (PCA)

3.4.10 Program Management Review

3.4.11 Other Meetings

3.4.12 Post Award Meeting

3.4.13 Technical Interchange Meeting (TIM)

3.4.14 System Supportability Reviews (SSR)

3.4.15 Aircraft Certification Working Group

3.4.16 Technical Order In-Process Review

3.4.17 Cockpit Working Group

iii

3.5 Facility/Runway/Security Management

3.6 Service Information and FAA Directive Review

3.6.1 Evaluation Content

3.6.2 Urgent FAA Airworthiness Directive (AD)

Program Management

4.1 Integrated Product Development

4.1.1 Schedule and Planning

4.1.2 Monthly Program Status Report

4.2 Quality Assurance Management

4.3 Risk Management

4.4 Manpower

4.4.1 Contractor Manpower Reporting

4.4.2 Subcontract Management

4.5 USAF Base Access

4.6 Configuration Control

4.7 Program Protection and Cybersecurity

4.7.1 Program Protection Planning

4.7.2 Supply Chain Risk Management and Counterfeit Prevention

4.7.3 Software Assurance

4.7.4 Cybersecurity

4.7.5 Secure Configuration of Commercial Software

Logistic Support Requirements

5.1 Diminishing Manufacturing Sources and Material Shortages

5.2 Supportability

5.3 Support Equipment

5.4 Initial Spares

5.5 Key Logistics Criteria

5.6 Aircraft and Simulator Installation Kit Proofing

System Engineering

6.1 System Engineering Management Plan

6.2 Requirements Traceability

6.3 FAA Certification / Airworthiness

iv

6.3.1 Certification Plan

6.3.2 Modified Airworthiness Certification Criteria (MACC)

6.4 Test and Evaluation

6.4.1 Test Planning

6.4.2 Test Reviews

6.4.3 Integrated Test Team

6.5 Deficiency Reports

6.6 Interface Control Documentation

6.7 Human Systems Integration

6.8 Frequency Allocation

6.9 Failure Modes, Effects, and Critcality Analysis

6.10 System Safety Program

6.11 Technical Documentation

Aircraft Modification Requirements

7.1 Acceptance at Contractor Facility

7.2 Aircraft Induction

7.2.1 Corrosion Control Management

7.3 Prototype Aircraft

7.3.1 Aircraft Installation and Test

7.3.2 Prepare Aircraft for Ground and Flight Test

7.3.3 Flight Crew Support

7.3.4 Refurbishment of Flight Test Aircraft

7.4 Aircraft Modification (Production)

7.5 Post Installation

7.6 Aircraft Delivery

Simulators (OFT and PTT)

8.1 Training Device Modification during production

8.2 Interim Contract Support (ICS)

Software Management and Planning

9.1 Software Requirements Definition

9.2 Software Design

9.3 Software Development

v

9.4 Software Testing

9.5 Software Configuration

Technical Orders

10.1 Technical Order Updates

10.2 Technical Order Meetings and Validation / Verification

10.2.1 Technical Order Guidance Conference

10.2.2 In-Process Review

10.2.3 Technical Order Validation

10.2.4 Technical Order Verification

10.2.5 Post Verification Review

10.3 Final Delivery

10.4 Technical Order Schedules and Status Report

10.5 Vendor Manual / Service Literature

10.6 Commercial Operations & Maintenance Manuals for the SIMULATOR (OFT AND PTT)

Training

11.1 TRAINING MATERIAL

11.2 INSTRUCTION

11.2.1 Operator (Aircraft/Simulator)

11.2.2 MX (Aircraft)

11.2.3 MX (Simulator)

11.3 TRAINING SCHEDULE

Over and Above

12.1 Maintenance

12.2 Contract Field Teams

12.3 TCTO / Airworthiness Directives

12.4 Mishap Investigation Support

12.5 Discrepancy/Defect Criteria

12.6 Fixed Hourly Rate Items

12.7 Other Areas Considered O&A Include:

Warranty Tracking of Serialized Items

Service Summary

APPENDIX A – Acronyms ........................................................................................................................... A-1 vi

APPENDIX B – Production Planning Schedule ............................................................................................ B-1

APPENDIX C – Meeting Entrance Criteria .................................................................................................. C-1

APPENDIX D – Addendum to Statement of Work ..................................................................................... D-1

APPENDIX E – Events and Milestones ........................................................................................................ E-1

Introduction This Statement of Work (SOW) defines the effort required for the T-1A Avionics Modification Program

(AMP). The effort is to modify the fleet of one hundred seventy eight (178) T-1A trainer aircraft, sixteen

(16) Operational Flight Trainers (OFT’s), and fourteen (14) Part Task Trainers (PTT’s).

1.1 BACKGROUND

The T-1A Jayhawk is a commercial derivative of the Beechcraft 400A aircraft with a Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA) Type Certificate number A16SW. The aircraft is a medium-range, twin-engine jet used to train student pilots to fly airlift and tanker operations for Specialized Undergraduate Pilot

Training (SUPT). The aircraft also provides Combat Systems Officer (CSO) training at Naval Air Station

(NAS) Pensacola. T-1A Main Operating Bases (MOBs) with aircraft, OFT, and PTT quantities assigned are identified in Table 1-1.

Table 1-1

T-1A MOB – Aircraft, OFT, and PTT Assigned

Base T-1A SUPT T-1A CSO OFT SUPT OFT CSO PTT

Randolph AFB, TX 17 0 2 0 2

Laughlin AFB, TX 48 0 4 0 4

Vance AFB, OK 45 0 4 0 4

Columbus AFB, MS 47 0 4 0 3

NAS Pensacola, FL 0 21 0 2 1

Totals 157 21 14 2 14

1.2 SCOPE

This is a one-time modification utilizing a single integrator to permanently replace all of the Air Force owned and operated T-1A aircraft avionics suites and provide corresponding and equivalent configuration modifications for the new T-1A Avionics Suites in all Air Force owned and operated simulators (OFT’s and PTT’s).

The modification solution for this contract utilizes an existing Commercial-off-the-Shelf (COTS) Avionics Suite as a baseline for prototype approval, resulting in a FAA 400T STC solution for the T-1A fleet.

Solution replaces the components listed in Appendix E of the System Requirements Document (SRD), and meets the performance requirements listed in the SRD, which includes the FAA’s Automatic Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast (ADS-B) Out mandate for CFR 14 Part 91, supporting the T-1A's standing requirement to access the National Airspace System.

The modification solution for this contract provides these logistics needs: Supply, Spares, Training Materials, Training, Aircraft Manuals converted to Air Force format, Simulator (OFT and PTT) manuals, Data Rights, Technical Data Packages, Frequency Spectrum Data, Cyber Security Analysis, and other data, analysis, and support as described herein.

Applicable Documentation

2.1 GENERAL

The following specifications, standards, and handbooks form a part of this SOW to the extent specified herein. Unless otherwise specified, the issues of the documents are those listed in the latest issue of the

Department of Defense Index of Specifications and Standards and supplement thereto.

2.2 GOVERNMENT DOCUMENTS

2.2.1 Specifications, Standards, and Handbooks

Standards

Document Number Document Title Version/Date

MIL-HDBK-516C Airworthiness Certification Criteria 12 Dec 2014

MIL-STD-1472G DoD HCI Style Guide [B3] 11 Jan 2012

MIL-STD-31000A Technical Data Packages 26 Feb 2013

MIL-STD-38784A

Department of Defense Standard Practice for Manuals, Technical: General Style and Format Requirements 25 Aug 2011

MIL-STD-464C

Electromagnetic Environmental Effects Requirements for

Systems 1 Dec 2010

MIL-STD-882E

Department of Defense Standard Practice for System

Safety 11 May 2012

Contract Data Requirements List (CDRL)

CDRL # Document Number Document Title Version

A001 DI-MISC-81397C Hazardous Materials Management Program Report Rev C

A002 DI-MGMT-80368A Monthly Status Report Rev A

A003 DI-ADMN-81249A Conference Agenda Rev A

A004 DI-ADMN-81373 Presentation Material

A005 DI-ADMN-81250A Conference Minutes Rev A

A006 DI-MISC-81241 Airworthiness Directives/Service Bulletins/Advisory Data

A007 DI-ADMIN-81401B Contract Change Proposals Rev B

A008 DI-MGMT-81861A Integrated Program Management Report Rev A

A009 DI-SESS-80642D Notice of Revision Rev D

A010 DI-MGMT-81453A Data Accession List Rev A

A011 DI-SESS-80640D Request for Variance Rev D

A012 DI-SESS-81732 Request for Waiver

A013 DI-ADMN-81306 Program Protection Implementation Plan

A014 DI-QCIC-80126B

Government Industry Data Exchange Program Alert

Response Rev B

A015 DI-MISC-80508B Technical Report Rev B

A016 DI-SESS-80294B Maintenance and Test Support Equipment List Rev B

A017 DI-SESS-81022D Configuration Audit Summary Report and Certification Rev D

A018 DI-SESS-81785A System Engineering Management Plan Rev A

A019 DI-IPSC-81431A System/Subsystem Specification Rev A

A020 DI-IPSC-81433A Software Requirements Specification Rev A

A021 DI-SESS-81731 Traceability Data

A022 DI-MISC-80678 Certification/Data Report

A023 DI-SESS-81766 Airworthiness Certification

A024 DI-NDTI-80566A Test Plan Rev A

A025 DI-QCIC-81536 Test Information Sheet

A026 DI-NDTI-80809B Test/Inspection Report Rev B

A027 DI-NDTI-81284 Test and Evaluation Program Plan

A028 DI-NDTI-80603A Test Procedure Rev A

A029 DI-SESS-81248B Interface Control Document Rev B

A030 DI-IPSC-81436A Interface Design Description Rev A

A031 DI-SESS-81495A Failure Mode, Effects, and Criticality Analysis Report Rev A

A032 DI-SAFT-81626 System Safety Program Plan

A033 DI-SAFT-80101C System Safety Hazard Analysis Report Rev C

A034 DI-SAFT-81563 Accident/Incident Report

A035 DI-SESS-80776A Technical Data Package Rev F

A036 DI-MGMT-81501A Weight and Balance Report for Aircraft Rev A

A037 DI-ILSS-81089 Training Facilities Report

A038 DI-IPSC-81432A System/Subsystem Design Description Rev A

A039 REMOVED

A040 DI-IPSC-81442A Software Version Description Rev A

A041 DI-IPSC-81427A Software Development Plan Rev A

A042 DI-IPSC-81438A Software Test Plan Rev A

A043 DI-IPSC-81435A Software Design Description Rev A

A044 DI-IPSC-81439A Software Test Description Rev A

A045 DI-IPSC-81440A Software Test Report Rev A

A046 DI-IPSC-81441A Software Product Specification Rev A

A047 DI-TMSS-80527C

Commercial off-The-Shelf Manuals and Associated

Supplemental Data Rev C

2.2.2 Other Government Documents, Drawings, and Publications

Federal Acquisition Regulations

Document Number Document Title Version/Date

FAR 52.219-14 Limitations on Subcontracting Nov 2011

DFARS 252-246-7005 Notice of Warranty Tracking of Serialized Items Mar 2016

Manuals

Document Number Document Title Version/Date

Department of Defense

(DoD) 5500.7-R Joint Ethics Regulation 17 Nov 2011

Department of Defense

Instruction (DoDI) 4161.02

Accountability and Management of Government Contract

Property 27 Apr 2012

DoDI 5000.02 Operation of the Defense Acquisition System 7 Jan 2015

DoDI 5230.24 Distribution Statements on Technical Documents 23 Aug 2012

DoDI 8500.01 Cybersecurity 14 Mar 2014

DoDI 8510.01 Risk Management Framework for DoD Information

Technology 12 Mar 2014

Technical Order (TO)

00-5-3 AF Technical Order Life Cycle Management 1 Apr 2015

TO 00-35D-54

United States Air Force (USAF) Deficiency Reporting, Investigation, and Resolution 1 Sep 2015

TO 1-1-689-3 Cleaning and Corrosion Control 16 Apr 2014

TO 1-1B-50

Basic Technical Order for USAF Aircraft Weight and

Balance 1 Apr 2008

TO 1T-1A-2-07JG-00-1 Job Guide, Lifting, Jacking, and Shoring 30 Sep 2011

TO 1T-1A-2-08JG-00-1 Job Guide, Leveling and Weighing 30 Sep 2011

TO 1T-1A-2-09JG-10-1 Job Guide, Towing and Taxiing 30 Sep 2011

TO 1T-1A-2-21JG-30-1 Job Guide, Air Conditioning Pressurization Control 30 Sep 2011

TO 1T-1A-5-1 Sample Basic Weight Checklists 15 Aug 2012

TO 1T-1A-17 Storage of Aircraft 30 Sep 2011

Forms

Document Number Document Title Version/Date

DD Form 1149 Requisition and Invoice/Shipping Document 1 Jan 2016

DD Form 1494 Application for Equipment Frequency Allocation Apr 2015

DD Form 2357 Hazardous Component Safety Data Statement Apr 1999

FAA Form 8130-3 Airworthiness Approval Tag 1 Feb 2014

OSHA Form 3514 Material Safety Data Sheet

Other Documents

Document Number Document Title Version/Date

AETCI 36-2219 Type 1 Training 18 Apr 2008

AFI 10-220 Contractor’s Flight and Ground Operations 21 Aug 2013

AFI 10-220 AFMC SUP Contractor’s Flight and Ground Operations 13 Aug 2015

AFI 11-2T-1, Volume 3 T-1A Operations Procedures 16 Jul 2015

AFI 33-210 Air Force Certification and Accreditation Program 23 Dec 2008

AFI 33-580 Spectrum Management 24 Dec 2015

AFI 62-601 USAF Airworthiness 11 Jun 2010

AFI 64-106 Air Force Industrial Labor Relations Activities 25 Mar 1994

AFPAM 63-113 Program Protection Planning for Life Cycle Management 17 Oct 2013

AFPD 17-1 Information Dominance Governance and Management 12 Apr 2016

AIA NAS 411 Hazardous Materials Management Plan Rev 3

Information Assurance Platform Information Technology

Guidebook

Version 1.5, 19 Dec 2013

Committee on National

Security Systems

Instruction (CNSSI) No.

Security Control Overlays for Industrial Control Systems Version 1, January 2013

Defense Acquisition Guide Feb 2014

DoD Integrated Master Plan (IMP) and Integrated Master

Schedule (IMS) Preparation and Use Guide

Version 0.9, 21 Oct 2005

DoD Program Protection Plan Outline and Guidance Version 1.0

DoD Risk Management Guide for DoD Acquisition Version 1.0, August 2006

Software Assurance Countermeasures in Program

Protection Planning Mar 2014

Technology Readiness Assessment Guidance Apr 2011

RTCA/DO-160G

Environmental Conditions and Test Procedures for

Airborne Equipment 16 Dec 2014

RTCA/DO-178B

Software Considerations in Airborne Systems and

Equipment Certification 13 Dec 2011

DO-357 User Guide: Supplement to DO-160G 16 Dec 2014

FAA Order 8110.101A Type Certification Procedures for Military Commercial

Derivative Aircraft 25 Feb 2015

AS9100C

Quality Management Systems – Requirements for

Aviation 15 Jan 2009

10 USC § 2320 Rights in Technical Data 31 Dec 2011

Title 44 USC Chapter 35 Coordination of Federal information Policy

14 CFR 21.101 Designation of Applicable Regulations 4 Dec 2012

Program Requirements The Contractor shall already have a proposed avionics suite with a Technical Readiness Level of 8 (IAW

Technology Readiness Assessment Guidance, April 2011) which utilizes standard Commercial off-The-

Shelf (COTS) Line Replaceable Units (LRU) components (vs unique to 400T) to facilitate future system growth. The Contractor shall meet the requirements documented in the T-1A SRD. The Contractor’s proposed avionics suite shall have demonstrated successful operation on Beechcraft 400A or equivalent aircraft. Equivalent aircraft is defined as FAR Part 25 aircraft of similar size and weight. The Contractor’s proposed solution shall be FAA certified for use in the T-1A within twelve (12) months of contract award. The resulting STC shall be applicable to all T-1A tail numbers and also completed within twelve

(12) months of contract award.

The Contractor’s solution shall consist of all efforts required to provide an industry standard avionics replacement suite in accordance with the T-1A SRD. This effort includes, but is not limited to, the following:

a) Perform integration engineering and design for all prototype efforts required to obtain the STC on two (2) complete aircraft prototype Avionics Suite installations; one (1) SUPT and one (1) CSO aircraft within 12 months after contract award. The Contractor modified T-1A aircraft shall result in a fully integrated, fully operational, flight tested, Avionics Suite IAW FAA standards. All installed components/material shall be FAA certified/approved.

b) Perform integration engineering and design for all prototype efforts required to obtain USAF approval on three (3) fully operational simulator prototype modifications; one (1) for each of the two (2) OFT configurations and one (1) PTT, within 12 months after contract award.

c) USAF operational test and evaluation for aircraft and training devices

d) Perform installation and operational checks of the approved modification on up to 176 T-1A aircraft (not counting prototype installations), (14) OFT simulators, and (13) PTT devices

e) Integrated logistics support which includes initial spares for the aircraft, OFT, and PTT and any additional support/maintenance equipment required for the modification

f) Technical data development

g) Training development for pilots, maintenance technicians, and training device maintainers

3.1 HAZARDOUS MATERIAL

The Contractor shall comply with all applicable Federal, State, and Local laws, regulations, and requirements regarding hazardous material. The Contractor shall comply with military base hazardous material requirements when applicable.

The Contractor shall implement a Hazardous Materials Management Program. The scope is to assure appropriate consideration is given to the elimination/reduction of hazardous substances, and to the proper control of hazardous substances that are not eliminated for the aircraft, aircraft components and associated support items (related to this modification) throughout all phases of the aircraft life cycle.

The guidelines of AIA NAS 411, Hazardous Materials Management Program, shall be used (Contract

Data Requirements List (CDRL) # A001, DI-MISC-81397C, Hazardous Materials Management Program

Report).

The Contractor shall review all drawings and processes for compliance with Environmental Protection

Agency guidelines on ODSs. Hazardous materials contained in or generated by the T-1A aircraft avionics suite or simulator (OFT and PTT) equipment shall be documented in the review findings by including the following information for each instance:

a) Material identification as to type, quantity, and potential hazards

b) Safety precautions and procedures necessary during handling, use, storage, transportation, and disposal

c) A copy of the Material Safety Data Sheet (OSHA Form 3514 or DD Form 2357), as appropriate

3.2 GOVERNMENT PROPERTY MANAGEMENT, SALVAGE AND DISPOSAL

The Contractor shall safely protect and retain all removed LRUs as accountable government property and provide the Government a monthly Contractor managed “Government Property” report (CDRL #

A002, DI-MGMT- 80368A, Monthly Status Report). This includes any LRUs, their supporting parts, and equipment (including all obsolete parts).

Upon Government written approval, the Contractor shall properly dispose of specifically named LRUs, supporting parts and equipment, and unused wiring as the result of the execution of this contract.

Disposal shall be in accordance with all applicable local, State, and Federal Regulations.

The Contractor shall safely return all requested Contractor managed/removed LRUs, supporting parts, and equipment to the Government per written Government instructions.

No less than thirty (30) calendar days prior to commencement of Low-Rate Initial Production (LRIP), the

Government will provide disposition instructions for the specifically named LRUs to be returned. The

Contractor shall make a shipment of these accumulated LRUs every ninety (90) calendar days to a location to be determined by the Government.

3.3 DATA RIGHTS

Technical data developed for this effort will at a minimum be IAW 10 USC § 2320 (a)(2)(A)(C)(iii) and will be marked IAW DoDI 5230.24 as Distribution “D”, Government purpose rights, which will allow the

Government to use, modify, reproduce, release or disclose the technical data or computer software within the Government without restriction and outside the Government for a Government purpose, and use all data related to this modification for sustainment and future training as necessary with no additional cost. This includes, but not limited to, TO, training material, simulator (OFT and PTT) software, installation drawings, and STC. The Government will retain unlimited data rights to all specifications, documentation, data, drawings, software, and modified system software source code specifically generated under this contract.

3.4 MEETING SUPPORT

The Contractor shall support required meetings and teleconferences to discuss program status, review requirements compliance, and resolve open issues. The Contractor shall develop and publish the agenda for meetings and reviews. The Contractor shall deliver agendas in accordance with the IMS

(CDRL # A003, DI-ADMN-81249A, Conference Agenda). The Contractor shall develop and publish the presentation materials for meetings and reviews it conducts. The Contractor shall deliver presentation materials in accordance with the IMS (CDRL # A004, DI-ADMN-81373, Presentation Material). The

Contractor shall record and publish the minutes for meetings and reviews it conducts. The Contractor shall deliver minutes in accordance with the IMS (CDRL # A005, DI-ADMN-81250A, Conference Minutes).

Contractor employees shall identify themselves as contractor personnel by introducing themselves or being introduced as contractor personnel and displaying distinguishing badges or other visible identification for meetings with Government personnel. In addition, contractor personnel shall appropriately identify themselves as contractor employees in telephone conversations and in formal and informal written correspondence.

The Contractor shall conduct the meetings and reviews listed in Table 3-1, Contractor Conducted

Meetings, at one of its facilities. Table 3-1 represents a notional schedule of meetings and reviews.

Meetings, reviews and working groups may be combined with other meetings, reviews and working groups as appropriate. Meetings, reviews and working groups shall support attendance via teleconference.

The Government will be invited to Contractor/Subcontractor meetings which will impact scheduled milestones. The Contractor shall invite the Government to all Aircraft Certification Working Group

(ACWG) meetings.

Table 3-1 Contractor Conducted Meetings

Event Quantity Location Notes

Technical Reviews:

System Requirements Review

(SRR) / System Functional

Review (SFR)

1/2 Contractor Facility Aircraft and training device may be held together

Preliminary Integration

Review (PIR) 2 Contractor Facility 1 for aircraft; 1 for training devices

Critical Integration Review

(CIR)

2 Contractor Facility 1 for aircraft; 1 for training devices

Test Readiness Review (TRR) 2 Contractor Facility 1 for aircraft; 1 for training devices

Functional Configuration

Audit (FCA)/ System

Verification Review (SVR)

2 Contractor Facility 1 for aircraft; 1 for training devices

Production Readiness Review

(PRR)

1/2 Contractor Facility

Aircraft and training device may be held together

Physical Configuration Audit

(PCA)

1/2 Contractor Facility

Aircraft and training device may be held together

Technical Interchange

Meetings (TIM)

As required

Management Reviews:

Post Award Meeting 1 Contractor Facility

Program Management

Review (PMR)

Contractor Facility or teleconference

As required; bi-annually and can be combined with other meetings

Working Groups:

ACWG meetings Certification is Contractor requirement;

USAF shall be invited

Cockpit Working Group

(CWG)

Contractor Facility

As needed, can be combined with other meeting

Technical Order In-Process

Review (TO IPR) Contractor Facility

Contractor determines the number of

IPRs required

Test Planning Working Group

(TPWG) meetings Contractor Facility Combined with other meetings

3.4.1 System Requirements Review (SRR)

The SRR shall be conducted to ensure the level of understanding of top-level system requirements is adequate to support further requirements, analysis, design activities, and that the system can proceed into initial system design with acceptable risk.

The SRR shall confirm:

a) The contractor understands the system requirements and performance requirements as captured in the system specification documentation, and that those requirements:

1) Are consistent with the preferred materiel solution (including its support concept)

2) Are consistent with program budget, schedule, risk, user and other program-specific constraints

3) Are feasible given available technologies for the preferred system solution

4) Adequately consider the maturity of interdependent system elements

5) Have bi-directional traceability with the SRD

6) Have verification methods that are defined and agreed upon

7) Can meet the program’s objectives with manageable risk

b) All system requirements and performance requirements derived from the SRD and SOW; and consistent with budget, schedule, risk, other program and system constraints, and with end-user expectations

c) Technical requirements from all acquisition documentation [e.g., Program Protection Plan (PPP);

Test & Evaluation Master Plan (TEMP); Reliability, Availability, Maintainability, and Cost (RAM-C) rationale report] are allocated to specifications

d) The technical requirements, including statutory and regulatory requirements, have been correctly and completely represented in the set of system requirements and can be developed within program budget and schedule constraints

e) The level of understanding of top-level system requirements is adequate to support further requirements analysis, decomposition, allocation, and design activities

f) Tailorable, derived, and correlated requirements are established within the framework of a candidate system logical architecture and fully derived functional segments

g) System performance requirements, non-tailorable design requirements, tailorable design requirements, available technology, and program resources (funding, schedule, staffing, and processes) are understood and will support further definition of the system logical architecture

The following work products at a minimum shall be reviewed by the SRR team.

a) System specification

b) Technical plans

c) Program risk assessment

d) Program life-cycle cost estimate

Outputs of the SRR include:

a) The review team shall document sufficient assessment results to show the program has produced the following:

1) An approved preliminary system specification

2) A preliminary allocation of system requirements to hardware, human, and software subsystems, with bi-directional traceability between the allocated requirements and the

SRD

3) Documented external interface requirements

4) An approved product support plan (PSP) with updates

5) Technical plans that are current and address the full scope of work

6) A software development plan (SDP) that adequately addresses the software-specific acceptability criteria in the technical plans section of Appendix C Table 2

7) An updated (if necessary) risk and opportunity assessment and associated risk mitigation and opportunity handling plans

8) A determination that the system requirements, preferred system solution, available technology, and program resources form a satisfactory basis for proceeding

b) The SRR technical review summary report shall be distributed containing the following attachments:

1) List of attendees

2) Final copies of all presentations

3) Updated (if necessary) risk assessment, mitigation plans, and opportunity handling plans

4) Documented action items including those required for closure

5) Meeting minutes

3.4.1.1 SRR entrance criteria:

The SRR shall be conducted only after the following events have been successfully completed:

a) The acceptability criteria for each of the SRR technical review products listed in Appendix C

Table 2 have been established

b) The government has received evidence that the system specification, technical plans, and program budget estimate are sufficiently mature to support the case for a successful SRR

c) Any prior technical reviews have been completed and its action items closed

3.4.1.2 SRR exit criteria:

The SRR shall be deemed completed only after the following events have been successfully completed:

a) All action items submitted during the technical review have been appropriately addressed.

b) All actions listed in the action items required for review closure have been completed and approved by the required parties

c) Each of the technical review products listed in Appendix C Table 2 meets all of its acceptability criteria, or has a corrective action plan documenting the corrective actions required to achieve acceptability

d) The USAF and Contractor concur that the program risk level is acceptable

e) All affected baselines have been updated in accordance with the Configuration Management

Plan (CMP)

f) The USAF SRR chair formally closes the review

3.4.2 System Function Review (SFR)

The SFR shall be conducted to help ensure that the system under review can proceed into preliminary design with acceptable risk and that all system requirements and functional performance requirements derived from the approved preliminary system specification are defined and are consistent with the program budget, program schedule, risk, and other program and system constraints.

The following work products at a minimum shall be reviewed by the SFR team. Other products may be added as necessary.

a) System functional baseline documentation

b) Major system elements definition

c) Program risk assessment

d) Technical plans

The SFR shall confirm that:

a) The system performance requirements, lower-level performance requirements, and plans for design and development form a satisfactory basis for proceeding to preliminary design

b) Design decisions and supporting rationale are documented to support bi-directional traceability from the source of the requirement to the functional baseline and preliminary allocated baseline

c) The lower-level performance requirements are fully defined and are consistent with the mature system concept

d) The requirements analysis has progressed to the point that the proposed requirements baseline is accurate, comprehensive, and fulfills the user-specified performance requirements contained in the SRD

e) Verification criteria and methods have been identified for all requirements, to be used during the SVR

f) The preliminary allocated baseline reflects the proposed requirements baseline and is balanced with respect to performance, cost, schedule, risk, and potential for evolutionary growth

g) The system functional baseline is technically achievable with regard to cost, schedule, and performance

h) The life-cycle cost (LCC) for the evolving design is consistent with the program affordability constraints

i) The preliminary physical architecture, program work breakdown structure, and contract work breakdown structure to be used subsequent to the SFR are all consistent

j) Risks have been identified and mitigation plans are in place

SFR Outputs include:

a) The review team shall document sufficient assessment results to show the program has produced the following:

1) An established system design traceable to the approved system specification (functional baseline)

2) An updated (if necessary) risk and opportunity assessment and associated risk mitigation and opportunity handling plans

3) Current data to update the cost analysis requirements description (CARD) document, based on the supplier’s proposed system functional baseline

4) An updated program development schedule including system and software critical path drivers

5) Initial requirement allocations to hardware configuration items (HWCI), software configuration items (SWCI), and humans

b) The SFR technical review meeting minutes shall be distributed containing the following attachments:

1) List of attendees

2) Final copies of all presentations

3) Requirements compliance assessment to determine the degree to which each requirement in the system functional baseline documentation satisfies one or more of the requirements in the SRD

4) Updated (if necessary) risk assessment, mitigation plans, and opportunity handling plans

5) Documented action items including those required for closure

3.4.2.1 SFR Entry Criteria

The SFR shall be conducted only after the following events have been successfully completed:

a) The acceptability criteria for each of the SFR technical review products listed in Appendix C

Table 3 have been established

b) The program manager and systems engineer have received evidence that the system functional baseline is fully defined and sufficiently documented to support the case for a successful SFR as judged against the tailored product acceptance criteria

c) Any prior technical review has been completed and its action items closed

3.4.2.2 SFR Exit Criteria

The SFR shall be deemed completed only after the following events have been successfully completed:

a) All action items submitted during the technical review have been appropriately addressed

b) All actions listed in the action items required for review closure have been completed and approved by the required parties

c) Each of the technical review products listed in Appendix C Table 3 meets all of its acceptability criteria, or has a corrective action plan documenting the corrective actions required to achieve acceptability

d) The USAF and Contractor concur that the program risk level is acceptable

e) All affected baselines have been updated in accordance with the CMP

f) The USAF SFR chair formally closes the review

3.4.3 Preliminary Integration Review (PIR)

The PIR shall be conducted to help ensure the preliminary design for the system under review is sufficiently mature and ready to proceed into detailed design and can meet the stated performance requirements within program budget, schedule, risk, and other program and system constraints.

The PIR shall confirm that:

a) All system-level functional and performance requirements base-lined at SRR and SFR have been correctly decomposed or directly allocated to the lowest level of the specification tree for all system elements uniquely identified

b) Sufficient requirement trades have been conducted, supported by systems engineering trade-off analyses, to influence the system physical architecture and allocated requirements

c) The allocated baseline is complete

d) The design as disclosed satisfies all requirements in the approved system specification

e) All external interfaces to the system, as defined at the SRR, have been documented in interface control documents

f) All system internal interfaces (system element to system element) have been documented in interface control documents

g) The verification approach to demonstrate achievement of all allocated performance requirements has been documented

h) All design constraints have been captured and incorporated into the allocated requirements and the design

i) Bi-directional traceability exists between the source requirements and the design elements for all decomposed and allocated requirements

j) All system hardware element physical architectures are complete

k) All system hardware element development specifications are complete

l) The software logical and physical architectures are complete to the extent specified in the SDP for the point in its life cycle at which PIR occurs, based on the selected life-cycle model(s)

m) The set of system elements comprising the preliminary system design can achieve the complete set of allocated system baseline requirements, and forms a satisfactory basis for proceeding into detailed design with acceptable risk

n) All critical technologies have been demonstrated in a relevant environment and can be integrated into a system with acceptable risk

o) Risks have been identified and mitigation plans are in place

The following work products at a minimum shall be reviewed by the PIR team. Other products may be added as necessary.

a) System allocated baseline documentation

b) System functional or allocated baseline documentation

c) Technical plans

d) Program risk assessment

e) Program life-cycle cost estimate

PIR Outputs include:

a) The review team shall document sufficient assessment results to show the program has produced

1) Technical data for the allocated baseline that are complete, satisfy the system specification, and provide a sufficient foundation for detailed design to proceed

2) Bi-directional traceability between all decomposed and allocated requirements to the lowest level of the specification tree, demonstrating that each and every function in the functional baseline has been allocated to one or more of the system elements, that the physical hierarchy is consistent with the functional baseline, and that there are no orphan system elements

3) Technical plans that are current and address the full scope of work

4) An updated (if necessary) risk and opportunity assessment, and associated risk mitigation and opportunity handling plans

5) Feasibility, budget, and schedule that are determined to be within acceptable risk margins.

6) A program IMS that has been updated (including systems and software critical path drivers) and includes all activities required to complete CIR

7) Updates to the CARD that reflect the design in the allocated baseline

8) Evidence to inform realistic requirements for Engineering & Manufacturing Development

(EMD) contract specifications

9) Interface requirements contained in system external interface control documentation and internal interface control documentation

b) The PIR technical review summary report shall be distributed containing the following attachments:

1) List of attendees

2) Final copies of all presentations

4) Documented action items including those required for closure

5) The tailored products listed in Appendix C Table 4 as completed following the technical review

6) Meeting minutes

3.4.3.1 PIR Entry Criteria:

The PIR shall be conducted only after the following events have been successfully completed:

a) The acceptability criteria for each of the PIR technical review products listed in Appendix C Table

4 have been established

b) The USAF and Contractor concur that the allocated baseline and the program budget estimate are sufficiently mature to support the case for a successful PIR as judged against the tailored product acceptance criteria

c) Any prior system element level or incremental PIRs on which this PIR is dependent have been completed and their action items closed, or documented action items required for closure are acknowledged

3.4.3.2 PIR Exit Criteria

a) The review team shall document sufficient assessment results to show the program has produced:

1) Technical data for the allocated baseline that are complete, satisfy the system specification, and provide a sufficient foundation for detailed design to proceed.

2) Bi-directional traceability between all decomposed and allocated requirements to the lowest level of the specification tree, demonstrating that each and every function in the functional baseline has been allocated to one or more of the system elements, that the physical hierarchy is consistent with the functional baseline, and that there are no orphan system elements.

3) Technical plans that are current and address the full scope of work.

4) An updated (if necessary) risk and opportunity assessment, and associated risk mitigation and opportunity handling plans.

5) Feasibility, budget, and schedule that are determined to be within acceptable risk margins.

6) A program IMS that has been updated (including systems and software critical path drivers) and includes all activities required to complete CIR.

7) Updates to the CARD that reflect the design in the allocated baseline.

8) Evidence to inform realistic requirements for EMD contract specifications.

9) Interface requirements contained in system external interface control documentation and internal interface control documentation.

b) The PIR technical review summary report shall be distributed containing the following attachments:

1) List of attendees

2) Final copies of all presentations

4) Documented action items including those required for closure

5) The tailored products listed in Appendix C Table 4 meet acceptability requirements

6) Meeting minutes

3.4.4 Critical Integration Review (CIR)

The CIR shall be conducted to help ensure that the detailed design for the system under review is adequate to proceed into fabrication, system integration, demonstration and test and can meet stated performance requirements within budget, schedule, risk, and other system constraints.

The CIR shall confirm that:

a) The initial product baseline is complete and describes the detailed design for production, fielding/deployment, and operations and support.

b) The system detailed design, down to the lowest system element level, is expected to satisfy the requirements of the system specification as derived from the SRD within current budget and schedule constraints.

c) The set of system elements comprising the detailed system design, including all internal and external interfaces, forms a satisfactory basis for proceeding into fabrication, integration and testing of pre-production versions of the system’s HWCIs and SWCIs with acceptable risk.

d) The detailed design of each individual configuration item (CI) that is an integral part of the system under review can meet the stated performance and engineering specialty requirements of the CI development specifications within program budget, schedule, risk, and other program and system constraints.

e) The flow down of requirements from the functional baseline to the lowest-level system detailed design element for each end item in the specification tree is complete and captured in each CI detailed design.

f) Bi-directional traceability exists between the source of the functional and allocated baselines and the lowest-level detailed design baselines.

g) The detailed designs for all external interfaces to the system satisfy the interface requirements contained in the system external interface control documentation defined at the PIR.

h) The detailed designs for all interfaces internal to the system elements satisfy the interface requirements contained in the system internal interface control documentation defined at the

PIR.

i) Verification requirements to demonstrate achievement of all specified allocated performance characteristics have been documented.

j) All design constraints and considerations have been captured and incorporated into the allocated requirements and the detailed design.

k) All design items incorporate technologies that have been demonstrated in a relevant environment and can be integrated into a system with acceptable risk.

l) Critical manufacturing processes that affect the system’s key characteristics have been identified and their capability to meet design tolerances has been demonstrated in a production-representative environment.

m) All system hardware element physical architectures and most detailed designs are complete.

n) Most system hardware element development specifications are complete.

o) The software logical and physical architectures and detailed design are complete to the extent specified in the SDP for the point in its life cycle at which CIR occurs, based on the selected lifecycle model(s).

p) The program’s decision management process documentation shows that key decisions are fully documented, executable and accompanied by sufficient rationale that supports each decision.

The following work products at a minimum shall be reviewed by the CIR team. Other products may be added as necessary.

a) System product baseline documentation

b) System functional or allocated or product baseline documentation

c) Technical plans

d) Program risk assessment

e) Program life-cycle cost estimate

CIR output includes:

a) The review team shall document sufficient assessment results to show the program has produced

1) A documented system initial product baseline with approved HWCIs and SWCIs.

2) Detailed design data for the initial product baseline that satisfy the system specification and that are sufficiently complete to support hardware fabrication and continued software implementation.

3) A documented and approved analysis with rationale supporting the conclusion that the initial product baseline satisfies the CIR.

4) Bi-directional traceability between all decomposed and allocated requirements to the lowest level of the specification tree and the system detailed design elements, demonstrating that each and every function in the functional baseline has been allocated to one or more of the system elements and that there are no orphan system elements in the detailed design.

5) Technical plans that are current and that address the full scope of work.

6) Corrective action plans for issues identified in the CIR.

7) An updated (if necessary) risk and opportunity assessment and associated risk mitigation and opportunity handling plans.

8) Feasibility, budget, and schedule that are determined to be within acceptable risk margins.

9) A program IMS that has been updated including fabrication, software implementation, test and evaluation, and critical path drivers.

10) Updates to the CARD based on the system initial product baseline.

11) An updated life-cycle sustainment plan (LCSP) including program sustainment development efforts and schedules based on current budgets, test evaluation results and firm supportability design features.

b) The CIR technical review summary report shall be distributed containing the following

1) List of attendees

2) Final copies of all presentations

3) Updated (if necessary) risk assessment, mitigation plans, and opportunity handling plans

4) Documented action items including those required for closure

5) Products listed in Appendix C Table 5 completed following the technical review

6) Meeting minutes

3.4.4.1 CIR Entry Criteria

The CIR shall be conducted only after the following events have been successfully completed:

a) The acceptability criteria for each of the CIR technical review products listed in Appendix C Table

5 have been established.

b) The government concurs that the initial product baseline and the program budget estimate is sufficiently mature to support the case for a successful CIR as judged against the tailored product acceptance criteria.

c) For the final CIR, any prior system element level or incremental CIRs have been completed and their action items closed.

3.4.4.2 CIR Exit Criteria

The CIR shall be deemed completed only after the following events have been successfully completed:

a) All action items submitted during the technical review have been appropriately addressed.

b) All actions listed in the action items required for review closure have been completed and approved by the required parties.

c) The content of corrective action plans for issues identified in the CIR is sufficiently complete and unambiguous to enable successful completion of all corrective actions.

d) Each of the technical review products listed in Appendix C Table 5 meets all of its acceptability criteria, or has a corrective action plan documenting the corrective actions required to achieve acceptability.

e) The government concurs that the program risk level is acceptable.

f) All affected baselines have been updated in accordance with the CMP.

g) The USAF CIR chair formally closes the review.

3.4.5 Test Readiness Review (TRR)

The TRR shall be conducted to assess test objectives, test methods and procedures, test scope, safety, readiness for USAF and Contractor Qualification Test and Evaluation (QT&E), and whether test resources have been properly identified and obtained.

The TRR shall confirm that:

a) The system or system element(s) are sufficiently mature and stable in configuration to begin testing.

b) The test procedures together with the planned test data to be collected are sufficiently robust to verify satisfaction of the SRD requirements.

c) Sufficient test personnel and their collective skill sets are available, and their roles and responsibilities have been clearly defined.

d) Sufficient test facilities, data collection systems, calibrated test support equipment, and logistics support necessary to perform the planned test is available.

e) Risks to equipment and human safety have been identified, analyzed, and addressed to mitigate potential hazardous outcomes.

The following work products at a minimum shall be reviewed by the TRR team. Other products may be added as necessary.

a) System technical documentation

b) Program execution and process control

c) Risk assessment

TRR outputs include:

a) The review team shall document sufficient assessment results to show the program has produced the following:

1) A documented plan for addressing technical issues and obstacles that might occur during conduct of the test

2) An updated (if necessary) risk and opportunity assessment and associated risk mitigation and opportunity handling plans

3) Lists of potential anomalies, limitations and system vulnerabilities for the planned test event

4) Verification that all planned preliminary or informal tests have been conducted and that the results satisfactorily indicate that the formal test event can begin

5) Verification that the system elements under test are sufficiently mature, defined and representative to accomplish the planned test objectives

6) Verification that the necessary safety releases from the program office have been provided to the testers prior to any test activities using personnel

7) Completed and approved test plans and procedures for the planned test event

8) Complete identification and allocation of all required test resources to the planned test

9) A recommendation on readiness to commence testing

b) The TRR summary shall be distributed containing the following attachments:

1) List of attendees

2) Final copies of all presentations

3) Updated (if necessary) risk assessment, mitigation plans, and opportunity handling plans

4) Documented action items including those required for closure

5) Products listed in Appendix C Table 6 completed following the technical review

6) Recommendation on readiness to commence the formal test event

7) Meeting minutes

3.4.5.1 TRR entrance criteria:

The TRR shall be conducted only after the following events have been successfully completed:

a) The acceptability criteria for each of the TRR technical review products listed in Appendix C

Table 6 have been established.

b) All applicable test procedures have…