SOW_Attachment_A.pdf

STATEMENT OF WORK

(SOW)

For

T-1A Avionics Modification Program

(AMP)

DATE: 7 DECEMBER 2015

REVISION NUMBER: 1

PREPARING ORGANIZATION: AFLCMC/WLZW TINKER AFB OK 73145

ii

Table of Contents

1 Introduction

1.1 Background

1.2 Scope

2 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

3 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/Security Management

3.6 Service Information and FAA Directive Review

3.6.1 Evaluation Content

3.6.2 Urgent FAA Airworthiness Directive

4 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 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 Critical Program Information Assessment

4.7.3 Anti-Tamper (AT)

4.7.4 Criticality Analysis

4.7.5 Counterfeit Prevention

4.7.6 Software Assurance

4.7.7 Cybersecurity

4.7.8 Secure Configuration of Commercial Software

5 Logistic Support Requirements

5.1 Diminishing Manufacturing Sources and Material Shortages

5.2 Supportability

5.3 Support Equipment

5.4 Spares

5.5 Key Logistic Criteria

5.6 Aircraft Installation Kit Proofing

6 System Engineering

6.1 System Engineering Management Plan

iv

6.2 Requirements Traceability

6.3 FAA Certification / Airworthiness

6.3.1 Certification Plan

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

7 Aircraft Modification Requirements

7.1 Aircraft Acceptance

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 Sell Off

8 Simulators

8.1 Training Device Modification during production

8.2 Interim Contract Support (ICS)

9 Software Management and Planning

9.1 Software Requirements Definition

9.2 Software Design

v

9.3 Software Development

9.4 Software Testing

9.5 Software Configuration

10 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

11 Training

12 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:

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

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

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

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

The T-1A fleet consists of 178 aircraft, 16 OFT’s, and 14 PTT’s stationed at five (5) Main Operating Bases (MOBs).

T-1A MOBs with aircraft and simulator quantities assigned are as follows:

T-1A Main Operating Bases – Aircraft and Simulators Assigned

Base T-1A T-1A CSO OFT 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, OH 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 multi-year, Air Force contract, one time modification, to permanently replace all of the Air Force owned and operated, T-1A avionics suites (defined below), and provide corresponding and equivalent configuration modifications for the new T-1A Avionics Suites capabilities, in all Air Force owned and operated OFT’s and PTT’s. The Contractor shall act as a single integrator to provide a turnkey solution for the avionics replacement described in this SOW.

The Contractor shall provide a solution for this contract which utilizes an Avionics Suite for an existing Beechcraft 400A (or equivalent aircraft) Supplemental Type Certificate (STC), as a baseline for prototype approval, and resulting in a FAA 400T STC solution for the T-1A fleet. The proposed suite, as a system, shall have a Technology Readiness Level of 8 IAW Technology Readiness Assessment Guidance, April 2011.

The Contractor’s proposed solution shall mitigate Avionics Obsolescence on the T-1A for the life cycle of the aircraft (next 20+ years). The Contractor’s proposed solution shall satisfy the FAA’s Automatic Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast (ADS-B) mandate for CFR 14 Part 91, supporting the T-1A's standing requirement to access the National Airspace System.

The Contractor’s proposed new T-1A Avionics Suite shall be commercially available and is defined as:

a) Shall perform to the existing T-1A System Requirements Document (SRD) Matrix

b) Shall consist entirely of Commercial off-The-Shelf (COTS) components (vs unique to 400T)

The Contractor shall provide for two T-1A complete aircraft prototype Avionics Suite installations, one

(1) non-CSO and one (1) CSO modified, and one T-1A fully functional, fully complete prototype modification of T-1A Government simulators - for each of the one (1) OFT and one (1) PTT.

Within 12 months of contract award, the Contractor delivered T-1A aircraft prototypes shall result in a fully integrated, fully operational, flight tested, Avionics Suite installed in accordance with (IAW) FAA standards, using Original Equipment Manufacturer (OEM) components, which are commercially available as COTS, operational flight test approved T-1A, with FAA certified Supplemental Type Certificate(s) for the Beechcraft T-1A, listing all Air Force T-1A tail numbers.

The Contractor shall provide all manpower, material, equipment, components, skills, expertise and knowledge, (and meet) all required prototype modifications, fleet modifications, to fully and successfully complete contract.

The Contractor shall also provide for the following logistics needs: Supply, Spares, Training Materials, Training, Aircraft Manuals converted to Air Force format, OFT and PTT manuals, Data Rights, Technical Data Packages, Frequency Spectrum Data, Cyber Security Analysis, and other data, analysis, and support described herein.

2 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-516B Airworthiness Certification Criteria 29 Feb 2008 MIL-STD-1472 [B9] DoD HCI Style Guide [B3] 30 Apr 1996 MIL-STD-31000A Technical Data Packages 26 Feb 2013

MIL-STD-464A

Electromagnetic Environmental Effects Requirements for Systems

19 Dec 2002

MIL-STD-882E

Department of Defense Standard Practice for System Safety

11 May 2012

MIL-STD-38784A Department of Defense Standard Practice for Manuals, 25 Aug 2011

Technical: General Style and Format Requirements Specifications

Document Number Document Title Version/Date DI-ADMN-81249A Conference Agenda Rev A DI-ADMN-81250A Conference Minutes Rev A DI_ADMN-81306 Program Protection Implementation Plan DI-ADMN-81373 Presentation Material DI-CMAN-80640C Request for Deviation Rev C DI-CMAN-80642C Notice of Revision Rev C DI-SESS-81248B Interface Control Document Rev B DI-ILSS-81089 Training Facilities Report DI-SESS-81495A Failure Mode, Effects, and Criticality Analysis Report Rev A DI-IPSC-81427A Software Development Plan Rev A DI-IPSC-81431A System/Subsystem Specification Rev A DI-IPSC-81432A System/Subsystem Design Description Rev A DI-IPSC-81433A Software Requirements Rev A DI-IPSC-81435A Software Design Description Rev A DI-IPSC-81436A Interface Design Description Rev A DI-IPSC-81437A Database Design Description Rev A DI-IPSC-81438A Software Test Plan Rev A DI-IPSC-81439A Software Test Description Rev A DI-IPSC-81440A Software Test Report Rev A DI-IPSC-81441A Software Product Specification Rev A DI-IPSC-81442A Software Version Description Rev A DI-MGMT-80004A Management Plan Rev A DI-MGMT- 80368A Monthly Status Report Rev A DI-MGMT-81453A Data Accession List Rev A DI-MGMT-81501A Weight and Balance Report for Aircraft Rev A DI-MGMT-81650 Integrated Master Schedule DI-MISC-80508B Technical Report Rev B DI-MISC-80678 Certification/Data Report DI-MISC-81241 Airworthiness Directives/Service Bulletins/Advisory Data DI-MISC-81397C Hazardous Materials Management Program Report Rev C DI-NDTI-80566A Test Plan Rev A DI-NDTI-80809B Test/Inspection Report Rev B DI-NDTI-81284 Test and Evaluation Program Plan

DI-QCIC-80126B

Government Industry Data Exchange Program Alert Response

Rev B

DI-QCIC-81536 Test Information Sheet DI-SAFT-80101C System Safety Hazard Analysis Report Rev B

DI-SAFT-81563 Accident/Incident Report DI-SAFT-81626 System Safety Program Plan DI-SESS-80294B Maintenance and Test Support Equipment List Rev B

DI-SESS-81002F

Developmental Design Drawings/Modes and Associated Lists

Rev F

DI-SESS-81359B Parts Lists Rev B DI-SESS-81731 Traceability Data DI-SESS-81732 Request for Waiver DI-SESS-81766 Airworthiness Certification DI-SESS-81785A System Engineering Management Plan Rev A

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 Regulation

Document Number Document Title Version/Date FAR 52.219-14 Limitations on Subcontracting 1 Oct 2009

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 Sep 2014

TO 00-35D-54

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

15 May 2015

TO 1-1-689-3 Cleaning and Corrosion Control 15 Jul 2008

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 Jul 2006 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 20 Material Safety Data Sheet

Other Documents Document Number Document Title Version/Date AETCI 36-2219 Type 1 Training 18 Apr 2008 AFI 10-220 Contractors Flight and Ground Operations 21 Aug 2013 AFI 33-210 Air Force Certification and Accreditation Program 23 Dec 2008 AFI 33-580 Spectrum Management 17 Jan 2013 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 33-2 Information Assurance Program 3 Aug 2011 AIA NAS 411 Hazardous Materials Management Plan Rev 2

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 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-178C

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 25 Feb 2014

Derivative Aircraft

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 1 Jan 2010

3 Program Requirements The Contractor shall utilize standard, open system interfaces, and Commercial off-The-Shelf components in the T-1A avionics suite 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 similarly equipped aircraft. The Contractor’s proposed solution shall be FAA certified for use in the T-1A within twelve (12) months of contract award.

The Contractor’s T-1A AMP program 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) prototype aircraft, one of each mission design

b) Perform integration engineering and design for all prototype efforts required to obtain USAF approval on two (2) prototype training devices, one OFT and one PTT

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), (15) OFT simulators, and (13) PTT devices

e) Integrated logistics support which includes initial spares for the aircraft and simulators 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 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) #, DI-MISC-81397C, Hazardous Materials Management Program Report).

The Contractor shall ensure that hazardous materials (HAZMAT) and ozone depleting substances (ODSs) are not required for the manufacture, operation, maintenance, support, or disposal of the T-1A avionics suite or simulator equipment. 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 avionics suite or simulator 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 and use, storage, transportation, and disposal; and

c) A copy of the Material Safety Data Sheet (OSHA Form 20 or DD Form 2357), as appropriate.

3.2 GOVERNMENT PROPERTY MANAGEMENT, SALVAGE AND DISPOSAL

The Contractor shall safely protect and retain all removed Line Replaceable Units as accountable government property, and provide the Government a monthly Contractor managed “Government Property” report (CDRL #, DI-MGMT- 80368A, Status Report). This includes any LRU’s, their supporting parts, and equipment (including all obsolete parts).

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

Disposal shall be in accordance with Air Force, local and all Federal Regulations.

Upon written Government approval, the Contractor shall safely return all requested Contractor managed/removed LRU’s, supporting parts, and equipment to the Government per written Government instructions.

3.3 DATA RIGHTS

All technical data and training device software related to this program will 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 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, OFT and PTT software, installation drawings, and STC.

3.4 MEETING SUPPORT

The Contractor shall support required meetings and teleconferences to discuss program status, review requirements compliance, and resolve open issues. Subcontractors will be authorized to attend meetings and teleconferences. The Contractor shall develop and publish the agenda for meetings and reviews it conducts. The Contractor shall deliver agendas in accordance with the IMS (CDRL #, 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 #, 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 #, DI-ADMN-81250A, Conference Minutes). The Government shall be invited to key Contractor / Subcontractor meetings which will impact scheduled milestones.

The Contractor shall conduct the meetings and reviews listed in Table 3-1 at one of its facilities in the location specified. Table 3-1 Contractor Conducted Meetings 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. Tentative dates, scheduling, and grouping of meetings and reviews will be determined during the Post Award Meeting.

The Contractor shall invite the Government to all Aircraft Certification Working Group (ACWG) meetings.

Government discretion will be used on any reviews related to the OFT and PTT in Table 3-1.

Table 3-1 Contractor Conducted Meetings Event Quantity Location Notes

Technical Reviews:

System Requirements Review (SRR) 1 Contractor Facility Aircraft and training device held together

System Functional Review

(SFR)

2 Contractor Facility Aircraft and training device 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

Modification Readiness Review (MRR)

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)

2 Contractor Facility 1 for aircraft; 1 for training devices

System Verification Review

(SVR)

2 Contractor Facility 1 for aircraft; 1 for training devices

Production Readiness Review

(PRR)

1 Contractor Facility Aircraft and training device held together

Physical Configuration Audit

(PCA)

2 Contractor Facility Aircraft and training device held together

Technical Interchange Meetings (TIM)

As required

Management Reviews:

Post Award Meeting 1 Contractor Facility Integrated Baseline Review 2 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 will 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 help ensure the level of understanding of top-level system requirements is adequate to support further requirements analysis and 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 as judged against the tailored product acceptance criteria.

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 summary report 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 draft 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 acquirer 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

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

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

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

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 flowdown 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

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 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 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 5have 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 requirements set for which the test is intended to address.

c) Disciplined test processes are in place and the test procedures have been validated prior to use.

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

e) The test team understands the system or system element capabilities to be tested and any vulnerabilities and limitations of the system element(s) under test sufficiently well to conduct the testing accurately.

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

g) 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

a) System technical documentation

b) Test environment

c) Program execution and process control

d) Risk assessment

e) Program life-cycle cost estimate and schedules

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…