GPR 7120.11.pdf

DIRECTIVE NO. GPR 7120.11 APPROVED BY Signature: Original Signed By

EFFECTIVE DATE: April 28, 2021 NAME: Eric K. Isaac

EXPIRATION DATE: April 28, 2026 TITLE: Director, Safety and Mission Assurance

CHECK THE GSFC DIRECTIVES MANAGEMENT SYSTEM AT

http://gdms.gsfc.nasa.gov TO VERIFY THAT THIS IS THE CORRECT VERSION PRIOR TO USE.

08/16

Goddard Procedural Requirements (GPR)

COMPLIANCE IS MANDATORY

Responsible Office: 300/Safety and Mission Assurance

Title: Technical Authority

PREFACE

P.1 PURPOSE

The purpose of this directive is to identify those Technical Authority Requirements that are specific to the Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC) as they apply to Health and Medical, Engineering, and Safety and Mission Assurance (SMA). This directive also documents the individuals who are delegated implementation responsibility by the Center Director pursuant to Section 3.3 of NPR 7120.5.

P.2 APPLICABILITY

a. This Directive applies to all Directorates in their support of any activities managed by GSFC included in the scope of NPR 7120.5 and NPR 7120.8. HTMA applicability is per NPR 7120.11.

b. In this directive, all document citations are assumed to be the latest version unless otherwise noted.

c. In this directive, all mandatory actions (i.e., requirements) are denoted by statements containing the term “shall.” The terms “may” or “can” denote discretionary privilege or permission; “should” denotes a good practice and is recommended but not required; “will” denotes expected outcome; and

“are/is” denotes descriptive material.

P.3 AUTHORITY

a. NPD 7120.4E, NASA Engineering and Program/Project Management Policy

b. NPR 7120.5, NASA Space Flight Program and Project Management Requirements

c. NPR 7120.8, NASA Research and Technology Program and Project

d. NPR 7120.11, NASA Health and Medical Technical Authority (HMTA) Implementation

e. NPR 8705.6, Safety and Mission Assurance (SMA) Audits, Reviews, and Assessments

f. NPR 8715.3, NASA General Safety Program Requirements

P.4 APPLICABLE DOCUMENTS AND FORMS

a. 300-PG-7120.0.1-, SMA Technical Authority Implementation Plan

b. 500-PG-7120.0.1A, Engineering Technical Authority Implementation Plan http://gdms.gsfc.nasa.gov/

DIRECTIVE NO. GPR 7120.11 Page 2 of 9

EFFECTIVE DATE: April 28, 2021

EXPIRATION DATE: April 28, 2026

P.5 CANCELLATION

GID 7120.3, Technical Authority

P.6 SAFETY

None

P.7 TRAINING

None

P.8 RECORDS

Record Title Record Custodian Retention

Technical Authority Memo Respective Branch Head *NRRS 8/102: TEMPORARY.

Destroy/Delete When No Longer

Needed.

*NRRS 1441.1 – NASA Records Retention Schedules

The individual who exercises Technical Authority will send a memo or email to their Branch Head as a notification and explanation of why TA was invoked. Once resolution is reached, a follow up memo or email will be sent to the Branch Head for closed loop reporting.

P.9 MEASUREMENT/VERIFICATION

Once TA is invoked, management meetings will be held as specified under procedures. Records of meetings will be kept and any actions documented.

DIRECTIVE NO. GPR 7120.11 Page 3 of 9

PROCEDURES

1.0 Overview

This procedure establishes the implementation of Health and Medical Technical Authority (HMTA) per

NPR 7120.11, Engineering TA (ETA) per NPR 7120.5, and SMA TA per NPR 7120.5. NASA established this TA process as part of its system of checks and balances to provide independent oversight of programs and projects in support of safety and mission success through the selection of specific individuals with delegated levels of authority. These individuals are the Technical Authorities

(TAs).

2.0 Health and Medical Technical Authority (HMTA)

The GSFC Chief Medical Officer has been delegated HMTA by the Chief Health and Medical Officer

(CHMO) with concurrence from the Center Director and is responsible for implementing HMTA at the

GSFC per NPR 7120.11. Unlike Engineering and SMA, HMTA is not integrated at the working level in the day-to-day program/project processes. To enhance HMTA awareness, the CHMO will utilize the participation of engineering and SMA TA’s in the day-to-day program/project work. Their responsibility is to identify potential health, medical, and human performance issues and notify the appropriate levels of HMTA in a timely manner (see paragraph 2.6 of NPR 7120.11).

3.0 Engineering Technical Authority (ETA)

The GSFC Center Director is the final executor of Engineering TA for the Center. The GSFC Center

Director delegates Center Engineering TA to the Director of the Engineering and Technology

Directorate (ETD). The ETD Director flows Engineering TA down to Division Chiefs, Branch Heads, and Program/Project Lead Engineers. The Director of ETD maintains configuration control of the

Engineering TA Implementation Plan (500-PG-7120.0.1).

4.0 Safety and Mission Assurance (SMA) Technical Authority

The GSFC Center Director is the final executor of SMA TA for the Center. The GSFC Center Director delegates Center SMA TA to the Director of the Safety and Mission Assurance Directorate. The SMA

Director flows SMA TA down to the Division Chiefs, Branch Heads, and Chief Safety and Mission

Assurance Officers (CSOs). SMA maintains configuration control of 300-PG-7120.0.1, SMA TA

Implementation Plan. SMA has TA through the CSO that is sometimes project funded and sometimes funded by Center Engineering, Safety and Operations (CESO). To maintain independence, their Branch

Head and the Division Chief are funded by CESO and they go through that chain as they raise their concerns to the Director of SMA.

DIRECTIVE NO. GPR 7120.11 Page 4 of 9

5.0 Flow of Authority

The flow of authority and acceptance of risk is described in NPR 7120.5. ETA originates from the

NASA Administrator and is formally delegated to the NASA Associate Administrator then flows to the

NASA Chief Engineer to the Center Director and further within the Center to the Director of

Engineering who further delegates ETA to Engineering Division Chiefs, Engineering Branch Heads, and

Program/Project Lead Engineers. ETA concerns are raised up the chain: from Branch Heads to Division

Chiefs to the Director of Engineering, and from program/project lead engineers to the Director of

Engineering. The Director of Engineering may further raise the concern to the Center Director. The

Director of Engineering or the Center Director can further raise the concern to the NASA Chief

Engineer and on to the NASA Administrator.

SMA TA originates from the NASA Administrator and is formally delegated to the NASA Associate

Administrator then flows to the NASA Chief of Safety and Mission Assurance to the Center Director and further within the Center to the Director of SMA who further delegates SMA TA to SMA Division

Chiefs, SMA Branch Heads, and CSOs. SMA TA concerns are raised up the chain: from CSOs to

Branch Heads to Division Chiefs to the Director of SMA. The Director of SMA may further raise the concern to the Center Director. The Director of SMA or the Center Director can further raise the concern to the NASA Chief of SMA and on to the NASA Associate Administrator and to the NASA

Administrator.

Only those individuals in positions with formally delegated TA can exercise Technical Authority.

Although a limited number of individuals make up the TAs, their work is enabled by the contributions of the program's or project's working-level engineers and other supporting personnel (e.g., contracting officers). Although the working-level engineers do not have formally delegated TA and consequently may not serve in a TA capacity, they can go to their respective Branch Heads to express their concerns if those concerns haven’t been addressed to their satisfaction by the holders of the TA at the program/project level.

The responsibilities of a program or project manager are not diminished by the implementation of TA.

The program or project manager is ultimately responsible for the safe conduct and successful outcome of the program or project in conformance with governing requirements. This includes meeting programmatic, institutional, technical, safety, cost, and schedule commitments.

6.0 Safety and Mission Success Review (SMSR)

For NPR 7120.5 programs and projects, TA for both Engineering and SMA for the GSFC payload culminates in the Safety and Mission Success Review (SMSR) (see NPR 8705.6), and shall be presented by the Project’s Mission Systems Engineer (MSE) and the CSO (or their appropriate substitutes) shortly before launch in accordance with the schedule established by Headquarters (HQ). The SMSR for GSFC missions is a Headquarters’ review co-chaired by the Office of the Chief Engineer (OCE) and the Chief

DIRECTIVE NO. GPR 7120.11 Page 5 of 9 of the Office of Safety and Mission Assurance (OSMA) and includes presentations by the launch vehicle provider as well as the GSFC payload MSE and CSO. The SMSR provides the knowledge, visibility, and understanding necessary for senior SMA and engineering management to either concur or non-concur with risk acceptance for the mission and to concur or non-concur to proceed with a launch or significant flight activity.

7.0 Program/Project Managers and Principal Investigators (PIs)

Program/project managers and/or Principal Investigators do not have TA, but they are responsible for the overall success of their project (cost, schedule, and technical), and are responsible for implementing

TA actions.

8.0 Formal Dissent

The process for handling formal dissents is based on the personal responsibility, which each individual has to adhere to the Agency’s shared core values of safety, integrity, teamwork, excellence and inclusion. In exercising this personal responsibility, individuals are required and encouraged to bring diverse views to the appropriate authority (e.g. the Program or Project Manager, anyone in the TA chain) in an open and timely manner, and without fear of retribution. Formal dissents are solicited, documented, reported, and dispositioned appropriately in accordance with the SMA and Engineering

Directorates’ TA Implementation Plans. The Formal Dissent Process is defined in NPD 1000.0.

Formal dissents are not necessarily tied to the SMSR process and are expected to be raised when they best influence positive outcomes. They may be raised at any time in the project lifecycle.

Key steps of the Formal Dissent process are:

a. The individual raising the dissent must specifically request that the dissent be recorded and resolved by the Formal Dissent process.

b. Disagreeing parties must jointly establish the facts agreed upon and their respective positions, rationale, and recommendations. A Formal Dissent must be supportable and based on a clear and sound rationale (not on vague or unyielding opposition).

c. The parties jointly and transparently present their views to the next higher level of the involved authorities (e.g., the Programmatic Authority, Technical Authority, and/or Institutional

Authority, as applicable).

d. If the dissenter is not satisfied with the process or outcome, the dissenter may appeal to the next higher level of management. The dissenter has the right to take the issue upward through the organization, even to the NASA Administrator, if necessary.

e. A Center Director may, at his or her discretion, request expedited hearing of a Formal Dissent at any level within the Agency up to and including the NASA Administrator based upon his or her judgement that a rapid resolution of the Formal Dissent is in the best interests of the Agency and the dissenting individual/organization.

DIRECTIVE NO. GPR 7120.11 Page 6 of 9

All authorities may be involved in decision-making in items that represent differences or formal dissents. In the event an authority chooses to (1) overrule a lower-level authority’s decision, or (2) non-concur with any formal dissent pending appeal, transparency in decision-making requires that they explain it to the person raising the issue and those above them in the authoritative chain.

DIRECTIVE NO. GPR 7120.11 Page 7 of 9

Appendix A – Definitions

A.1 Technical Authority. Part of NASA's system of checks and balances that provides independent oversight of programs and projects in support of safety and mission success through the selection of individuals at delegated levels of authority. These individuals are the Technical Authorities.

Technical Authority delegations are formal and traceable to the Administrator.

A.2 Technical Authority Requirements. Requirements invoked by OCE, Office of Safety and

Mission Assurance (OSMA), and Office of the Chief Health and Medical Officer (OCHMO) documents (e.g., NPRs or technical standards cited as program or project requirements) or contained in Center institutional documents.

A.3 Safety and Health Mission Support Authority. The Institutional Authorities providing mission support with respect to safety of the workforce, public, and facilities.

DIRECTIVE NO. GPR 7120.11 Page 8 of 9

Appendix B – Acronyms

ETD Engineering and Technology Directorate

CESO Center Engineering, Safety and Operations

CHMO Chief Health and Medical Officer

CSO Chief Safety and Mission Assurance Officer

ETA Engineering Technical Authority

GID Goddard Interim Directive

GPR Goddard Procedural Requirements

GSFC Goddard Space Flight Center

HMTA Health and Medical Technical Authority

HQ Headquarters

MSE Mission Systems Engineer

NASA National Aeronautics and Space Administration

NPR NASA Procedural Requirement

OCE Office of Chief Engineer

OCHMO Office of Chief Health and Medical Officer

OSMA Office of Safety and Mission Assurance

PG Procedures and Guidelines

SMA Safety and Mission Assurance

SMSR Safety and Mission Success Review

TA Technical Authority

WFF Wallops Flight Facility

DIRECTIVE NO. GPR 7120.11 Page 9 of 9

CHANGE HISTORY LOG

Revision Effective Date Description of Changes

Baseline 04/28/2021 Initial Release