Clear-Cod UEWR SOW-2Ltr Results CLEAN.1 8Dec11.docx

Contract #: XX XX-XX-XX

Upgraded Early Warning Radar (UEWR) (Clear and Cape Cod)

Statement of Work

WARNING

This document contains technical data whose export is restricted by the Arms Export Control Act (Title 22, U.S.C. section 2751 et. seq.) or the Export Administration Act of 1979, as amended (50 U.S.C Appendix 2401 et. Seq.). Violation of these export laws is subject to sever criminal penalties. Disseminate in accordance with provisions of DOD Directive 5230.25 and

AFI 61-204.

DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT D

Distribution authorized to U.S. Government agencies and their contractors. Other requests for this document shall be referred to:

MISSILE DEFENSE AGENCY (MDA)

SENSORS DIRECTORATE (SN)

HUNTSVILLE, ALABAMA

35897-3801

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY STATEMENT

This document contains information exempt from mandatory disclosure under the FOIA. Exemption (3) applies (10 USC 130, Authority to Withhold Unclassified Technical Data with Space or Military Application).

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Clear-Cod UEWR SOW-2Ltr Result CLEAN 8 Dec11

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

COMPETITION SENSITIVE SOURCE SELECTION INFORMATION See FAR 2.101 and 3.104

Rev 2 – 18 November 2010

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

Clear-Cod UEWR SOW-2Ltr Results CLEAN.1 8Dec11.docx

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

SOURCE SELECTION SENSITIVE– See FAR 2.101 and 3.104 vi

STATEMENT OF WORK (SOW)

Sensors UEWR

1. INTRODUCTION

1.1 Introduction

This contract shall upgrade the Early Warning Radar (EWR) at Clear Air Force Station (AFS), Alaska, with an option for Cape Cod AFS, Massachusetts (herein referred to as the Clear Upgrade and Cape Cod Upgrade respectively). Under this contract the Signal Processors (SP) and Data Processors (DP) at Beale Air Force Base (AFB), California shall be rehosted yielding a clean and stable baseline for the Clear upgrade (and the Cape Cod upgrade if contract option is exercised). The primary purpose of the Clear and Cape Cod upgrades is to add a missile defense capability to the existing missile warning and space surveillance missions, while maintaining the on-going operational mission. The contractor shall be responsible for working with the Missile Defense Agency (MDA) Ballistic Missile Defense System (BMDS) integration/communication contractors to establish connectivity from the radar to the Ground-Based Midcourse Defense (GMD) Fire Control and Communication (GFCC). The Clear Upgrade shall be designed based on Revision G of the Prime Item Development Specification (PIDS) and this SOW. Although not required under the provisions of this contract to fully implement the requirements of PIDS Rev H and the BMD System Specification (SS), the design shall be modular, scalable, flexible, and robust enough to be able to address these additional and future emerging requirements without significant architecture modifications. The contractor shall develop and maintain an open architecture that is: reconfigurable, portable, maintainable, capable of technology insertion, vendor- independent, reusable, scalable, interoperable, upgradeable, and long-term supportable. The contractor modular design and integration shall maximize the use of COTS component/ interface standards, technologies, products, or architectures while ensuring logistical supportability throughout the life cycle.

The Clear Upgrade is envisioned to consist of a team of multiple contractors: UEWR contractor; United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) site construction contractor; all Command, Control, Battle Management, and Communication (C2BMC) GFCC agencies and contractors; and the Single Stimulation Framework (SSF) contractor. The scope of work defined in this Request for Proposal (RFP) is limited to the radar upgrade. Additionally, there will be several concurrent efforts at Clear which will require careful scheduling coordination and de-confliction throughout this upgrade.

The Cape Cod Upgrade will be an option to the base contract. Should the Cape Cod option be exercised, the contractor shall implement the Clear Upgrade design, install, and test this capability into the Cape Cod system. The contractor shall support all UEWR integration efforts into the BMDS.

1.2 Background

The initial Upgraded Early Warning Radar (UEWR) effort was part of the April 1998 contract for the Lead System Integrator for the Ground-Based, Midcourse Defense (GMD) segment of the Ballistic Missile Defense System (BMDS). A second GMD contract in 2001 deployed both Beale and Fylingdales UEWRs. A Thule UEWR Contract followed in 2006 with the BMDS integration completed under the GMD Core Completion (BMDS Integration) Contract in 2008. This EWR upgrade contract documents the requirements for upgrading the EWR at Clear AFS, Alaska, with a follow-up option to also upgrade the EWR at Cape Cod AFS, Massachusetts.

1.3 Government Actions

The Government is expected to take the following actions in support of the UEWR contractor for the course of the period of performance:

· Co-chair the UEWR contractor Integrated Product Teams (IPT) as an approving member in addressing the issues relevant to each IPT. Assignments to the various IPTs may vary based on the direction of the UEWR Government Program Manager.

· Provide sponsorship and funding to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers for the implementation of the Clear UEWR facility and site requirements in accordance with the information provided to and incorporated into the MDA Facility Requirements Document (FRD) for Clear.

· Provide sponsorship and coordination to facilitate direct interface between the UEWR contractor and other contractors and Government organizations (e.g., Air Force Space Command (AFSPC), US Strategic Command (USSTRATCOM), US Northern Command, MDA, Electronic Systems Center Missile Warning, Defense, and Wideband Sensors Branch Sustainment Office (ESC/HSIGS), the USAF Sustainment contractor; Operational Test Agency (OTA); other Government programs (e.g., Single Stimulation Framework (SSF), and all communications for C2BMC and GMD to connect UEWR to GMD Fire Control System support agencies and contractors in support of Ballistic Missile Defense Systems)). Upon BMDS integration and upgrade completion, Clear and Cape Cod will be certified and added to the BMDS architecture.

· Facility changes required at the Centralized Integration Support Facility (CISF) shall be the responsibility of the Government.

· Develop and process Software Change Forms (SCF) and 1067s (Modification Proposal) for SP/DP design at Beale.

· Obtaining system accreditation and authorization to operate for all missions is the responsibility of the Government.

2. Applicable Documents All documents listed in this SOW shall apply to the base and option.

2.1 Reference Documents

The following documents are provided for guidance.

2.2 Common Compliance Documents

The following documents, of the exact issue specified, form a part of this UEWR Statement of Work which shall be executed in accordance with (IAW) the documents specified herein. Where no date is specified, the revision of the document current as of the date of this Statement of Work applies. In the event of a conflict between any of the following documents and this Statement of Work, this Statement of Work shall have precedence.

GOVERNMENT DOCUMENTS

NOTE: When PIDS is invoked in this contract, it includes the following updated UEWR PIDS documents.

End of UEWR PIDS Documents

Doc No. H310673; Revision F 1 Jul 10

Change 1 16 Jul 08

28 Dec 10

Change 1 01Sep 10

2.2.2 UEWR Interface Control Documents (ICD)/Interface Design Documents (IDD)

1) UEWR to GFC IDD - D742-10109-2 Revision F 30 Jun 10

2) UEWR to SSF "Draft" ICD developed by Missile Defense System Engineering and Test (MDSET) Government Team - 14 Oct 10 (replaces UEWR to ET IDD)

· Item #2 above represents an in process update to UEWR to ET IDD - D742-10104-2 Revision B - PIRN 01 (update) - Dated 30 May 07, IRN 02 15May 08, IRN 03 19 May 09, IRN 04 20 Apr 09

3) EWR to ITW/AA and Space Surveillance Network (SSN) Interface Control Document (ICD) Document No. H38164, Rev G 15 Sep 10

4) UEWR Internal Network Processing Equipment (PE) Networking ICD Document No. G760210 Rev G 15 Sep 10

5) UEWR Stand-Alone Trainer (UST) ICD Document No. H329070 Rev. C 8Nov04

6) UEWR External Communication Interfaces ICD H337211 Rev. A 15 Jul09

7) VCN3/VCN4 Technical Data Package

1. REQUIREMENTS

This Statement of Work (SOW) describes the effort required by the contractor for the Upgraded Early Warning Radar (UEWR) Program. The contractor is responsible for the design, development, manufacturing, delivery, installation and test of the operational Simulator Tester (S-T) and Signal Processor/Data Processor (SP/DP) hardware/software suite at Beale AFB, CA, and the Clear Upgrade, with an option for the Cape Cod upgrade, while maintaining the operational mission at all affected locations. The contractor shall leverage the latest UEWR operational baseline which reflects the PIDS (Revision G). The contractor shall rehost the signal and data processors, install and test that design at Beale, and verify that design through operational acceptance. The contractor shall coordinate with and share information, subject to the restrictions in and of the established Proprietary Information Agreements, with the UEWR and support contractors for the parallel Clear AFS activities. This effort will culminate in operational acceptance of Beale, followed by Clear in FY16 and if the option is exercised, at Cape Cod in FY17. The contractor shall complete final site configuration, calibration (as needed), and restoration at each site following operational acceptance.

3.1 Program Management

The contractor shall provide the executive level leadership to implement and control the program activities throughout the life of the program. These duties shall include, but are not limited to: serving as the focal point to the UEWR Program Office; conducting and integrating all aspects of the program such as contract schedule, cost, risk management and technical status to ensure successful design reviews and execution. The contractor shall perform the necessary administration required to support the contract and provide coordination for the development of presentations, the arrangement and coordination of Program Management Reviews (PMR), and other reviews and meetings.

3.1.1 Integrated Product and Process Development (IPPD)

The contractor shall establish and implement an IPPD process in all technical and functional disciplines to assist the Government Program Manager in effective communication and program execution. The IPPD process shall allow for coordination/interaction with the Government and other designated contractors on: schedule reconciliations, technical interchanges, comprehensive program management meetings, integrated product team meetings, and related tasks necessary to deliver the requisite performance within cost and schedule constraints. The contractor shall provide monthly program status reports to the Government (Automated Data Product (ADP) 4). The Government shall be notified of all emergent issues as they arise.

The contractor shall provide all administrative effort associated with issuing and monitoring sub-tier contract efforts and products including cost and schedule requirements and reporting. The contractor shall ensure flow down of applicable Government technical and administrative requirements to all sub-contractors. The contractor shall maintain and provide current status of sub-contracts including scope of work, cost, schedule, and status of products and data items.

The contractor shall plan and implement Working Groups with approval provided by the Government. The contractor shall ensure de-confliction and synergy where possible with subordinate working groups to support the Joint Program Management Plan (JPMP). The subordinate working groups at a minimum are:

· Integrated Logistics Support Management Team (ILSMT)

· Training Planning Team (TPT)

· Test Planning Working Group (TPWG)

· Joint Schedule Working Group (JSWG)

· Security Working Group (SWG)

· Communications Working Group (CWG)

· Site Activation Task Force/Facility Working Group (SATF/FWG)

· Interface Control Working Group (ICWG)

· Engineering Working Group (EWG)

3.1.1.1 Technical Interchange Meeting (TIM)

The Government will schedule, or the contractor shall schedule with Government concurrence, TIMs, as required. The purpose of these TIMs is to allow for technical interchange between the various UEWR stakeholders (e.g., other Government contractors) and/or Government subject matter experts.

3.1.2 Program Management Reviews

The contractor shall conduct an initial Program Management Review (PMR) within 60 calendar days of contract award and at least quarterly thereafter. External stakeholders (e.g., other Government prime contractors) may be invited as jointly approved by the Government and the UEWR Contractor. Each PMR shall address at a minimum: technical, financial, schedule, risk, action items, technical performance measures, and quality assurance findings. To the extent feasible, the contractor shall schedule PMRs concurrent with other meetings or TIMs in order to reduce costs. PMRs shall be held at the contractor’s facility or at a location designated by the Government. The contractor shall coordinate an agenda with the Government at least 10 working days in advance of each PMR. The PMR read ahead material shall be available at least two working days prior to the PMR. The contractor shall plan, prepare for, conduct, and provide minutes of all program and technical reviews within 10 working days of completion of these reviews (ADP 4).

3.1.3 Business Operations

The contractor shall establish, maintain, and use an integrated performance management system in the performance of this contract. A validated Earned Value Management System (EVMS) shall be a part of this integrated system that is compliant with the EVMS guidelines contained in ANSI/EIA-748. The EVMS shall use the Contract Work Breakdown Structure (CWBS) IAW MIL-STD 881C and CWBS Dictionary (Contract Data Requirements List (CDRL) A003). The contractor shall develop, maintain and deliver:

· The Contract Funds Status Report (CFSR) (CDRL A004)

· Contract Performance Report (CPR) (CDRL A005)

· Cost Data Summary Report (CDSR - DD Form 1921) (CDRL A001)

· Functional Cost-Hour Report (FCHR)/Progress Curve Report (CDRL A002)

The EVMS shall be linked to, and supported by the contractor’s management processes and systems to include the Integrated Master Schedule (IMS), change management, material management, procurement, cost estimating, and accounting. The correlation and integration of these systems and processes shall provide for early indication of cost and schedule problems, and their relation to technical achievement.

3.1.3.1 Integrated Baseline Reviews (IBR)

The contractor shall engage jointly with the Government’s Program Manager in IBRs to evaluate the risks inherent in the contract’s planned performance measurement baseline IAW MDA 5004.1H and BMDS 5004.01. The initial IBR shall occur not later than four months after contract award. Subsequent IBRs shall occur after each major change to the baseline, and at Government direction. The totality of the baseline may be reviewed and evaluated annually by the Government. The Contractor shall use the latest approved performance measurement baseline (to include the entire contract scope of work), be consistent with contract schedule requirements, and assign adequate resources. IBRs shall be conducted on subcontracts that meet or exceed the EVMS application threshold. The UEWR Contractor shall lead the subcontractor IBRs, with active participation by the Government.

3.1.3.2 Integrated Master Schedule (IMS)

The Contractor shall develop, maintain, and manage the execution of the program using an Integrated Master Schedule (IMS) and Integrated Master Plan (CDRL A006) as part of the day –to –day execution tools. The Integrated Master Plan (IMP) shall incorporate the events, criteria and tasks the contractor will use to manage the execution of the program and shall be mapped to the SOW. The IMS shall contain the networked, detailed tasks necessary to manage program execution.

The IMP and IMS shall be traceable to the Contract Work Breakdown Structure (CWBS), Earned Value Management System (EVMS) and the Statement of Work (SOW). The IMS shall be used to evaluate progress toward meeting program objectives, and to integrate the program schedule activities. The IMS shall contain program events, accomplishments, criteria, detail tasks, and Section F-02 milestone events, from contract award to contract completion.

3.1.3.3 Joint Master Schedule (JMS)

The contractor shall use the Government prepared JMS to support the continual maintenance of the JMS (ADP 41) as a Government owned, contractor-maintained product. Configuration Control will be by the Government via the JSWG. The JMS includes dates, durations, and dependencies from the Government and other prime contractors, as well as, dates, dependencies, and durations for key tasks from the contractor IMS. The contractor-maintained JMS shall comprise necessary links and dependencies to include at a minimum: USACE site Construction contractor, all C2BMC GFCC Government agencies and contractors, the SSF contractor (and follow-on contractor), the USAF radar sustainment contractor, AFSPC contractors, and the BMDS test effort. The contractor shall establish a process for obtaining the updates from the Government and other impacting contractors. The contractor shall update the JMS monthly. The JMS aids the Government, UEWR contractor, and other contractors, in coordinating tasks on the SP/DP Rehost and the Clear upgrade. The contractor shall provide stringent maintenance and updating of the JMS and IMS tools to identify and resolve conflicting activities for the duration of the Clear Upgrade. Should conflicts occur that cannot be resolved by the contractor, the contractor shall notify the Government for resolution.

3.1.4 Security

The contractor shall ensure coverage, by a Facility Security Officer (FSO) and an Information Assurance Officer (IAO), at the contractor and radar sites when needed. The contractor shall prepare and implement a Site Security Management Plan (SSMP) (CDRL A012). The contractor shall work with the site commander on coordination of facility access required by the contractor and its sub-contractors. The contractor shall provide access to all existing contract related data and documentation.

3.1.4.1 Information Security

The contractor shall support execution of the MDA Information Security Program. The contractor shall execute tasks listed below and as otherwise defined in this SOW.

· The Contractor shall ensure that cleared subcontractor facilities shall schedule and conduct annual Information Security Program Reviews (IPRs) and self-inspections. Serious deficiencies at the subcontractor location shall be reported to the Contractor. When a security risk has been identified at an uncleared location the Contractor will conduct a security program review or SAV with the concurrence of the COR. Develop IPR reports and conduct briefings with programs to identify and review goals, processes, and findings.

· Assist with implementation of the Security Incident and Preliminary Inquiry (PI) process IAW DOD and Agency policy. Analyze security incidents to verify incident descriptions and address cause, impact, mitigation, and recommended courses of action. Coordinate, discuss, and resolve discrepancies. Submit reports to MDA Security.

3.1.4.2 Program Protection

The contractor shall support the execution of the MDA Program Protection activities. The contractor shall execute tasks listed below:

· Plan and implement an Acquisition System Protection program encompassing program security, program protection, and systems security engineering for this contract based upon the requisite threat documents provided by MDA.

· The Contractor and MDA shall conduct a joint analysis based upon relative threat information to determine the protection required for the Critical Program Information (CPI) and develop a plan to implement the required protection in accordance with the Government directed Program Protection Plan (PPP). Assess, develop, and draf, update, maintain, and implement a Program Protection Management Plan (PPMP) A007 and Critical Program Information (PPP/CPI) and training guidelines for the protection of CPI for the BMDS.

· The Contractor shall generate, update, maintain and implement a Program Protection Management Plan (PPMP) (CDRL A007) which will be a stand-alone document for this contract. The PPMP shall include compliance implementation planning in accordance with the Sensors Sustainment PPP, DODI 5200.39, DOD5200.1-M, USSTRATCOM Directive 538-2, DOD 5200.1-R, DTM-09-016, DTM-08-027 change 1, NDAA 932, DODD 8500.1, DOD 5200.8-R, CJCSI 6510.01F, CJCSI 6511.01, NSTISSAM Tempest 2/95, NSTISSP No. 11, and MDA 5200.08. The Contractor shall provide inputs to and support Government security analyses, including system security analyses, the System Vulnerability Analysis (SVA), Operations Security (OPSEC) Plan, System Security Engineering (SSE) requirements analysis, and Information Assurance (IA)/Computer Network Defense (IA/CND) technical assessments. The Contractor shall support government Protection Assessment Reviews (PAR) and audits/inspections for compliance monitoring of CPI protection initiatives, and Security and Program Protection Working Groups.

· Develop PP Training Plans and conduct Contractor training of how to assess criticality of technologies and mitigate CPI risks from known or postulated threats IAW government issued PPPs.

· Conduct periodic self-assessments to evaluate Program adherence to PPMP and processes. Develop security policy and procedures. Provide government updates on implementing the BMDS System Security Engineering (SSE) requirements IAW the BMDS and UEWR system specifications.

· Develop System Security Engineering (SSE) requirements, System Connection Authorization Requirements documents, and Security Accreditation Agreements documents.

· The Contractor shall comply with security requirements in accordance with NSA Guide for Addressing Malicious Code Risk throughout the development cycle.

3.1.4.3 Supply Chain Risk Management

· The contractor shall demonstrate that the contractor has visibility into its supply chain for critical components, understands the risks to that supply chain, and has implemented or plans to implement risk mitigations to counter those risks in the PPMP in accordance with DOD 4140.-R and DTM-08-27.

· The provisions of this SOW shall be included in the solicitations and subcontracts for all suppliers, suitably modified to identify the security risks suppliers must address to ensure the protection of CPI within the supply chain." Rationale: Accuracy and completeness of requirements traceability for Acquisition Security.

3.1.5 Small Business

The contractor shall provide Small Business utilization and participation data (CDRL A038).

3.2 Systems Engineering

The contractor shall implement robust systems engineering processes (as documented in a Contractor-developed System Engineering Management Plan (SEMP)(ADP 3)) to develop, fabricate, integrate, test, evaluate, document, deliver, and support the SP/DP rehost and the Clear upgrade as described in this SOW. System Engineering overall technical management shall include but not be limited to the conduct of systems analyses, engineering trade studies, preparation and implementation of the SEMP. This design shall be based on the latest operational baseline, be backward compatible to Beale, Fylingdales and Thule and be forward compatible for Cape Cod inclusion. All changes, deviations and waiver requests, to the PIDS Rev G baseline shall be presented to the Government for review through the UEWR System Requirements/Design Review (SRDR) (CDRL A027), Preliminary Design Review (PDR) (CDRL A028), and Critical Design Review (CDR) (CDRL A029). All component designs being incorporated into Beale (SP/DP suite only), Clear, and Cape Cod shall be compliant with JSP-440/480 so that they can be deployable to all other UEWR sites (Beale, Fylingdales, and Thule). Redesign due to parts obsolescence, shall be form, fit, function replacements to the maximum extent practical. If replacement is not form, fit, function replaceable the contractor shall identify this at the earliest design review practical for Government consideration, decision, and direction. The contractor shall prepare and deliver Scientific and Technical Reports (CDRL A019), as directed by the Government. The contractor shall maintain a Technical Performance Measurement (TPM) (ADP 46) baseline. TPMs shall be identified at the SRDR and refined, as necessary, at the PDR and CDR. Expected system performance compared to the TPMs shall be briefed at all PMRs.

3.2.1 Specialty Engineering

The contractor shall prepare a Specialty Engineering Management Plan (SpEMP) (ADP 42). The contractor shall implement a Specialty Engineering Program for this contract. At a minimum; this shall include updates to the following plans and documentation:

· RAM-T Program Plan (ADP 23) IAW MAP and XBR/UEWR Product Assurance Plan, Rev B

· Reliability Design Criteria (ADP 30)

· Maintainability Design Criteria (ADP 31)

· Human Systems Integration Program Plan (ADP 28) IAW MIL-STD-1472F

· Electromagnetic Interference (EMI)/Electromagnetic Compatibility (EMC) Control Plan (ADP 32)

The contractor shall establish and implement a UEWR Failure Review Board (FRB) process that provides data packages identifying all failures, the failure description, root cause, and corrective action status including related change request identifiers, age of the root cause/corrective action activity, and current open actions on the Government Integrated Data Environment (IDE), as well as, minutes of the FRB. The contractor shall submit quarterly Failure Reporting, Analysis and Corrective Action System (FRACAS) data summaries (ADP 38). The contractor shall submit Maintainability Math Models, Allocations and Predictions data (ADP 39) to address contract-unique design changes and associated impact on the overall UEWR RAM assessment. Similar data shall be provided for Reliability Math Models, Allocations and Predictions (ADP 40). This RAM data (ADP 39 & 40) shall include an initial data set to address design changes and subsequent annual data sets to reflect operational performance. Using the GMD Program Plan (GMD 286) as a guide, the contractor shall generate, maintain and execute a Failure Modes, Effects and Criticality Analysis (FMECA) (CDRL A024) and maintain the Critical Items List (CIL) (CDRL A024).

The Contractor shall support: test planning, development of test plan, developing or modifying existing UEWR scripts in support of the test plan, performance of the measurements, schedule and coordination, and data analysis in support of DD1494 Stage 4 testing, test report analysis and submittal of the DD1494 application for the Clear radar site.

3.2.2 MDA Sensors System Requirements Allocation/Management

The contractor will be provided the latest UEWR Dynamic Object Oriented Requirements System (DOORS) database. The contractor shall maintain at least the 8.3 version of the DOORS to document requirements traceability to upper level specifications (e.g. BMD SS) and allocation to lower-level specification documentation in the database. The contractor shall provide for Government access to the database (this may require coordination with the radar sustainment organization/contractor). The contractor shall update the database through the VCN synchronization effort. The DOORS database shall be delivered/ merged with the sustainment database. All future DOORS updates shall be provided to the Government for inclusion by the sustainment contractor. The contractor shall generate Specification Change Notices (SCN) (CDRL A013) for any systems design and requirements updates, as identified in the UEWR Specification Tree, including all internal and external interfaces and system-level specifications (CDRL A011). The contractor shall generate Engineering Change Proposals (ECP) (CDRL A010) with any proposed SCNs changes for Government review and approval. The contractor shall ensure that all such requests contain proposed SCNs and any analysis required to support Requests for Deviations / Waivers (CDRL A011).

3.2.2.1 Interface Definition for UEWR

The contractor shall implement the interfaces per the documents referenced in section 2.2.2 and the Thule/Sustainment TDP and VCN-4 interfaces. The contractor shall establish and implement an Interface Control Working Group (ICWG) for managing the interface requirements between the Prime Mission Equipment (PME), the Simulator Tester and the external interfaces managed by other Government agencies and/or contractors for this upgrade program.

3.2.3 Risk Management

The contractor shall establish, execute, and sustain a risk management program as documented in the Risk Management Plan (CDRL A036) for the contract that, at a minimum:

· Identifies, analyzes, manages, and tracks cost, schedule and technical risks

· Identifies, analyzes, manages, and tracks risks that could impact the outcome of test events

· Reports risks in MDA specified templates from MDA 3058.01-INS as guidelines

· Integrates quantitative risk assessments with cost and schedule baselines

· Uses risk assessments as part of entry and exit criteria for technical and programmatic reviews

3.2.4 Safety, Quality, and Mission Assurance (SQMA)

The contractor/subcontractors shall implement a Safety, Quality, and Mission Assurance Program (MAP) in compliance with MAP and MDA Parts, Materials, and Process Mission Assurance Plan (PMAP), SAE AS-9100, XBR/UEWR Product Assurance Plan, and ANSI/IEEE C95.1-1991. The contractor shall comply with all federal, state, and local environmental laws, regulations, and policies for all activities defined in this SOW including 29 CFR 1910.147, NEPA 42, and DODI 6055.11. The contractor shall generate, submit and implement a Mission Assurance Implementation Plan (MAIP) (CDRL A031) identifying how MAP/PMAP shall be implemented for this contract. While addressing MAP requirements for this contract, the contractor shall ensure the following are addressed: Safety, Accident Prevention, Hazardous Materials Management, Environmental Compliance, Quality Assurance, Mission Assurance, and parts obsolescence. Key manufacturing metrics and quality indicators shall be presented and available for review at PMR as required in the MAP. The Contractor shall demonstrate a dynamic Environmental Stress Screening (ESS) Program by monitoring ESS effectiveness, including first-pass ESS escapes, to ensure continual improvement of the ESS Program. The Contractor shall prepare an ESS/Highly Accelerated Stress Screening (HASS) Program Plan as a part of the Quality Assurance Plan (ADP 22) that defines hardware indenture level of ESS, selected environmental profiles and rationale, power on/off application, and metrics to be used for evaluating ESS effectiveness.

3.2.4.1 Safety

The contractor shall establish and implement a System Safety Program Plan (SSPP) (ADP 47). The contractor shall perform a safety assessment and develop hazard tracking logs and report the results in the Safety Assessment Report (SAR) (CDRL A032). The contractor shall deliver a Health Hazard Assessment Report (ADP 35). Specific items to be emphasized include but are not limited to the following:

· Hazard identification (including environmental), analysis, hazard tracking, and developing mitigation IAW with MAP, MIL-STD-882D, and MIL-STD-1472F.

· Support to the System Safety Working Group (SSWG) and Software Safety Working Group (SwSWG)

· Safety metrics & Reporting (IAW with MAP, PMAP, SAE AS-9100, and MDA 6055.02M) The contractor shall define, support, and/or perform tests and demonstrations on safety critical hardware, software, and procedures to verify compliance with safety requirements. The contractor shall establish process and product controls to ensure latent hardware and software paths are not present which may cause unwanted functions or inhibit desired functions for all component assembly and subassembly levels.

3.2.4.2 Quality Assurance (QA)

The contractor shall maintain a cost-effective QA program that integrates QA requirements into the design, manufacture, test and maintenance of hardware and software. The contractor’s QA program shall establish the necessary QA processes, controls, and approval authority to ensure that product quality, reliability, safety, and other element attributes are not compromised. Audits and analyses shall be conducted to ensure subcontractors and vendors are compliant with the QA program established for this contract effort. The contractor shall provide Quality Assurance Plan (QAP) (ADP 22) to address any contract-unique modifications. The Quality Assurance Program shall apply only to new and modified hardware and software. The contractor’s quality program shall ensure that all required verification methods are documented in the contractor’s development and production planning and manufacturing processes IAW MAP and SAE AS 9100.

3.2.4.2.1 Quality Conformance Inspection Data

Quality conformance inspection data in the product configuration documentation shall reflect use of commercial test equipment and standards. The need for any Special Test Equipment (STE), if required, shall first be approved by the Government. Quality conformance inspection data shall be audited by the contractor against the corresponding configuration item and the applicable test equipment and standards to ensure its adequacy. Audits shall include actual validation of data against the hardware and software.

3.2.4.2.2 Quality Assurance Provisions (QAP)

QAPs shall be prepared, utilized, and maintained on drawings and specifications. In addition, the QAPs shall include Critical Safety Item requirements. QAPs shall be documented on the drawing or in book form for Critical and Major Characteristics for spare/repair components, assemblies, and subassemblies. Non-spare items shall be identified as above or through inspection planning efforts.

3.2.4.2.3 PMP Management Structure/Counterfeit Parts Control

All new parts and materials selections introduced as part of this contract shall be processed IAW with the PMAP to hardware category D requirements. The Contractor shall update the approach and methodology for implementing the Parts, Materials, and Processes (PMP) Program Plan used for UEWR (ADP 63). All microcircuits and discrete semiconductor parts shall be procured from authorized franchised distributors. Procurement of these parts from non-franchised distributors is PROHIBITED unless approved by the MDA/SN Parts, Materials, and Processes Control Board (PMPCB). The requirements of this paragraph shall be flowed down to all suppliers/subcontractors. The UEWR contractor shall conduct an on-site counterfeit part avoidance assessment a minimum of twice a year at all subcontractors (quarterly or monthly if counterfeit parts are routinely traced to a subcontractor) to verify flow down and compliance with MDA Policy Memorandum No. 50. The contractor shall support Government conduct of these assessments at the UEWR contractor facility twice annually throughout the period of performance.

3.2.4.2.4 Foreign Object Elimination (FOE)

The contractor shall establish, implement and maintain a Foreign Object Elimination (FOE) program, which systematically eliminates Foreign Object Damage and Debris (FOD) to preserve safety, quality, and reliability IAW MAP and SAE AS-9100.

The FOE program shall provide for a standardized approach that maintains awareness, prevention, and compliance, and assures continued reinforcement. The FOE program shall also ensure operational processing areas maintain a safe, clean, and FOD-Free environment; with appropriate controls commensurate to the criticality of the hardware; including provisions for tool control, hardware accountability, and consumables control. FOD focal points shall be established. Internal evaluations shall be conducted to measure compliance to established FOD requirements. The contractor shall develop and implement a FOE Program Plan (ADP 25) that specifies the requirements, techniques, and training for implementing and assuring FOE awareness and prevention.