SOW - SMBA Implementation Phase RFI.pdf

Effective Date: TBD, DRAFT Expiration Date: TBD, DRAFT

Check the LEO MIS Server at https://jpssmis.gsfc.nasa.gov/frontmenu_dsp.cfm to verify that this is the correct version prior to use.

470-SMBA-00438, Revision – DRAFT LEO Programs Division, Code 470

Near Earth Orbit Network (NEON) Sounder for Microwave-Based Applications

(SMBA)

Statement of Work (SOW)

GSFC LEO CMO

<Date>

DRAFT

NOAA / NASA

Goddard Space Flight Center

Greenbelt, Maryland https://jpssmis.gsfc.nasa.gov/frontmenu_dsp.cfm

NEON SMBA SOW 470-SMBA-00438, Revision DRAFT Effective Date: DRAFT ii Check the LEO MIS Server at https://jpssmis.gsfc.nasa.gov/frontmenu_dsp.cfm to verify that this is the correct version prior to use.

Near Earth Orbit Network (NEON) Sounder for Microwave-Based

Applications (SMBA) Statement of Work (SOW) Review/Signature/Approval Page

Prepared By:

Jessica Knizhnik

Approved By:

Roger Clason

Electronic Approval available on-line at: https://jpssmis.gsfc.nasa.gov/frontmenu_dsp.cfm iii Check the LEO MIS Server at https://jpssmis.gsfc.nasa.gov/frontmenu_dsp.cfm to verify that this is the correct version prior to use.

Preface

This document is under LEO Division configuration control. Once this document is approved, LEO approved changes are handled in accordance with Class I and Class II change control requirements as described in the LEO Configuration Management Procedures, and changes to this document shall be made by complete revision.

Any questions should be addressed to:

LEO Configuration Management Office

NASA/GSFC

Code 473 Greenbelt, MD 20771 iv Check the LEO MIS Server at https://jpssmis.gsfc.nasa.gov/frontmenu_dsp.cfm to verify that this is the correct version prior to use.

Change History Log

Revision Effective Date Description of Changes (Reference the CCR & CCB/ERB Approval Date)

Rev - TBD Initial Release per 470-CCR-24-0TBD v Check the LEO MIS Server at https://jpssmis.gsfc.nasa.gov/frontmenu_dsp.cfm to verify that this is the correct version prior to use.

Table of Contents

I. INTRODUCTION

II. SCOPE

III. DEFINITIONS

IV. APPLICABLE DOCUMENTS

V. REFERENCE DOCUMENTS

VI. PRECEDENCE

VII. WORK TO BE PERFORMED

1 MANAGEMENT

1.1 Program Management

1.1.1 Government Oversight

1.1.2 Government Resident Office Support

1.1.3 Quality Management System

1.1.4 Subcontract Management

1.1.4.1 Incorporation of Lower Tier Supplier Information

1.1.4.2 Meetings with Lower Tier Suppliers

1.1.4.3 Flow Down of Requirements to Lower Tier Suppliers

1.1.4.4 End Item Data Packages from Lower Tier Suppliers

1.2 Financial Management

1.2.1 Performance Measurement Baseline (PMB)

1.2.2 Integrated Master Schedule

1.2.3 Work Breakdown Structure (WBS)

1.2.4 Organization Breakdown Structure (OBS)

1.2.5 Change Control

1.2.6 Estimate at Completion (EAC)

1.2.7 Project Management Plan

1.3 Risk Management

1.4 Configuration Management

1.4.1 Configuration/Change Control Board (CCB)

1.4.1.1 Design Changes

1.4.1.2 Drawings and Drawing List

1.5 Reviews and Meetings

1.5.1 Contractor-Led Meetings and Reviews

1.5.1.1 Kick-off Meeting

1.5.1.2 Program Management Reviews

1.5.1.3 Integrated Baseline Review (IBR)

1.5.1.4 ETU Pre-Build Review

1.5.1.5 ETU Summary Review

1.5.1.5.1 Design Modification Reviews

1.5.1.6 Weekly Meetings

1.5.1.7 Engineering Peer Reviews

1.5.1.7.1 Manufacturing Readiness Review (MRR)

vi Check the LEO MIS Server at https://jpssmis.gsfc.nasa.gov/frontmenu_dsp.cfm to verify that this is the correct version prior to use.

1.5.1.7.2 Test Readiness Reviews

1.5.1.7.3 Test Data Reviews

1.5.1.7.4 Software Reviews

1.5.1.7.5 Technical Interchange Meetings (TIMs) and Other Reviews and Meetings ..

1.5.1.8 Subcontract, and Subsystem Reviews

1.5.2 Government Chaired Instrument Reviews

1.5.2.1 System Requirements/Definition Review (SRR/SDR)

1.5.2.2 Preliminary Design Review (PDR)

1.5.2.3 Critical Design Review (CDR)

1.5.2.4 Pre-Environmental Review (PER) - Each Instrument

1.5.2.5 Pre-Shipment Review (PSR) - Each Instrument

1.5.3 Higher Level Reviews

1.5.3.1 Observatory-level Reviews

1.5.3.2 Program-level Reviews

1.5.3.3 Operations Reviews - Each Flight Model

1.6 Data Retention

2 SYSTEMS ENGINEERING

2.1 Requirements Analyses, Derivations, And Allocations

2.1.1 Technical Performance Metrics

2.1.2 Instrument Interface

2.2 Contamination Control

2.3 Design Engineering

2.4 Design, Analysis and Verification Documentation

2.4.1 Design Analyses

2.4.2 Trending

2.5 Special Studies

2.6 Constraints

3 MISSION ASSURANCE

3.1 Equipment Tagging

4 FABRICATION AND ASSEMBLY

4.1 SPARES

4.2 SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENT

4.2.1 Software Development Plan

4.2.2 Software Configuration Management

4.2.3 Software Requirements Specification

4.2.4 Software Detailed Design

4.2.5 Instrument Software Development Environment

4.2.6 Software Testing

4.2.7 Software Version Description

4.2.8 Software User Manual

4.2.9 Software Reviews

4.2.10 Software Measures (Metrics)

4.2.11 Operational Simulator Software

4.2.12 NASA Independent Verification and Validation (IV&V) Support vii Check the LEO MIS Server at https://jpssmis.gsfc.nasa.gov/frontmenu_dsp.cfm to verify that this is the correct version prior to use.

4.2.13 Software Maintenance

4.2.14 Sensor Data Sets

4.2.15 Flight Software Deliverable

4.3 Hardware

4.3.1 Engineering Test Unit (ETU)

4.3.2 Flight Instruments

4.3.2.1 First Flight Model

4.3.2.2 Additional Flight Models

4.3.2.2.1 Deliverable Documentation

4.3.2.2.2 Spares

4.3.2.2.3 Logistics

4.3.2.2.4 Post-Shipment Support

4.3.3 Operational Simulator

4.3.4 Ground Support Equipment (GSE)

4.4 DELIVERABLE DOCUMENTATION

5 TEST PROGRAM

5.1 Test Readiness Reviews

5.1.1 Test Process Decision Meetings

5.2 Pre-Environmental Review

5.3 Test Documentation

5.3.1 Instrument Program Test Plan

5.3.2 Instrument Calibration

5.3.3 Test Software Validation Plan

5.3.4 Test Procedures

5.3.4.1 Notification of Tests

5.3.5 Deviations and Waivers

5.3.6 Test Reports and Test Data

5.4 Verification and Validation

5.4.1 Verification & Validation (V&V) Plan

5.4.2 Verification Reports

6 DELIVERY

6.1 Acceptance or End Item Data Package (CDRL IT-6)

6.2 Packaging, Handling, Storage, and Transportation

6.3 Pre-Ship Readiness Review

6.4 Delivery, Checkout, And Acceptance

6.4.1 Hardware Delivery Documentation

6.4.1.1 Operations Support Manuals

6.4.1.2 Technical Manuals

6.4.2 Documentation Delivered with Hardware

6.4.3 Photographic Documentation

6.4.4 Test Data Files

6.5 Sensor Database Support

6.5.1 Sensor Command and Telemetry Database Support

6.5.2 Instrument Mission Data Structure Definition Support

6.5.3 Instrument Memory Table Support

6.6 Instrument Post Delivery Support

viii Check the LEO MIS Server at https://jpssmis.gsfc.nasa.gov/frontmenu_dsp.cfm to verify that this is the correct version prior to use.

6.6.1 General Roles and Responsibilities (PDSP and PDS phases)

6.6.2 System Integration and Test Support

6.6.2.1 Instrument Contractor Personnel and Facility Support

6.6.2.2 Instrument Performance Evaluation

6.6.2.3 Instrument Data Products Support

6.6.2.4 Interface Testing

6.6.2.5 Engineering Test Unit (ETU) Support

6.6.2.6 Bench Checkout

6.6.2.7 Flight Model Support

6.6.3 Flight Vehicle Test Suite Support

6.6.4 Launch Site Support

6.6.5 Mission System Integration Support

6.6.5.1 Integrated Mission Timeline

6.6.5.2 Operations Reviews

6.6.5.3 Rehearsal Anomaly Definition

6.6.5.4 Satellite Operations Exercises

6.6.5.5 Compatibility Tests

6.6.5.6 Mission Rehearsals

6.6.5.7 Operations Product Validation

6.6.5.8 Recommended Operating Procedures

6.6.5.9 Operational Readiness Test

6.6.5.10 Instrument Training

6.6.6 Commissioning and Post-Launch Support

6.6.7 Post Delivery and Post-Launch Sustaining Engineering and Cal/Val

6.6.7.1 SMBA Cal/Val Command Generation Support

APPENDIX A NPR 7150.2A TAILORED COMPLIANCE MATRIX

APPENDIX B ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS

List of Tables

Table 1.5-1. Top-Level Instrument Reviews

Check the JPSS MIS Server at https://jpssmis.gsfc.nasa.gov/frontmenu_dsp.cfm to verify that this is the correct version prior to use.

I. 1. INTRODUCTION

The Sounder for Microwave-Based Applications (SMBA) is a passive microwave instrument that produces global atmospheric temperature and moisture profiles. SMBA provides microwave data to support temperature and humidity sounding data including in cloud covered conditions.

This Statement of Work (SOW) covers the work required to build the SMBA instruments required for the Near-Earth Orbit Network (NEON) Program.

II. 1.2. SCOPE

This SOW reflects the Contractor’s scope and period of performance as defined in the Contract.

Throughout the remainder of the document, the instrument supplier will be referred to as the Contractor. NASA/Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC), including its support services contractors, will be referred to as the Government. This SOW and the Contract Data Requirements List (CDRL) identify the deliverables associated with the SMBA instrument. The Contractor shall meet the requirements of all contractual documents. The Contractor shall facilitate insight by the GSFC Program Office into the Instrument progress and status.

Compliance with the requirements stated herein shall be the responsibility of the Government and the Contractor.

This SOW defines the minimum effort required of the Contractor that shall include the business and technical management including necessary related Government reviews and discussions, design, engineering analyses, data reduction, data presentations, technical reviews and related Government discussions, development, fabrication, integration, test, evaluation, delivery, and support for the SMBA instruments and software in support of the NEON Program. This support shall include post-delivery support from delivery of the SMBA through the period of performance of this Contract. This SOW defines the roles, responsibilities, and obligations between the Government and the Contractor. The Contractor shall develop this instrument using sound engineering principles founded in industry best practices, stated Government standards and requirements, and agreed-upon Contractor internal standards and policies.

This SOW covers all SMBA instruments. Any requirement that is only applicable to the first flight unit or any other unit is specifically called out. Where no clarification regarding applicability is provided, the requirements are applicable to all flight units.

III. 1.3. DEFINITIONS

Contractor – The developer of the item of reference. If the term Contractor is used in this document without specific reference to an item (e.g., SMBA, GSE, etc.), then the term shall be interpreted to imply the SMBA contractor. In all cases, the term Contractor also implies any and all associated suppliers and subcontractors.

Government – Federal Civil Servants and support contractors (contractors that represent NASA or are delegates for NASA)

Check the JPSS MIS Server at https://jpssmis.gsfc.nasa.gov/frontmenu_dsp.cfm to verify that this is the correct version prior to use.

Shall – Compliance by the Contractor is mandatory. Any deviations from these contractually imposed mandatory requirements require the approval of the contracting officer.

May – At the discretion of the Contractor or Government.

Will – Designates the intent of the Government.

Instrument – The SMBA flight hardware, support equipment (i.e., STE/GSE), software, documentation and/or data necessary to fulfill the requirements of the Contract and this SOW.

IV. 1.4. APPLICABLE DOCUMENTS

The documents listed in this section apply directly to the performance of the Instrument Contract. These documents establish detailed specifications, requirements, and interface information necessary for the performance of the Contract. Attachments TBS, TBS and TBS to the SMBA Contract provide the current issue revision and approved CCR for all applicable documents listed below. The Contractor shall comply with the applicable documents specified in Contract Attachments TBS, TBS and TBS. The table below contains a summary of the applicable documents, but may be incomplete. For the complete listing and latest revisions, consult the Contract attachment TBS.

Document No. Document Name 470-SMBA-00439 SMBA Contracts Data Requirements List (CDRL) 470-SMBA-00436 SMBA Instruments Mission Assurance Requirements (IMAR) 470-SMBA-00435 SMBA Performance Requirements Document (PRD) TBS SMBA Instrument Interface Control Document (ICD) TBS Spacecraft to SMBA Instrument Mechanical ICD (MICD) TBS Data Interface Requirement Document (IRD) TBS SMBA Contamination Control Plan (CCP) TBS SMBA FVTS Requirements Specification TBS SMBA FVTS Interface Requirements Control Document (IRCD) TBS Instrument Mission Assurance Requirements (IMAR) Compliance

Deviations Matrix for the Sounder for Microwave-Based Applications

(SMBA)

GSFC-STD-1001 Criteria for Flight Program Critical Milestone Reviews GPR7120.4 Risk Management

V. 1.5. REFERENCE DOCUMENTS

For the complete listing and latest revisions, consult the Contract attachment TBS.

Document No. Document Name TBS SMBA Flight Software and Table Update Delivery Process TBS SMBA Continuous Risk Management Plan D TBS Drill Template Design Guidelines TBS SMBA Flight Spare Philosophy

Check the JPSS MIS Server at https://jpssmis.gsfc.nasa.gov/frontmenu_dsp.cfm to verify that this is the correct version prior to use.

NPR 8715.3 NASA Safety Manual NPR 8000.4 Risk Management Procedural Requirements GSFC-STD-1000 GOLD Rules NPR 7123.1 NASA Systems Engineering Processes and Requirements GSFC-STD-7000 General Environmental Verification Standard (GEVS) NPR 7150.2 NASA Software Engineering Requirements GPR 8700.6 Engineering Peer Reviews GPR 8700.4 Integrated Independent Reviews NPR 8621.1 NASA Procedures and Guidelines for Mishap Reporting, Investigating, and Recordkeeping

ANSI/EIA748 Industry Guide for Earned Value Management IEST-STD-CC1246D Product Cleanliness Levels and Contamination Control

Program

VI. 1.6. PRECEDENCE

In the case of conflicting requirements, the order of precedence of documents not specifically called out in the Contract is: The Contract takes precedence over the SOW, followed by the CDRL, IMAR, PRD, ICDs and the remaining applicable documents. In the event of an inconsistency between any of the reference documents herein and the requirements of this SOW, the SOW shall take precedence. Any conflicts discovered by the parties between the requirements in this SOW and any referenced specification herein shall be brought to the attention of the other party for resolution.

VII. 1.7. WORK TO BE PERFORMED

This section, along with the CDRL, GSFC 470-SMBA-00439, describes the specific work to be accomplished by the Contractor. In accordance with the requirements of this document, the Contract, all associated requirements documents, other attachments and applicable documents to this Contract, the Contractor shall provide the effort and resources that include, but are not limited to personnel, materials, equipment, and facilities necessary for the successful and on-time design, analysis, development, fabrication, assembly, integration, test, calibration, qualification, and delivery and support of the instrument. The Contractor shall also provide the personnel, materials, equipment necessary to support Observatory Integration and Test, support to mission-level activities, training and post-delivery support of the instrument throughout the performance of this Contract.

The Contractor shall deliver to the Government an instrument that is fully tested and calibrated with demonstrated compliance to the requirements of this Contract. The Contractor shall support the development of bilateral instrument documents, analyses, and models, which define the details of the instrument-to-spacecraft interface and instrument accommodation and operating information.

Check the JPSS MIS Server at https://jpssmis.gsfc.nasa.gov/frontmenu_dsp.cfm to verify that this is the correct version prior to use.

1 MANAGEMENT

1.1 Program Management

The Contractor shall appoint a dedicated Program Manager (PM) to direct and manage the SMBA Program. The Contractor’s Program Manager shall have responsibility for the overall technical performance, resource management, and schedule management of the contractual effort and all subcontracts. The Contractor’s designated Program Manager shall report to a level of company management appropriate to ensure prompt resolution of all problems. The Program Manager shall maintain close liaison with the designated Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR) and Instrument Manager and be responsible for effective and timely communication regarding program performance.

1.1.1 Government Oversight

The Contractor’s management, tracking, control, and reporting processes shall facilitate insight by the GSFC Program Office into the instrument progress and status. The Contractor shall provide the Government access (electronic, if possible) to the instrument configuration management, risk management, and planning and scheduling systems. The Contractor shall provide access (electronic, if possible) to the instrument anomaly reporting system.

The Contractor shall open to Government attendance Contractor and Subcontractor/lower tier suppliers’ internal data, reviews, audits, meetings and other activities within the scope of the Contract where the Government has determined based on contractor/subcontractor performance and/or risk to the program a need for such oversight, except those mutually agreed to be Contractor only. The Contractor shall notify the Government Resident Office and the COR of meetings (3 working days), reviews or tests (10 working days) in sufficient time to permit meaningful Government participation.

The Contractor shall ensure that all software documentation, source code and software design models required for a NASA Software Independent Verification and Validation (IV&V) effort are made available to NASA IV&V personnel as required. Wherever possible, the Contractor shall permit electronic access (if possible) to the required information. The Contractor shall allow NASA IV&V review and participation before final product delivery to the Government.

The Contractor shall make all test data available upon request.

1.1.2 Government Resident Office Support

The Contractor shall provide facilities to support nominally two Government in-plant representatives at the instrument development/build site, including private securable office space, furniture, file/storage area, and telephones, as well as access to a shared conference room from Contract award through observatory on-orbit acceptance (nominally Launch + 6 months). The Contractor shall provide within these offices high-speed (broadband) internet access and periodic wireless access, as required, to an ISP (Internet Service Provider) within the Contractor’s facility to allow for access to the GSFC network. The Government shall provide

Check the JPSS MIS Server at https://jpssmis.gsfc.nasa.gov/frontmenu_dsp.cfm to verify that this is the correct version prior to use.

access to an approved electronic document repository where the Contractor shall post all required documents and test data.

1.1.3 Quality Management System

The developer shall have and implement a Quality Management System as required by the Instrument Mission Assurance Requirements document (SMBA IMAR), as tailored by SMBA IMAR Compliance Deviations Matrix (TBS) within Contract TBS, Clause J.1, Attachment N (TBR). This document can be found in Attachment TBS of the Contract.

1.1.4 Subcontract Management

The Contractor shall actively manage its lower tier suppliers (LTS). This management shall include robust mission and quality assurance focused oversight and technical insight. The Contractor shall routinely verify LTS adherence to both Contractor-flowed down and approved Subcontractor processes. The Contractor shall meet the requirements in the following sections as noted to provide the Government with visibility into LTS activities. At all times, the Contractor shall remain responsible for the management and control of LTS. The Contractor shall maintain a schedule of onsite visits to its key suppliers or those presenting risk to the program. The Government may require additional onsite personnel at LTS facilities in cases of frequent anomalies. This schedule shall reflect planned and actual surveillance audits and be available for review at each PMR.

1.1.4.1 Incorporation of Lower Tier Supplier Information

The Contractor shall provide to the Government the following LTS information at a minimum:

a) Earned Value Management System (EVMS) and financial data as required herein

b) Schedule and Schedule Reporting, typically via the IMS

c) Project Status Reviews and/or Reports, typically via the PMR

d) Problem Reports per the IMAR, as tailored by SMBA IMAR Compliance Deviations

Matrix (TBS) within Contract TBS, Clause TBS, Attachment TBS, typically summarized at the PMR as required

e) Design, Manufacturing, Integration and Test Review schedule and contact information, minutes or material discussed

LTS Risk items, risk mitigation tasks and status of risks shall be reported and included in each review as appropriate, required or as requested by the Government.

1.1.4.2 Meetings with Lower Tier Suppliers

The Contractor shall invite the Government to all formal/major reviews and acceptance activities at Lower Tier Suppliers (LTS). The Contractor shall provide at least one week notice for formal/major reviews.

Check the JPSS MIS Server at https://jpssmis.gsfc.nasa.gov/frontmenu_dsp.cfm to verify that this is the correct version prior to use.

1.1.4.3 Flow Down of Requirements to Lower Tier Suppliers

The Contractor shall flow all applicable requirements and controls stated or referenced herein to its LTS. The LTS shall supply a compliance matrix delineating their compliance with each of the requirements. These Matrices shall be provided to the Government for review.

1.1.4.4 End Item Data Packages from Lower Tier Suppliers

The contractor shall submit end item data packages from Lower Tier Suppliers as CDRL IT-8.

1.2 Financial Management

The Contractor shall use and maintain in performance of this Contract an Earned Value Management System (EVMS). The Contractor's system shall meet the guidelines and be maintained in accordance with the EVMS requirements described in this Contract, under NASA Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Supplement (NFS) Clause 1852.234-2. The Earned Value Management System (EVMS) shall be supported by the Contractor's management processes and systems and in accordance with the Contractor’s EVM Plan. (Reference Contract Performance Report (CPR) (CDRL PM-8).

1.2.1 Performance Measurement Baseline (PMB)

The Contractor shall define the PMB, completing a time phased integrated plan to unify technical scope, schedule, and budget into an overall plan in accordance with the Contractor’s EVM Implementation Plan. The Contractor shall define the work scope, establish a schedule for accomplishing the work and estimate the resources required to accomplish the work. The Government will complete a PMB cost and schedule validation as required.

1.2.2 Integrated Master Schedule

The Contractor shall submit an Integrated Master Schedule (IMS) to be used to manage this instrument development effort. (Refer to CDRL PM-8).

The Contractor shall submit a comprehensive listing of all external Giver-Receiver items also referred to as Receive-Deliver (Rec-Del) items to provide the project a description of each Giver- Receiver (G-R) indicated in the IMS (Refer to CDRL PM-16).

1.2.3 Work Breakdown Structure (WBS)

The Contractor shall develop and maintain the Work Breakdown Structure (WBS) and WBS dictionary in accordance with CDRL PM-3. The Contractor uses the WBS as the primary framework for Contract planning, budgeting, and reporting of the cost, schedule, and technical performance status to the Government. The WBS structure shall be established by the Contractor (based on guidelines provided by the Government) and shall be reported to the Government at a minimum of Level 3 decomposition. The Contractor shall maintain a WBS at a minimum one level lower than reporting Level 3. Prior notification to the Government of WBS changes at Level 3 or higher is required before implementation (Reference WBS CDRL PM-3).

Check the JPSS MIS Server at https://jpssmis.gsfc.nasa.gov/frontmenu_dsp.cfm to verify that this is the correct version prior to use.

The WBS through level 3 shall be established in conjunction with the NEON Financial Management team prior to submittal of a proposal in accordance with this SOW.

1.2.4 Organization Breakdown Structure (OBS)

The Contractor shall develop and maintain the OBS, outlining hierarchical arrangement of the Contractor’s management organization, which human entity is responsible for the work and the associated reporting relationships. The OBS shall have the same type of definition as the WBS, accomplished through a charter of functions and responsibilities and is the organizational equivalent to a WBS dictionary.

1.2.5 Change Control

In order to maintain baseline integrity and assure oversight of the baseline change control process, the Contractor shall use a formalized change control process for all Baseline Change Requests (BCR) via the Change Control Board (CCB) process established by the Contractor.

The Government shall be a member of the BCR CCB and shall have approval authority for any BCR over $250k and any schedule BCR that impacts the critical path. BCRs incorporating rolling wave changes and/or new scope do not require Government approval. In the event the Government does not attend a CCB, the Contractor shall provide notification, via e-mail submittal, of all BCRs. The Government will respond within three (3) working days, provided that pre-coordination of the BCR has occurred. Notification shall occur prior to implementation of the BCR into the baseline and annotate the type of change, Control Account Manager (CAM), Control Account impacted, identification of effects, the value of the change (if applicable), internal Contractor approval and the accounting month for which the BCR will be implemented.

1.2.6 Estimate at Completion (EAC)

Once the PMB has been established and approved by the Government, a comprehensive EAC shall be developed by the Contractor as part of the recurring detailed budget and planning process.

1.2.7 Project Management Plan

The Contractor shall perform to and maintain a Project Management Plan (PMP) in accordance with CDRL PM-11.

1.3 Risk Management

The Contractor shall establish and maintain a comprehensive risk management program that meets the requirements of Contractor Risk Management Plans and the NEON Program Continuous Risk Management Plan, TBS. All Configuration Control Board (CCB) approved, authorized, and funded Risk burn-down (mitigation) activities shall be integrated into the IMS.

The Contractor shall invite the Government to attend Contractor Risk Management Board meetings. The Contractor shall document and report all identified risks in accordance with the program’s approved Risk Management Plan (RMP) (CDRL PM-12) and the NEON Risk Management Plan, TBS. The Contractor shall address identified risk areas at program status

Check the JPSS MIS Server at https://jpssmis.gsfc.nasa.gov/frontmenu_dsp.cfm to verify that this is the correct version prior to use.

reviews. The Contractor shall maintain a Risk List throughout the program life cycle, and add mitigation steps to the Integrated Master Schedule which shall be made available to the Government upon request.

1.4 Configuration Management

The Contractor shall perform configuration management (CM) in accordance with the Configuration Management Plan, per CDRL PM-10. The Contractor shall maintain and employ a configuration management system to demonstrate that the configuration item conforms to current approved documentation. The Contractor shall maintain configuration of flight hardware, software, electrical ground support equipment (EGSE) and mechanical ground support equipment (MGSE) as well as any equipment which mates to flight hardware throughout all phases of assembly and test. Software Configuration Management (CDRL SW-3) is discussed in Section 4.3.2.

The Contractor shall perform and document configuration verification as parts and assemblies are incorporated into higher-level assemblies and at major Program milestones (in accordance with GSFC-STD-1001A).

The Contractor shall submit for Government consideration a waiver or deviation for any flight item that is found to be non-compliant with the Government’s requirements and is not reworked to be compliant, or replaced with a compliant item.

The Contractor shall support the process of Government configuration audits that confirm that the configured product is accurate and complete. The two types of configuration audits are the Functional Configuration Audit (FCA) and the Physical Configuration Audit (PCA). Both are a series of audits and inspections performed throughout the development effort. The FCA, CDRL SE-11, examines the functional characteristics of the configured product and verifies that the product has met, via test results, the requirements specified in its functional baseline documentation. FCAs shall be conducted on both hardware and software configured products.

The PCA (also known as a configuration inspection) examines the physical configuration of the configured product and verifies that the product corresponds to the build-to (or code-to) product baseline documentation previously approved (reference CDRL SE-11). FCAs shall be conducted on both hardware and software configured products.

The Contractor shall prepare and provide, as a minimum, the following configuration control documentation:

a) Configuration Control Board (CCB) status shall be reported at the Monthly Program Management Review in accordance with CDRL PM-1.

b) Engineering Drawings in accordance with CDRL SE-5.

c) The Configuration Item Identification List (CIIL) and the Computer Software

Configuration Items (CSCIs) in accordance with CDRL SE-8.

Check the JPSS MIS Server at https://jpssmis.gsfc.nasa.gov/frontmenu_dsp.cfm to verify that this is the correct version prior to use.

1.4.1 Configuration/Change Control Board (CCB)

The Contractor shall be a member of the SMBA GSFC CCB and required to participate in the review of Project-level documents which are applicable to the Instrument Contractor (i.e., plans, specs, support of ICD updates, satellite I&T documents, etc.). The Government shall be invited to all Contractor Instrument CCBs having the right to participate at its discretion. Government approval is required prior to the implementation of any Class I change. Contractor shall document and control engineering changes as either Class I or Class II engineering changes.

Class I changes are modifications affecting the following:

a) Contractually specified form, fit and function

b) Government Furnished Equipment

c) Cost to the Government

d) Contractual deliveries

e) Schedule Contract milestones

f) Interchangeability of any item/unit that has already been delivered (excludes launched hardware)

All other changes are considered Class II or lower and may be incorporated without Government authorization. The Contractor shall notify the Government of change classifications. The Contractor shall provide all reasonable evidence required in support of change classifications.

The Government reserves the right to upgrade any change classification to Class I if the Government determines the change to be improperly classified according to the Class I/Class II definitions above.

Per the IMAR, as tailored by SMBA IMAR Compliance Deviations Matrix (TBS) within Contract TBS, Clause TBS, Attachment TBS, the Contractor shall invite the Government to participate in the Contractor’s Failure Review Board (FRB) and Material Review Board (MRB).

1.4.1.1 Design Changes

The Contractor shall document and control engineering changes as either Class I or Class II.

Configuration Change Requests (CCRs) shall be forwarded to the Government in accordance with CDRL SE-1, Engineering Change Requests.

1.4.1.2 Drawings and Drawing List

The Contractor shall prepare and maintain a complete set of Flight equipment drawings and drawings for GSE. The drawings shall be maintained at the Contractor’s facility. The Contractor shall make available to the Government drawings and an Indentured Drawing List for each hardware type upon request.

1.5 Reviews and Meetings

A top-level overview of the reviews to be conducted is provided in Table 1.5-1, below. Further details for each review can be found in the subsequent sections of this SOW and the data pack requirements are provided in the CDRL. The Contractor shall notify the Government at least 10

Check the JPSS MIS Server at https://jpssmis.gsfc.nasa.gov/frontmenu_dsp.cfm to verify that this is the correct version prior to use.

working days in advance of lower level Contractor subsystem reviews to allow the Government time to attend the review as part of its management activities. The Contractor shall conduct independent technical assessment of instrument activities; conduct formal design reviews;

implement a rigorous technical peer review process of component and subsystem designs; and provide facilities to conduct scientific/technical meetings.

The Contractor shall host, prepare and present instrument reviews and provide review packages in accordance with the stated CDRL Data Requirement Document. The Contractor shall conduct the reviews for each sensor as shown in the following table.

Table 1.5-1. Top-Level Instrument Reviews

Review Applicability CDRL Reference

Chair

Integrated Baseline Review (IBR) FM1 RE-TBS Government System Requirements Review (SRR) FM1* RE-TBS Government System Definition Review (SDR) FM1* RE-TBS Government Preliminary Design Review (PDR) FM1* RE-TBS Government ETU Pre-Build Review FM1 RE-TBS Contractor ETU Test Summary Review FM1 RE-TBS Contractor Critical Design Review (CDR) FM1* RE-TBS Government Manufacturing Readiness Review FM1* Contractor Pre-Environmental Review (PER) All Flight

Instruments RE-TBS Government

Pre-Ship Review (PSR) All Flight Instruments

RE-TBS Government

* If any changes are made to the instrument (design, processes, procedures, etc.), this review may be required at the Government’s discretion, depending on the magnitude of the changes

The Contractor shall provide the technical and administrative support for all Project reviews and meetings.

Unless stipulated otherwise agreed or by the Government, the Contractor shall hold all Instrument Project Reviews and meetings at the Contractor's facility.

All reviews and meetings shall provide a virtual attendance option.

Mission Assurance boards (Material Review Board, Failure Review Board, Parts Control Board, Materials and Processes Control Board) are prescribed in the Instrument Mission Assurance Requirements document.

1.5.1 Contractor-Led Meetings and Reviews

The Contractor shall implement a thorough technical peer review process of component and subsystem designs, conduct independent technical assessments of instrument activities, and hold

Check the JPSS MIS Server at https://jpssmis.gsfc.nasa.gov/frontmenu_dsp.cfm to verify that this is the correct version prior to use.

formal design reviews. The reviews listed in this section should not be considered a complete set of reviews for the Contractor’s program. Additional reviews that the Contractor deems necessary to successfully execute the program will be conducted at the Contractor’s discretion.

The Contractor shall develop and apply a process for capturing and responding to action items assigned during Contractor-led meetings and reviews. The Contractor shall record and deliver meeting minutes for the meetings and reviews called out in this section.

1.5.1.1 Kick-off Meeting

The Contractor shall hold a program kickoff meeting approximately 2 weeks after the contract award.

The Kickoff Meeting agenda shall be developed jointly with the Government, but should include:

a) An overview and introduction to the organization and personnel (both vendor and Government Teams)

b) A top-level look at the total program schedule with a more detailed look at the near-term schedule (between kickoff and IBR)

c) A summary of regularly scheduled meetings and a tentative meeting schedule for the first 6 months (PMRs, table top reviews, peer reviews, project milestone reviews, etc)

d) An overview of the instrument design concept

e) An overview of any technology development work

f) An overview of current risk database and risk management approach

g) Overview of configuration management approach

h) Overview of SMA and quality processes

i) Overview of vendor facilities (tour if possible)

The Kickoff will nominally to be held at vendor facility. Assumed duration is 1 day.

1.5.1.2 Program Management Reviews

The Contractor shall provide for Monthly Project Management Reviews (PMRs) as specified in the CDRL PM-1. These reviews will generally be held at the Contractor’s facility, but may be held at the Government’s facility, with mutual agreement between the Government and Contractor.

The PMR shall be designated to provide a management level review of technical, schedule and programmatic activities. A PMR will typically consist of a meeting to review formal status and splinter meetings to address special topics to be mutually determined prior to each review. The addition of special topics will be coordinated between the Government and Contractor Managers.

Up to twice a year, the Government shall coordinate an integrated PMR where the Instrument Contractor and the Spacecraft Contractor shall present status and issues. This review shall be in lieu of the Monthly PMR for that month. The Contractor shall plan to travel to each combined review through delivery. The integrated PMR will rotate between the SMBA Instrument

Check the JPSS MIS Server at https://jpssmis.gsfc.nasa.gov/frontmenu_dsp.cfm to verify that this is the correct version prior to use.

Contractor’s facility and the Spacecraft Contractor’s facility. The semi-annual PMR may be planned periodically at GSFC in Greenbelt, Maryland.

1.5.1.3 Integrated Baseline Review (IBR)

The Contractor shall conduct an IBR to assess and validate the Performance Measurement Baseline in accordance with CDRL RE-6. The Contractor shall support a formal on-site IBR conducted by the Government with government participation. This review will be established by the Government as early as practicable and conducted in accordance with NASA requirements within 180 days of contract award or formal contract definitization. Additional baseline reviews may be required when substantial changes are made to the baseline (e.g., subsequent detailed planning; including routine rolling wave planning and program re-planning resulting from incorporation of significant contract modifications). The IBR will be tailored to meet the needs of the SMBA project.

The Government will coordinate the timeframe and scope of the IBR with the Contractor. The IBR will ensure that the PMB captures the entire scope of work, is consistent with the contract schedule requirements and has an adequate resource plan. The IBR team shall include Government personnel.

1.5.1.4 ETU Pre-Build Review

The Contractor shall hold an ETU Pre-Build Review to get Government agreement for the ETU Program – the scope and fidelity of the ETU, what testing will be done, and an attempt to define priorities ahead of time to aid in quicker decision making should there be cost, schedule, procurement, or facilities challenges that require an adjustment to the scope or fidelity of the

ETU.

The Contractor shall deliver the review data package in accordance with CDRL RE-14.

1.5.1.5 ETU Summary Review

The Contractor shall hold an ETU Summary Review to present the actual testing conducted compared to the plan, the results and any lessons of that testing, and any subsequent changes, either to the ETU and/or the flight design.

The Contractor shall deliver the data package in accordance with CDRL TBS.

The ETU Summary Review can be combined with the CDR if mutually agreed by the Contractor and Government.

The Contractor shall deliver the review data package in accordance with CDRL RE-15.

1.5.1.5.1 Design Modification Reviews

Whenever there is a design change to the flight instrument that the Government feels cannot be adequately reviewed by other means, the Contractor shall hold a Design Modification Review

Check the JPSS MIS Server at https://jpssmis.gsfc.nasa.gov/frontmenu_dsp.cfm to verify that this is the correct version prior to use.

(DMR) to review these changes at the Government’s request. The Contractor shall include Government representatives on the review board.

The Contractor shall deliver a DMR Data Package in accordance with CDRL RE-9.

1.5.1.6 Weekly Meetings

In order to track status, coordinate activities, and resolve issues, the Contractor shall support weekly meetings and telecons with the Government at mutually agreed to times.

At a minimum, the weekly meetings should include: 1) a meeting to review status, work completed in the prior week, and a look ahead; 2) a technical issues meeting to cover technical issues as mutually agreed by the Contractor and Government; 3) a brief weekly financial and business meeting to review staffing, spending and funding, and special studies task status and hours.

1.5.1.7 Engineering Peer Reviews

The Contractor shall define and implement a series of Engineering Peer Reviews (EPRs) for the hardware and software subsystems of the instrument commensurate with the scope, complexity and acceptable risk of the product (CDRL PM-6). The purpose of an EPR is to reduce risk through expert knowledge infusion, confirmation of approach, and specific recommendations.

The Contractor shall chair and host EPRs at the Contractor’s facilities with both Government decisional and non-decisional participation on the review panels. The Contractor shall conduct multiple peer reviews, as appropriate, over the lifecycle of each subsystem and component with content consistent with the evolving design and development.

At a minimum, the Contractor shall complete a comprehensive series of subsystem or lower-level peer reviews prior to any instrument design reviews. Successful completion of these EPRs and resolution of associated technical issues and actions is considered to be an important aspect of entry criteria in the formal review process. The Contractor shall also use EPRs for the focused evaluation of concepts, designs, plans and processes associated with combinations of subsystems and system functions and performance that cross traditional subsystem or discipline boundaries.

The Contractor shall conduct peer reviews as defined in the Peer Review Plan per CDRL PM-6 and document the peer reviews in accordance with CDRL RE-7, Engineering Peer Review Data Packages.

The Contractor shall systematically and comprehensively peer-review the product at the individual subsystem level, software module level, and at component (“box”) and lower levels of assembly. In addition, packaging reviews shall be conducted on all electrical and electromechanical components in the flight system. Subsystem and component level design reviews are considered to be EPRs and subject to this procedure. Examples include fault detection and correction; or solutions to address, for example, pointing, thermal or contamination constraints.

Check the JPSS MIS Server at https://jpssmis.gsfc.nasa.gov/frontmenu_dsp.cfm to verify that this is the correct version prior to use.

1.5.1.7.1 Manufacturing Readiness Review (MRR)

The Contractor shall conduct a Manufacturing Readiness Review (MRR) with the Government and its representatives in attendance. The MRR shall be conducted prior to the start of flight hardware manufacturing. The purpose of the MRR is to verify the engineering baseline by a design, drawing, and engineering requirement review to assure that all prerequisites have been met, all necessary paperwork is correct and complete, and the final and correct material is released to manufacturing and that the manufacturing planning is complete and reflects the final configuration. All documentation required to manufacture hardware in compliance with the contract requirements shall be available for Government review at the MRR. The MRR shall be considered complete and approved by the Government when all outstanding action items are closed or a detailed plan for closure is submitted by the Contractor and approved by the Government. The MRR data package shall be submitted in accordance with CDRL RE-8.

1.5.1.7.2 Test Readiness Reviews

The Contractor shall conduct Test Readiness Reviews (TRRs) immediately prior to the start of any test of critical sub-assemblies, the instrument, and instrument suite-level tests.

Unless stipulated otherwise by the Government, the Contractor shall include Government personnel in TRRs. The Contractor shall send a test procedure to the Government at least 3 days prior to the review.

The Contractor shall deliver TRR Data Packages in accordance with CDRL RE-12.

1.5.1.7.3 Test Data Reviews

The Contractor shall conduct Test Data Reviews (TDRs).

Unless stipulated otherwise by the Government, the Contractor shall include Government personnel in TDRs.

The Contractor shall conduct TDRs for data collected from instrument critical sub-assembly, subcontracted subassembly, instrument, and instrument suite-level tests.

The Contractor shall conduct TDRs prior to the shipment of deliverable GSE.

The Contractor shall conduct a TDR of the interim data during the qualification or acceptance test process of the instrument prior to the breakdown of any test setup (e.g., vibration testing, EMI/EMC testing, thermal vacuum testing, etc.) to ensure successful collection of required data, and prior to the PSR, to determine readiness.

1.5.1.7.4 Software Reviews

The Contractor shall plan and conduct software reviews per the Software Management Plan, CDRL SW-01.

Check the JPSS MIS Server at https://jpssmis.gsfc.nasa.gov/frontmenu_dsp.cfm to verify that this is the correct version prior to use.

Unless stipulated otherwise by the Government, the Contractor shall include Government personnel in Software Reviews.

The Contractor shall provide seven working days of advance notice to enable participation by the Government personnel.

The Contractor shall conduct the following software reviews:

a) Software Requirements Specification Review/Walkthrough

b) Software Preliminary Design Review

c) Software Critical Design Review

d) Software Test Readiness Review

e) Software Qualification Review

The Contractor shall provide a Software Preliminary Design Review (SWPDR) Data Package in accordance with CDRL SW-04.

The Contractor shall provide Software Critical Design Review (SWCDR) Data Package in accordance with CDRL SW-05.

The Contractor shall provide a Software Test Readiness Review (SWTRR) Data Package in accordance with CDRL SW-09.

The Contractor shall submit a Software Acceptance Review (SWAR) Data Package in accordance with CDRL SW-11.

The Contractor shall conduct software peer reviews.

The Contractor shall document the scope and process for conducting software peer reviews in the Software Management Plan in accordance with CDRL SW-01.

1.5.1.7.5 Technical Interchange Meetings (TIMs) and Other Reviews and Meetings A Technical Interchange Meeting (TIM) is an informal meeting between the Contractor and Government representatives. For example, to reach understanding of an operation or analysis, presentation of test results, discuss planned interface changes, plan for an upcoming test, etc.

TIMs typically are held at the Contractor’s facility and typically run no more than two days.

Actions are tracked by the TIM organizer.

The Contractor shall conduct technical/management interchange meetings as needed to discuss and resolve any technical and/or managerial issues or concerns. The Contractor shall submit meeting minutes, which will include the briefing materials, the attendees, action items, and significant decisions made at the TIM. The Contractor shall inform the Government at least one week in advance of Contractor-initiated technical interchange meetings.

In addition to the meetings and reviews described above, the Contractor shall support routine informal meetings and telecons with the Government. Weekly meetings or telecons between the

Check the JPSS MIS Server at https://jpssmis.gsfc.nasa.gov/frontmenu_dsp.cfm to verify that this is the correct version prior to use.

Government and the Contractor shall be supported by the Contractor at mutually agreed to times in order to coordinate activities and resolve issues.

1.5.1.8 Subcontract, and Subsystem Reviews

The Contractor shall plan and conduct Subcontract and Subsystem reviews per the Project Management Plan, CDRL PM-01.

Unless stipulated otherwise by the Government, the Contractor shall include Government personnel in Subcontract and Subsystem Reviews.

The Contractor shall conduct PDRs and CDRs for all major subsystems whether the subsystems are provided by the Contractor or by a subcontractor.

Whether internal or external, Subcontract and Subsystem reviews shall be conducted by the Contractor and chaired and staffed by independent reviewers for the hardware under review.

The Government reserves the right to attend these reviews and requires ten business days notification.

For Subcontractor and Subsystem reviews, the Contractor shall document the minutes. Any action items shall be captured in the MAID.

The Contractor shall submit Subsystem / Subcontract Review Data Packages in accordance with

CDRL SR-07.

1.5.2 Government Chaired Instrument Reviews

Major reviews are major milestones in the instrument life cycle where information is formally presented to a panel of Government experts and external reviewers. Major reviews should plan to involve approximately 10 to 50 Government representatives. The Contractor shall determine the optimum number of consecutive days to perform each of these reviews to meet the requirements in GSFC-STD-1001A, but not to exceed four days. The Contractor shall conduct dry runs of all System-level Reviews with the Government approximately two to four weeks in advance of the reviews, or as agreed to with the Government. These dry runs may be conducted either face-to-face or by electronic means.