Attachment_0011__SLCET_FDSC_Final_Certified_29Feb12.pdf

ARMY CAPABILITIES INTEGRATION CENTER

CAPABILITIES INTEGRATION DIVISION

RELIABILITY, AVAILABILITY & MAINTAINABILITY (RAM)

ENGINEERING BRANCH

FAILURE DEFINITION AND SCORING CRITERIA (FDSC)

for the

SEMITRAILER, LOWBED, CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT

TRANSPORTER (SLCET)

M870A4

29 Feb 2012

PREPARED FOR

UNITED STATES ARMY MANEUVER SUPPORT CENTER OF EXCELLENCE

CAPABILITIES DEVELOPMENT AND INTEGRATION DIRECTORATE

REQUIREMENTS DETERMINATION DIVISION

ASSURED MOBILITY AND ENGINEER REQUIREMENTS DIVISION

PREPARED BY

TRAINING AND DOCTRINE COMMAND

ARMY CAPABILITIES INTEGRATION CENTER

RELIABILITY, AVAILABILITY AND MAINTAINABILITY (RAM) ENGINEERING BRANCH

LEONARD WOOD FIELD OFFICE

320 MANSCEN LOOP, SUITE 141

FORT LEONARD WOOD, MO 65473

“Excellence in Engineering, Scientific, Technical, & Analytical Services for the Combat Developments Community” i

FAILURE DEFINITION AND SCORING CRITERIA (FDSC)

for the

SEMITRAILER, LOWBED, CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT

CERTIFICATION SHEET

Purpose: This FDSC supports the Reliability and Maintainability (R&M) requirements as established in the SLCET Capability Production Document (CPD) . It will be used to determine classification and chargeability of test incidents, which occur during R&M related testing for the system. Further, it will be used for establishing an agreed upon data base to project operational

R&M values for estimates of operational effectiveness and ownership costs, as well as determining compliance with established reliability requirements in the SLCET CPD and contractual specifications.

System Description: The SLCET is a 40-ton capacity, road-legal, low-bed semitrailer equipped with a mechanical folding gooseneck, level deck, and a multi-axle rear suspension of at least three axles used for transportation of engineer construction equipment, ISO containers, and other miscellaneous heavy items. The SLCET is the next in the M870 series of semitrailers, the

M870A4.

Point of Contact: Mr. Gary Pryor, Commercial 573-563-7345, email: gary.pryor@us.army.mil.

Certification: Date: 29 Feb 2012

MICHAEL MENARD

Eastern Regional Manager

RAM Engineering Branch

FAILURE DEFINITION SCORING CRITERIA (FDSC)

for the

SEMITRAILER, LOWBED, CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT

1. PURPOSE.

a. The FDSC serves as a tool for directing/guiding Reliability Scoring Integrated Process

Team (IPT) members through the test incident/event scoring process with the intent of eliminating as much subjectivity from the scoring process as possible. The purpose of the

Failure Definition is to define, from the user's perspective, degraded system performance which, when evidenced by component or subsystem malfunctions, is considered a failure. The purpose of the Scoring Criteria is to define a specific and agreed upon process for scoring incidents/events which occur during reliability and maintainability related testing (such testing should be conducted in accordance with the approved Operational Mode Summary/ Mission

Profile (OMS/MP)). The scoring process involves the classification of each incident/event into the proper category (based upon its impact on the SLCET operational performance/functionality) followed by charging the cause of the incident to a particular source.

b. It will be used for establishing an agreed upon data base which will be used to project operational R&M values for estimates of operational effectiveness and ownership costs, and to determine compliance with established reliability requirements in the SLCET CPD and contractual specifications. Further, it is written under U.S. Army Training and Doctrine

Command (TRADOC) format and guidelines.

c. The CPD requires that the SLCET shall achieve a 0.94 probability of completing 380 miles without experiencing a System Abort (SA). This mission reliability is equivalent to a Mean

Miles Between System Abort (MMBSA) of 6141 miles, assuming the exponential distribution.

Failure of components due to accidents, overloading beyond rated limits (i.e., impact from unexpected terrain conditions (outside terrain profile definition parameters)), or battle damage are not considered reliability/durability failures against the CPD requirements.

2. SYSTEM DESCRIPTION. The SLCET is a 40-ton capacity, road-legal, low-bed semitrailer equipped with a mechanical folding gooseneck, level deck, and a multi-axle rear suspension of at least three axles used for transportation of engineer construction equipment, ISO containers, and other miscellaneous heavy items. The SLCET is the next in the M870 series of semitrailers, the M870A4.

APPENDIX A

A-2

3. FAILURE DEFINITION.

a. Essential Functions. The SLCET must execute the following essential functions, and be capable of performing these functions in all scenarios/mission profiles depicted in the OMS/MP.

(1) Move. The trailer must be able to be safely attached to, detached from, and transported by the appropriate prime mover at the speeds and over the terrain specified in the requirements documentation.

(2) Accept and Transport Cargo. The trailer must be capable of being loaded/unloaded and moved with all applicable cargo types, weights, and dimensions.

b. Failure Definition. For the SLCET, the following definitions of failure and clarifications are applicable. A further expansion of failure effects for each essential function is shown in

Table 1.

(1) Essential Function Failure (EFF) and System Abort (SA).

(a) An Essential Function Failure (EFF) is defined as an event that results in the loss of or operationally unacceptable degradation in one or more of the essential functions. Table

1 describes allowable degradation in essential functions and provides additional clarifications with regard to the scoring of the loss of essential functions. An EFF may result in a “Partial Mission Capable” status under wartime conditions or reduce its utility in certain operations. By definition all System Aborts (SA) are also EFFs. Therefore, MMBEFF is calculated including SA and EFF events.

(b) An EFF is scored as a System Abort (SA) if it results in the loss or degradation of an essential function(s) that renders the system unable to enter service or causes immediate removal from service, deadlines the platform, or makes it non-mission capable.

SAs also include those events that create a personal injury related Category I

(catastrophic) or II (critical) hazard as defined in MIL-STD-882D (see Table 2). By definition, all SAs are also EFFs and are annotated as “SA/EFF”.

(2) A Non-Essential Function Failure (NEFF) is defined as loss of non-essential functions, degradation of essential functions not meeting the criteria of an EFF, or minor malfunctions related to either essential or non-essential functions which can be deferred to the next maintenance period.

(3) A Rapidly Recoverable Event (RRE) is defined as an incident which occurs during operations and meets the conditions of an EFF or SA, but which can be quickly remedied by the crew (not maintenance personnel) within 15 minutes using only normally available tools and equipment. The 15 minute exclusion is subject to a maximum of one such incident per

200 miles of operation. The second and subsequent incidents will be scored under their own merits. This category is intended to cover those infrequent incidents which can be quickly corrected without significant loss of function. If it is apparent that there is a systemic problem which is being consistently scored as an RRE, the scoring body may decide to score them

A-3 either individually or as a group as an EFF or SA.

(4) A Dependent Failure is a failure event caused by another related event and which occurs simultaneous or nearly simultaneous to the related causing event. In some cases, it may be necessary to present engineering evidence to clearly link the dependent event to the causing event. The score of the first (primary) incident should reflect the combined effect of the primary and all secondary related failures (EFF, SA/EFF, etc). The secondary incident(s) are scored as Dependent Failures and charged to the failure of the primary incident (using

Primary Incident Chargeability). Thus, the system is charged a single failure event but all related maintenance time is counted. The Dependent Failure score is also sometimes used for TIRs which document the reoccurrence of an intermittent failure event; usually in those cases separate TIRs were written to document failures which were later determined to be instances of the same intermittent failure. The scoring IPT may alternatively choose to annotate or revise the TIR describing the initial occurrence to include subsequent related occurrences.

(5) Clarifications.

(a) Failures that are discovered during scheduled maintenance or corrective maintenance for an unrelated failure are normally considered on their own merit, regardless of when they are discovered. Sometimes a failure is discovered which did not exhibit noticeable symptoms or which did not affect operations enough for an investigation to be initiated, but by their nature are serious events (i.e. Class III oil leak).

If the crew or maintainer can correct a system abort incident discovered during other maintenance (or PMCS) within 45 minutes, without requiring a higher level of maintenance, and without requiring any part which would not be normally available, the incident will be considered an EFF only. Normally available parts means parts stocked at the level the repair is being performed (i.e. for repairs being performed by the field level maintainer, normally available repair parts are those available to the maintainer (i.e.

Authorized Stockage List (ASL) or Prescribed Load List (PLL). If the crew finds a problem during PMCS, it must be something he can correct which will normally be limited to tightening fittings, etc – but not using parts from the ASL/PLL. If more than one new failure is discovered at one time, the scoring body should use their judgment as to the scoring of these incidents, taking into account the cumulative maintenance time for all newly discovered failures. All incidents not meeting these guidelines will be scored under their own merits. A failure will be scored on its own merits in cases where a failure is detected on a subsystem during scheduled/corrective maintenance that would have been considered an SA/EFF during the performance of the mission if an attempt had been made to operate the affected subsystem.

(b) Cracks in structural members or assemblies will be scored as System Abort.

Cracks in welds of structural members or assemblies and which cannot be repaired at field level are scored as System Abort.

A-4

Table 1. Failure Expansion Matrix.

Essential

Function

Failure Criteria

Essential Function Failure

(EFF)

EFF/System Abort (SA) Non-Essential

Function Failure

(NEFF)

Move Malfunction resulting in noticeable degradation below full movement capability

Flat tires due to normal wear and tear

Systemic failure of external signals/lights

Loss of Anti-Lock Braking System

(brakes still functional)

Unable to move forward or reverse at

50% of required rate

Unable to connect to towing vehicle due to malfunction of trailer

Flat tires due to interference or contact with other trailer components

(subject to note 1)

Degradation or loss of braking function

Mechanical gooseneck inoperable

Cracks in structural members or assemblies

Cracks in welds of structural members or assemblies which cannot be repaired at the Field Level

Failure of individual external vehicle signals/lights

Accept and

Transport

Cargo

Malfunction resulting in degradation below full cargo capacity (40 tons)

Malfunction resulting in the inability to load or unload cargo from the rear of the trailer; or significant degradation in the ability to load or unload from the front of the trailer

Unable to load / unload cargo from the front of the trailer due to malfunction

Unable to support cargo load

Malfunction resulting in degradation below 75% cargo capacity (30 tons)

Cracked or warped decking which does not interfere with performance of mission

Notes:

1: Inability to perform essential functions not attributable to a specific malfunction are not scored against reliability.

2: Malfunctions of the towing vehicle, or malfunctions of the towing vehicle which cause loss or degradation in the ability to perform essential functions will not be scored against the reliability criteria for the M870A4.

TABLE 2. HAZARD SEVERITY, MIL-STD-882D

Description Category Environmental, Safety, & Health Result Criteria

Catastrophic I

Could result in death, permanent total disability, loss exceeding $1M, or irreversible severe environmental damage that violates law or regulation.

A-5

Critical II

Could result in permanent partial disability, injuries or occupational illness that may result in hospitalization of at least three personnel, loss exceeding $200K but less than $1M, or reversible environmental damage causing a violation of law or regulation.

Marginal III

Could result in injury or occupational illness resulting in one or more lost work days, loss exceeding $10K but less than $200K, or mitigatible environmental damage without violation of law or regulation where restoration activities can be accomplished.

Negligible IV

Could result in injury or illness not resulting in a lost work day, loss exceeding $2K but less than $10K, or minimal environmental damage not violating law or regulation.

A-6

4. SCORING CRITERIA. Classification of an event is based upon its impact on system operational performance. Primary classification categories are: “Reliability Failure Event”, “Non-Reliability Failure Event”, and “Other Event or Failure”. Reliability Failure events are divided into Essential Function Failure (EFF), System Abort/EFF (SA/EFF), Non-Essential

Function Failure (NEFF), Dependent Failure, and Rapidly Recoverable Event (RRE). Once an event has been classified as a failure, chargeability is assigned. Actual maintenance need not be performed in order to assign chargeability. Figure 1 depicts the general scoring process.

Scoring Procedure

a. Select appropriate category below and proceed as directed:

(1) Event is "Reliability Failure”. Proceed to 4.d.

(2) Event is “Non-Reliability Failure ". Proceed to action 4.b.

(3) Event is “Other Event or Failure”. Proceed to action 4.c.

b. Non-Reliability Failure. Identify the event as one of the following and proceed to next event/incident:

(1) Preventive maintenance, checks, or services (PMCS).

(2) Scheduled maintenance.

(3) Routine operating procedures performed by crew and prescribed in operator manual.

c. Other Event or Failure. Assign event to one of the following failure categories.

Then, proceed to next event/incident:

(1) Pre-test/Post-test checkout.

(2) System Modification.

(3) Test Peculiar.

(4) Misuse.

(5) Non-R&M Oriented.

(6) Unrelated Damage.

(7) Performance Limitation.

(8) Administrative

d. Reliability Failure. Assign event to appropriate category, then proceed to 4.e

(Chargeability):

(1) EFF

(2) SA/EFF

(3) Non-EFF

(4) Dependent Failure

(5) Rapidly Recoverable Event (RRE)

A-7

SCORING PROCESS

PREVENTIVE MAINTENANCE

CHECKS & SERVICES

(PMCS)

SCHEDULED MAINTENANCE

ROUTINE OPERATING

PROCEDURES

ACCIDENT

CREW

HARDWARE (CFE or GFE)

MAINTENANCE PERSONNEL

PRIMARY FAILURE

SOFTWARE

SUPPORT EQUIPMENT

TECHNICAL

DOCUMENTATION

TRAINING

UNKNOWN

Chargeable Reliability Failures R&M Relevant Non-Failure Events Failures/Events Not Relevant to R&M

Non-Chargeable Reliability Failures

PRE-TEST/POST-TEST CHECKOUT

SYSTEM MODIFICATION

TEST PECULIAR EVENT

MISUSE

UNRELATED DAMAGE

NON-RAM ORIENTED

PERFORMANCE LIMITATION

LEGEND

SELECT FROM OPTIONS SHOWN

BELOW THIS TYPE ICON

PRIMARY FAILURE

CATEGORIES

NON-ESSENTIAL FUNCTION

FAILURE

DEPENDENT

FAILURE

ESSENTIAL FUNCTION

FAILURE

SYSTEM ABORT

Figure 1 -- Generalized Scoring Process

ADDITIONAL FAILURE

CATEGORIES

RELIABILITY

FAILURE EVENT

NON-RELIABILITY

FAILURE EVENT

OTHER EVENT

OR FAILURE

FAILURE CAUSED BY

TEST EVENT

(as recorded on a Test Incident Report (TIR))

RAPIDLY RECOVERABLE

EVENT

A-8

e. Chargeability. Identify the cause of the event from the following list:

(1) Accident

(2) Crew

(3) Hardware

(4) Maintenance personnel

(5) Primary Failure (for incidents classified as “Dependent Failures” only)

(6) Support Equipment

(7) Technical Documentation

(8) Training

(9) Unknown

5. INSTRUCTIONS FOR TEST DATA COLLECTION. Accurate collection of certain data and information is critical to successful evaluation of a systems R&M performance. Some of this information and data is used by scoring personnel to make final determinations regarding categorization of reliability failures. Maintenance and supply demand categories, defined in a later section, are determined based on the failure category assigned or by definition. Following is a list of data and information that should be collected:

o Maintenance level o MOS performing maintenance o Maintenance clock-minutes/hours used o Maintenance man-minutes/hours used o Spare parts, LRUs, or SRUs used o Repair parts used o POL quantity used o Crew Correctable Maintenance Demand (CCMD) o Scheduled Maintenance Demand (SMD) o Non-Essential Maintenance Demand (NUMD) o Essential Unscheduled Maintenance Demand (EUMD) o Essential Logistics Demand (ELD) o Non-Essential Logistics Demand (NELD)

6. DEFINITIONS.

a. Chargeability Definitions.

(1) Accident. Chargeability category for incidents resulting from a mishap involving operational elements of the system (e.g., hardware, crew, maintainers, test players acting as crew, etc.) and usually resulting in equipment and/or personnel damage that cannot be charged to any other chargeability category. For example, accidents due to careless operations would not be charged to the “Accident” category, but instead would be charged under the “Crew” classification. Also, if the incident was due to faulty hardware design, the incident would be assigned a hardware chargeability, not “Accident”.

(2) Crew: Chargeability category for events attributable to crew error that were not

A-9 rooted in hardware/software design, inadequate training, or poorly written manuals.

(3) Hardware: Chargeability category for malfunctioning hardware and personnel related events caused by poor hardware design.

(4) Maintenance Personnel: Chargeability category for events attributable to maintenance personnel errors that were not rooted in hardware/software design problems, inadequate training, or poorly written manuals.

(5) Primary Failure: Chargeability category for secondary malfunctions which are directly attributable to an initial malfunction. For instance, if a surge protector fails and causes a microprocessor to burn up, the microprocessor failure is charged to "Primary

Failure" due to the failed surge protector. However, all maintenance to repair both failures is chargeable.

(6) Support Equipment: Chargeability category for events attributable to special tools, common tools, TMDE, spares, repair parts, associated software or other special equipment not part of the operational system.

(7) Technical Documentation: Chargeability category that includes all events attributable to misleading, incorrect, or nonexistent, but needed, information in the manuals. Poorly written manuals may cause crew or maintenance personnel errors. In these cases, manuals should be charged.

(8) Training: Chargeability category that includes any event that can be directly attributed to inadequacies in training due to omitted or incorrect training procedures, or inappropriate training material, such as information above the general level of understanding of the target audience. For an event to be charged to training, the instructional information needed must have been included in the manuals.

(9) Unknown. Events for which no explanation can be found. Every attempt should be made to determine the true cause of the failure and place the event in one of the other chargeability categories. Root causes of failures with an unknown chargeability are unlikely to get addressed or fixed.

b. Crew Correctable Maintenance Demand (CCMD). The CCMD is used to capture events where the crew corrected failures. These maintenance actions must be authorized at the crew level in the TM or applicable documentation. Each failure event should be recorded based on its impact on system performance, regardless of who accomplishes the corrective action. An event scored on its own merits and fixed by the crew generates a CCMD. An EFF corrected and authorized by the crew generates both an EUMD and a CCMD.

c. Dependent Failure. A failure event caused by another related event and which occurs simultaneous or nearly simultaneous to the related causing event. In some cases, it may be necessary to present engineering evidence to clearly link the dependent event to the causing event. The Dependent Failure score is also sometimes used for TIRs which document the

A-10 reoccurrence of an intermittent failure event; usually in those cases separate TIRs were written to document failures which were later determined to be instances of the same intermittent failure.

The scoring IPT may alternatively choose to annotate or revise the TIR describing the initial occurrence to include subsequent related occurrences.

d. Essential Function Failure (EFF). Any event which causes the inability to perform an essential function or which causes degradation in performance below specified levels in one or more of the essential functions.

e. Essential Logistics Demand (ELD). An ELD is recorded for all essential unscheduled maintenance demands and all scheduled maintenance demands that require parts or line replaceable units (LRUs). An ELD is recorded for each part requested or consumed. Thus, it is possible to record more than one ELD per event. This category does not include crew level

PMCS.

f. Essential Unscheduled Maintenance Demand (EUMD). A EUMD is recorded for each event requiring unscheduled maintenance that cannot be deferred until the next scheduled maintenance point at the prescribed level of maintenance. This means that by definition, all

EFFs resulting in a maintenance actions generate EUMDs. Non-EFFs may also result in

EUMDs. Crew safety and potential damage to the system are other key considerations in determining what maintenance is non-deferrable. Repair of fully redundant components, or restoration of a degraded essential function will also result in an EUMD. Note that an EUMD that is corrected and authorized by the crew also generates a CCMD.

g. Non-EFF (NEFF). Failure events which can not be classified as an essential function failure. A Non-EFF may result in loss of non-essential functions, degradation of essential functions not meeting the criteria for an EFF, or minor malfunctions related to either essential or non-essential functions. A Non-EFF will normally generate a Non-Essential Unscheduled

Maintenance Demand (EUMD). It is not always the case that a failure generates an unscheduled maintenance demand.

h. Non-Essential Logistics Demand (NELD). An NELD is recorded for all non-essential unscheduled maintenance demands that require parts or line replaceable units (LRUs). An

NELD is recorded for each part requested or consumed. Thus, it is possible to record more than one NELD per event. This category does not include crew level PMCS.

i. Non-essential Unscheduled Maintenance Demand (NUMD). An NUMD is any unscheduled maintenance action and which can be deferred until the next scheduled maintenance period at the prescribed level of maintenance. This category is used to cover the remaining incidents that require unscheduled maintenance but did not qualify as EUMDs. A NUMD performed by the crew also generates a CCMD.

j. Non-Reliability Failure Event. An event in which no actual failure has occurred but which is relevant to maintainability or logistics. A non-failure event may consist of, but is not limited, to any of the following events:

A-11

(1) Preventive Maintenance Checks and Services (PMCS). This includes those procedures defined as PMCS in the system's technical documentation. It does not include those incidents where a part is required. Requirement of a replacement part infers that a component has failed (may qualify as a “failure” and results in corrective action); or that a component has worn out (may be considered as scheduled maintenance). Failures that are discovered during PMCS are normally considered on their own merit, regardless of when they are discovered.

(2) Scheduled Maintenance. This includes those procedures defined as scheduled maintenance in the system's technical documentation. Failures that are discovered during scheduled maintenance are normally considered on their own merit, regardless of when they are discovered.

(3) Routine Operating Procedures. Routine operating procedures performed by the crew and which are prescribed in the user manual. Routine tasks the crew may quickly perform are not charged as failures.

k. Other Event or Failure. Events scored thusly will not have a chargeability assigned and will not be included in the overall reliability and maintainability evaluations of the system.

These events may include pre-test checkout/inspections, equipment modifications, test-peculiar events, test-directed abuse (e.g. test directed stresses beyond the performance limit of the system), unrelated damage, and other non-R&M related events. Further expansion this category follows:

(1) Pre-test/Post-test checkout. TIRs describing the performance of pre-test or post-test inspections or checkouts, and events observed during pre-test inspection or other pre-test activities. The test plan must specify the duration of the pre-test period in order to determine when the pre-test has ended. Events occurring after the expiration of the pre-test duration will be scored on their own merits. Events occurring after the conclusion of the test are also scored in this category. Post-test events discovered after the conclusion of the test but which occurred during the test will be scored on their own merit.

(2) Equipment modification. All maintenance actions involved in the installation of hardware kits or incorporation of redesigned components. If the replaced component was not functioning at the time of its replacement with the modification, the event will be scored on its own merit. The maintenance time will be estimated based on the time to restore the system to its original condition. Subsequent events related to the malfunction will be scored on their own merit.

(3) Test peculiar. Events caused by equipment that is not part of the system being tested or people not acting as test players (crew or maintenance personnel). Engineering evaluations to analyze the cause of the malfunctions, as well as any malfunctions and/or maintenance efforts caused by the engineering evaluation. Events related to test peculiar diagnostic equipment used in lieu of the diagnostic equipment which will be fielded are scored on their own merits.

A-12

(4) Non-R&M Oriented. Events for which a test incident report might be initiated by the test activity, but which are not events used in R&M computations. Examples include suggested improvements, reports on inadequate test procedure, unusable or unacceptable replacement parts which were discovered prior to or during installation, the systems consistent inability to meet performance specifications even though no actual malfunction has occurred, test schedule delays, and suggested human factors improvements.

Recommended changes to the system support package not related to a specific event, and damage caused by natural phenomena (lightning, earthquakes, etc) and other influences that are beyond the control of the operational elements of the system are also covered here.

(5) Misuse. Events in which official test participants (crewmembers or maintenance personnel) cause damage to the system either willfully or through gross negligence are subject to being classified as abuse (ultimately, a decision for the Scoring Conference members to make after considering the facts). This category also includes any incidents in which the tester directs the deliberate misuse of the system (e.g. a test excursion to exceed the performance limits of the system), whether called for by the test plan or not. Events attributable to misuse will not be scored against the system, as they provide no viable indication of its ability or inability to function reliably in the operational environment.

(6) Performance Limitation. This includes those incidents which report the inability of the system to meet a specified performance criterion even though no malfunction/failure has occurred.

(7) Unrelated Damage. This category includes damage caused by natural phenomena

(e.g. lightning, earthquakes, etc.) and other influences that are beyond the control of the operational elements of the system. Accidents caused by hardware malfunction or other operational elements of the system (crew, maintainers, etc.) are charged on their own merit.

(8) Administrative. Incidents noting administrative details of testing, such as the start or end of the test, addition or removal of test articles, or notes relating to performance testing.

l. Rapidly Recoverable Event (RRE). An incident which occurs during operations and meets the conditions of an EFF or SA, but which can be quickly remedied by the crew (not maintenance personnel) within 15 minutes using only normally available tools and equipment.

The 15 minute exclusion is subject to a maximum of one such incident per 200 miles of operation. The second and subsequent incidents will be scored under their own merits. This category is intended to cover those infrequent incidents which can be quickly corrected without significant loss of function. If it is apparent that there is a systemic problem which is being consistently scored as an RRE, the scoring body may decide to score them either individually or as a group as an EFF or SA.

m. Scheduled Maintenance Demand (SMD). This is a maintenance action that is part of a program of preventive maintenance and is not attributable to an equipment failure. To qualify as an SMD, an event must meet the necessary intervals, usage requirements, conditions, and durability requirements defined in applicable system technical documentation (i.e. technical manuals).

A-13

n. System Abort (SA). A failure event resulting in loss or degradation of an essential function(s) which renders the system unable to enter service or causes immediate removal from service, results in unsafe operation, deadlines the platform, or makes it non-combat capable.

Every SA is also an EFF by definition.