(1) NASA Expendable Launch Vehicle Payload Safety Program Briefing to 30 th SW April 13, 2010 Cal Staubus ELV Payload Safety Manager.

(1)

NASAExpendable Launch Vehicle

Payload Safety ProgramBriefing to 30th SW

April 13, 2010

Cal Staubus ELV Payload Safety Manager

Assuring the Safety & Enhancing the Success of ELV Payload Activities2

Objectives

• Improve safety of NASA ELV payloads

• Improve the Safety Review and Approval process for NASA payloads

• Improve the understanding of NPR 8715.7, PSWGs and their relationship to AFSPCMAN 91-710 and Air Force Range Safety

• Explain the purpose and content of the NASA ELV Payload Range Safety Requirements (NEPRSR)

• Address questions

• Introduce ELV Payload Safety Website

EUROPA Explorer

Assuring the Safety & Enhancing the Success of ELV Payload Activities

PSWG

• PSWG members maintain their individual safety authority for their areas/locations of responsibility

– The PSWG is established to recognize all safety authorities– Air Force Range Safety still upholds AFSPCMAN 91-710– Astrotech and other contracted Payload Processing Facilities (PPF)

still ensures their local safety requirements are met for payload processing in their facilities

– Launch Vehicle Safety representative ensures their launch vehicle and spacecraft integration safety requirements are met

– NASA LSP Safety chairs the PSWG meetings and ensures NASA safety requirements are met on NASA property and per NASA contracts in contracted PPFs (includes NPR 8715.7)

– LSIM helps ensure appropriate safety (NASA/contracted PPF) requirements are met

– Payload Project Safety ensures all local safety requirements are met

3


Payload Safety Working Group Membership

MissionPSWG

w/ ChairpersonSystem or Subject

Matter Expert

(As Needed)

Ground OPS

(As Needed)

Launch Vehicle Contractor

Safety

Air Force

45/30 SWRange Safety

Mission Center

NASA & ContractorSafety

*LSP LSIM

*Invited participant

KSC S&MA

Launch Services

Division (SA-D)

Note: NASA Launch site safety organization will most likely chair

Payload Processing

Facility Safety


Background

• NASA STD-8719.8 ELV Payload Safety Review Process Standard (June 1998) to be updated June 2003

– For the most part successful but needed improvements:• KSC and GSFC both submitted proposals in 2004 (PPBE) to OSMA to

improve the ELV Payload Safety review and approval process• Complicated roles for projects involving multiple NASA Center• International Partners (CALYPSO) issues• Lack of defined authorities in the safety review and approval process• Lack of acceptance of external (non-NASA) approving authority and

requirements relying heavily on Air Force Range Safety requirements• Lack of process for resolving dissenting opinions within NASA and with

external organizations• Payload Safety Working Group (PSWG) authority, activities and

processes not consistent from payload to payload (JPL vs. GSFC projects)

(5)


Background (continued)

• Program development effort built on the current PSWG approach and augmented as needed to addressing lessons learned

• Improvements to include:– Establish a NASA organization responsible for consistent

implementation/interpretation of safety requirements and overseeing the safety review process

– Establish and maintain NASA ELV Payload Safety Processes and Requirements

– Identify Decision Making Authorities• Formal process for resolving differences within the PSWGs• Formal variance/waiver process

– Replace NSS with NPR

6


NPR 8715.7 Format

• Chapter 1:

– Introduction

– Payload Safety Policy

– Programmatic Roles and Responsibilities

– Tailoring and Waiver Processes

• Chapter 2: – Payload Safety Working Group– Project Roles and

Responsibilities– Flow of Activities and

Deliverables – Content of Deliverables– Data Submittals New Horizons


Applicability

NPR 8715.7 Applies to:

• Unmanned orbital and unmanned deep space payloads managed, launched, or developed in a joint venture with NASA

• The payload’s design, fabrication, testing, vehicle integration, launch processing, launch, planned recovery, etc.

NEW HORIZONS on an ATLAS VNPR 8715.7, paragraph P.2.b & c


Applicability (cont.)

NPR 8715.7 Does NOT Apply to:

• Payloads that interface with a manned launch vehicle or spacecraft

• Payloads that will fly on suborbital launch vehicles

• Non-NASA payloads launched from Wallops Flight Facility where NASA is just providing range services

• In-flight spacecraft operational safety or mission success

MESSENGER Assembly

NPR 8715.7, paragraph P.2.b, c, e & f


ELV Payload Safety Review Process Interfaces


PSWG Composition

• PSWG Chairperson - NASA KSC SMA Launch Services Division Safety Engineer.

• Co-Chairperson may be appointed for any mission

• Composition of the PSWG & member participation may vary based on:

– project activities – technical issues– multi-Center project involvement– operational requirements e.g.

selection of launch vehicle or processing facility

DAWN

NPR 8715.7, paragraph 2.3.1.i.( 7 )


Payload Safety Working Group Membership

MissionPSWG

w/ ChairpersonSystem or Subject

Matter Expert

(As Needed)

Ground OPS

(As Needed)

Launch Vehicle Contractor

Safety

Air Force

45/30 SWRange Safety

Mission Center

NASA & ContractorSafety

*LSP LSIM

*Invited participant

KSC S&MA

Launch Services

Division (SA-D)

Note: NASA Launch site safety organization will most likely chair


Each PSWG member

• Participate in the safety review and approval process

• Ensure compliance with all safety requirements for their area of responsibility and authority

• Review and provide comments to the project on deliverables within 30 days after submittal

• Assess and concur on tailoring and any waiver that is within their scope of responsibility

• Coordinate with the PSWG to resolve payload safety concerns and if needed, with the Agency Team

• Ensure that payload, facility, and payload/launch vehicle integration issues are disseminated to their organization and to other PSWG members

LRO

NPR 8715.7, paragraph 2.3.3.a – f


Each PSWG member

• Participate in PSWG activities

• Assess and concur on deliverables (plans, tailored requirements, hazard reports, Certificate of Safety Compliance, etc.)

AURORA Scanning

NPR 8715. 7, paragraph 2.3.3.g, h


The PSWG Chairperson

• Manage & administer PSWG activities (meetings, schedule, etc)

• Ensure PSWG member participation

• Provide official PSWG signature (indicating concurrence from all PSWG members) for all deliverables and correspondence

• Ensure deliverables are available for review

• Ensure that the PSWG, Agency Team, & LSP representatives are invited to PSWG activities

• Ensure all comments to deliverables are organized and submitted to the project ≤ 35 days after submittal

CALIPSO

NPR 8715. 7, paragraph 2.3.4.a – f


The PSWG Chairperson

• Ensure PSWG activities are documented - e.g. notices, action items, decisions, etc.

• Ensure distribution of final minutes

• Ensure PSWG participation by appropriate members at payload/launch vehicle integration working group meetings

• Schedule and conduct PSWG meetings concurrently with major project reviews and as required to meet the safety milestones of this program

• Ensure notification of the project safety schedule and changes

GLAST solar panel

NPR 8715. 7, paragraph 2.3.4.g – L


The PSWG Chairperson (cont.)

• Ensure the Agency Team is informed of safety issues that may impede the safety review process

• Ensure that all safety related documents are accessible to the PSWG members, Agency Team, and other subject matter experts or technical authorities

• If the PSWG cannot reach consensus, coordinate with the NASA ELV Payload Safety Manager to establish a resolution approach

• Coordinate with the PSWG and the project to ensure implementation of recommendations, interpretations, and resolutions of any safety concern provided by the Agency Team

New Horizons

NPR 8715. 7, paragraph 2.3.4.m – p

(18)

Safety Review Process Major Events

Complies with AFSPCMAN 91-710 with some minor variations while meeting NASA project requirements



Flow of Activities and Deliverables

• NPR 7120.5 - The safety review and approval activities are designed to coincide with the project management reviews required by NPR 7120.5, e.g., PDR, CDR, & Pre-ship Review.

• Process and deliverable dates may be altered through advanced formal agreement between the Payload Project Office and the PSWG provided that safe processing, project schedule, and safety review input to Key Decision Points (as defined in NPR 7120.5) are not impacted.

GOES - N

NPR 8715. 7, paragraph 2.4.2


Timeline of ELV Payload Safety Reviews


A Payload Safety Introduction (PSI) Briefing

• SCHEDULE PSI as early as possible but no later than midpoint of the Preliminary Design Phase. First meeting of the PSWG (Concept Briefing).

• Payload project submittals:– As a precursor to the tailoring processes,

identification of the safety requirement documents that are applicable to the project; previously approved waivers and alternative approaches, and known tailoring issues

– Draft Systems Safety Plan providing a conceptual overview of the Systems Safety Program

– Identification of known spacecraft systems and a preliminary assessment of potential hazards documented in a preliminary hazard list

– A basic Ground Operations Flow Overview providing the location and timeline of major payload activities and tasks

• The information provided should be as complete as the technical maturity of the conceptual design and operations allow Deep Impact

NPR 8715. 7, paragraph 2.4.2.a


Timeline of ELV Payload Safety Reviews


Safety Review I

• SCHEDULE: Begins prior to PDR & completed ≤ 60 days after PDR or as necessary ensuring PSWG’s timely input to Key Decision Point C

• PSWG meeting in conjunction with PDR

• Payload project submittals due ≥30 days prior to the PDR meeting:

– Final System Safety Plan – Tailored Payload Safety Requirements– Safety Data Package I

• PSWG shall:– Approve the final System Safety Plan– Discuss comments of Safety Data package I– Discuss the Tailored Payload Safety

Requirements – Assess Preliminary Hazard Analysis and any

Hazard Reports– Address any safety issues from PDR DAWN

NPR 8715. 7, paragraph 2.4.2.b.(1 – 3)


Safety Review I (cont.)

• The PSWG Chairperson shall provide the Payload Project Manager with:

– Status of Safety Review I including any safety concerns following the PDR meeting

– Assessment of the project’s safety efforts and identification of any safety concerns to support the project’s Key Decision Point C

TOPEX/Poseidon

NPR 8715. 7, paragraph 2.4.2.b.(4,5)



Safety Review II

• SCHEDULE: Begins prior to CDR & completed ≤ 60 days after CDR or as necessary ensuring PSWG’s timely input to Key Decision Point D

• PSWG meeting in conjunction with PDR

• Payload project submittal items due ≥30 days prior to the CDR meeting:

– Safety Data Package II– Final Tailored Payload Safety

Requirements

• Payload project submittal items due at CDR:

– Safety Action Tracking Log for review and concurrence to close completed actions

MRO

NPR 8715. 7, paragraph 2.4.2.c.(1, 3)


Safety Review II (cont.)

• PSWG shall:– Discuss comments of Safety Data

Package II– Address any safety issues from CDR– Review the project for any changes to

the design, processing, or interfaces for new or increased hazards or safety issues

• The PSWG Chairperson provides the Payload Project Manager with:

– Status of Safety Review II including any safety concerns following the CDR meeting

– Assessment of the project’s safety efforts and identification of any safety concerns to support the project’s Key Decision Point D

GOES - N

NPR 8715. 7, paragraph 2.4.2.c.(2, 4)



Safety Review III

• SCHEDULE: Begins with data submittal & completed at a PSWG meeting held ≥5 business days prior to Launch Services Program’s Ground Operations Review

• Payload project submittals:– Safety Data Package III

• Due ≥ 60 days prior to Safety Review III

• Finalized ≥ 30 days before hardware shipment to processing site

– Safety Action Tracking Log– Safety Verification Tracking Log– Certificate of ELV Payload Safety

Compliance

• PSWG verifies that all safety requirements have been satisfied or will be satisfied and waivers have been approved

ODYSSEY over Mars’ south pole

NPR 8715.X, paragraph 2.4.2.e.(1, 2)


Safety Review III (cont.)

• The PSWG Chairperson and the ELV Payload Safety Manager shall sign the Certificate of ELV Payload Safety Compliance indicating that the project has safety approval to ship to the launch area

• The ELV Payload Safety Manager shall provide the Payload Project Manager with a letter ≤ 5 days after successful completion of Safety Review III. The letter shall:

– Indicate that the project has successfully completed the payload safety review process per this NPR

– Include a copy of the signed Certificate of ELV Payload Safety Compliance

– Identify any conditions or constraints applicable to the safety approvals LUNAR Prospector

NPR 8715. 7, paragraph 2.4.2.e.(3,4) and 2.4.3

CERTIFICATE OF

ELV PAYLOAD SAFETY COMPLIANCE

A. Payload Mission: __________________________________

B. Launch Vehicle: __________________________________

C. The Payload Project Office hereby certifies that the payload complies with all applicable requirements of NPR 8715.7, Expendable Launch Vehicle Payload Safety Program.

D. Approved Waivers: __________________________________

E. Payload Project Manager Signature for Approval: ________________________ Date: ________________________

F. Payload Safety Working Group (PSWG) Concurrence: The PSWG Members concur that the necessary payload safety requirements of NPR 8715.7 and those safety requirements related to their areas of responsibility and authority are being or are planned to be satisfactorily accomplished thus completing the NPR 8715.7 safety and approval process performed by the project’s PSWG. From this point forward, payload processing safety issues shall be worked with the appropriate safety authority and need not be worked as a group under the PSWG. All compliance of safety requirements that are pending successful completion of in-line work required to support and complete this mission must be documented on the Safety Verification Tracking Log and attached. All in-line working level safety processes, procedures and requirements necessary for safe launch processing and a safe successful mission shall be followed as directed by the local safety authorities. 1) NASA Payload Safety Working Group (PSWG) Chairperson: ________________________________ Date: __________________ USAF Safety: __________________________ Date: __________________ Project Safety Engineer: _______________________ Date: __________________


Once the payload is shipped

• After transportation to the launch area processing facility, the project shall:

– Update the Safety Verification Tracking Log at least weekly (more frequently if needed to remove operational constraints)

– Ensure the current Safety Verification Tracking Log is available

– Ensure Technical Operating Procedures are approved 10 days prior to use

OSTM/Jason II



NASA ELV Payload Range Safety Requirements (NEPRSR) Template

• NASA desires a consolidated set of payload safety requirements

• Letter of Intent signed by NASA KSC SMA Director and the 30th and 45th SWs Chiefs of Safety (May 14, 2009)

• A jointly tailored AFSPCMAN 91-710 with pertinent NASA safety requirements added

– Range Safety changed to PSWG or local safety authority– Range User changed to Payload Project– Focuses on what safety requirements are needed for

payloads

• Keeps AFSPCMAN 91-710 paragraph numbers

• In a columnar template to become a baseline for tailoring by each project (payload mission) displaying tailoring decisions (C,T, I, N/A)

34


Tailoring Process

• Purpose: Ensure oversight of Agency requirements and provide Centers and Project Managers with the authority and flexibility to complete their tasks.

• Definition: The process of assessing the applicability of requirements and evaluating potential compliance to generate a set of specific requirements for the project.

• The Payload Project Office & its system safety engineer work with the PSWG to identify applicable requirements

• The PSWG Chairperson and Agency Team ensure consistency

• The PSWG Chairperson and the ELV Payload Safety Manager ensure appropriate authorities approve (sign) each tailored document. At a minimum, these include the Payload Project Manager, SMA Technical Authorities (project and ELV Launch) and Air Force Range Safety.

Deep Space

NPR 8715. 7, paragraph 1.4.1 - 5

• Letter of Intent between AF and NASA regarding joint tailoring of AFSPCMAN 91-710



NEPRSR

• AFSPCMAN 91-710 still applies in its entirety to NASA payloads launching from Air Force Ranges even though the paragraph or section is not included in the NEPRSR

• Air Force Range Safety Authority is unchanged

• Air Force Range Safety participates as a member of the PSWG

• Many policies, processes or responsibilities that do not apply to payloads or are transparent to them are not included

• Safety submittals and safety become more consistent

• Found on NASA PBMA website

38


Noncompliance (ELS/Waiver) Process

• ELS’ during the NEPRSR tailoring process do not require a NASA ELS/Waiver Request Form

• ELS’ proposed after the tailored NEPRSR has been signed require a NASA ELS/Waiver Request Form

• When a requirement cannot be met (not deemed an ELS) it is considered a waiver and requires a NASA ELS/Waiver Request Form

GOES N

NPR 8715. 7, paragraph 1.5.1 - 4

NASA ELV Payload Safety ELS/Waiver

Request

1. Request Type:

Equivalent Level of Safety (ELS)

Waiver

NASA ELV PAYLOAD SAFETY ELS/WAIVER REQUEST

Control Number

Other Authority Tracking #:

2. Date of Request

3. Duration:

4. Requesting Organization:

5. Location(s) Where the Request Applies:

6. Safety Requirements Document and Paragraph:

7. NASA Program (Select All Applicable)

Launch Services Program (ELV) Institutional Other (specify) ________________

8. Specify Mission/Project:

9. Does this Request affect personnel safety? Yes No (If yes, see directions)

10. Does this Request affect public safety? Yes No

(If yes, see directions)

11. Is a Federal, State, or local regulation being violated? Yes No

(If yes, see directions)

12. Describe the requirement(s) and the specifics of how it (they) would not be met if this Request is approved: 13. What other options or procedures were considered, and what was the rationale used to disposition/discard these options?

14. Have any design features or procedural controls been eliminated or compromised which would affect the safe operation of the system/operation?

Yes No (If Yes, specify) 15. Does this Request affect any other ELS or waiver, agreement, software design or other hardware design or procedural consideration?

Yes No (If Yes specify)

16. What additional controls or measures are in place to minimize the risk to personnel, facilities, and flight equipment?

17. How has the number of people and amount of hardware exposed to the potential hazard been minimized?

(41)

Content of Deliverables


Content of Deliverables

• The payload project coordinates with the PSWG to:

– Ensure that the content of the deliverables satisfies the requirements of NPR 8715.7 and AFSPCMAN 91-710 (under transition to the NASA ELV Payload Range Safety Requirements (NEPRSR) template)

– Ensure that the level of technical detail is commensurate with the project’s life cycle phase

– Ensure that changes are annotated for easy location and verification

AIM fully deployed



A Payload Safety Introduction Briefing

• Overview of the System Safety Program • Identification of organizational roles

and responsibilities• Identification of applicable safety

requirements and compliance documents

• Description of payload, instruments, and anticipated GSE

• Description of the flight path and planned recovery activities

• Identification of potential payload/launch vehicle interfaces and unique GSE

• Identification and preliminary assessment of potential hazards

• Overview of Draft Tailored Payload Safety Requirements

DAWN

NPR 8715. 7, paragraph 2.5.3.a - h


A Payload Safety Introduction Briefing (cont.)

• Identification of any potential noncompliances

• Any potential hazardous failure modes, failure probability, and performance characteristics during ground operations

• Identification of planned studies and analyses that support safety requirements

• Description of processing flow and anticipated schedule

• Identification of facility requirements• Identification and discussion of potential

contingency operations• Overview of the Mishap Preparedness and

Contingency Plan(s) • Recommendations for future safety Technical

Interchange Meetings, reviews, working groups, subject matter expert support, resolution of unmet requirements, Design Reviews, and other topics as deemed necessary. MRO

NPR 8715. 7, paragraph 2.5.3.i - p


A System Safety Plan

• Purpose: Details the payload project’s system safety program consistent with NPR 8715.3, AFSPCMAN 91-710 and MIL-STD-882, DoD Standard Practice for System Safety

• A system safety roles and responsibilities section describing:

– Interfaces & lines of communication

– Review and approval process with approving authorities identified

– Identification of key system safety personnel & responsibilities

– Activities required to identify, evaluate, & eliminate or control hazards & to minimize risk

AIM

NPR 8715. 7, paragraph 2.5.4.a


A System Safety Plan (cont.)

• System Safety Program Milestones in reference to major project milestones

• System Safety Data identified by title, number, date, and means of delivery or process for accessibility

• Identify System Safety interfaces between:– Other applicable safety disciplines (i.e.

nuclear safety, facility or institutional safety, Range Safety, explosive and ordnance safety, chemical and biological safety, radiation safety, hazardous materials safety, fire safety, laser safety, software safety, etc.)

– Design systems engineering – Other support disciplines (i.e. maintainability,

quality, reliability, software development, human factors engineering, industrial hygiene, etc.)

– All system integration and test disciplines

CALIPSO

NPR 8715. 7, paragraph 2.5.4.b - d


Preliminary Hazard Assessments & Hazard Reports

• Purpose: Utilize system safety engineering and analyses to identify and document potential hazards and verification for how those hazards will be eliminated or controlled

• At the Payload Safety Introduction Briefing, they will reflect the conceptual design, planned interfaces, operations, and identify potential hazards

• Hazard Reports will identify:– The hazard and mechanism for

occurrence and resulting outcome – The worst case severity and probability,

mitigations, and severity and probability with mitigations in-place

• Hazard Reports are included in each Safety Data Package

Deep Impact


1. Hazard Report

Number: NASA ELV Payload Safety Hazard Report

2. Status of Report: Date:

3. Revision: Originator Name: Email: Date: Phone:

4. Facility (Check all that apply): Testing Launch Pad Processing Transport to Pad

5. Mission/Payload:

6. Hazard Group:

7. System/Subsystem

8. Hazard Description:

9. Requirement(s):

10. Risk: Initial Impact Final Impact Initial Probability Final Probability

11. Project Manager:

12. PSWG Chair:

13. Hazard Causes 14. Hazard Controls 15. Safety Verification Methods 16. Facility 17. Status of Verification


Safety Data Package I

• Descriptions of hazardous and safety critical flight hardware and software, systems, components, materials, and GSE that reflects the PDR-level design and operations scenario

• A description of the payload and mission • Initial descriptions of all payload systems

including hazardous and safety critical subsystems, their operation, and interfaces

• Preliminary hazard reports and summaries of the hazard analyses

• Information identifying compliance to the Tailored Payload Safety Requirements

• For previously launched buses, identification and description of safety-related problems, mishaps, or failures that occurred during fabrication, testing, processing, or integration that could affect the safety of the flight hardware or software, GSE, personnel, or other NASA resources THEMIS



Safety Data Package II

• Updated Safety Data Package I information that reflects the CDR-level design & operations

• Updated description of payload & mission• Updated Hazard Reports • Descriptions of hazardous and safety critical

subsystems, their operation, and updated methods of compliance to the Tailored Payload Safety Requirements

• Detailed information of safety features, inhibits, monitoring systems, and their control and status during all processing phases

• Supporting plans, studies, and reports (provided or referenced), upon request

• Description of GSE, summary of hazardous, non-hazardous, and safety critical operations, list of hazard reports, and supporting hazard analyses for operations performed in NASA facilities, NASA contracted facilities, and launch site facilities (i.e., Ground Ops Plan)

• A cross-reference identifying the disposition of review comments and indicating any changes NPR 8715. 7, paragraph 2.5.7


Safety Data Package III

• Includes all the Safety Data Package updates with all comments addressed, incorporate all changes that reflect the as-built configuration and planned processing activities

• As-built description of payload and mission

• Final Hazard Reports

• Updated descriptions of hazardous and safety critical subsystems

• Updates to supporting plans, studies, and reports; required summaries of test results provided upon request

• Record of test failures, anomalies, mishaps involving qualification hardware, flight hardware, GSE, software (if used for hazard control), and an assessment of the resolution and safety implications of these events

• A signed copy of approved safety waivers

• A cross-reference identifying the disposition of review comments since previous submittal and indication of any changes NPR 8715. 7, paragraph 2.5.8


A Safety Verification Tracking Log (SVTL)

• Documentation (in a tabular format) of the status of safety verifications identified in the Hazard Reports

• Information for each safety verification:– tracking number– brief description of the verification, – Hazard Report number(s) – Any constrained operation(s) – If independent verification is needed– Scheduled and actual completion dates– Method of closure, status, and any comments

• “Closed” - mitigations are in place and that the safety risk is controlled as specified in the Hazard Report. Safety verifications often are best performed at a certain time in the payload processing flow.

• Submitted at Safety Review III and used to ensure the completion of safety verifications even after transportation to the launch area processing site

Deep Space


NASA ELV PAYLOAD SAFETY VERIFICATION TRACKING LOG

1. Page

of 2. PAYLOAD: 3. DATE:

4. Log No.

5. Hazard Report

Number

6. Safety Verification

Number

7. Safety Verification. Method

8. Operation(s) Constrained

9. Independent Verification

Required Yes/No

10. Scheduled Completion

Date

11. Date Complete

12. Method of Closure (Comments)

Safety Verification Tracking Log


Safety Action Tracking Log (SATL)

• Documentation (in tabular format) of the status of safety-related actions from safety reviews and meetings

• Information for each safety action:

– action number– brief description – responsible person(s) – scheduled and actual

completion dates– status and any comments

• Submitted at Safety Review II and III and may also be used by the PSWG Chairperson to record and track actions

DAWN


NASA ELV Payload Safety Action Tracking Log

1. Item # 2. Action 3. Responsibility 4. Due Date

5.Status 6.Response/Comments


Program Website

http://kscsma.ksc.nasa.gov/ELVPayloadSafety/default.html


Program Website


Program Website


Contacts & Questions?

• Cal Staubus, ELV Payload Safety Manager – Work: 321-867-8757– Cell: 321-213-0348– [email protected]

• Jennifer Mirenda, Senior Safety Engineer, ManTech KSC– Work: 321-867-9723– [email protected]

(1) NASA Expendable Launch Vehicle Payload Safety Program Briefing to 30 th SW April 13, 2010 Cal Staubus ELV Payload Safety Manager.

Documents

nasa safety requirements

local safety requirements

safety review processestablish

individual safety authority

nasa lsp safety chairs

metpayload project safety

payload jpl

nasa payloadsimprove