NASA TECHNICAL NOTE ! Z I.-- .,,¢ .,¢ Z NASA TN D-7599 APOLLO EXPERIENCE REPORT THE COMMAND AND SERVICE MODULE MILESTONE REVIEW PROCESS by Harmon L. Brendle and James A. York Lyndon B. Johnson Space Center H uston, Texas 77058 NATI ONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION • WASHINGTON, O. C, • MARCH 1974
96
Embed
Apollo Experience Report Command and Service Module Milestone Review Process
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
8/8/2019 Apollo Experience Report Command and Service Module Milestone Review Process
The JSC Director waived the use of the International System of Units (SI) for this Technical Note,because, in his judgment, the use of SI Units would impair the usefulness of the report or result
in excessive cost.
16. Abstract
The sequence of the command and service module milestone review process is given, and the
Customer Acceptance Readiness Review and Flight Readiness Review plans are presented• Con-
tents of the System Summary Acceptance Documents for the two formal spacecraft reviews are
detailed, and supplemental data required for presentation to the review boards are listed. Typi-
cal forms, correspondence, supporting documentation, and minutes of a board meeting areincluded•
17. Key Words (Suggested by Author(s))
• Configuration Management
• Project Management "Subsystem Review
• Vehicle Configuration Verification
• Customer Acceptance Readiness Review
• Flight Readiness Review
19. Security Classif. (of this report)
None
18. Distribution Statement
Cat. 31
20. Security Cla_if. (of this _ga) 21. No. of Pages 22. Dice
$4.25None 111
* For saleby the NationalTechnicalInformationService,Springfield,Virginia 22151
8/8/2019 Apollo Experience Report Command and Service Module Milestone Review Process
determined the agenda items that were presented to the review board. This procedureshifted the determination of significant issues for the board's review from the contrac-tor to NASA.
The Phase I CARR was primarily a configuration assessment that was conducted
after completion of manufacturing and served as a checkpoint for power-on testing.
The Phase II CARR was conducted after completion of subsystem-level testing and
served as an assessment before the start of integrated systems testing.
The Phase HI CARR was a complete assessment of the spacecraft. The Phase HI
CARR was conducted after completion of integrated systems testing and served to verify
the degree of completion, the customer acceptance, and the degree of readiness for
shipment of the spacecraft to the NASA John F. Kennedy Space Center (KSC).
The FRR was a mission readiness assessment. The FRR was conducted after the
test and checkout activities at KSC but before the start of launch countdown.
MI LESTONE REVIEW PROCESS
General Sequence
The sequence of the CSM milestone review process is shown in figure 1. The
CARR plan and the FRR plan provided specific definition of responsibilities and require-
ments for both NASA and contractor personnel. The CARR and FRR plans determined
the review team and board membership; which included contractor personnel, the re-
view team tasks and objectives, the requirements to support review team tasks, and theaction item resolution responsibilities.
The contractors provided the data required for review (appendixes A to E) in Sys-
tem Summary Acceptance Documents (SSAD's), in which the data were sorted and cata-loged by subsystem and type to facilitate the work of the review teams. Data not
suitable for sorting by subsystem also were provided for the review teams. In addi-
tion, other data were made available to the review team on request.
_-.--_ At manufacturing site
Menuflcturing I Subsystem test I/ = ! I ntIRrated I
phtse sL_temses_tPrelaunchlCARR _] Servicing
Phi're H _"[ COUntdown
CARR Phls# ITI _,
CARR and FRR
shipment
to launch
site
J_ At launch site -._
Launch
Figure 1.- Command and service
module milestone review
sequence.
The responsibility for coordination
and implementation of the CSM reviews was
assigned to the Review Planning Office of
the NASA Manned Spacecraft Center (MSC)
(now the Lyndon B. Johnson Space Center)
CSM Project Engineering Division. Because
frequent coordination was necessary to de-
termine the most practical time for formal
reviews in support of the CSM milestones,
focal points were established at the NASA
office in Downey, California (NASA-Downey),
and at the CSM prime contractor, North
American Rockwell Corporation (NR),
facility.
8/8/2019 Apollo Experience Report Command and Service Module Milestone Review Process
Implementing correspondenceestablishing review schedulesand locations, iden-tifying team andboard members, anddefining data to be reviewed as well as boardpresentation requirements was prepared anddistributed at least 2 weeksbefore eachreview. (AppendixF is a typical implementing letter. ) Various MSCdivisions support-ing these reviews were requestedto provide a listing of individuals whowouldpartici-pate in the review. TheMSCReviewPlanningOffice screenedthese lists and included
approved team members on an official visitation list for access to the contractor facil-
ity. This screening process was necessary to ensure appropriate support during theteam reviews.
The review process flow consisted of a 3-day subsystem data review followed by
a 3-day period in which the contractor or other design agency prepared responses to
the problems identified by the review team or special briefings requested by the NASA
program management (or both). The board normally convened the following day to act
on the contractor responses.
Each review team consisted of the subsystem manager (SSM), the reliability and
quality assurance (R&QA) specialist, and the subsystem test engineer (STE). Each
team included a contractor representative to answer on-the-spot questions by the team
members. Individuals from the MSC Flight Safety Office, the MSC Flight Crew Support
Division, and the KSC CSM Engineering Division also supported the team.
The teams reviewed the data presented by the contractor, which included subsys-
tem SSAD books for all applicable subsystems and data in support of these subsystems
that were too bulky to include in the SSAD. Other data required by the review teams in
completing their tasks were also provided on request.
To aid the review team in performing a comprehensive review, brief handouts
that contained descriptions of team tasks and objectives and a detailed description of
the SSAD book sections and supporting data were provided at the review. This infor-
mation was extracted from the CARR and FRR plans as required. The review teams
prepared daily team minutes (figs. 2 and 3) to record their review activities and docu-
mented all significant problems to which the contractor was not able to readily respond
on customer acceptance review item dispositions (CARID' s) (fig. 4) or flight readiness
review item dispositions (FRRID's) (fig. 5).
The CARID's and FRRID's contained the problem description, recommendations
for corrective action, and constraints. Before submittal to the contractor, the CARID's
and FRRID's were serialized and reviewed by the NASA review coordinator for complete-
ness and accuracy. The CARID's and FRRID's then were given to the contractor for
preparation of a written response or position regarding corrective action or other dis-
position of'the problem.
At the conclusion of each subsystem review, the applicable NASA and contractor
SSM, R&QA representative, and STE signed readiness statements (figs. 6 to 9), which
attested that the vehicle was ready to proceed to the next phase of test acceptance or
flight and that all exceptions were identified and documented on CARID's and FRRID' s.
8/8/2019 Apollo Experience Report Command and Service Module Milestone Review Process
The CARID workbook was used as the working document to report and expedite the
CARR Board action items. The CARl]:) workbook was published by NR and contained the
CARID actions and responses at the time of the CARR Board meeting. Distribution was
limited to the NR and NASA CARR coordinators for use as required in the closeout of
CARID's. The minutes of the CARR Board meetings, including summaries of the
CARID's, were distributed by MSC to all offices and organizations having a workinginterest in the CSM.
Pre-CARR activities: The SSAD data were prepared by the contractor on a pro-
gressive basis concurrently with the manufacturing and checkout of the subsystem. The
NASA-Downey office participated with NR in the review of the SSAD's to ensure that
they were adequate to support the formal review.
In accordance with current proceduresp NASA R&QA reviewedp in real time, all
closed disposition record (DR) squawk sheets, material review disposition records
(DR-MR's), DR failures, and DR unsatisfactory conditions. Issues from this review
were resolved in real time or presented to the board as an open, unsatisfactory condition.
In accordance with current procedures, MSC reviewed (at NR-Tulsa, Oklahoma)
all SLA repairs resulting from material-review dispositions approximately 2 weeks be-fore acceptance. A report of the review was prepared by NR and submitted to MSC.
This report was made available at the formal CARR for reference only. Issues covered
by this report were reopened at the formal CARR only if new information was available
or if the MSC SLA project engineer approved (or both).
Formal reviews: Approximately 1 week before the CARR Board meeting, a for-
mal review of SSAD's and supplemental data was conducted at NR-Downey by the sub-
system review teams listed in table II. The review teams were structured as defined
in the following paragraph. The formal reviews lasted approximately 3 days and were
audits of the data provided in accordance with the team tasks enumerated on the follow-
ing pages. Approximately 2 weeks following acceptance of the SLA, a formal review
of SLA-SSAD and supplemental data was conducted at an MSC-designated location by
the SLA subsystem review team described in the following paragraph. The review
lasted approximately 2 days, and all issues resulting from this review were presented
to the chief of the MSC CSM Project Engineering Division for disposition.
Subsystem review teams: The subsystem review teams were composed of the
following members.
1. MSC SSM (team leader)
2. NASA P,&QA representative (MSC or NASA-Downey)
3. NASA-Downey STE
4. NR systems engineer
5. KSC systems test engineer (as available)
18
8/8/2019 Apollo Experience Report Command and Service Module Milestone Review Process
Special teams: "Specialworking teams were established to review items of spe-
cial consideration such as tanks, nonmetallic materials, wiring, and ACE.
Members-at-large: The following individualswere designated as subsystem re-
view team members-at-large.
1. Members-at-large from NASA
a. NASA-Downey vehicle manager
b. Apollo Spacecraft Program Office (ASPO) project engineer
c. NASA R&QA representative (MSC or NASA-Downey)
d. NASA-Downey configuration management representative
e. MSC safety representative
2.Members-at-large from NR
a. Reliabilityrepresentative
b. Quality representative
c. Manufacturing representative
d. Quality information representative
e. Apollo Test Operations representative
f. Configuration Management Office (CMO) representative
g. Safety representative
The members-at-large or their designated representatives attended all sessions and
were available for consultationto all subsystem review teams. The members-at-large
ensured that allprogram anomalies and hardware problems applicable to the spacecraft
under consideration thatwere known to them were considered for CARID' s.
Review team tasks: The CARR team review objectives were met by performing
the team tasks outlined in table II.
Team minutes: Team minutes were submitted to the CARR secretariat daily.The minutes included the team accomplishments, the CARID's submitted, and other
significantinformation as a permanent record of the team activities. The team leader
was responsible for the preparation of the team minutes (fig.2).
S-389 21
8/8/2019 Apollo Experience Report Command and Service Module Milestone Review Process
Status report of action items: The contractor provided a monthly status report
of all open CARID's to MSC. The monthly status report included the followinginformation.
1. The CARID number
2. The action abstract
3. The reference closeout documentation
The first monthly report by NR was made within 10 days following the CARR Board
meeting and offered closeout actions on all items constraining the next test phase or ac-
ceptance. This report was submitted to the Manager, Apollo Spacecraft Program, MSC.
Subsequent reports were grouped with reports from CARR's for other vehicles. Also,
NR submitted closeout proposals for all open CARID's and action items to MSC in realtime.
Contractor logisticsupport: In additionto the logisticsupport defined in the pre-
ceding sections of the CARR plan, the contractor provided secretarial, reproduction,
and data retrieval services required to support the various CARR activities. The work-
books for the Phase I and Phase IICARR' s included the CARID's and the CARID re-
sponses. Twenty copies were provided by NR for the CARR Board meeting. The
workbooks for the Phase IH CARR included the CARID's, the CARID responses, and
special briefings. Forty copies were provided by NR for the CARR Board meeting.
Environmental control system and crew compartment fit and function KSC data
review.- Special environmental control system (Ecs) and crew compartment fit and
function (CCFF) data reviews were held at KSC after the Altitude Chamber Test to en-
sure that the ECS was acceptable for flight. The data review did not constrain CSM
acceptability for delivery. The applicable sections of the SSAD were updated, and thenecessary supporting data were provided for this review. The requirements for these
reviews are contained in the CSM FRR plan.
Flight Readiness Review Plan
The FRR was conducted at KSC and MSC. The FRR data reviews were held at
KSC, and the NASA preboards and FRR Boards met at MSC. The purpose of the FRR
was to evaluate the CSM, the SLA, the ground-support equipment (GSE), and other re-
lated items for assessing their readiness to support the launch and designated mission.
The review objectives were to define any action required to bring the CSM and the SLA
to a condition of flight readiness and to bring the GSE to a condition of CSM launch sup-port readiness. The scope of the FRR was limited to the information developed on the
CSM, the SLA, and related items subsequent to (i. e., delta data from) the Phase HI
CARR of the specific vehicle under review.
Procedures and implementation.- Information on data requirements, scheduling,
activities,reviews, composition of teams, and team tasks and other considerations
necessary for implementing the FRR plan are presented in the following paragraphs.
Data and documentation: Spacecraft data were assembled and sorted by subsys-tem as described in table IH. The detailed content of each SSAD was as described
25
8/8/2019 Apollo Experience Report Command and Service Module Milestone Review Process
bsections were set up for FRRID numbering but did not require
SSAD books.
cA data book was prepared but did not conform to the standard
SSAD format.
In addition to SSAD data, supplemental data were provided. The supplemental
data were existing data that were unsuitable for sorting by subsystem. Supplemental
data requirements are defined in appendixes D and E. The NASA associate contractors
prepared that portion of the data for which they were responsible and submitted their
inputs through NASA-Downey to KSC for inclusion in the data package.
The MSC was responsible for the preparation of the SSAD and of supplemental
data involving all Government-furnished equipment (GFE). The equipment managers
were responsible for the preparation of these inputs and for submission through the
GFE Office, MSC, for inclusion into the GFE data package in accordance with applicableprocedures. The GFE data were forwarded to RASPO-KSC 1 week before the start of
the team reviews.
All problems identified by the data review teams were documented on FRRID's.
An FRRID (fig. 5) was a two-part form that allowed NASA to document problems in a
uniform format and the contractor to provide an answer in the corresponding uniform
manner. The FRRID's were assigned control numbers to facilitate communications on
specific problems.
28
8/8/2019 Apollo Experience Report Command and Service Module Milestone Review Process
An FRRIDworkbookwasprepared by the contractor for presentation to the MSCpreboard. The workbook containedcopies of the NASAproblem definition sheets, thecontractor resolution sheets, andany supportingdata relative to the FRRID.Thirty-five copies of the FRRIDworkbookwere required to support the MSCpreboardmeeting.
An FRRIDworkbookalso wasprepared for presentation to theMSCFRRBoard.The workbook containedFRRID's that were presented to the FRRBoard for dispositionor information andwaspublishedby NASA. Fifty copies were required. The contractorwas permitted to publish a preliminary issue of the FRRIDworkbook for useat his in-housereview.
Presentations of FRRID's andspecial briefings for the MSCpreboard andthe FRRBoardwere by meansof film transparencies (view graphs). The contractor providedtwo copies of eachview graph. Two hard copies of eachview graph were prepared bythe contractor in support of the preboard meeting. After mutual determination of the
FRRID's and special briefings to be presented to the FRR Board, a final briefing was
prepared. Support for preparation of the view graphs was provided to the contractor
by NASA, who published 50 copies of the contractor's briefing material to be handed
out at the FRR Board meeting. This handout constituted the FRR report. Schedules
for data and documentation were established jointly by KSC, MSC, and the contractor.
Pre-FRR activities: Following the Altitude Chamber Test, a special review was
convened by the Manager, RASPO-KSC, to assess the acceptance of the ECS and the re-
suits of the CCFF Test conducted during the Ambient Chamber Test. The review was
scheduled to start within 5 days following the completion of the Altitude Chamber Test.
Exact dates were coordinated with the contractor by RASPO-KSC, and implementing
correspondence was originated by the MSC Review Planning Office. The contractor
provided data in accordance with SSAD content requirements for the ECS and the crew
equipment subsystem, with applicable backup data available on request.
The ECS review team was composed of the following individuals. (Subsystem re-
view team tasks are shown in table IV. )
1. MSC SSM
2. MSC reliability systems engineer
3. MSC Flight Crew Support Division representative
4. NR-Launch Operations (LO) systems engineer
5. KSC systems engineer (as available)
6. MSC Safety Office representative
29
8/8/2019 Apollo Experience Report Command and Service Module Milestone Review Process
Contractor members-at-large were representatives from the following NR organizations.
1. Program Reliability
2. Program CMO
3. Program Quality
4. Project Engineering
Team minutes: Team minutes were compiled daily for the purpose of recording
the activity of the team and of indicating the team tasks completed, the FRRID's sub-
mired, and other significant information. Minutes were to be submitted to the FRR
control station no later than 8:30 a.m. on the following day. The team leader was re-
sponsible for the preparation of the team minutes.
Use of FRRID's: The FRRID's were used to identify specific problems by citing
part number, reference documentation, and a brief summary of how the problem was
identified. In the FRRID, a specific action for solving the problem was recommended
and a specific constraint including the logic for arriving at the constraint was given.
Design review or product improvement items or items affecting mission rules were to
be handled through program (CCP or CCB) channels rather than through FRRID's. No
FRRID's were to be written for planned work (including open DR' s) unless the schedule
for completion of the planned work would not support the overall schedule of events.
No FRRIDts were to be written on open certifications and open CSM failures because
the contractor presented data on these subjects to the FRR Board. The FRRID's could
be generated on GSE problems if NASA took exception to the operational readiness re-port problem summary and if the problem might impact launch. The FRRID's were to
be submitted as soon as they were written to allow the contractor time to respond. The
FRRID's submitted after the deadline, which was announced at the FRR kickoff meeting,
were not to be processed.
The NASA-NR coordinator team: The NASA-NR coordinator team consisted of
the Chief, Review Planning Office, MSC; the RASPO-KSC project engineer; the NR-
Downey Project Engineering representative; the NR-LO representative; the KSC Space-
craft Operations representative; and the ASPO-MSC project engineer. The team was
responsible for the following.
1. Establishing an FRR control station
2. Reviewing FRRID's and advising team members in preparation of FRRID's
3. Reviewing and coordinating FRRID resolutions
4. Serving as FRR Board and preboard secretariat
35
8/8/2019 Apollo Experience Report Command and Service Module Milestone Review Process
Action items: The FRR Board secretariat recorded the board action items and
made them available for approval by the board chairman or his designee immediatelyfollowing meeting adjournment. Those action items that were considered to be con-
straints to further testing or launch of the vehicle under review were so identified.
Each action item was annotated on the FRRID under consideration. Contractor person-
nel with sufficient authority to accept or negotiate these actions attended the FRR Board
meetings. Action items affecting other vehicles were closed by generating a program
action FRRID.
Minutes: Minutes of the FRR preboard and FRR Board meetings were prepared
jointly by NASA and NR. Single points of contact to assist the secretariat in this task
were designated by NASA and the contractor. The minutes were prepared and made
available for approval by the chairman within 24 hours after meeting adjournment.
Program action FRRID's assigned by the chairman were included in the minutes andsummarized by an attachment to the minutes.
Action item resolution: The FRRID closeout submittals and action item resolu-
tions were coordinated by the MSC Review Planning Office. The Manager for the Com-
mand and Service Modules, MSC (or his designee), determined when proper action had
been implemented to resolve the action items resulting from the FRR Board meeting.
Constraints to further testing or to launch, as defined by the FRR Board, were consid-
ered removed only by this determination of action item resolutions. The Manager for
the CSM confirmed or rejected all NR submittals for closeout of action items or FRRID's
in a timely manner that supported the launch schedule.
Status report of action items: The contractor provided a formal status report ofall open FRRID's and other action items to the Manager for the Command and Service
Modules, Apollo Spacecraft Program, MSC. The status report included the following.
1. The FRRID number
2. The action abstract
3. The reference to closeout documentation
A status report was submitted to NASA following the ECS and CCFF reviews. A
second status report was provided following the GSE review. Interim reports were sub-
mitted if the status changed significantly or if the contractor could not complete the ac-tionitem closeouts before the assigned constraint. In the period between the MSC FRR
Board meeting and the NASA Headquarters FRR, status reports were provided weekly.
Daily closeout actions were coordinated by telephone, and facsimiles were trans-
mitted to the MSC Review Planning Office so that a real-time status could be maintained.
The MSC Review Planning Office kept the appropriate KSC office posted on closeoutstatus.
38
8/8/2019 Apollo Experience Report Command and Service Module Milestone Review Process
The SSAD book data shall be limited to the specific command and service module
(CSM) under consideration unless otherwise noted and to copies of existing documenta-
tion or an extraction from an existing data system.
1. Readiness statements -- The readiness statements shall be filled out and
signed at the conclusion of each system review. Readiness statements are signed by
the NASA and contractor representatives. The contractor will sign the readiness
statements during the contractor SSAD review before the NASA review.
2. Section 2 will be left blank.
3. Latest parts list -- An alphanumeric, "as designed" parts list for the partic-
ular system will be provided. This list will include part number (P/N), nomenclature,
next assembly, quantity, and traceability for contractor parts, specification control
drawing parts, and field installed parts.
4. Contract specifications list (SSAD 4.34 only) --The contract specifications
that are applicable to the CSM being reviewed will be listed in SSAD 4.34 ("CSM
General") only.
5. Contract specification waivers -- A copy of each contract specification waiver
or deviation accumulated since the preceding phase will be included.
6. Parts serialization list --A list is required of serial and lot numbers based
on the manufacturing completion records for all parts that require traceability in
accordance with the engineering drawing and that have been installed on the vehicle.
7, EOAS printout --The EOAS printout will be included in this section. The
Phase III CARR input will be limited to delta data from the previous phase.
8. Unreleased engineering data list _ A list of unreleased contractor engineer-
ing data will be provided. The list shall be coded to reflect those items that affect
hardware and to identify the constraint points.
9. Parts removal summary -- The parts removal summary is a tabulation by
P/N based on the parts serialization list (section 6) summarizing open removals and
all parts that have been replaced on the vehicle.
10. Hardware shortage list _ The hardware shortage list should include allitems that do not support the normal departmental installation requirement. The list
will be based on the fabrication and inspection record and the test and inspection
record shortage sheets.
11. TIR (Phase III CARR only) _ A TIR that contains temporary installations of
category B (nonflight functional) and category C (flight items being fit checked) items
will be provided for Phase III CARR's.
45
8/8/2019 Apollo Experience Report Command and Service Module Milestone Review Process
27. TPE reports or test cell supervisor's report--- A list of the checkout
requirements showing status and a copy of each applicable report are to be included.
28. DCOE report (Phase IS CARR only) -- A list of the checkout requirementsshowing status and a copy of each applicable DCOE report are to be included for the
Phase IS CARR only.
29. TPS's -- A copy of each applicable TPS (excluding TPS's included in sec-
in this section shall be provided in lieuof prime contractor inputs for all SSAD 2.15
sections that require G&N information not under prime contractor cognizance.
32. Section 32 will be left blank.
33. First flight components (SSAD 4. 34 only)- A list by P/N and name of each
certification-test-network-level part that has not been flown on a previous mission is
to be included.
34. Section 34 will be left blank.
35. IPL-- An IPL documenting the use of irregular parts and the rationale for
their acceptance in flight hardware applications will be provided.
36. Modification after integrated test (SSAD 4. 34, Phase IH CARR only)- Alist with a short narrative description of all modifications or rework planned after
integrated test and before shipment will be included. The impact on retest require-
ments is to be included for the Phase HI CARR only.
37. CARID status (Phase HI CARR only)- A list of CARID's from the previous
increment along with a short narrative summary describing the status of each will be
provided. A copy of each CARID and the contractor's response will be included for the
Phase HI CARR only. The SSAD 4. 34 book will include the CARID's numbered 5.24to 5.33.
38. Section 38 will be left blank.
39. Section 39 will be left blank.
40. ASHUR's and HRE requests-- Copies of all ASHUR's and HRE requests
applicable to previously flown hardware items currently installed in the CSM under
review will be included.
41. Section 41 will be left blank.
42. Section 42 will be left blank.
47
8/8/2019 Apollo Experience Report Command and Service Module Milestone Review Process
Each command and service module (CSM) system (including the spacecraft/lunar
module adapter) designated in table HI shall have a separate System Summary Accept-
ance Document (SSAD) prepared to document the history of that system area. The SSAD
data shall be limited to the specific vehicle under consideration unless otherwise notedand to copies of existing documentation or to an extraction from existing documentation.
SUMMARYOFCONTENTS
Each SSAD will be divided into the following sections. When a section is
designated as "not used" or has limited applicability, no divider or data are required.
1. Readiness statements
2. Not used
3. Parts list
4. Contract specifications list (SSAD 4. 34 only)
5. Contract specification waivers
6. Parts serialization list
7. Engineering Order Accountability System (EOAS) printout
8. Unreleased engineering data list
9. Parts removal summary
10. Hardware shortage list (SSAD 4. 34 only)
11. Temporary installation record (TIR)
12. Test Specification and Criteria Document (TSCD) and Test and Checkout
The following list contains details of SSAD section contents.
1. Readiness statements -- The readiness statements shall be signed by the
contractor at the conclusion of each subsystem review.
2. Section 2 will not be used.
3. Parts list -- An alphanumeric parts list shall be provided. This list will
include contractor parts, specification control drawing parts, Government-furnished
equipment (GFE), and field installed parts. Information presented in this parts list
will include part number, nomenclature, next assembly, quantity, and traceability
coding.
4. Contract specifications list (SSAD 4. 34 only) -- A list of all contract speci-
fications that are applicable to the vehicle being reviewed shall be provided for SSAD
4. 34 only.
5. Contract specification waivers --A copy of each NASA-contractor contract
specification waiver or deviation shall be provided. Data shall be delta from the
Phase HI Customer Acceptance Readiness Review (CARR).
6. Parts serialization list -- A list of those parts identified in the alphanumeric
parts list (section 3) that are required to have traceability in accordance with the
engineering drawing and that have been installed on the vehicle shall be provided. This
list will show serial and lot numbers based on the manufacturing completion records.
7. EOAS printout -- A copy of the EOAS history report shall be provided. The
data will be delta from the Phase HI CARR data cut-off. (This section is intended toshow change traffic since the Phase HI CARR but does not necessarily correlate with
section 15, "Open EO's. ")
8. Unreleased engineering data list m A list of unreleased contractor engineering
data. shall be provided. The list shall be coded to reflect those items that affect hard-
ware and to identify the constraint points. This list also will be ceded to items on the
latest product plan.
9. Parts removal summary -- A tabulation by part number based on the parts
serialization list (section 6) summarizing open removals and parts that have been
replaced on the vehicle shall be provided. Data shall be delta from the Phase HI CARR.
10. Hardware shortage list (SSAD 4. 34 only) -- A list of all parts (including
GFE) that do not support the normal department installation requirements shall be
provided. This list will be based on the fabrication and inspection record and the test
and inspection record shortage sheets. The parts shall be coded with the appropriate
SSAD number and listedin SSAD system numerical order in SSAD 4.34 only.
11. TIR _ A TIR that contains temporary installation of category B (nonflight
functional) and category C (flight items being fit checked) items shall be provided.
59
8/8/2019 Apollo Experience Report Command and Service Module Milestone Review Process
12. TSCD and TCRD waivers (SSAD 4. 34 only) -- A copy of each John F. KennedySpace Center Launch Operations waiver or deviation will be included. The waivers will
be marked with the SSAD system numbers and filed in numerical order in SSAD 4. 34
only.
13. Open DR's and CAR's -- A copy of each open DR and any associated CAR
except for MR items will be included.
14. Open MR's and CAR's -- A copy of each open material review dispositionrecord (DR-MR) (a DR that has been elevated to an MR) and any associated CAR willbe included.
15. Open EO's -- A copy of each EO that is open according to the configuration
verification record will be provided.
16. Section 16 will not be used.
17. Engineering analyses -- A copy of any engineering analysis to support
material review dispositions (MRD's) in areas where possible system degradation can
occur will be provided. Each analysis must include the composite effect of prior MRD's
so that total system integrity can be demonstrated. If no analysis is required, astatement listing the MR's reviewed and affirming that no analysis is required will beprovided.
18. Closed DR's and CAR's -- A copy of each closed DR and any associated CAR
except for MR items will be included.
19. Closed MR's and CAR's -- A copy of each closed DR-MR and any associatedCAR will be included.
20. UR's (SSAD 4.34 only) -- A copy of all open and closed NASA UR's specifi-
cally related to the vehicle under review shall be provided. A copy of the contractor
response shall be provided for each closed item. The UR's will be coded with theappropriate SSAD system number and filed in numerical order in SSAD 4. 34 only. Datashall be delta from the Phase ]II CARR.
21. Section 21 will not be used.
22. Section 22 will not be used.
23. Section 23 will not be used.
24. Operating time/cycle record- Copies of the code A (as defined by specifica-
tion MA0201-0077) hardware cumulative time records shall be provided. The milestone
data shall be provided so that the remaining useful life can be assessed easily. Pressurevessel cycle data will be included for each pressure cycle.
25. Section 25 will not be used.
26. Annotated TCP's -- Each annotated, "as run" TCP shall be provided along
with applicable test deviations. (Tests relating to multiple systems, to modules, orto the CSM stack are in SSAD 4. 34. )
6O
8/8/2019 Apollo Experience Report Command and Service Module Milestone Review Process
27. Test summary reports -- A list of tests requiring test summary reports and
a copy of each report will be provided.
28. DCOE reports -- A copy of each applicable DCOE shall be provided. The
data will be delta from the Phase HI CARR.
29. TPS's -- A copy of each applicable TPS shall be provided. Data shall bedelta from the Phase III CARR.
30. Section 30 will not be used.
31. Section 31 will not be used.
32. Section 32 will not be used.
33. First flight components (SSAD 4. 34 only) -- A list by part number and name
(based on the alphanumeric parts list, section 3) of each certification-test-network-
level part that has not been flown on a previous mission will be provided. Parts shall
be coded with the applicable SSAD system number and listed in SSAD numerical orderin SSAD 4. 34 only.
34. Launch-critical spares list -- An alphanumeric listing of the spare parts
that will be held in a condition of flight readiness for the vehicle being reviewed shall
be provided.
35. IPL (SSAD 4.34 only) -- The IPL will contain the parts installedsince the
Phase IIICARR. The IPL will be coded with the SSAD system number and listedin
SSAD sequence inSSAD 4. 34 only.
36. Modification after integrated test (SSAD 4. 34 only) -- A list of all modifica-
tions and rework planned or completed after integrated test shall be provided. Thelist will include a short narrative description of the modification and the retest require-
ments, if any. The list will be included in SSAD 4. 34 ("CSM General") only. The
items will be coded with the applicable SSAD system code and listed in numerical order.
37. CARID's and responses -- A copy of each CARID with the contractor' s
response from the Phase III CARR, delta environmental control system data, and
delta crew compartment fit and function data will be provided. (The CARID's numbered
5.23 to 5.33 will be included in SSAD 4.34. )
38. Section 38 will not be used.
39. Section 39 will not be used.
40. ASHUR's and HRE's -- A copy of each ASHUR and each HRE applicable to
previously flown hardware items currently installed in the vehicle under review shall
be provided.
41. Section 41 will not be used.
42. Section 42 will not be used.
61
8/8/2019 Apollo Experience Report Command and Service Module Milestone Review Process
20. Integratedsystem schematics; installation drawings; individual drawings;and closedDR's, test preparation sheets, FCA's, andpreventive maintenanceworkorders (available on specific request by specific number)
21. NASAunsatisfactory condition records (as applicable to GSE)
72
8/8/2019 Apollo Experience Report Command and Service Module Milestone Review Process