Escolar Documentos
Profissional Documentos
Cultura Documentos
1A
APOLLO
PROGRAM
JULY1966
APOLLO
RELIABILITY
AND
QUALITY
ASSURANCE
PROGRAM
--
(PAGES)
PLAN
"('THRU)
(CODE).
"(<<2>,,.
(NASA
CR OR TMX
__ NATIONAL
OR AD NUMBER)
(CATE
AERONAUTICS
Washington,
_.",.J
Y)
AND
SPACE
D.C.
20546
ADMINISTRATION
7
IT
LI
r_
NASA
Apollo
Issuance
System
Documentation
No.
NHB
RA
5300.
IA
001-000-I
PREFACE
Date:
This
has
document
been
Program
sedes
the
-Revision
an
official
in
Development
issue
dated
The
changes
as the result
Offices.
is
prepared
Plan,
October
and additions
of coordinated
Significant
changes
of paragraph
release
of
accordance
with
M-D
MA
1965.
the
Apollo
the
have
2.6 to expand
500.
This
Program
Office,
of
revised
the
edition
and
Apollo
super-
reflect current
operations,
Center
and Apollo
Program
been
Apollo
1966
requirements
to this document
actions
between
which
July,
made
are:
Failure
and Defect
Reporting.
-Addition
of paragraphs
2.7
and
Z.9 to cover
Apollo
Single
Failure
Points,
and Apollo
Flight Readiness
Reviews.
-Revision
of paragraphs
4.Z and 4.3 to clarify Mission
Reliability
and
Center
Reliability
Analyses.
-Addition
of Section
8 covering
Identification
for Traceability.
-Addition
to Section
9 covering
Nonconforming
Material
Control.
Requirements
should
be
considered
for
implementation
where
they
are
not
now
being
carried
out.
The
Center
Program
Offices
should
compare
the
benefits
to be
derived
with
the
problems
of implementation.
Where
Center
Program
Offices
are
unable
to implement
certain
requirements,
the
deviation
should
be
made
known
to the
Director,
Apollo
Program
Office,
including
the
identification
of,
need
for,
and
extent
of the
deviation.
"--_--
S_muel
C.
Fhilips
Major
General,
USAF
Director,
Apollo
Program
DISTRIBUTION:
Special
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Par.
SECTION
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.4
1.5
1.6
1.7
1:
INTRODUCTION
Purpose
...................................
Scope
.....................................
Authority
..................................
Applicability
Applicable
Documents
Abb reviati ons ...............................
Glossary
SECTION
2:
General
2.2
R&QA
2.2.1
2.2.2
2.2.3
2.2.4
2.2.5
2.2.6
2.3
2.3.4
2.3.5
2.3.6
2.3.7
2.3.8
2.3.9
2.3.10
2.3.11
2.3.12
AND
QUALITY
ASSURANCE
Requirements
General
I-2
REQUIREMENTS
...................................
2-1
for
Phased
Hardware
Development
. .
.................................
2-1
Z- l
Study/Definition
Phase
Requirements
..............
Design
Phase
Requirements
....................
Manufacturing
and Checkout
Phase
Requirements
......
Ground
Test, Static Firing
and Checkout
Phase
Requirements
.............................
Pre-launch
Phase
Requirements
(Stage and Module
and
Integrated
Test) ...........................
Post-Flight
Phase
Requirements
.................
2- 1
2-2
2-5
Requirements
2-8
Requirements
2.3.1
2.3.2
2.3.3
of Terms
RELIABILITY
z.1
1- 1
i' 1
1- 1
1- 2
i- 2
i- 2
General
Appropriate
in NASA
to All
Documents
...................
Phases
...........
.................
..............
2- 6
2-7
2-8
2-8
2-8
NASA
NASA
NPC
NASA
Apollo
Apollo
Apollo
NPC
Management
Instructions
..................
Reliability
and Quality
Publications,
NPC
250-1
200-2,
and NPC
200-3 ....................
Quality
Publication,
NPC
200-1A
............
Program
Development
Plan, ]VI-D ]vIA 500 ......
Program
Specification,
SE 005-001-I
.........
Program
Configuration
Management
Manual,
500- 1 ...........................
, ....
2-8
2-11
2-12
2-12
2-12
Apollo
Apollo
Apollo
Apollo
Other
Logistics
Requirements
Plan, NHB
7500.1 ......
Documentation,
NPC
500-6,
NPC
500-7 ........
Test Requirements,
NPC
500-10
............
Metrology
Requirements
Manual,
NHB
5300.2
. . .
Apollo
Rg_QA
Documentation
...............
2-13
2--13
Z-13
2-13
2--13
Z- IZ
iii
Par.
Page
2.4
R&QA
Program
...................
2.4.1
General
2.4.2
2.4.3
2 4 4
Level
Level
Level
I - Apollo
Program
II - Center
Apollo
III - Contractor
Office
Program
2.4.5
2.4.6
Level
Level
IIIA
- Government
IV - Subcontractor
Agency
.................
and
Supplier
.............
2-14
.................................
2.5
Apollo
R&QA
z.6
Apollo
Failure
Data
System
and
2-14
.................
Office
...........
2-14
2-15
2-15
2- 16
2-16
.......................
Defect
Reporting,
2-16
Analysis
and
Control.
2-16
General
Pre- Launch
2.6.1
2.6.2
2.6.3
Post
Apollo
Single
2.8
Apollo
Test
2.9
Flight
2.9.1
2.9.2
3:
2- 19
Failure
2-19
Points
General
3.2
Level
3.3
Level
IlIA
spection
.....................
................................
Review
(FRR)
Assessment
Assessment
2-20
...................
Considerations
Recommendations
RELIABILITY
3.1
Level
tion
...............................
Readiness
Reliability
Reliability
SECTION
2- 16
2- 16
Flight
2.7
3.4
Implementation
AND QUALITY
2-20
.............
...........
ASSURANCE
2-20
2-20
PLANS
...................................
II
Center
3-
Reliability
- Government
and//or
Reliability
III//IV
Plans
SECTION
- Contractor
.................................
4:
MISSION
and
Quality
Agency
Quality
Assurance
Reliability,
Assurance
Plans
Assurance,
Plans
..........
Quality
and
3-1
In3-3
Inspec3-3
RELIABILITY
ANALYSIS
4.1
General
4.2
Level
I - Mission
Reliability
Analysis
...............
4-I
4.3
Level
II - Center
Reliability
Analysis
...............
4-3
4.4
Level
Ill - Contract0r
4.5
Level
IV
4.6
Center//Apollo
4.7
Data
iv
...................................
4-
Reliability
- Subcontractor
Requirements
Program
Analysis
Reliability
Office
- R&QA
...................
............
Analysis
Review
..........
.........
._. . . . . . .
4-3
4-4
4-4
4-4
Par,
SECTION
5:
General
5.1
5.1.1
5.1.2
5.1.3
5.2
5.2.1
5.2.2
5.2.3
5.2.4
5.3
AND QUALITY
REPORTING
ASSURANCE
5-1
...................................
Informati
Reporting
Reporting
Level
RELIABILITY
STATUS
on
Categories
Levels
...........................
Detail
............................
I - Apollo
R&QA
Program
Quarterly
II
- Center
R&QA
Status
Reporting
Level
Status
III - Contractor
and Government
Reporting
.............................
5.5
Level
IV
6:
General
Auditing
- Subcontractor/Supplier
RELIABILITY
6.3.4
AND
.......
5-2
5-2
5-3
5-3
5-4
.............
Agency
R&QA
QUALITY
5-4
5-4
......
R&QA
Status
ASSURANCE
Reporting
AUDITING
6-I
6-i
.........................
5-1
5-1
5-I
5-2
. . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . .. . . .. . . . .
Organizations
Audit Guideline
6.3.3
R&QA
Program
Evaluation .....................
Problems
and Recommendations..
...............
5.4
6.3
Status Report..
General
.................................
Center Apollo R&QA
Highlights ............
6.2.1
6.2.2
6.2.3
6.2.4
General
..................
. ..............
Mis sign Evaluation ..........................
Level
SECTION
......................
General
......
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .....
. , , . .
Level
I - The Apollo
Program
Office
- R&QAAudits
of Center
Apollo
Program
Offices
- R&QA
.........
Level
II - Center
Apollo
Program
Office
- R&QA
Audits
of the R&QA
Activities
Performed
by Center
Line
Organizations
.............................
Level
II - Center
Apollo
Program
Office
- R&QA
Audits
of the R&QA
Activities
Performed
by GovernmEnt
Agencies
at Contractors',
Subcontractors',
and
Suppliers' Plants
.....................
-. . . . .
6-I
6-I
6-Z
6-Z
6-2
6-2
6-4
6-5
6-5
v
Par.
Page
6.3.5
6.3.6
6.3.7
6.3.8
Level
II - Center
Apollo
Program
Office
- R&QA
Audits
of the R&QA
Activities
of Apollo
Program
Contractors,
Subcontractors,
and Suppliers
.........
Level
IIIA - Government
Agency
Audits
of Contractors'
R&QA
Activities
....................
Level
III/IV - Contractors
'/Subcontractors'
Audits
of Their
Own
R&QA
Activities ..................
Audit
6.5
Follow-Up
Reports
....
Reports
of Follow-Up
PARTS,
General
7.2
Program
7.3
Responsibility
7.4.8
7.4.9
7.4.10
7.4.1 1
7.5.1
7.5.2
7.5.3
7.5.4
6-9
Up
6-9
6-9
6-9
6-9
. .......................
Action
Action
.....................
.....................
Actions
MATERIALS
AND
...................
COMPONENTS
PROGRAM
7-I
...................................
Policy
7-i
.............................
7-i
...............................
7-I
7-2
7-2
Materials,
and
Components
Program
Elements
7-2
....
Adequate
Specifications
.......................
Qualification
Testing .........................
Failure
Analysis
and Reporting
..................
Process
Control ............................
7-2
7-2
7-3
7-3
7-3
7-3
7-3
7-3
Inspection
.............
Parts
Traceability
i [ _ i..
i i [ i i _ _..
Documentation
.............................
7-3
7-3
7-4
General
.. .. . . . . . .. . . ,, ,
Parts
and Materials
Selection ...................
Parts
Standardization
........................
Parts
and Materials
Lists .....................
Apollo
7.5
6-8
The
Apollo
Program
Office
- R&QA
...............
Center
Apollo
Program
Offices
- R&QA
............
Parts
Information
Activity .....................
Parts,
7.4.1
7.4.2
7.4.3
7.4.4
7.4.5
7.4.6
7.4.7
. ....
FollowFollow-Up
7:
6-7
............................
Informal
Formal
7.1
7.4
6-7
...............................
Actions
General
SECTION
7.3.1
7.3.2
7.3.3
6-6
Level
III/IV - Contractors
'/Subcontractors'
Audits
of Subcontractor
and Supplier
R&QA
Activities .......
6.4
6.5.i
6.5.2
6.5.3
6.5.4
6-6
Parts
General
Input
Output
Special
Information
Center
(APIC)
i i i i i i i i
.............
. , . . . . . . . . . ,
. ..................................
.......
Data
[ [ [ i i . [ . i[ Z[ i[ [ [ [ i [ [ i[ [Z [ i [ [ [
vi
7-4
7-4
7-4
7-4
7-5
Par.
SECTION
8:
General
8.2.2
8.2.3
8.3
8.3.7
8.3.8
8.4
General
8.5
8.6
........
8- I
Limitations
...............................
".
for Identification
...................
Material
Identification
8-2
8-2
8-2
8-2
8-3
8-3
8-3
8-4
...............
8-5
General
.................................
Repair
and/or
Use As Is ......................
Scrap
.................
% .................
General
Article
Control
8-5
8-5
8-5
.....................
8-5
.................................
8-5
Applicability
..............................
Identification
for Traceability
Requirements
Conditional
Release
for Limited
Tests
Only
and
Record
Requirements
8-5
8-5
8-6
.........
.........
...................
8-6
General
.................................
Data Request
Response
.......................
Record
of Retention
.........................
Procured
Material
..........................
Replacement
Manual
or
SECTION
9.1
General
9.2
Applic
9.3
Material
9:
8-6
8-6
8-6
8-6
of Articles
......................
Mechanized
Data Processing
. . .........
8-7
8-7
. . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
9-1
NONCONFORMING
....
ability ...................
Review
8- 2
8-2
Criteria
for Article
Identification
................
Exempt
Material
and Article
List ......
..........
Engineering
Documents
.......................
Multiple
Application
Review
of Common
Articles
......
Commercial
Off-the-Shelf
Identification
............
Identification
Methods
........................
Location
of Identification
......................
Control
of Identification
Numbers
................
Data
8.6.1
8.6.2
8.6.3
8.6.4
8.6.5
8.6.6
_etermination.
_iiii_iiiiiii.iZ.iZiZiii.i_i 8-_
Limited-Life
8.5.1
8.5.2
8.5.3
8.5.4
8-
8- 1
Nonconforming
8.4.1
8.4.2
8.4.3
TRACEABILITY
.................................
Requiements
8.3.1
8.3.2
8.3.3
8.3.4
8.3.5
8.3.6
FOR
...................................
Application
8.2.1
IDENTIFICATION
Board
Membership
MATERIAL
CONTROL
-.............
................
9-1
9-1
vii
Page
Par.
9-I
9-2
General
.....
. . . . . . . ....................
Qualifications and Duties ......................
Procedure
9.4
. . . . . . ................
9.4.1
9.4.2
9.4.3
9.4.4
9.4,5
9.4.6
9.4.7
Documentation
9.5
Appendix
Appendix
Appendix
and Records
..
Subcontractor
A:
B:
C:
MRB
OF
9-6
9-%
9-7
9-_(
9-8
...........................
Reference
Documents
....
....................
List of Abbreviations
and Codes
.................
Glossary
of Terms
..........................
LIST
9-2
9-Z
9-4
9-4
9-5
9-5
9-6
9-6
......................
General
......
Contracting
O'ff'ice'r'Ac'ti%n:
: : : : : : : : : : : : : : : ....
Nonconformance
Action Summaries
. . . . . . . . . . . . .
250 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
DD Form
9.5.1
9.5.2
9.5.3
9.5.4
9.6
9-Z
.........
a-i
b-i
c-i
ILLUSTRATIONS
Page
Figure
2-1
R&QA
2-2
Program
3-1
Relationship
4-i
Mission
5-1
Apollo
R&QA
Program
6-i
Apollo
RS_QA
Audit
9-I
Action
Sequence
Requirements
for Phased
Hardware
Documentation/Requirements
of Plans
and Approval
Reliability Analysis
Structure
Requirements
.......
2-9
.......
3-2
4-2
.....................
Quarterly
Summary
2-3
Development...
Status Report
5-3
........
6-3
.....................
for Nonconforming
Material
Disposition
viii
. .
9-9
Section
i.1
1:
INTRODUCTION
PURPOSE
The
purpose
of the Apollo
Reliability
gram
Plan
is to set forth the overall
provide
procedures
for implementing
Program.
and QualityAssurance
(R&QA)
Apollo
R&QA
requirements
and evaluating
the Apollo
Proand to
R&QA
1.2 SCOPE
The
a.
Apollo
States
to the
b.
R&QA
the
R&QA
Apollo
Identifies
do
eo
1.3
Establishes
Apollo
R&O.A
Plan,
policies,
as
set forth
requirements,
in this publication:
and
procedures
applicable
Program;
the means
implemented
c.
Program
whereby
in the Apollo
requirements
plans;
the
R&QA
policies
and
requirements
are
Program;
for provisions
to be
included
in the
Center
Provides
guidelines
for consistent
implementation
of applicable
NASAwide
R&QA
documents,
and
development
of additional
standards
and
procedures,
as needed;
and
Establishes
requirements
for
reporting,
auditing,
and
evaluating
progress
at all levels
to ensure
that a check
and balance
is provided
at each level (i.e., Apollo
Program
Office
- R&QAtoCenters,
Centers
to contractors,
and contractors
to subcontractors).
AUTHORITY
at
The NASA
Projects
Approval
Document
000)
establishes
NASA
approval
of the
following
R&QA
requirements:
(PAD)
Apollo
for Apollo
Program
(Code
92-900and states
the
"Reliability,
Quality
Assurance
and
Inspection
programs
will be
established
in
accordance
with
the
provisions
of NPC
250-I,
NPC
Z00-1A,
NPC
200-2,
and NPC
200-3,
as appropriate,
in-house
and/or
at the sytem
prime
and subcontractors
to satisfy the overall
mission
requirements;
and
a plan
for independent
assessment
of
reliability
and quality will be established
to assure
that the mission
requirements
can
be
met.
The
status
of these
activities will be
reported
separately
or as a part
of the system
periodic
progress
reports."
l-I
1.4
Introduction
Do
1.4
The
Apollo
Program
Development
10, sets
forth
the broad
policies,
cedures
for Apollo
R&QA.
Plan
(PDP),
requirements,
M-D
MA
disciplines,
500,
Section
and pro-
APPLICABILITY
a.
The organizational
elements
participating in the Apollo Program
will
adhere
to the provisions of this publication. The provisions
specified
herein
will be assessed
for their impact
on the on-going program.
The
Apo i lo Program
Director
will be notified by the Center
of
any deviations that are considered
necessary
and the basis for such
deviations.
b.
This
publication
elements :
is
applicable
to
the
following
Apollo
Program
Essential
Ground
Ground
Operations
(1) Spacecraft.
(2) Saturn
IB.
(3) Saturn
V.
(4)
Launch
Vehicle
(5) Vehicle
and
Equipment
Systems
(6)
Crew
Launch
System
(e.g.,
ACE,
MSE,
(GOSS).
System
(7) Mission
1.5
Engines.
Support
Support
Equipment.
Experiment
APPLICABLE
Mission
ESE)
and
Equipment.
DOCUMENTS
Q
a.
be
Documents
Appendix
applicable
to
the
Apollo
R&QA
Program
are
set
forth
in
A.
Any
inconsistencies
found
to exist
between
referenced
documents
should
be brought
to the
Program
Office
- R&QA.
this
document
and the
attention
of the Apollo
1.6 ABBREVIATIONS
A list
of
Appendix
1.7
abbreviations
and
codes
used
in this
publication
is
set
forth
B.
GLOSSARY
OF
TERMS
A glossary
of terms
used
in this
publicationis
set
forth
1-Z
in Appendix
C.
in
Section
2.1
ASSURANCE
GENERAL
The
Apollo
activities
all directed
lished
in
sets
forth
quarters
requirements;
activities.
described
2.2
2:
R&QA
2.2.1
R&CZA
Program
is based
on a series
of requirements
or
which
take place
during
the various
hardware
program
phases,
toward
meeting
the Apollo
performance
requirements
estabthe Apollo
Program
Specification.
Section
2 of this document
the
Apollo
hardware
R&CIA
requirements;
the NASA Headand
Apollo
Program
Office
documents
which
describe
these
and an outline
of the basic
R&QAProgram
implementation
Details
of the R&QA
Program
implementation
activities
are
in subsequent
sections.
REQUIREMENTS
FOR
PHASED
HARDWARE
DEVELOPMENT
GENERAL.
R&QA
Offices
have
the responsibility
for assuring
that
adequate
R&QA
requirements
are
established,
and for accomplishment
of, or participation
in or verification
of the accomplishment
of,
these
requirements.
The
following
is a listing
of R&QA
requirements
by hardware
development
phase.
Key requirements
are
also
depicted
in Figure
2-1.
The
R&QA
requirements
are
shown
under
the phase
in which
they are
expected
to be accomplished;
however,
some
items
may
be initiated
earlier
or later
depending
upon the
status
of their
particular
hardware
development.
All the requirements
are appropriate
to the major
hardware
systems
of the Apollo
Program.
It is recognizedthat
certaintypes
of hardware
and current
phases
of development
may
require
some
adjustment
inaccomplishing all these
requirements;
therefore,
the Center
Apollo
Program
Office
is responsible
for selecting
and implementing
those
requirements
necessary
to achieve
satisfactory
performance
of the hardware
over
which
it has cognizance,
within
the restrictions
of Apollo
Program
Office
Directives.
References
noted inparentheses
indicate
documents
where
detailed
requirements
can be found.
Z.Z.Z STUDY/DEFINITION
PHASE
a.
Development
NPC
ZOO- 2)
of preliminary
b.
Development
predictions.
of preliminary
(NPC
250-1)
c.
Establishment
requirements
5330.1,
NPC
of reliability
in preliminary
500-1)
REQUIREMENTS
R&QA
program
mathematical
plans.
model
and
safety
goals
specifications.
(NPC
and
and
(NMI
250-1,
reliability
other
R&QA
5320.1,
NMI
2-1
i
2.2.3
Reliability
d.
2.2.3
Analysis
major
DESIGN
V a.
of
problems
PHASE
feasible
in
and
Quality
alternatives
achieving
goals.
As surance
Requirements
and
factors
(NPC
250-i)
which
could
be
REQUIREMENTS
Development
NPC
200-2)
and
approval
of
R&QA
program
of system/functional
7500.1,
NPC
250-1)
plans.
logic/block
(NPC
b.
Development
500-I,
NHB
c.
Use
(M-D
d.
Development
of preliminary
cality analyses.
(NPC
250-1)
failure
mode,
e.
Development
(NPC
250-I,
models
and reliability
f.
Performance
250-
diagrams.
I,
(NPC
u/
I/"
and
MA
analysis
of
500, M-DE
mission
8000.005)
of mathematical
RA
006-007-1)
of
trade-off
profile
studies
for
mathematical
effects,
involving
model.
and
criti-
predictions.
reliability.
(NPC
250-1)
g.
Apportionment
nents.
(NPC
h.
Establishment
(NPC
500-i)
i.
Establishment
tions. (NPC
j.
Determination
parts).
(NPC
k.
Determination
500-I,
NHB
of need
7500.1)
Design
NHB
minimize
1.
m.
to
7500.I)
Selection
facturing
document)
of
250-1)
reliability
of
reliability
goals
to
requirements
of quality
assurance
500-I,
NPC
500-I0)
of parts
sources.
and
in
in specifica-
(equipment,
maintainability.
human-induced
failures.
with established
(NPC
250-1,
reliability,
NHB
7500.1,
compo-
specifications.
requirements
equipments
human,
(NPC
250-I,
(NPC
and related
Section
7
spare
NPC
Z50-
manuof this
n.
Designation
of parts
to be identified
by serial or lot numbers;
determination
of traceability
requirements.
(NPC
200-2,
NPC
500-i,
Section
8 of this document)
o.
Determination
250-I,
NHB
of
time
and
duty
cycle
critical
7500.1)
2-2
articles.
1,
(NPC
DESIGN
Models
I
I
I
Profile
I
Apportionment
Prediction
ReIiability
I
I
I
I
I
FMECA
I
I
Mimmion
Requirememt8
Design
Specificationn
End Item
Design
Reviews
Ground
TeBt
Plans
PDR/CDR
I
I
]
I
Part8
Program
Figure
2-1.
R&QA Requirements
Hardware
Development
for Phased
,5
j
.
I
I
I
I
I
I
..__[
PRE-LAUNCH
(STAGE
AND
MODULE
AND
INTEGRATED
-T------7
I
TEST)
MISSION
AND
POSTffiFLIGHT
-U
I
I
!
Assessment
Data
Feedback
Flight
Test
Evaluat_n
Data
Quality and
Historical
Records
lew.._........__s
Hey
DCR/FRR
Flight
Reliability
Qualification
Status
Te_.
and
Test
Report
2-3/2-4
MANUFACTURE
AND
GROUND
CHECKOUT
TEST.
STATIC
FIRING.
AND
CHECKOUT
Reliability
Reliability
Assessment
FMECA
Failure
Quality
Control
Control
Operating
and
Time
Quality
Program Test
Ground
Test
I
J
-]
COFW
I
Mission
Directives
I
I
Data
Assurance
Requirements
p.
Identification
q.
Development
reliability
r.
Development
of procedures
to controI
purchased
parts,
processes,
assemblies,
and maintenance
of inspection,
measuring,
and test
equipment.
500-1,
RA 006-011-1A)
s.
Development
of detailed
for
receiving
inspection,
test
and
acceztance
NPC
200-2,
NPC
250-1)
t.
Establishment
c a system
and initiation of systematic reporting
of failures, anal ses, corrective actions, andverificationtesting.
(NPC
Z50-I, NPC
200-2, NPC
500-10,
Pai'agraph
2.6 of this
document)
u.
Participation
in development
of
500-I, NPC
500-10, NPC
250-i)
V.
of quality
2.2.4
of
program
Participation
qualifi
c ati on
NPC
Z00-Z)
w.
Participation
250-1,
M-D
x.
Participation
tion
management
NB
C,
reliability
plan.
in the establishment
procedures.
Provision
for
and inspectors.
training
(NPC
Performance
NPC
200-3)
of receiving
Exercise
of
reliability
NPC
of
reviews.
(NPC
of and
500-1)
CHECKOUT
as
NPC
200-2)
part
of
criteria
end-item
500-10,
test program.
demonstration
500-10,
NPC
(NPC
exercise
PHASE
the
and fabricated
and calibration
(NPC
200-2,
NPC
and
conformance
inspection
and
(NPC
500-1,
NPC
overall
of
500-1,
5330.1,
program
procedures
in-process
inspection.
in performance
tests.
(NPC
AND
(NMI
evaluation
(NPC
250-1)
in performance
MA 500)
2.2.4 MANUFACTURING
a.
characteristics.
(NPC
and
250-1,
500-1,
NPC
of configura-
REQUIREMENTS
and maintaining
certification
of operators
200-2,
NPC
200-1A,
NMI 5330.4)
and
configuration
in-process
inspection.
management
(NPC
200-2,
(NPC
requirements.
500-1)
d.
e.
f.
g.
Participation
in Material
Section
9 of this
document)
Designation
of Quality
Participate
M-D
MA
in performance
500)
Updating
of failure
(NPC
250- I)
Review
Stamping.
mode,
Board
(NMI
of reviews.
effects,
actions.
(NPC
Z00-Z,
5330.2)
(NPC
and
250-1,
criticality
NPC
200-2,
analyses.
2-5
2.2.5
Assurance
h.
Updating of system/functional
NPC
250- i)
logic/block
i.
Updating
of mathematical
assessments.
(NPC
250-1,
j.
Verification
of performance
of systems,
nents and parts qualification tests. (NPC
NPC
250-I, NPC
200-2)
Requirements
diagrams.
models
and performance
RA 006-007-1)
(NPC
of
500- l,
reliability
subsystems,
500-I, NPC
compo500-I0,
Verification of performance
of reliability demonstration
tests
on critical systems,
subsystems,
components,
and parts. (NPC
500-i, NPC
500-I0, NPC
Z50-1)
k.
I. Verification
(NPC
Z00-Z,
of
NPC
performance
500-1, NPC
of end-item
500-I0)
acceptance
tests.
Performance
of systematic
reporting of failures, analyses, corrective actions, and verification testing. (NPC 250-I, NPC Z00-2,
NPC
500-10, Paragraph
Z.6 of this document)
mo
n.
Initiation and
NPC
500- I)
o.
Performance
250. (NPC
p.
Preparation
of factory
500-I, NPG
2.2.5 GROUND
TEST,
REQUIREMENTS
a.
Performance
NPG
Z00-3)
b.
Exercise
C0
do
e.
f.
maintenance
of
Government
500-I0, NPC
of Certificates
STATIC
equipment
FIRING
of receiving
logs.
acceptance
Z00-Z)
- sign
of Flight Worthiness.
AND
CHECKOUT
and in-process
ofconfigurationmana'gement
(NPC
(NPC
250-1,
off
DD
500r10)
PHASE
inspection. (NPC
requirements.
(NPC
Verification
of performance
of systems, subsystems,
nents and parts, qualification tests. (NPG
500-i, NPC
NPG
250-I, NPC
Z00-2)
200-Z,
500-I)
compo500-I0,
Verification of performance
of reliability demonstrationtests
on
critical systems,
subsystems,
components,
and parts. (NPC
500-I, NPC
500-I0, NPC
250-I)
Verification
of
(NPC
Z00-Z, NPC
performance
500-i, NPC
of end-item
500-10)
acceptance
tests.
Verification of performance
of pre-use
checkout
(ground support
equipment)
and
pre-launch
checkout
(flight systems).
(NPC 500-10)
Z-6
Requirements
2.2.6
Performance
of systematic
reporting
of failures,
rective
actions
and
verification
testing.
(NPC
250-1,
NPC 200-2,
Paragraph
2.6 of this
document)
go
h.
Maintenance
of equipment
i.
Endorsement
Participation
experience
NPC
250-
j.
k.
Review
of Certificates
in
and
revision
failure
(NPC
of ground
test
analyses.
{NPC
and monitor
Performance
200-2, NPC
b.
Verification
of test
made
at launch
site.
e.
plan
500-10,
(NPC
500-I0)
based
on flight
NPC
200-2,
procedures.
a.
d.
250-1)
of Flight Worthiness.
2.2.6 PRE-LAUNCH
PHASE
REQUIREMENTS
AND
INTEGRATED
TEST)
C.
corNPC
1)
of software
I. Review
logs.
analyses,
500-10,
of
receiving
Z00-3)
(STAGE
AND
in-process
of all modifications,
(NPC
500-10,
NPC
Verification
that
the
scribed
by officially
engineering
changes
have
been
installed
in
Verification
simulated
and
procedures.
MODULE
inspections.
repairs,
250-1,
NPC
(NPC
and
rework
200-Zl
space vehicle
hardware
end items
are
dereleased
engineering
and that all required
after
hardware
delivery
from
the factory
the hardware.
(NPC
500-11
of performance
countdown.
(NPC
of
500-10)
system-integrated
tests
Verification
and
updating
of equipment
logs,
narrative
item
reports, and qualification test status. (NPC
250-I,
200-2, NPC
500-I0)
and
endNPC
f.
Review
and
assessment
of pre-flight
troubles;
constraints,
waivers,
deviations,
modifications,
discrepancies;
and,
adequacy
of corrective
actions.
(NPC
250-1,
NPC 200-2)
g.
Verification
h.
Review,
ground
holds,
of final
from
rules,
scrubs,
i.
Performance
Z50- I)
j.
Provision
mission
profile.
(M-D
MA
500)
reliability
standpoint,
of the mission
operational
and
contingency
plans
concerning
countdown,
aborts,
and alternative
missions.
(M-D
MA 50.0)
of
reliability
for
assessment
(APO
PD
each
flight. (NPC
No. 8)
Z-7
2.2.7
Reliability
Review
k.
of software
/. Review
2.2.7
POST-FLIGHT
a.
Participation
APO
PD No.
Comparison
and ground
Do
Co
do
e.
2.2.8
of results
test. (NPC
of
hardware
on next
Participate
flight
data.
modifications
flight.
(NPC
of
of
NPC
(NPC
Development
Program.
(NPC
of
NASA
for
Requirements
test
from
ALL
(NPC
on
NASA
to the
Establishment
(2)
Performance
appropriate
pletion
of
follow-on
on
im-
analysis
of
PHASES
analysis.
(NPC
by
contract
NPC
250-i)
of Training
NPC
500-i,
250-I,
500-1,
NPC
and
NPC
or
Motivation
200-2)
200-2,
Section
DOCUMENTS
requirements
listed
T INS
TRUC
above
are
amplifed
of
of
design
5320.1
and
instructions
reliability
detailed
points
in
the
mission;
the
and
de-
Office
docuof these
docuare
given
in
Structure."
TIONS
Management
Instructions
Apollo
Program.
These
(1)
analysis
reliability
in NASA
Headquarters
and
Apollo
Program
which
are
described
below.
The
relationships
and
their
requirements
to R&QA
requirements
2-2,
"Program
Documentation/Requirements
MANAGEMEN
500-I0,
design
based
reports,
as
required
NPC
500-10,
NPC
200-2,
audits.
(NPC
failures
plan
data
collection
and
200-2,
NPC
250-1)
R&QA
500-1,
data.
effect
on
NPC
500-1)
250-1,
and
implementation
250-i,
NPC
Z00-1A,
IN NASA
test
predicted
TO
Performance
of R&QA
6 of this document)
The
flight
ground
APPROPRIATE
Preparation
directive.
GENERAL.
of
of critical
flight
of this
document}
in revision
(NPC
500-10)
b.
Assurance
procedures.
with those
500-10)
Review
provement
Performance
NPC
500-10,
a.
evaluation
of
correction
(Paragraph
2.6.3
veloped
ments,
ments
Figure
2-8
REQUIREMENTS
Assurance
flights.
REQUIREMENTS
2.3.2
PHASE
a.
d.
2.3.1
pre-launch
in
19)
Quality
procedures.
monitor
REQUIREMENTS
c.
2.3
and
and
analysis
program
goals
of
from
5330.0
provide
are applicable
guidance
for:
;
system
design
reliability
through
at
com-
NASA
Management
Instructions
NPC
Development
M-D MA
Plan
500
]
|
_.._2_____
ram
ication
-001-1
Reliability
and
Quality
Assurance
Program
Plan
Test
Requirements
NPCApollo
500-10
Apollo
Logistics
Requirements
Plan
NHB 7500.1
Requirements
Test
Reliability
and
Quality
Assurance
Requirements
Mission
and
System
Performance
Requirements
Requirements
Logistics
ablhty
Figure
2-2.
Program
Documentation/
Requirements
Structure
and
Quality
Assurane
|
__
|
Program
APO
Directive
Ir
Apollo
Documentation
Administration
Instruction
NPC
00-6
Apollo
Configuration
Management
NPC 500-1
Apollo Metrology
Requirements
Manual
NHB
5300.2
Operations
Requirements,
Safety
Requirements
Documentation
Index Apollo
NPC 500-7
Configuration
Management
Requirements
,ram
Documentati
-I
on
Requirements
Metrology
Requirements
e Requirements
/
n
2-9/2-10
Reliability
and
Quality
Assurance
(3) Establishment
as practical,
C.
NASA
NPC
a.
of quality
assurance
(5) Demonstration
of conformance
(6) Establishment
of data
feedback
to demonstrate,
can be achieved;
characteristics;
to standards;
for quality
improvement.
NASA
Management
Instruction
5330.4,
Policies
and Procedures
for Recertification
of Hand
Soldering
Personnel
is applicable
to the
Apollo
Program.
This
instruction
establishes
policies
and procedures
for recertification
of agency
and supplier
personnel
involved
in
hand
soldering
on
NASA
programs
and
obviates
the requirement
for recertification
training
at a NASA
as
a requisite
RELIABILITY
200-2,
and
for
AND
NPC
recertification.
QUALITY
PUBLICATIONS,
NPC
250-1,
200-3
The
provisions
of NPC
250-1,
Reliability
Program
Provisions
for Space
System
Contractors,
and NPC
200-2,
Quality
Program
Provisions
for Space
System
Contractors,
constitute
basic
requirements
for R&QA
programs
to assure
the reliability
and
quality
of Apollo
space
systems.
The provisions
of NPC
200-3,
Inspection
System
Provisions
for Suppliers
of Space
Materials,
Parts,
Components,
and Services,
constitute
for inspection
systems
to assure
the quality
terials, parts,
components
and services.
b.
insofar
NASA
Management
Instruction
5330.2,
Quality
Status
Stamping
Requirements,
is
applicable
to the
Apollo
Program.
This
instruction
establishes
the
policy,
procedures,
and
the
NASA
quality
status
stamps
required
for
indicating
the
quality
status
of NASA
space
systems,
components,
mate
rials,
and accompanying
documents
either
procured
from
suppliers
or developed
inhouse.
school
2.3.3
2.3.3
of a testing program
that system
reliability
(4) Identification
b.
Requirements
When
invoked
in
NASA
contracts,
NPC
basic requirements
of Apollo
space
ma-
250-I,
NPC
200-2,
and
NPC
200-3,
or
elements
thereof,
serve
as requirements
to
Apollo
contractors
in the preparation
of contractor
reliability,
quality, or inspection
plans.
(Ref: Section
3.0.)
c.
In all cases,
the Center
Apollo
Program
Offices
-R&QA
are
responsible
for determining
and
interpreting
NASA
R&QA
requirements
for appropriate
Apollo
systems
and hardware,
and
invoking
these
requirements
in appropriate
Apollo
contracts
and
specifications
in accordance
with the procedures
of NPC400, NASA
Procurement
Regulations,
NASA
PR
1.50 and 1.51.
The
requirements
of these
documents
also
apply
to Center
in-house
activities.
Particular
attention
will be given to invoking
those
requirements
which
can
provide
effective
utilization
of
resources
to gain maximum
benefit to the program.
2-11
2.3.4
Reliability
2.3.4
NASA
QUALITY
and
PUBLICATION,
Quality
NPC
Assurance
Requirements
200-iA
a.
The
provisions
of NPC
200-1A,
Quality
Assurance
Provision_
for
Government
Agencies,
constitute
basic
requirements
for
Government
Agencies,
either
NASA
or
DoD,
at
contractor's
plants
performing
inspection
and
quality
assurance
functions
for NASA.
b.
The
Center
Apollo
Program
Office
-R&QA
delineating
specific
quality
assurance
and
to be
performed
by
the
Government
Agency
accordance
with
NPC
400,
NASA
Procurement
PR
14.1,
14.2,
and
14.50
and
for
invoking
is
responsible
for
inspection
functions
representatives
in
ReguIations,
NASA
NPC
200-1A,
where
appropriate.
2.3.5
APOLLO
PROGRAM
DEVELOPMENT
PLAN,
M-D
MA
500.
The
provisions
of Section
I0, Reliability
and Quality
Assurance,
of the
Apollo
Program
Development
Plan,
set
forth
R&QA
requirements
and
discipIines
applicable
to the
Apollo
Program.
In particular,
reference
is
made
to
the
requirement
to
use
NPC
250-1,
NPC
200-2,
NPC
200-3,
and
NPC
200-1A,
as
provided
above.
Included
are
specific
reliability
and
quality
disciplines
which
are
required
during
appropriate
phases
of the
Apollo
Program.
2.3.6
APOLLO
Program
gram
as
a.
Mission
b.
Program
c.
Reliability
d.
Program
PROGRAM
SPECIFICATION_
SE
005-001-1.
Specification
contains
technical
requirements
an entity. These
requirements
relate to:
requirements
identified
performance
description
and
APOLLO
PROGRAM
of
the
program.
assurance
goals.
and
testing
requirements.
The
provisions
of
this
document
establish
the
requirements
for
the
program
from
which
detailed
ments
are
established
by Center
Apollo
Program
2.3.7
Apollo
requirements.
requirements
quality
and
The
CONFIGURATION
MANAGEMENT
basic
R&QA
Offices
reliability
require- R&QA.
MANUAL,
NPC
500-I.
The
provisions
of NPC
500-i,
Apollo
Program
Configuration
Management
Manual,
constitute
the basic requirements
to establish
uniform
configuration
management
methods
and procedures
which
will accurately
define all Apollo
Program
equipment
at any
point in time. Apollo
R&QA
program
hardware
activities at
all levels
will be based
on configuration
management
techniques
required
2-12
by
NPC
500-I.
Reliability
and
Quality
Assurance
Requirements
2.3.12
2.3.8
APOLLO
LOGISTICS
REQUIREMENTS
PLAN,
NHB
7500.1.
The
Apollo
Logistics
Requirements
Plan, NHB
7500.1,
establishes
the
logistic requirements
and assures
their proper
integrationthroughout the Apollo
Program.
The
Apollo
Program
Office
- R&QA
will
be responsible
for assuring
compliance
with R&QA
requirements
incorporated
in the Apollo
Logistics
Requirements
Plan.
2.3.9
APOLLO
so
NPC
DOCUMENTATION,
500-6,
Apollo
NPC
500-6,
Documentation
NPC
500-7
Administration
Instruction
(ADAI),
establishes
policies,
assigns
responsibilities
and
prescribes
management
procedures
for
the
identification,
planning,
selection,
acquisition,
control,
scheduling,
and minimization
of essential
documents
required
for the management
of the Apollo
Program.
ADAI,
Section
10, Exhibit
A, defines
the category
of documents
designated
"Reliability
and Quality
Assurance."
Apollo
R&QA
documentation
and
data activities
will be conducted
in accordance
with the requirements
of the
ADAI.
b.
NPC
500-7,
of documents
Apollo
Documentation
Index (ADI), provides
a list
required
and
authorized
for use
on the Apollo
Program
at all levels.
gram
documents.
It contains
all
recurring
Apollo
Pro-
2.3.10
APOLLO
TEST
REQUIREMENTS,
NPC
500-10.
The
Apollo
Test
Requirements
(ATR),
NPC
500-10,
provides
test policy, establishes
minimum
test requirements,
and gives test documentation
requirements
which
are to be met by all Centers.
The ATR
is applicable
to all ground
and flight tests of space
vehicle
hardware
and associated
active ground
support
equipment
(GSE).
Center
Apollo
Program
Offices
-RS_QA
will ensure
that Rg_QA
requirements
are
integrated
into the test program
as provided
in the ATR.
2.3.11
APOLLO
The
and
METROLOGY
REQUIREMENTS
MANUAL,
Apollo
Metrology
Requirements
Manualprovides
criteria
for maintenance
of uniform
measurements
NHB
5300.2.
requirements
of high ac-
curacy
throughout
the Apollo
program.
Center
Apollo
Program
Offices
- R&QA
will be responsible
for assuring
that the requirements
of this manual
are
applied
to all Centers,
sites, andtheir
contractors.
2.3.12
OTHER
a.
APOLLO
R&QA
DOCUMENTATION
When
existing
NASA
or other Government
Agency
R&OA
documents
are
found
to be inadequate
in fulfilling the R&QA
needs
of the
Apollo
Program,
the Apollo
Program
OfficeR&QA
and/or
Center
Apollo
R&QA
personnel
will develop
additional
standards,
guidelines
and directives.
These
will be developed
to implement
program
requirements,
and include
such documents
as:
Manual
for Evaluating
Contractor
Reliability
Plans
2-13
2.4
Reliability
and
Quality
Assurance
Requirements
and Performance,
NHB
5320.2; Quality Program
Evaluation
Procedures,
SP-6003;
Apollo
Reliability
Estimation
Guidelines,
RA
006-007-I;
and
Delegation
of Apollo
Parts
Information
Activity
b.
2.4
PROGRAM
2.4.1
GENERAL
MA
1450.045.
The
implementation
of the
Apollo
the
phased
application
of"JR&QA
tinuous
evaluation
of the
degree
quirements.
Four
organizational
R&QA
Program
requirements,
of achievement
levels
of the
Program
are
implementation
(I) Level
Apollo
Program
(2) Level
II
Center
Apollo
(3) Level
III
ilia
Contractors
Government
IV
Subcontractors
defined
for
program
is based
on
and
the
conof these
reApollo
R&QA
purposes:
Office
Program
Offices
Agencies
and
Suppliers
The responsible
R&QA
organizations
at each ofthese
levels will
develop
and implement
R&QA
programs
to ensure
the accomplishment
of established
program
objectives
by the line organizations.
Four
key
implementation
activities
for these levels
are outlined
in paragraphs
2.4.2 and 2.4.3 below,
and described
in detail in Section
3, R&QA
Plans;
Section
4, Mission
Reliability Analysis;
Section
6, R&QA
Auditing.
2.4.2
M-I
IMPLEMENTATION
(4) Level
b.
to MSFC,
It is the responsibility
of Center
Apollo
R&QA
personnel
to
bring
to the attention
of the Apollo
Program
Office
- R&QA
any
problem
areas
where
inadequate
documentation
exists.
The
Apollo
Program
Office
- R&QA
will take necessary
steps
to implement
preparation
and issuance
of appropriate
directives, technical
standards,
guidelines,
and similar
documents
in accordance
with procedures
of NPC
500-6.
R&QA
a.
Responsibility
LEVEL
Office-
I- APOLLO
R&QA
will
5, R&QA
PROGRAM
assure
that
Status
OFFICE.
appropriate
Reporting;
and
Section
The
Apollo
Program
R&QA
policies
and
requirements
are
developed
and
implemented
throughout
the
Apollo
Program.
To provide
program
visibility, periodic
program
and
mission
evaluations
will be performed,
based
on organized
and
systematic
analyses
of elements
missions.
These
analyses
will be
quantitative
and
qualitative
They
are keyed
to missions
the Apollo
Program
Director
2-14
of the
based
program
and selected
on Center/contractor
inputs,
both
formal
and
informal.
of current
interest
and presented
to
as a status report
with appropriate
Reliability
and
Quality
Assurance
Requirements
conclusions
and
recommendations.
Program
will
be
assured
through
Office
- R&QA
activities:
a.
b.
Implementation
of Apollo
R&QA
carried
out under
the provisions
plans
at lower
levels.
Assessment
goals
for
Program
to verify
2.4.4
The
the
effectiveness
following
requirements
of this plan
of mission
success
and crew
selected
hardware
systems
and
through
mission
model
analyses,
results.
of the R&QA
Apollo
Program
through
activities
and related
R&QA
safety
against
assigned
missions
of the Apollo
to the level
necessary
c.
Establishment
of status
reporting
for
evaluating
progress
in
achieving
Apollo
program
and mission
R&QA
objectives.
The
Apollo
R&QA
Program
Quarterly
Status
Report
to the
Apollo
Program
Director
includes
both
program
and mission
evaluations.
d.
Performance
activities
program.
of periodic
performed
by
the
surveillance
various
and
auditing
participants
of
of R&QA
the Apollo
2.4.3 LEVEL
IICENTER
APOLLO
PROGRAM
OFFICE.
The
Center
Apollo
Program
Offices
- R&QA
will assure
that
appropriate
R&QA
requirements
are
developed
and implemented
by their
Apollo
contractors
and
Center
line
organizations.
Center
Apollo
Program
OtficesR&QA
will
implement
the
following
activities
as a basis
for Center
program
and hardware
evaluations:
a.
Implementation
of Apollo
R&QA
carried
out under
the provisions
level
contractor
and Government
b.
Assessment
apportioned
to the level
c.
Establishment
of reporting
achieving
Center
program
Status
reports
will
be keyed
needs.
d.
2.4.4
requirements
through
of Center
R&QAplans
Agency
plans.
of hardware
reliability
and
to the hardware
systems,
necessary
to verify
results.
Performance
of periodic
activities
conducted
by
and Government
Agencies.
crew
safety
against
goals
through
model
analyses,
systems
for evaluating
and
hardware
R&QA
to Center
management
surveillance
Center
line
activities
and lower
progress
objectives.
and Level
in
and
auditing
of R&QA
organizations,
contractors,
LEVEL
IIICONTRACTOR.
The
Apollo
ment
the gR&QA
requirements
established
Program
Offices
- R&QA
and will ensure
develop
and
implement
R&QA
programs
requirements.
The
four
activities
detailed
be carried
out by contractors
to the extent
contractors
will
impleby the
Center
Apollo
that
their
subcontractors
in accordance
with these
for Levels
I and II will
required
by Centers.
2-15
2.4.5
Assurance
Requirements
2.4.5 LEVEL
IIIA - GOVERNMENT
AGENCY.
The Government
Agencies
will implement
the R&QA
requirements
established by the Center
Apollo
Program
OfficesR&QA.
Generally,
these will include
planning, inspection, reporting, and auditing activities.
2.4.6 LEVEL
IV - SUBCONTRACTOR
ANDSUPPLIER.
The Apollo subcontractors
will implement
the R&QA
requirements
established by
the Apollo contractors. All four activities detailed for Levels I and
II may
be carried out by major
subcontractors
to the extent required by prime
contractors.
2.5
APOLLO
R&QA
DATA
SYSTEM
Apollo
R&QA
Offices
are
responsible
for
information
required
for R&QA activities,
other
Government
Agencies,
contractors,
systems
will be capable
of:
a.
Providing
systematic
b.
Providing
Centers
data
in
to support
c.
Providing
historical
records.
d.
Providing
a system
adaptable
e.
Providing
and Center
supporting
Apollo
f.
2.6
Supporting
(APIC).
APOLLO
AND
storage
a form
interface
FAILURE
AND
information.
of R&QA
capable
of exchange
requirements.
to machine
data to meet
R&QA
information
the ApOllo
implementing
a system
to obtain
which
is generated
within
NASA,
and subcontractors.
These
data
parts
DEFECT
the
program,
among
coding
contractors
and
operation.
Apollo Program
requirements.
Office
Apollo
REPORTING,
and
- R&QA
Parts InformationCenter
ANALYSIS
CONTROL
2.6.1 GENERAL.
Apollo
R&QA
offices
Centers
and contractors
employ
analyzing,
correcting,
verifying,
and defects
(discrepancies).
See
are
responsible
for assuring
that
a controlled
system
for
reporting,
and feeding
back data on all failures
Appendix
C for definitions.
2.6.2 PRE-LAUNCH
ao
bo
2-16
Failure
release
launch
through
and
defect
reporting
will
commence
to manufacturing
of design
drawings
complex,
and related
support
equipment
all subsequent
phases
including
flight
with
engineering
flight hardware,
and will continue
operation.
for
Every
defect
observed
or encountered
during
inspection
of flight
equipment
(including
pertinent
GSE) will be recorded
and reported
in order
to initiate
corrective
action
(via MRB,
as appropriate)
Reliability
and
Quality
Assurance
Requirements
in quality
control
quality trends.
Co
HI
and
procedures,
and
to
establish
Every
failure
encountered
in testing, checkout,
or operation
of
flight equipment
(including
GSE
and GOSS
interface
equipment)
will be verified,
recorded,
analyzed,
compared
with
previous
occurrences,
and
corrected
on the item and subsequent
items,
so that no unexplained
failures
will be present
in Apollo
hardware.
Human
errors
during
testing and training will be recorded.
Reporting
procedures
ensure
dissemination
tion
e.
processes
2.6.2
(Example
Failure
and
information:
(1) Failure
indicated
defect
(_')
" Affected
manufacturer
"
"
"
records
item
name,
part
higher
assembly
and
manufacturer
implemented
to
defect informa-
following
name,
minimum
reports
and
location
reported
number,
serial
part
Functional
subsystem
name
Stage/module
name
and
serial
Type
ofactivitybeing
conducted
Hardware
phase
Environmental
conditions
is a failure
number
number,
quality,
with
human
and
serial
number
and reference
time or cycles
of failure
(consistent
" Type
of failure
Primary-design,
num-
procedure
NPC
500-10)
induced,
other
Secondary-induced
by a primary
failure
Description
of defect/failure
(include
symptom
served,
Remedial
(*)
the
Report
number
and
date
Reference
to related
failure
defect
Reporting
organization,
individual
Date
of failure/defect
observance
Designation
as to whether
condition
or defect
Operating
Criticality
(*)
will contain
and
Defect
Report
Requirements
with an asterisk
(_) are required
"
"
"
"
Next
ber
and
and
- UCR).
('_)
(*)
(*)
(*)
(*)
(*)
(*)
(*)
(*)
will be established
and control
of failure
mode
and probable
action taken
Time
to repair
Authorized
NASA
(2) Failure
and
Defect
(*)
(*)
Report
Reference
number
to
(*)
Name
of
analysis
organization
infailure
ob-
description)
signature.
Analysis
and
original
cause
Report
date
report
and
Requirements
number
principal
and
related
investigator
reports
for
the
Z-17
2.6.2
Reliability
(2) Failure
(*)
(*)
(*)
(*)
"
"
"
"
"
and
(*)
(*)
f.
g.
Control
Report
number
Reference
to
"
"
(_)
Analysis
Quality
Report
Requirements
Requirements
(Cont'd)
Report
Requirements
and date
the original
report
number
and
related
reports
Corrective
action
statement
Effectivity
date and hardware
serial number
Type
and results
of verification
test
Authorized
NASA
signature.
Each
Center
Program
Office will make
provisions
for a data bank
system
(computerized,
where
practicable)
for storage
and rapid
retrieval
of failure and defect information.
Each
Center
Program
Office
will
prepare
and
disseminate
periodic
summaries
on manufacturing
and post-manufacturing
defects,
unresolved
failures
and corrective
actions.
The reports
shall be
agement
Reviews
designed
and scheduled
to provide
informationfor
manvisibility at all levels, including
monthly
MSF
Program
reliability
and
quality
status
reports,
as well
as for
requirements
of key
checkpoints
Program
Directive
No. 6, M-D
MA
h.
Assurance
Determination
of the cause
Summary
of previous
occurrences
Recommended
course
of corrective
action
Verification
of appropriate
information
on the report
Authorized
NASA
signature
validating
both the analysis
and recommended
corrective
action.
(3) Recurrence
(*)
(*)
Defect
and
in accordance
1400.006.
with
Apollo
NASA
Management
Instruction
8020.3A,
Manned
Space
Flight
Flash
Reports
establishes
formal
requirements
for MSF
Program
Managers
to inform
promptly
the OMSF
Program
Director
of any
event,
activity
or condition
that jeopardizes
or has the
potential
of adversely
affecting
program
objectives,
schedules
or cost. A copy of Flash
Reports
relating
to equipment
failures
will be sent to the Apollo
Program
Office-Test,
and the Apollo
Program
i.
2-18
Office-
R&QA.
NASA
Management
Instruction
5310.1,
Reporting
of Parts
and
Materials
Application
Problems,
establishes
procedures
for the
inter'installation
reporting
of quality and application
problems,
results
of failure analyses,
and follow-up
actions involving
parts
and materials.
Apollo
problem
items
having
significant
application in other
NASA
equipment
will be
reported
to other NASA
installations
in accordance
with the procedures
of this instruction.
Reliability
and
Quality
2.6.3 POST
a.
Assurance
Requirements
2.7
FLIGHT
Apollo
R&QA
the following
(1} The
or
Offices
actions
deficiency
of the Centers
are
responsible
in the event
of a critical
flight
will
be
corrected
prior
{2 } A deviation
approval
will be obtained
Director,
Code
MA,
with
copies
Office
- Test,
and Apollo
Program
Written
will be
b.
Flisht
notification
sent
to the
Anomalies
of
same
the
corrective
distribution
Reportin_
to follow-on
from
the Apollo
to the
Apollo
Office
- R&QA.
action
as in (2)
(FLARE)
for
failure:
taken
above.
taking
flights,
Program
Program
in
(1) above
System
The
detailed
flight
and post-flight
reporting
requirements
are
identified
in the Apollo
Test
Requirements
Document,
NPC
50010, and in Apollo
Program
Directive
No. 19, Apollo
Flight
Evaluation
Requirements.
The Apollo
Program
Office
- R&QA
has the
responsibility
for
tracing
the
status
of all flight
anomalies
and
their
impact
on future
missionsthroughthe
systematic
recording
and reporting,
by means
of the FLARE
System,
of the following:
(1)
Identified
mission
failures
(2)
The
status
of all
(3)
The
effect
of corrective
(4)
The
relationship
items
reported
Program
sources;
planned
of
in
and
anomalies;
corrective
action
actions;
on
future
flight
failures/anomalies
past
Flight
Readiness
and
(5) The
missions;
to
Reviews
correlation
between
flight
failures/anomalies
vious
failure
mode,
effects
and
criticality
analyses;
and other
related
reliability
and quality
analyses.
2.7
APOLLO
SINGLE
FAILURE
significant
and other
and
pretrends
POINTS
All
NASA
activities
with
cognizance
over
design
and
development
of
Apollo
flight
equipment,
launch
complex
equipments,
and related
support
equipment
which
have
major
impact
on mission
success
and crew
safety
are responsible
for establishing
and implementing
procedures
for reporting and controlling
single
failure
points.
a0
For
each
mission
a single
failure
point
summary
of items
listed
in
descending
order
within
each
criticality
(priority)
category,
together
with
appropriate
corrective
actions
underway,
will be prepared,
updated
and submited
to the Apollo
Program
Director
either
separately
or as part
of the reliability
and quality
status
reporting.
2-19
2.8
Reliability
b,
2.8
and
Quality
Assurance
Single
failure
point
summaries
will
be updated
and
will
be
included
and
reviewed
as a part
listed
in Apollo
Program
Directive
No. 6 (M-D
APOLLO
Requirements
on a scheduled
basis
of the six checkpoints
MA 1400.006).
TEST
Apollo
R&QA
Offices
are
responsible
for assuring
the development
of a
failure
mode,
effects,
and
criticality
analysis
system
for
each
stage,
module
and mission
essential
GSE,
to determine
criticality
categories
for
tests,
in accordance
with the requirements
of Tables
3-1 and 3-2 of
the Apollo
Test
Requirements,
NPC
500-10.
2.9
FLIGHT
READINESS
REVIEW
(FRR)
2.9.1 RELIABILITY
ASSESSMENT
CONSIDERATIONS.
The purpose
of the
FRR
{Apollo
Program
Directive
No.
8, M-D
MA 2210.008}
is to
determine
the readiness
status
of the spacecraft,
launchvehicle,
and
launch
complex
inorder
to certifythe
flight
readiness
of the systems
for
the
mission.
The
Apollo
Program
Office-R&QA
is responsible
for
preparation
and
presentation
of the
reliability
assessment
portion
of the
review.
The
FRR
reliability
assessment
will consider
the following
elements_
a.
Failure
mode,
b.
Single
c.
Mission
level
ment
contributors
d.
Review
e.
Waivers
f.
Status
of reliability
g.
Status
of critical
h.
Overall
test
i.
Review
of pertinent
failure
2-20
provide
a.
Comparison
b.
Qualitative
c.
Identification
d.
Final
ness
criticality
analyses.
analysis
to determine
to mission
risk.
and
of
and
points.
of failure
2.9.2 RELIABILITY
sideration
will
effect
history
and
deviations
major
corrective
to contract
"high
equip-
action.
end
item
specifications.
testing.
life
components
evaluation
from
R&QA
and
life
reliability
program
remaining.
standpoint.
information.
ASSESSMENT
RECOMMENDATIONS.
the
above
elements,
the
FRR
reliability
the
risk"
Based
on conassessment
following:
of reliability
assessment
assessment
conclusions
from
the
of end
of critical
items
and
standpoint
with
with
mission
low
recommendations
of reliability
assigned
goals.
hardware.
reliability.
concerning
evaluation.
flight
readi-
Section
3.1
3:
RELIABILITY
AND
QUALITY
ASSURANCE
PLANS
GENERAL
Requirements
and
procedures
for
implementation
of the
Apollo
R&QA
Program
will
be developed
in plans
prepared
by Center
Apollo
Program
Offices
-R&QA,
Government
Agencies,
and
contractors
in accordance
with
requirements
developed
herein.
The relationship
of R&QA
plans
to
program
documentation
and approval
and/or
review
requirements
is presented
in Figure
3-1.
This
document
(NHB 5300.1A)constitutes
the Level
I Plan.
3.2
LEVEL
II
- CENTER
RELIABILITY
AND
QUALITY
ASSURANCE
PLANS
Each
Center
Apollo
Program
Office
- R&OAis
responsible
for the development
of Apollo
R&QA
plans
based
on the
policies
and requirements
stated
herein.
Upon
formal
review
by the Apollo
Program
Office
- R&QA,
these
plans
will
serve
as the
operational
plans
for implementation
of
R&QA
policies
and requirements
by the Center
Apollo
Program
Offices.
Center
Apollo
R&QA
plans
will include
but notbe
limited
to the following:
ae
Internal
organizational
structure,
functional
responsibilities,
interrelationships,
methods
of operation,
management
of hardware
R&QA
efforts
and level
of authority,
at the Center,
Center
component,
and/or
Resident
Offices.
The
Center
Apollo
R&QA
organizational
structure
will
be detailed
in a manne]:
similar
to that
for the Apollo
Program
Office
- R&QA
in M-D
M_A_ 500.
b.
Plans
for
furnishing
c.
Control
procedures
have
been
reviewed
status
of NASA-DoD
to
assure
that
for
adequacy
R&QA
of
support
manpower.
major
procurement
R&QA
requirements,
documents
and ap-
proved.
d.
e,
f,
Designation
to Government
Procedures
Agency
approval.
of Government
Agencies
Agency
representatives
R&QA
for
judging
plans
and
adequacy
procedures,
Plans
for
auditing
R&QA
activities
Agencies
on a scheduled
basis.
and
at
assignment
contractors'
of R&QAfur_ctions
plants.
of contractor
and
Government
and time
phasing
for review
and
at
contractors
and
Government
3-1
3.2
Reliability
Manned
and
Quality
Assurance
Plans
Office of
Space Flight
Approval
Required
Apollo
Program
Office
Office
mmm._
I
I
I
I
il
Approval
Required
li
r_
_5_
,%
IV
Program
Plan
Apollo R&QA
NHB 5300.1A
lDevelopment
/
Apollo ProgramPlan
M-D MA 500
Approval
Required
I
I
Review
Required
I
Center
Apollo
Program
Office
I
I
Center
R_,QA
Office
I
I
I
I
I
Approval
Required
i
i
Approval
Required
Ir
I
I
I|u|
Level
II
I
I
1
Center
OA
I
C enter
Apollo Project
Development
Plans
Plans
II
Approval
Required
Contractual
Documents
(Work Statements)
---t
Program
I..iII
I Cntractr /
L::._I
Level
I
"t co.
or
Leve ls
III/IIIA
t' nlI
_J
Agency
Plans
l aove=mentl
Reliability
and
Quality
Assurance
Plans
3.4
g.
Plans
for developing
reports
in response
5.3).
h.
Plans
for placing
and specifications,
i.
Procedures
for RS_QA
review
of test plans
to ensure
integration
of
R&QA
requirements,
for R&QA
monitoring
of test performance
and
for RS_QA
evaluation
of test results
against
acceptance
requirements
in specifications,
quality
assessments
in this document
(Ref.
acceptance
requirements
or revisions
thereof.
including
phasing
k.
Procedures
for ascertaining
the need for,
training,
including
time phasing
thereof.
and
Procedures
dissemination,
information
technical
standards
collection
description
of the data
system,
and
and corrective
action
(Ref. paragraphs
and
under
n.
Center
Schedules
Some
ments
for
of the
other
Apollo
Program
accomplishing
Office
the
performance
for
2.6).
of R&QA
including
failure
reporting
(e.g., inspection,
system
at other
NASA
locations
listed.
above
activities may
be accomplished
than Center
Apollo
Program
Offices
Center
Apollo
R&QA
plans should
state where
out and by whom
they will be accomplished.
Government
Agency
(GA)
organizations,
spection
and/or
reliability
assurance
gram
OfficesR&QA,
will
prepare
guidelines.
cognizance.
activities
3.3 LEVEL
Ilia - GOVERNMENT
AGENCY
INSPECTION
AND/OR
RELIABILITY
and
procedures
Z.5 and
Procedures
for conducting
R&QA
activities
tests,
calibration,
etc.) both
in-house
and
me
documents
thereof.
Procedures
for
developing
time
and status
paragraph
in contractual
j.
I.
for
reliability
and
to requirements
by organizational
- R&QA.
In such
these
QUALITY
ASSURANCE
activities
are
elecases,
carried
ASSURANCE,
PLANS
assigned
quality
assurance,
functions
by the
Center
Apollo
plans
and
procedures
for
in=
Proimple-
menting
these
functions
at
the
contractors'
plants.
These
GA plans
will
be
prepared
in accordance
with
the
policies,
requirements,
and
guidelines
provided
by the
Center
Apollo
Program
Offices
- R&QA,
and
those
of NPC
200-iA,
Quality
Assurance
Provisions
for
Government
Agencies.
In
cases
where
Government
Agencies
are
assigned
reliability
assurance
functions,
they
will
key
their
activities
to the
provisions
of NPC
250-1.
When
these
plans
are
approved
by the
cognizant
Center
Apollo
Program
Office
- R&QA,
or
its designee,
they will serve
as the basis
for performance
of the assigned
functions.
3.4
LEVEL
III/IV
INSPECTION
ao
Apollo
reliability,
specific
Center
- CONTRACTOR
PLANS
RELIABILITY,
QUALITY
AND
contractors
(and
subcontractors,
as appropriate)
will
prepare
quality
and/or
inspection
plans
in accordance
with
the
requirements
detailed
in the
contractual
work
statement
by
Apollo
Program
Offices
or
their
designees.
These
plans
and
3-3
3.4
Reliability
and
Quality
Assurance
Plans
procedures
will conform
to the policies,
requirements,
and guidelines
provided
by the Center
Apollo
Program
Offices
- R&QA,
Government
Agencies
and the applicable
provisions
of NPC
250- 1, Reliability
Program
Provisions
for Space
System
Contractors,
NPC
200-2,
Quality
Program
Provisions
for Space
System
Contractors,
or NPC
200-3,
Inspection
System
Provisions
for Suppliers
of Space
Materials,
Parts,
Components,
and Services.
For
new procurement
actions,
a statement
of work
will normally
require
the contractor
to submit
a preliminary
reliability,
quality
or inspection
plan for eventual
incorporation
into
the
resulting
contract.
Although
NPC
200-2
and
NPC
200-3
do not
require
NASA
Center
approval
of contractor
quality
or inspection
plans,
this approval
requirement
gram
and
must
be placed
into
peditiously
as possible.
b.
is mandatory
current
operating
Within
the provisions
established
by NASA
PR
400, reliability, quality
and/or
inspection
plans,
and any changesthereto,
prepared
by the contractors
(and subcontractors
as appropriate)
will reflect the requirements
imposed
and will be
consistent
with the needs
of the situation
(e.g., equipment,
complexity,
criticality in the system,
end use, maturity,
etc.). When
contractor
reliability,
quality
and/or
inspection
plans
serve
are approved
as the basis
by the cognizant
for implementation
Center
R&QA
Office, they will
of reliability, quality and/or
inspection
requirements
throughout
the contractors'
activities.
Procedures
for implementation
and changes
thereto
will be prepared
by
contractors
(and subcontractors,
as appropriate)
and made
available
to the Center
Apollo
Program
Office
- R&QA
or its designee
for review or approval,
as indicated
in NPC
250-i,
NPC
200-2,
NPC
200-3,
or the contract.
3-4
Section
4:
MISSION
RELIABILITY
ANALYSIS
4. 1 GENERAL
Apollo
reliability
analyses
and modeling
activities
together
constitute
the
overall
mission
reliability
analysis.
The latest
reliability
data
will continually
be assimilated
and correlated
with previous
analyses
to evaluate
current
status
and progress
toward
goal
achievement.
The mission
reliability
analyses
are based
.ha
combination.f
the following
activities
at all
levels
of the program:
a.
b.
4.2
Detailed
reliability
analyses,
based
on such
reliability
engineering
activities
as, failure
mode,
effects,
and criticality
analysis
(FMECA),
single
failure
point
analysis,
analysis
of test
and operations
plans
and
results,
failure
correction,
adequacy
of specifications,
design
reviews,
etc.,
will
be conducted.
During
the above
analyses,
modeling
activity,
at the
appropriate
level,
will
be used
as a tool to assist
in
conducting
analyses
which
involve
interactions
and interfaces
between
various
mission
and hardware
aspects
of the program.
Compatible
reliability
analysis
models
will be
logical
representation
of mission
and
hardware
gram.
There
will
normally
be
some
overlap
considered
at adjacent
activity
levels.
Details
bility
analyses
using
mathematical
models
are
bility
Estimation
Guidelines,
RA 006-007-I.
LEVEL
ae
I - MISSION
RELIABILITY
structured
to provide
a
aspects
of the proin the level
of detail
on performing
reliagiven
in Apollo
Relia-
ANALYSIS
The
Level
I mission
reliability
analysis
is concerned
with the total
program
aspects
of mission
reliability,
including
mission
success,
crew
safety,
and
launch
availability.
This
analysis
considers
the
interfaces
between
the
spacecraft,
launch
vehicle,
launch
complex
and
GOSS;
the
interactions
between
pre-launch
and
post-launch
phases
of the mission;
and all mission
and abort
modes.
The mission
level
model
provides
a means
for
evaluating
the
effect
on mission
reliability
of program
changes
involving
more
than
one Center,
and
it considers
the interactions
which
affect
mission
plans,
performance
of systems,
sequencing
of events,
and overall
configuration.
Two outputs
of this
analysis
are:
(1)
Mission
(2)
Apollo
Reliability
Systems
Analysis
Verification
Report,
Report,
RA
RA
007-001-1,
001-002
and
through
006-1.
4-1
Mission
Reliability Analysis
4.Z
lla
<
0_-..
_'_
(n
<
<
I=
i
_
_
o
cn
cD
.,._ c_
F-t
_
.
,-i
._o
o
o
----
=
o
o
o
_-1
"
>
FIGURE
4-1.
MISSION
RELIABILITY
ANALYSIS
Mission
b.
Reliability
Analysis
The
following
information
system
verification
reports
evaluations
for
the
Flight
tion
Reviews,
and
the
Apollo
(I) The
ments
crew
summary
identified
of system
of
major
by discrepancies
reliabilities.
(3) An
analysis
verification
flight
(4)
and
ground
LEVEL
testing
reliability
analysis
and
as inputs
to the
mission
the
Design
CertificaQuarterly
Status
Report.
predictions,
of mission
success
availability.
hardware
and
in apportioned
of
Apollo
status
of
manned
systems
by
and
engineering
operational
versus
missions
planned
to
and
and
assessprobability,
problem
estimated
determine
completed
areas
values
the
prior
previous
assessment.
A summary
of major
differences
between
currently
achieved
reliability
and
that
expected
for the
particular
stage
of hardware
maturity,
obtained
by compilation
and
analysis
of hardware
test
results.
(5) An
(6)
from
the
mission
will
be
utilized
Readiness
Reviews,
R&QA
Program
status
of reliability
apportionments,
as they relate to estimates
safety probability,
and launch
(2) A
4.3
4.4
analysis
probability,
gether
with
rules,
the
cedures.
of the
overall
risks
associated
with
crew
safety
probability
and
launch
the
impact
of proposed
major
changes
system
hardware,
and
the
mission
single
review
of
II - CENTER
failure
RELIABILITY
points
and
their
relative
mission
availability,
in the
operational
success
tomission
pro-
standing.
ANALYSIS
Center
reliability
analysis
and
modeling
activity
will consider
subsystems,
stage,
module,
and
if necessary,
specific
equipments;
and will be
conducted
for the spacecraft,
launch
vehicle,
launch
complex,
and GOSS.
Reliability
analysis
includes
reliability
engineering
activities
previously
described.
Center
modeling
activity
will emphasize
the interfaces
between
various
contractors.
Center
reliability
analyses
will be updated
in
those
areas
which
contribute
most
to unreliability.
Center
Apollo
R&QA
personnel
will use
the support
of Center
design
engineers
in analyzing
modeling
inputs to verify
input validity.
4.4
LEVEL
III - CONTRACTOR
Apollo
contractors
ties
for
specific
Center
requirements.
flect.the
level
of
estimates.
RELIABILITY
ANALYSIS
will conduct
reliability
analysis
equipment
and
component
parts
Specifically,
these
analyses
part
detail
necessary
to establish
and
modeling
activiin accordance
with
and
models
will
remeaningful
equipment
4-3
4.5
4.5
Mission
LEVEL
IV - SUBCONTRACTOR
RELIABILITY
Reliability
Analysis
ANALYSIS
Major
subcontractors,
and
others
as required,
will conduct
reliability
analyses
and
modeling
activities
for their specific
equipment
and component
parts,
in accordance
with the requirements
established
for the
prime
contractor
models.
Similarly,
these
analyses
and
models
will
reflect
the level of part detail necessary
to establish
meaningful
equipment
estimates.
4.6
CENTER/APOLLO
a.
PROGRAM
OFFICE
- R&QA
REVIEW
A Center/Apollo
Program
Office
- R&QA
review
will
be conducted
all levels to ensure
the compatibility
of inputs to the next higher
model.
Each
Center
will review
and monitor
the inputs to each
tractor's
suitable
at
level
con-
model
to ensure
that the outputs
of the resulting
model
are
for combination
into the Center's
model.
At the next echelon,
an
Apollo
Program
OfficeR&QA
technical
team
will review
and
monitor,
with the Centers,
the inputs to the Center's
model
to ensure
that
the
outputs
of the
resulting
model
are
suitable
for use in the
mission
model.
b.
Although
there is nominally
only one level of overlap
necessary
in the
formal
modeling
information,
each
echelon
of modeling
will have the
authority
to "test the system"
(i.e., to examine
selected
portions
of
the model
in greater
detail than normal)
in order
to attain an understanding
of the modeling
procedures
and to act as a check
and balance
to maintain
the integrity
of overall
results.
For
example,
this will,
on some
occasions,
involve
and
examination
of a "thin slice" of the
model
at a subcontractor's
OfficeRg_QA,
Center
and
engineers.
4.7
DATA
a.
by a joint team
of Apollo
Program
contractor
reliability
and
design
REQUIREMENTS
The
following
data,
analysis
concerned,
at
are
(i) Mission
profile.
(2) Mission
operational
(3) System
and
supporting
(4) Reliability
(6) Failure
ground
program
of
detail
appropriate
including
logic
and
and
effects
rankings.
to
the
level
of
rules
element
models
mode
(7) Criticality
a level
required:
functional
logic/block
rationale.
(5) Apportionment
4-4
plant
prime
reliability
estimates.
analyses.
logic
diagrams.
diagrams
and
Mission
Reliability
Analysis
(8) Failure
mation,
rate
and
(9) Qualitative
4.7
(or
other
supporting
failure
distribution
parameters)
infor-
rationale.
assessments
of the
validity
of assumptions
based
on
recent
and
data
input s.
(lO) Quantitative
f.
assessments
most
test data.
The
data must
necessarily
flow
upward
to the next level to meet
the
data input needs
of the level above.
There
will be additional
requirements
for certain
data items,
such as (1) and (2) above,
to flow downward
for uniformity
between
analyses
will generally
flow
follows :
Level
II to Level
the lower
level models.
upward
to the next level
Launch
vehicle/spacecraft/ground
tems/stage/module/subsystem/black
Level
III to Level
II
Level
IV
III Subsystem/black
to Level
Stage/module/subsystem/black
The hardware
of modeling
as
support
sys-
box
box/component
box/component/part
4-5
!I
Section
5.1
5:
ASSURANCE
GENERAL
5. I. 1 INFORMATION
CATEGORIES.
R&QA
status reporting
for the Apollo
Program
will be implemented
in accordance
with the requirements
established
herein.
The primary
objective
of R&QAstatus
reporting
is to provide
NASA
management
with status and progress
information in three major
categories:
a.
Information
evaluation
tions,
defects,
b.
Information
(plans,
c.
5.1.2
of
a technical
(apportionment,
test
results,
status
related
reports,
Recommendations
agement
action.
to
for
REPORTING
LEVELS.
at the following
levels:
management
schedules,
the
status
Program
Director
The
Apollo
Program
b.
Level
II
Center
Apollo
Apollo
Program
rector
and
Level
III
Contractors
ter
Apollo
include
Apollo
d.
Level
IV
of
R&QA
Level
for
problems
Office
Program
Office
and
Program
aspects
etc.),
and
man-
will be implemented
R&QAto
Manager,
the
Apollo
- R&QA
to the
and Center
Dias
appropriate.
Agencies
R&QA
organizations
- R&QA,
Subcontractors/Suppliers
quality
malfunc-
requiring
Offices
- R&QA
Government
Offices
line
Offices
and
administrative
manpower,
reporting
Program
Center
Program
reliability
assessment,
and
funding,
solutions
a.
c.
5.1.3
nature
prediction,
etc.).
as
to
(This
Cenwill
to
Center
applicable.)
to Contractors
REPORTING
DETAIL.
The status reports
will be prepared
at each
level, to reflect the analysis
ofthe program
performed
at that level.
The
amount
of detail
in reports
submitted
to the next higher
level
will be compatible
with the decision
making
authority
of that level.
It is
erate
the responsibility
their own
report
of R&QA
organizations
requirements.
They
at all levels
will coordinate
to genthese
requirements
with
other
organizational
elements
having
related
reporting
requirements
to ensure
integrated
effort and unified direction, and
provide
information
to organizational
levels
above
and
5-I
5.2
Reliability
below
the
representative
program.
accordance
5.2
LEVEL
REPORT
5.2.1
level
The
reports
with
schedules
I - APOLLO
and
R&QA
will
Quality
as
required
be submitted
required
by
PROGRAM
Assurance
to
to
the
Status
fulfill
the
next
the
next
higher
QUARTERLY
Reporting
needs
higher
level.
of
level
the
in
STATUS
GENERAL.
An Apollo
R&QA
Program
Quarterly
Status
Report
will
be prepared
by the Apollo
Program
Office
- R&QA,
and presented
to
the Apollo
Program
Director
every
three months
starting July 1965.
This
report
will be based
on an analysis
and evaluation
of Center/
contractor
status reports
and inputs directed
to three major
areas:
a.
Mission
b.
R&QA
c.
Problems
Evaluation
Program
Evaluation
and
Recommendations
Figure
5-I
illustrates
the approach
used
in developing
these three
major
areas ofthe report. The paragraphs
that follow, describe
these
reporting
areas
in some
detail. The Apollo
R&QA
Program
Quarterly
Status
Report
will be reviewed
and
coordinated
with Centers
and
other
directorates
of the Apollo
Program
Office prior to presentation to the Apollo
Program
Director.
It will be furnished
officially
to Centers
every
three months
for information
and action, as appropriate.
5.2.2
MISSION
EVALUATION.
Specific
mission
evaluations
will
be made
to
define
the
relationship
between
the
results
of mission
reliability
analyses
and
the established
mission
requirements,
and will be keyed
to the
capability
of the
total
Apollo
system
(equipment
and
facilities)
to meet
the
launch
window
for
a particular
mission.
This
would
require
analysis
maintainability,
will
be
presented
Status
a.
b.
c.
and
and
trade-offs
launch
as
part
among
such
factors
as
reliability,
availability.
The
following
results
Apollo
R&QA
Program
Quarterly
Report.
The
status
of
of the
mission
above.
missions
reliability
The projected
impact
sion, of any problems
terest.
The
status
of the
Emphasis
will be
quiring
management
of
current
analysis,
on the Manned
encountered
Manned
outputs
of the mission
graph
4,2 above.
5-2
time
of the
Lunar
reliability
placed
on
action.
the
interest
based
as defined
in
Lunar
Landing
in the missions
Landing
mission,
analysis,
identification
as
on the
paragraph
outputs
4.2
(MLL)
misof current
in-
based
defined
of critical
on
the
in para-
areas
re-
Reliability
and
Quality
Assurance
Status
Reporting
5.2.4
Director
Apollo
Program
Apollo
R&QA Program
Status Report
R&QA
Program
Evaluation
and
Recommendations
Indicators
Schedules
Manpower
Open-ended Failure
Reports
Contract
Status
Audits
Mission
Evaluation
CPreparatory,
Mission ReliabilityAnalysis
Mission Success and
Crew Safety
Apportionments, Predictions,
and Assessments
Launch Availability,
Maintainability
I
J
Test Results
Failure Summaries_
ReliabilityGrowth
Single Point Failure Analysis
R&QA
Software/Hardware
Analysis
Center/Contractor
Figure
5-1.
Apollo
Program
Inputs
R&QA
Status
Report
5.2.3
R&QA
PROGRAM
EVALUATION.
The
R&QA
Program
evaluations
will define
the current
status
of program
implementation
related
to the
overall
program
requirements
established
in Section
2 of
this Plan. Key indicators,
such as:
schedules,
manpower,
contract
status,
audits,
test results,
failure
summaries
including
specific
open- ended
troublemalfunctionfailure
reports,
and problems
identified as a result
of mission
reliability analyses
will be evaluated
in the program
context
to provide
a basis for recommendations
to
the
Apollo
Program
Director.
The
results
will be presented
as
part of the Apollo
R&QA
Program
Quarterly
Status Report.
5.2.4
PROBLEMS
AND
RECOMMENDATIONS.
the
mission
and
program
evaluations
evaluated.
Those
requiring
management
and
specific
recommendations
will be
these problems.
The problems
defined
by
will
be
summarized
and
action
will be identified
made
regarding
solutions
to
5-3
5.3
5.3
Reliability
LEVEL
5.3.1
II - CENTER
R&QA
and
STATUS
Quality
Assurance
Status
Reporting
REPORTING
GENERAL.
The
Center
Apollo
Program
OfficesR&QA
are
required
to
submit
R&QA
status
information
to fulfill the Level
I
needs.
The
status
reporting
will be accomplished
as described
in
the Center
R&QA
plans
and will involve
both formal
and informal
submissions
in accordance
with the Apollo
Program
Office
- R&QA
requests
and
schedules.
In general,
Center
R&QA
status information will be submitted
to the Apollo
Program
Office
- R&QA
four
weeks
prior
to the
presentation
of the
Apollo
R&QA
Program
Quarterly
Status
Report
to the
Apollo
Program
Director.
This
status
information
will
include
Center
Apollo
R&QA
reports
to
Center
management,
and the following
information
for the Apollo
R&QA
Program
Quarterly
Status
Report:
a.
Center
mission
b.
An
reliability
model.
evaluation
of
analysis
each
models
Center's
and
portion
supporting
of the
data
total Apollo
for
the
R&QA
Program.
c.
5.3.2
5.4
LEVEL
STATUS
Specific
III - CONTRACTOR
REPORTING
recommendations.
reporting
and
schedules
the
contract.
AND
at
GOVERNMENT
this
level
established
LEVEL
IV - SUBCONTRACTOR/SUPPLIER
REPORTING
R&QA
status
quirements
5-4
and
CENTER
APOLLO
R&QA
HIGHLIGHTS.
Weekly
highlight
reports
for the spacecraft,
launch
vehicle,
launch
and flight operations,
and
engines
are
submitted
to the Apollo
Program
Office by the Center
Apollo
Program
Offices,
in accordance
with the Apollo
Documentation
Index,
NPC
500-7.
R&QA
problem
areas
will be included
in
these reports.
R&QA
status
quirements
Offices,
and
5.5
problems
and
reporting
schedules
at
this
level
established
will
AGENCY
be
by
in
the
R&QA
accordance
Center
R&QA
with
Apollo
the
reProgram
STATUS
will
be
in accordance
by the
prime
contractors.
with
the
re-
Section
6.1
6:
ASSURANCE
GENERAL
This
section
defines
the requirements
for establishing
and implementing
an Apollo
R&QA
Audit
Program
in accordance
with the provisions
of this
plan
and the Apollo
Program
Development
Plan,
M-D
MA 500.
It covers
the following
requirements:
6.2
a.
Periodic
reliability
b.
Definition
c.
Procedures
for
performing
d.
Procedures
actions.
for
reporting
e.
Procedures
the degree
AUDITING
scheduling
and/or
of
quality
audits
to assess
the implementation
assurance
requirements.
of organizations
responsible
The
responsible
R&QA
Program
auditing.
audits.
results
for
follow-up
of accomplishment.
ORGANIZAT
for
of Apollo
of audits
of prescribed
and
prescribed
corrective
corrective
actions
to assess
IONS
R&QA
organizations
will perform
R&QA
at
audits
the
four
as follows:
levels
of the
6.2.1 LEVEL
I- APOLLO
PROGRAM
OFFICE.
The
Apollo
OfficeR&QA
is responsible
for auditing performance
R&QA
Offices at the Manned
Space Flight Centers.
6.2.2 LEVEL
II- CENTER
APOLLO
PROGRAM
OFFICES.
Apollo Program
Office - R&QA
(or delegated
zations) is responsible
for auditing:
a.
b.
The
performance
R&QA
responsibilities.
of
The activities
of the
dent
R&QA
personnel)
pliers'
plants.
Center
Government
assigned
line
organizations
Agencies
to Apollo
Center
assigned
(including
contractors'
Program
of Apollo
The
R&QA
Apollo
Center
organi-
Apollo
6-1
6.2.3
Reliability
c.
The
activities
pliers
6.2.3
LEVEL
under
IlIA-
of
their
Apollo
and
Quality
contractors,
Assurance
Auditing
subcontractors,
and
sup-
cognizance.
GOVERNMENT
AGENCIES.
The
Government
Agen-
cies
(including
NASA
resident
R&QA
personnel)
assigned
at contractors',
subcontractors',
and
suppliers'
plants
are
responsible
for auditing
the Apollo
R&QAactivities
performed
by the contractor,
subcontractor,
or supplier
as directed
by the Center
letter of delegation.
6.2.4
LEVEL
III/IV - CONTRACTORS/SUBCONSTRACTORS.
contractors/subcontractors
are responsible
a.
The
performance
quired
b.
by
AUDIT
6.3.1
The
performance
of
quired
by contract.
provides
GUIDELINE
GENERAL.
own
in-house
their
b.
activities,
as
re-
summary
chart
and
suppliers,
as
re-
of the
Apollo
R&QA
audit
PROCEDURES
Each
organization
audits
performing
as well
below,
will
as
follow
the
the
specific
Schedules
of audits
planned
during
the
next
quarter
will be
maintained
and the next
level above
and the organization
to be
audited
will be notified
officially at least one month
in advance
of each audit.
Each
ing
C.
R&QA
subcontractors
general
guideline
procedures
listed
procedures
in ensuing
paragraphs.
a,
Apollo
auditing:
contract.
Figure
6-1
activities.
6.3
of their
The
for
official
agency
Audits
audit
with
of
will
an
R&QA
be
made
individual
by
a team
designated
activities
may
be
selected
as
by
the
audit-
chairman.
performed
separately
or
jointly, as desired.
Audits
will be conducted
in general
accordance with the Manual
for Evaluating
Apollo Contractor
Reliability
Plans
and
Performance,
NHB
5320.2,
and/or
Quality
Program
Evaluation
Procedures,
are not mandatory.
HI
Immediately
held
between
following
the audit
organization
being
audited
The
organization
audited
and
be
given
an opportunity
a formal
report.
6-2
SP
6003,
the audit,
team
and
to
will
except
that numerical
a post
audit
critique
appropriate
personnel
discuss
thus
be
to defend
the
made
them
findings
aware
prior
ratings
will be
of the
of the
audit.
of the
findings
to issuance
of
Reliability
LEVEL
Apollo Program
R&QA
(Code MAR)
II
Center
OfficeCPO 2
6.3
ACTIVITY
BEING
AUDITED
Office
Apollo Program
R&QA
CPO
Center
FORMAL
AUDIT REPORT
DISTRIBUTION
1
CPM
Line
Organization
CPM, CD,
Code MAR
CTR 3
(via
CD)
CPO 2
GA
SGA,
Code
II
CPO 2
Contractor/Subcontractor/Supplier
Government
Agency
Assigned
at Contractors'
Plants
(GA)
Contractor/Subcontractor/Supplier
CPM,
CPO,
Code MAR
Contractor/Subcontractor
Contractor/Subcontractor
GA, Contr 3 ,
CPO 3
II
IlIA
III/IV
CPM,
MAR
CTR
CTR 3,
(themselves)
uI/IV
Contractor/Subcontractor
Subcontractor/Supplier
GA, Contr
CPO 3
3,
Code MAR:
Apollo Program
Office - R&QA
CPO:
Center
Apollo Program
Office - R&QA
CPM:
Center
Apollo Program
Manager
CTR:
Center
In-House
R&QA Office
GA:
Supervisory
Office of GA
CD:
Center
Director
1 In addition
to organizations
2 or delegated
representative
3 if appropriate
auditing
FIGURE6-1.
and being
audited
APOLLO R&QAAUDIT
SUMMARY
6-3
6.3.2
Reliability
eg
action
6.3.2
b.
Assurance
Auditing
in
by
the
report
specified
specific
recommendations
organization
for
corrective
groups.
After
the audit report
has been
distributed,
the auditing
agency
will follow
up to assure
that action items
and recommendations
for corrective
action have
been implemented.
LEVEL
CENTER
a,
Quality
At the completion
of each audit, the audit chairman,
or his designee,
will prepare
and issue a formal
report
of the results
of
the audit,
structured
as given
in paragraph
6.4 below,
and will
include
fo
and
I - THE
APOLLO
APOLLO
PROGRAM
The
Apollo
Program
performance
of the
intervals,
as required,
tion
of
the
Apollo
r e quir ement s.
For
any
Program
planned
Offices
(1) Scope
of
Program,
(2)
Inclusive
PROGRAM
OFFICES
OfficeR&QA
audits
Center
Apollo
Program
to ensure
the
execution
Program
R&QA
policies,
formal
- R&QA
audit;
OFFICE
- R&QA
- R&QA
AUDITS
the
activities
and
OfficesR&QA
at
and
implementaprocedures,
and
audits,
notification
of Center
will include
the following:
i.e., KSC
R&QA
OF
Program,
Saturn
Apollo
IB
R&QA
etc.
dates
of
audit,
including
time
of
arrival.
(3)The
Apollo
Program
Office - R&QA
Chairman
and delegated
members
of the auditing
group.
The audit team
will be comprised
of Apollo
Program
Office - R&QA
and Center
personnel.
(4) Advance
preparations
assembling
C.
(if any)
to be
records,
made
by
the
Center;
i.e.,
etc.
The
purpose
of a formal
audit is to determine
the degree
and
adequacy
of compliance
with the Centers'
Apollo
R&QA
Program
Plans.
Also,
the
establishment
and
implementation
of
intra-Center
Apollo
R&QA
policy
and
operating
procedures
by the Center
Apollo
Program
Office
- R&QAwill
be observed.
In addition,
the Apollo
Program
Office
- R&QA
will participate
in Center
R&QA
audits
of Government
Agencies/contractors/
subcontractors/suppliers.
This
participation
will be
coordinated
R&QA.
d,
appropriate
with
the
appropriate
Center
As
a minimum,
copies
of the
audit
the
Apollo
Program
Office
- R&QA
gram
Office
- R&QA
and
the
Center
Apollo
report
and
the
Apollo
Program
will
be
Center
Program
6-4
Office-
furnished
to
Apollo
ProManager.
Reliability
and
6.3.3
Quality
Assurance
LEVEL
II
CENTER
APOLLO
OF
THE
R&QA
ACTIVITIES
OR GANIZATIONS
a,
b.
PROGRAM
PERFORMED
The
purpose
o these
quacy
of compliance
following
Apollo
R&QA
with
the
requirements
the
Compliance
procedures.
of Apollo
(4)
The
status of plans for and usage
plishment
of the line organization's
Compliance
tribution
management
Copies
ties
gram
with
with
R&QA
to
of the
the
requirements
LEVEL
THE
AGENCIES
PLIERS'
with
the
technical
report
CENTER
R&QA
AT
PLANTS
The
Center
organization)
Apollo
R&QAoperating
R&QA
reporting
of manpower
in the accomR&QA
activities.
of
will be
audited,
appropriate
Manager,
Apollo
II-
Center
the requirements
for the management
functions
at supplier
operations.
APOLLO
ACTIVITIES
CONTRACTORS'
Apollo
will
furnished
Center
Program
Director,
and will be kept
the cognizant
Center
R&QA
Program
audit the
ernment
Agencies
(including
contractors',
subcontractors',
to evaluate
the effectiveness
ance.
of
(3)
{7) Compliance
Apollo
R&QA
aw
- R&QAAUDITS
CENTER
LINE
audits
is to evaluate
the degree
and adeof the
line organizations
in each
of the
activities:
of Center
(6)
OF
BY
(2) Compliance
with the requirements
policy, plans, and procedures.
(5) Compliance
Government
6.3.4
OFFICE
The
Center
Apollo
Program
Office
- R&QA
(or delegated
Center
organization)
will perform
audits of the performance
of the R&QA
activities
of Center
line organizations
at intervals,
as required
to ensure
the execution
and
implementation
of the applicable
Apollo
Program
R&QA
policies,
procedures,
and requirements.
(1) Compliance
R & QA
plan.
C.
6.3.4
Auditing
for
implementation
guidelines.
to each
line
activi-
Director,
Center
Apollo
ProOfficeR&QA
via the Center
in a central
Activity.
PROGRAM
audit
OFFICE
PERFORMED
- R&QA
R&QA
file maintained
by
- R&QAAUDITS
BY
a SUBCONTRACTORS'
Office
Apollo
of the
of
GOVERNMENT
L AND
SUP-
(or delegated
Center
activities
of the Gov-
NASA
resident
R&QA
personnel)
at
and suppliers'
plants, as required,
of the Agency's
R&QA
perform-
6-5
6.3.5
Reliability
bB
The
purpose
of these
quacy
of compliance
following:
of
audits
the
and
6.3.5
(i) The
provisions
of NPC
(Z) The
provisions
of the Government
TORS,
b.
Co
Auditing
degree
with
and
adeeach
of the
R&QA
plans.
200-1A.
Agencies'
Agencies'
Apollo
Program
periodic
R&QA
activity
re-
Copies
of the
audit
report
will
be given
to each
of the
Government
Agencies
audited,
the
appropriate
supervising
office
of the
Government
Agency
audited,
the
Center
Apollo
Program
Manager,
the
Apollo
Program
Office
- R&QA,
and
will
be kept
in a
central
audit
file
by the
cognizant
Center
R&QAActivity.
LEVEL
OF
THE
a.
Assurance
is to evaluate
the
Government
Agency
(3) The
status
of the
Government
activities
as reported
in their
ports.
C.
Quality
II - CENTER
APOLLO
R&QA
ACTIVITIES
SUBCONTRACTORS,
PROGRAM
OF
APOLLO
AND
OFFICE
PROGRAM
SUPPLIERS
The
Center
Apollo
Program
Office
- R&QA
organizations)
will
audit
the
activities
and
Apollo
Program
contractors,
subcontractors,
required,
to evaluate
adequacy
and
degree
the
appropriate
contractual
R&QA
requirements.
Copies
of the
audit
report
will
Program
Managers,
appropriate
Apollo
Program
Office
- R&QA,
audit
file
by the
cognizant
Center
be
On
every
1965
- R&QAAUDITS
CONTRAC-
and
(or
delegated
Center
performance
of the
and
suppliers,
as
of compliance
with
distributed
Government
and
will
be
R&QA
Activity,
three
to
Center
Agencies,
kept
in a
months
Apollo
the
central
thereafter,
the Center
Apollo
Program
Office
- R&QA
will issue apt.posed
schedule
of contractor
audits
to be performed
during
the next
three
months.
This
schedule
will be sent to the Apollo
Program
Office
- R&QA
where
the list will be compared
with those
issued
by other Centers.
If it should
become
apparent
that two or more
audits
are
planned
to be made
upon
the same
contractor
during
the reporting
period
(by different
auditing
activities), the Apollo
Program
Office
- R&QA
will attempt
to combine
audit plans
so
that a minimum
interference
of contractor
activities
will result.
6.3.6
LEVEL
TORS'
a,
IIIA - GOVERNMENT
R&QA
ACTIVITIES
AGENCY
AUDITS
OF
CONTRAC-
The
Government
Agency
(including
NASA
Resident
R&QA
personnel)
assigned
to contractors'
plants
will perform
audits of
the R&QA
activities performed
by Apollo
contractors
under their
cognizance,
as indicated
in the letter
of delegation.
Proposed
6-6
Reliability
and
Quality
schedules
Centers,
b.
Ce
Assurance
as
of these
required
Copies
LEVEL
THEIR
a0
b,
C.
6.3.8
of the audit
to
the
cognizant
report
will be
the Center
Office-
sent to the
Apollo
R&QA,
Program
and
the
Center
Apollo
Pro-
Office
- R&QA,
the
cognizant
center
AUDITS
OF
contractors/subcontractors
on a timely
basis in accord200-2,
Section
15, Audit
of
When
contractually
required,
reliability program
audits will be
performed
periodically
as outlined in paragraph
2.3 of NPC
250- I.
Control
and
audit of a contractor's
reliability
program
will be
conducted
as outlined
in paragraph
2.4 of NPC
250-I.
These
audits will include
and emphasize
the Reliability
Evaluation
Program
and
adhere
to the suggested
procedures
of paragraph
4.5
of NPC
250-I.
Audit
reports
will
be
submitted
NASA
Center,
Government
Agency
sentatives)
and prime
contractor,
When
audit
to the cognizant
contracting
(including
NASA
R&QA
repreas appropriate.
- CONTRACTORS'/SUBCONTRACTORS'
AND
SUPPLIER
R&QA
contractually
the activities
in a manner
AUDITS
OF
ACTIVITIES
required,
contractors/subcontractors
will
and performance
of major
subcontractors/
similar
to that described
in paragraph
6.3.5
In each
case,
auditing
contractor/subcontractor
will
present
to
the cognizant
Center/prime
contractor
a listing of audits to be
performed
at least a monthprior
to the actual performance
of the
audit. The Center
R&QA
Office will reviewthe
schedule
and participate
Co
forwarded
When
contractually
required,
Apollo
will audit their own quality activities
ance
with
the requirements
of NPC
Quality
Program
Performance.
suppliers
above.
Do
will be
Center.
Ill/IV - CONTRACTORS'/SUBCONTRACTORS'
OWN
R&QA
AC TIVITIES
LEVEL
Ill/IV
SUBCONTRACTOR
a.
audits
by the
6.3.8
These
audits will be performed
in accordance
with the requirements
of NPC
200-1A,
Section
4, Surveying
and Monitoring,
as
amplified
by the documents
referred
to in paragraph
6.3.1 (c)
above.
These
audits
may
be combined
with
Center-originated
audits
or as a supplement
to Center
audits.
gram
Manager,
Apollo
Program
Activity.
6.3.7
Auditing
in the
audits,
as appropriate.
Audit
reports
will
be
submitted
to the cognizant
NASA
Center,
Government
Agency
(including
NASA
resident
R&QA
personnel),
and prime
contractor,
as appropriate.
6-7
6.4
6.4
Reliability
AUDIT
Section
1:
is the end
final
audit
Assurance
Auditing
Purpose,
audit.
1.2
Scope,
which
any limitations
1.3
Survey
Team,
which
nate
their
titles
and
1.4
Itinerary,
physical
2:
product
report
of the combined
efforts
will include
the following
which
should
should
that
which
location(s),
AUDIT
describe
may
have
the
the
been
should
list
organizational
should
and
RESULTS
Summary,
in a brief
explain
describe
the dates
AND
should
of the
summarize
major
audit
not
The
anticipated
reports
audited,
of
of the
recommendarecommendafor
action
pertinent
facts
examined
of the problem,
an indication
or revealed
during
that
vary
all
reports
will
owing
to complexity
of
the
of each specific
problem
are
responsible
for acor will be performed.
APPENDIX,
which
will give
supplementary
data,
such
charts,
description
of the activity
or hardware,
pertinent
documentation,
etc.
will
the
audit.
Recommendations
for action
as a result
discussed,
showing
which
organizations
tion,
and when
follow-up
action
should
4:
desig-
DESCRIPTION
Description
of the findings
including
a description
cause
of the problem,
effect
of the problem,
and
a specific
need
for corrective
action.
Section
and
all of the
specific
responsible
b.
de
including
the
results
findings.
Subject
Discussion
audit.
the
RECOMMENDATIONS
a.
c.
of the
audit,
the
organization(s)
of the audits.
Recommendations,
which
should
detail
tions
made
as a result
of the audit.
Each
tion
should
designate
the
organization
in its accomplishment.
AUDIT
conducting
team
membership
affiliations.
2.2
DETAILED
for
scope
of the
imposed.
Audit
audit
3:
which
abstract
the
reasons
2.1
Section
of the
infor-
INTRODUCTION
1.1
Section
6-8
Quality
REPORTS
A formal
written
report
R&QA
Audit
Team,
The
mation
when feasible:_
*It
is
herein.
and
include
all
of item,
of the
extent
as
details
listed
of audit,
etc.
FOLLOW-UP
Assurance
Auditing
6.5.4
ACTIONS
6.5.1 GENERAL.
The
most
important
part
of an audit
program
benefit
that
accrues
to the
entire
Apollo
Program
by the
plishment
of the prescribed
corrective
action.
In order
to
that
the
corrective
action
has
been
accomplished,
or that
quent
facts
have
indicated
that
some
other
action
should
lowed,
a specific
follow-up
system
will be employed
by all
ties having
an audit
function.
is the
accomensure
subsebe folactivi-
6.5.2 INFORMAL
FOLLOW-UP
ACTION.
The initial follow-up action will
be performed
through
the use of a phone
call, memorandum,
or
letter to the activity responsible
for implementation
of corrective
action. The interval after the audit and before implemental
followup action will vary with the complexity
and importance
of the corrective action, but will not normally
exceed 30 days.
6.5.3 FORMAL
FOLLOW-UP
ACTION.
If the
result
of the
informal
6-9
AND
GENERAL
This
section
expands
Section
10.5.6
of M-D
MA 500,
Apollo
Program
Development
Plan,
which
provides
the requirements
for the selection
of
reliable
parts,
materials,
and
components
in the
Apollo
Program.
The
program
developed
herein,
establishes
the policy,
responsibilities
and
requirements
necessary
to ensure
the
selection,
application,
and
dissemination
of
information
concerning
reliable
parts,
materials
and
components,
throughout
the Apollo
Program.
7.2
PROGRAM
a.
Do
C.
d.
e.
7.3
The
utilize
exist
POLICY
Apollo
Parts,
applicable
in the Apollo
Materials
methods,
Program.
and
techniques,
Parts
and materials
previously
space
programs
will be selected
as
necessary,
to make
certain
Apollo
Program.
NASA-wide
(NASA
Form
ensure
that
NMI 5310.1).
All
parts
contractor
the Centers.
Components
Program
and systems
which
will
fully
currently
proven
reliable
in other
missile
and
from
preferred
parts
lists
and tested,
they
are
satisfactory
for use in the
Part/Material
Application
Problem
Disposition
Reports
863) will be used
by the Centers
and _heir
contractors
to
failures
already
encountered
will
not be repeated
(See
selected
or his
for
Apollo
subcontractors,
will
be inspected
100
except
as otherwise
percent
by
provided
the
by
Parts
traceability
is used
to enable
defective
parts
to be located
ir; the
system,
should
some
problem
arise.
Not all material,
parts,
assemblies
or equipment
will
require
the same
depthof
traceability.
Identification
of proposed
exempt
articles
will be documented
and submitted,
with
the
reason
for
exemption,
for
approval
prior
to start
of pr ocurement
or manufacture
(See Section
8 of this
document).
RESPONSIBILITY
7.3.1 THE
a.
APOLLO
PROGRAM
The
Apollo
Program
ordinate
Center,
DoD
the program
activities,
OFFICE
- R&QA
Office
- R&QA
will
and allied
program
as necessary.
provide
activities;
direction;
coand support
7-1
7.3.2
Parts,
b.
The
Apollo
Program
Materials
Office
- R&QA
existing
Apollo
parts
programs
pliance
with
existing
procedures
for program
improvement.
7.3.2
CENTER
with
R&QA
APOLLO
PROGRAM
and
will
OFFICES-
a.
Prepare
technical
requirements
which
gram
elements
of paragraph
7.4 below
contractor
parts and materials
program
b.
Keep
formed
Parts
c.
monitor
at Centers
and to make
the policies
stated herein,
the Center
(or designated
Center
organizations)
the
Parts
Components
Program
and
review
to determine
comrecommendations
In
accordance
Apollo
Program
will:
R&QA.
Offices
reflect
the parts
proand review
and approve
plans.
the
Apollo
Program
Office
- R&QA
and
other
Centers
inof significant
events
relating
to parts
program
activities.
failure
information
will be disseminated
in accordance
with
requirements
and
Materials
Monitor
and
established
Applications
audit
their
in
in-house
NMI
5310.I,
Problems.
and
Reporting
contractors'
of
parts
NASA
pro-
grams.
d.
7.3.3
7.4
PARTS,
7.4.1
Ensure
that their respective
parts program
participants,
either
directly
or through
the Center,
provide
APIC
(paragraph
7.3.3
below)
with timely
parts/materials
information
and documentation
resulting
from
program
implementation,
as
outlined
in
paragraph
7.4. below.
PARTS
INFORMATION
ACTIVITY.
MSFC
will be responsible
for
the
operation
of
the
Apollo
Parts
Information
Center,
APIC,
an
activity
established
at Huntsville
for collection,
storage
and
dissemination
of parts
and
materials
information,
in accordance
with
M-1
MA
1450.045.
Any
changes
in the APIC
activity
will be coordinated
between
the Apollo
Program
Office
- R&QA
and
APIC
management.
MATERIALS,
GENERAL.
sponsible
ment
the
fined
7.4.2
AND
COMPONENTS
PROGRAM
ELEMENTS
The
Center
Apollo
Program
Offices
- R&QA
are
reto ensure
that all Apollo
Program
organizations
impleParts,
Materials,
and Components
Program
elements
de-
in the
ensuing
paragraphs.
PARTS
AND
MATERIALS
SELECTION.
Parts
will be selected
by
program
participants
on the basis of proven
qualification
for their
application(s)
as reflected
in Center
control
documentation.
In the
absence
of such documentation,
contractors
will submit
a candidate
listing of critical
parts/materials
to the Center
Apollo
Program
Office
- R&QA
for review
or approval,
as directed
by the Center.
Historical
data
derived
from
similar
applications
will be considered
7-2
in making
selections.
"Off-the-shelf"
parts
will not be
used
Parts,
Materials
and
Components
Program
7.4.10
unless
identification and life history are known
for the class of
item
and/or
the specific hardware
itself, as appropriate
(See
paragraph
8.3.5).
STANDARDIZATION.
Parts
standardization
programs
will
7.4.3 PARTS
be implemented
where
possible
to minimize
the total number
of part
types
in the Apollo
Program.
Design
reviews
will include
provisions
that will
check
progress
in parts
standardization.
7.4.4 PARTS
AND
MATERIALS
LISTS.
Appropriate
parts
and material
lists,
supported
by acceptance
test
data
and proven
performance,
will be developed
in accordance
with Center
control
documentation,
as required
by the
cognizant
Center.
Lists
will
reflect
maximum
standardization
and multiple
application
capability.
Lists
will
be
submitted
for
approval
when
so directed
by the cognizant
Center.
7.4.5 ADEQUATE
SPECIFICATIONS.
Adequate
pared
to define,
control,
and procure
parts
ance
with NPC
500-1
and Center-approved
specifications
and materials
supplements.
7.4.6 QUALIFICATION
TESTING.
In cases
where
tests
results
are not
available
or parts/materials
have
not adequately
been
tested
for
a
specific
intended
application,
a qualification
test
program
will be
developed
in accordance
with the specification
requirements.
Contractor
test
programs
will
be reviewed
or approved
bythe
cognizant Center Apollo Program
Office - R&QA.
7.4.7
FAILURE
ANALYSIS
analysis
and reporting
implemented.
Parts
accordance
with NMI
AND REPORTING.
A system
for the recording,
of all failures
that occur
will be initiated
and
failure
information
will
be disseminated
in
5310.1.
7.4.8
PROCESS
CONTROL.
An adequate
defect
prevention
program
will
be
maintained
to control
the
manufacturing
process
of parts
and
subassemblies.
Screening
techniques,
such
as:
visual
inspection,
x-ray,
seal
leak
test_s,
burn-in,
etc.,
will be utilized
to detect
defective
items.
Procedures
outlining
these
manufacturing
techniques
will
be developed
in accordance
with the cognizant
Center's
requirements.
7.4.9 INSPECTION.
In-process
inspection
as well as final inspection
procedures
will be applied. These
procedures
will be kept current by incorporating
new and approved
techniques, as appropriate.
TRACEABILITY.
Methods
and
procedures
will
be estab7.4.10 PARTS
lished
assuring
parts
traceability
by part
number,
manufacturer
serial
number,
date
or lot code,
as appropriate,
and location
as
used
in Apollo
hardware.
This
information
will be documented
and
submitted
to the cognizant
Center
(See Section
8 of this
document}.
7-3
7.4.11
7.4.11
Parts,
DOCUMENTATION.
Materials
Documentation
and
of
the preceding
be prepared
by the Apollo
participants,
ments
of the cognizant
Center.
7.5
APOLLO
7.5.1
PARTS
INFORMATION
GENERAL.
All
Apollo
CENTER
Components
Program
activities
in accordance
with
will
require-
(APIC)
participants
will
support
the
APIC
Program
by
the
timely
submission
of available
parts/materials
data,
as
appropriate,
from
the activities
described
in paragraph
7.4 above.
The
APIC
information
will be made
available
to all Apollo
participants.
7.5.2
INPUT.
The
required
7.5.3
by
types
of parts/materials
APIC,
a.
Program
b.
Parts/materials
c.
Preferred
d.
Specifications
e.
Failure
f.
Inspection
g.
Characteristic
h.
Additional
may
parts
list by
part
test
reports
parts/materials
analysis
information
include:
number
list
reports
reports
data
comments
OUTPUT.
The
as
primary
a.
Integrated
test
b.
Qualification
c.
Parts
analysis
d.
Usage
factors
e.
Availability
f.
Failure
rates
g.
Critical
items
h.
Manufacturing
i.
Supplier
required
outputs
of
by
par.
7.5.3.
may
include:
APIC
information
status
lists
summary
and
status
and
sheets
of specifications
modes
list
and
construction
techniques
comments
7-4
available
in, and
Parts,
Materials
and
Components
j.
Preferred
k.
Item
parts
and/or
Inspection
APIC
outputs
and adequate
SPECIAL
and
7.5.4
materials
identifcation
Replacement
7.5.4
Program
and
substitute
test data,
including
will be useful
input data.
DATA.
Special
items
data
to
the
are
results
degree
those
of qualification
that they
which
do
not
reflect
tests.
timely
fall within
the
primary
APIC
outputs
listed above. Apollo program
participants
will
submit
all requests
for special
parts and materials
data to MSFC
for consideration.
MSFC
will establish
the necessary
operational
methodology
encompassing
separate
specialized
information
requirements
tailored
to a particular
user's
needs.
Additional
APIC
outputs
will be made
available
to all participants,
as appropriate.
7-5
_J
I"
Section
8.1
8:
IDENTIFICATION
FOR TRACEABILITY
GENERAL
This
section
defines
the requirements
for establishing
and implementing
an Identification
for Traceability
(I/T)
Program.
The program
will enable
compliance
with
NASA
quality
provisions
of NPC
200-2,
inspection
systems
of NPC
200-3
and
configuration
provisions
of NPC
500-1,
and be
consistent
with
the
logistics
provisions
of NHB 7500.1
for Apollo
space
systems
and related
equipment.
These
requirements
are
applicable
to all
NASA
Centers,
contractors,
subcontractors
and suppliers
involved
in the
Apollo
Program
to:
1) assure
the availability
of the required
historical
records
and functional
data
of identified
article(s)
in order
to facilitate
failure
analysis
and
corrective
action;
2) permit
the
location
of like
article(s),
and
3) provide
complete
article
retrieval
capability.
B.2
APPLICATION
8.2.1 GENERAL.
The
Center
Apollo
Program
OfficesR&QA
are
responsible
for assuring
that
all Apollo
Program
organizations
implement
the
requirements
for
Identification
for
Traceability.
These
requirements
will
be applied
to Apollo
space
systems,
boilerplate
test
hardware,
battleship
vehicles,
spare
parts,
and
associated
ground
support
equipment
meeting
any of the following
conditions:
a.
The
equipment,
requirements.
b.
The
safe
c.
The
equipment
in its system
do
8.2.2
equipment,
conditions
if
discrepant,
will
adversely
when
discrepant,
can
for using
or maintenance
is susceptible
application.
The data
accumulated
sary
for
analysis
product
improvement.
to
during
effect
result
to failure
the life
failure
affect
the
mission
in hazardous
personnel.
or
gradual
or
un-
degradation
of the equipment
are
necesrecurrence
prevention
or
DETERMINATION.
Identification
for
Traceability
will
be
lished
on drawings,
specifications,
and technical
documents.
requirements
will be established
during
design
and evaluated
sign
review,
and/or
may
be performed
as required
at any
subsequent
to design
review
to ensure
that
identification
is
duced
at the proper
level
and
that
the identification
method,
and location
are properly
specified.
estabThe
at deperiod
introtype,
8-1
8.2.3
8.2.3 LIMITATIONS.
No statement
a waiver
to the contractual
logistics
requirements.
8.3
REQUIREMENTS
FOR
IDENTIFICATION
8.3.1 CRITERIA
FOR
ARTICLE
IDENTIFICATION.
Article identification
and the degree
of traceability required
on equipment
which meet
any of the conditions of paragraph8.2
will be established by detailed
analysis
of the
equipment
and
its component
parts.
The following
criteria
will
be
considered
in establishing
the need
for article
identification:
8-2
a.
Functionally
matched
and assemblies.
sets
of hardware
b.
c.
In-process
degradation
d.
Articles
or
assemblies
degradations,
limitations,
vicing
and maintenance,
e.
I/T
requirements
established
continued
through
the
next
highest
degree
of traceability
material
subject
and limitations.
to
time
requiring
and
cycle
subject
to time
and
checkouts,
calibration,
and reinspection.
cycle
selective fits
variations
or
variations,
periodic
ser-
for
lower
level
articles
must
be
higher
level
of
assembly,
to the
required
by any of its components.
8.3.2
EXEMPT
MATERIAL
AND
ARTICLE
LIST.
Not all
material
or
fabricated
articles
will
require
identification
for traceability.
All
proposed
exempt
material
or articles
will be listed
and submitted,
with
reason
for
exemption,
to the
procuring
agency
for approval
prior
to the start
of procurement
or manufacturing.
Articles,
subassemblies
and
assemblies
may
be listed
at the
highest
level
of
fabrication
or assembly,
providing
they
do not contain
any components
that require
I/T.
8.3.3
ENGINEERING
DOCUMENTS.
The
engineering
drawing
is the primary
vehicle
for
transmitting
detailed
I/T
requirements.
The
method
of identification
and
the location
and type
of marking
to be
used
for
the article,
will
be indicated
on the drawings,
specifications
and/or
supporting
technical
or other
control
documents.
(See
Exhibits
X, XI
and
XII of NPC
500-1).
All changes
released
for
material
or articles
identified
for traceabilitywill
indicate
an introduction
point
of effectivity
and disposition
of the articles
in process.
8.3.4
MULTIPLE
APPLICATION
article
having
the
same
REVIEW
description
OF
COMMON
ARTICLES.
and
specification
that
Any
has
Identification
for
Traceability
8.3.7
application
to both
flight hardware,
man-rated
and/or
other
equipment
will
be
reviewed
to
ground
determine
support,
if a dif-
ferential
of design,
quality,
and/or
reliability
requirement
exists.
When
a higher
requirement
exists
for any
of the preceding
categories,
source
or specification
control
drawings
will be generated
to: (I) specify
the higher
requirements,
(2) enable
positive
identification
for traceability,
and (3) preclude
the use of an unidentified
article
for a space
quirement
exists.
or
replacement
article,
where
the higher
re-
8.3.5
COMMERCIAL,
_OFF-THE-SHELF
IDENTIFICATION.
Off-theshelf or commercial
articles
for which
adequate,
detailed
drawings
are not available
due to the proprietarynatureof
the article and for
which
identification
is required
will have
specification
or source
control
drawings
prepared
with
identification
requirements
as
specified
in paragraphs
8.2, 8.3.1 and 8.3.4.
8.3.6
IDENTIFICATION
METHODS.
The
following
are
typical
methods
that
will be used
to enable
traceability
of articles
through
every
step of procurement,
processing
or manufacturing.
These
methods
will
provide
capability
of tracing
backward
to the material
from
which
fabrication
originated
and forward
to determine
the location
of like articles
within
any level of process
or assembly.
a.
Lot Numbers.
Lot numbers
may
be used to identify materials,
articles
and/or
assemblies
when
produced
in homogeneous
groups
or through
a controlled
process.
b,
Date
Codes.
Date
be used
on articles
also
Co
do
8.3.7
on
articles
subject
indicating
the date of manufacture
may
by a continuous
or controlled
process,
to variations
or
degradation
with
age.
Serial
Numbers,
Serial
numbers
will be
used
on materials,
articles,
assemblies,
or end
items:where
variables
data are
maintained,
and may
be used for non-homogeneous
articles.
Combined
Identification
Methods.
When
required
by application
and
usage,
various
combinations
of lot numbers,
date codes,
and/or
serial
numbers
may
be utilized to achieve
the required
identification
for traceability,
continuity,
and
control
required
by these requirements.
LOCATION
OF
IDENTIFICATION.
When
practicable,
articles
will
carry
the identification
permanently
affixed
on the exterior
of the
article.
When
affixing
identification
to a particular
article is impractical,
due to size or effect on function,
other means
of identification,
such
within a given
_'This
is
by specific
a qualified
codes
made
intended
customer
article
to
as sealed
assembly,
packages,
tagging
or
may
be incorporated.
control
the
use
of regular
drawing,
and
to prevent
in an assembly
or equipment.
records
catalog
articles,
them
from
being
of location
not
identified
substituted
for
8-3
8.3.8
Identification
Traceability
a.
Articles
Composed
of
Per_manent_! Y
Fastened
Components.
Articles
composed
of permanently
fastened
components
that
require
separate
identification
will
have
the
identification
established
on
one
component
with the other
components
recorded
on the article
records.
b.
Multi-Cavity
from
each
will
8.3.8
for
Molding
specific
assure
CONTROL
or
cavity
traceability
OF
Casting.
will
be
to
the
Identification
established
cavity
IDENTIFICATION
and
of the
article
a method
that
by
the
manufacturing
lot.
Lot
and
NUMBERS.
numbers
serial
numbers
will be assigned
to specific
material
and articles
in a
consecutive
manner
to prevent
use
of the same
number
on
articles
with the same
drawing
and/or
part number.
a.
Raw
Material
(1)
Identification
Requirement.
Raw
material
will
be identified
by lot and/or
serial number,
and will be supported
by documented
laboratory
analysis
data, including
the related
melt
and/or
heat
data as required
by the material
specification.
(2)
Maintenance
tained
on
facturing
duced.
b.
the
of
Identification.
material
and
cycle
Procured
accordance
through
c.
Identification
where
Article
Identification
records
to a
a higher
level
Identification.
with
the
be
the
mainmanu-
ofidentificationis
Articles
requirements
will
in
point
of
will
intro-
be
paragraphs
identified
8.2,
in
8.2.I,
8.6.4.
(I)
Supplier
Identification.
Individual
supplier
on
articles
and
records
in a unique
and
that
will
conform
to contractor
specification
trol
drawing
requirements.
(2)
Supplier
multi-plant
vidually
identified
traceability,
when
to the
procuring
aries,
or affiliates.
Fabricated,
(I) Introduction
Processed,
of
manufacturing
on
the
articles
required.
This
contractor
from
and
locations
will
be
indiand
records
to assure
includes
articles
supplied
other
segments,
subsidi-
Assembled
Identification
will
be identified
acceptable
manner
or
source
con-
Article
Method.
Identification.
Identification
will
be
introduced
at
the
proper
point
in the
manufacturing
cycle
as indicated
by design
drawings,
technical
and/or
controlled
documents.
Controls
and
initiation
of actual
identification
will be performed
procedures.
as
required
by
approved
8-4
I
i
manufacturing
Identification
for
T ra c eability
(2) Control
its own
(3)
the
NONCONFORMING
8.4.1
8.4.2
REPAIR
be
8.4.3
same
lot or
MATERIAL
of
split
AND/OR
USE
related
split lot.
IDENTIFICATION
GENERAL.
Nonconforming
fied
in accordance
withparagraph
ing
specific
identification
is
a.
8.5
of Split Lots.
Each
portion
specific
identification.
Maintenance
of
Identification.
Identification
will
be
maintained
on
articles
and
records
in a sequential
manner
to
enable
rapid
traceability
back
to the original
identification
and
forward
to determine
the locations
of all like articles
from
8.4
8.5.3
AS
material
8.3
will
be
required
above.
In addition,
to
be
the
identifollow-
necessary:
IS
Nonconforming
articles
having
additional
different
from
the normal
manufacturing
specific
identification.
operations
procedure,
performed,
will have
Nonconforming
articles
will be positively
identified
both on the
article and the manufacturing
documents.
This identification
will
be maintained
throughout
the life of the article
to assure
that
additional
operations
and/or
nonconformances
are
considered
in the event of a failure and analysis,
and to enable
locating
the
article
during
subsequent
inspections
and
tests to evaluate
its
effect on higher
levels of assembly.
SCRAP.
Serial
numbers
of articles
that are
scrapped
will be recorded
to account
for and terminate
the use of that specific
serial
number
for like articles.
The
lot number
of scrapped
material
or
articles
will
be
recorded
and
become
part
of the permanent
traceability
record.
LIMITED-LIFE
ARTICLE
CONTROL
8.5.1
GENERAL.
These
provisions
establish
the
identification
ability
requirements
for
the
utilization
and
control
of
articles
which
do
not
fully
meet
design,
quality,
and/or
specifications
and
must
be used
where
unusual
measures
sary
to meet
schedules
for
testing
hardware.
8.5.2
APPLICABILITY.
These
requirements
will be applied
and implemented
on all flight hardware,
man-rated
equipment,
ground
support
equipment,
do not meet
all
poses.
8.5.3
IDENTIFICATION
be required
that
and
spare
requirements,
parts
to assure
that
are
used
only for
FOR
TRACEABILITY
all articles
in the
for
tracelimited-life
reliability
are
neces-
any articles
that
limited
test pur-
REQUIREMENTS.
limited-life
category
It will
that are
8-5
8.5.4
Identification
used
for
limited
test
purposes
are
and
can
be removed
and replaced
and/or
actual flight performance.
prior
identifiable
DATA
and
traceable,
testing
a.
Identification
Method.
Identification
for
traceability
will be
established
on each
article
by uniquely
marking
in a manner
that will make
the article
visually
outstanding
individually
and
when
assembled
with
other
articles.
Each
higher
level
of
assembly
must
be
marked
in a unique
manner
to identify
visually
that
it contains
such
an article,
up to and including
the end item.
b.
Identification
Records.
Records
will be established,
maintained,
and
will accompany
the articles.
The
records
will specifically
identify
the
articles
and
the
next
higher
levels
of assembly
that contain
the articles.
The
records
will enable
traceability
CONDITIONAL
RELEASE
FOR
LIMITED
space
for recording
to record
the identity
TESTS
and/or
equipment,
containing
limited-life
articles
fer to another
site or location
for the performance
will not be given final acceptance
release.
8.6
Traceability
to final acceptance
of all articles,
so identified,
and
have
the removal
of each
article,
and a space
of each
replacement
article.
8.5.4
for
AND
RECORD
ONLY.
Hardware
requiring
of limited
transtests,
REQUIREMENTS
8.6.1
GENERAL.
The
record
system
will have
the capability
of rapid
tracing
from
the highest
level of assembly
back
to the lowest
level
specified
for
introduction
of I/T
and
of rapid
tracing
forward
to
assure
the location
of all like materials,
articles, or characteristic
lot in order
to effect the timely
removal
from
the process,
assembly,
system,
or equipment.
The
related
data and records
will
be
adequate
to enable
analysis
of problems
to ensure
timely
and
effective
corrective
action.
8.6.2
DATA
REQUEST
RESPONSE.
Complete
data and record
retrieval
and
analysis
will be accomplished
within a maximum
period
of 48
elapsed
hours
from
the initial request
for information.
8.6.3
RECORD
OF
RETENTION.
Records
tained
for
a minimum
period
Of
has
been
accepted
by the customer
8.6.4
PROCURED
a.
Purchase
of
I/T
articles
will
be
rethree
years
after the hardware
or as specified
by the contract.
MATERIAL
Orders
and
Attachments.
Purchase
orders
will
in-
clude
reference
to engineering
drawings
and
documents
that
require
I/T,
will include
specific
instructions
relative
to data,
records,
and
other
information
that must
accompany
the shipment,
and will reference
the requirements
for data and records
to be retained
by the supplier.
8-6
Identification
b.
for
8.6.6
Traceability
Receivin_
Acceptance.
Determination
ing inspection
that all requirements
with, that all required
data
quate,
and
that the material
to the records.
c.
Receiving
number,
material
d.
Laboratory
analysis
and/or
article.
and records
identified
Records.
The receiving
date
code,
and/or
serial
or articles.
of
serial
Testing.
material
number
will be made
at receivfor I/T have been
complied
are complete
can be related
record
numbers
and adedirectly
will reference
the lot
of each
shipment
of
Records
resulting
from
and
articles
will
relate
to assure
traceability
the
testing
to a specific
to the
fabricated
and
lot
8.6.5
REPLACEMENT
OF
ARTICLES.
The
data and record
system
will
provide
specific
information
relative
to all removals
of articles
from
assemblies,
including:
(I) the analysis
and corrective
action
information,
(2) the
identification
and
disposition
of removed
articles,
and (3) the identification
of all replacement
articles.
8.6.6
MANUAL
OR
MECHANIZED
DATA
PROCESSING.
The
data
re-
quirements
of this document
may
be implemented
by the use of a
manual
data and record
system.
A mechanized
system
may
be used
in lieu of, or in support
of, a manual
system.
The format
and content will be
negotiated
with
the
procuring
agency.
8-7
Section
9.1
9:
NONCONFORMING
MATERIAL
CONTROL
GENERAL
This
section
provides
guidance
to NASA
installations
for
the review,
control,
and disposition
of nonconforming
material.
Users
must
maintain
a continual
awareness
of the
underlying
NASA
philosophy
that
defects
and
nonconformances
should
be kept
to an absolute
minimum
by means
of effective
planning
throughout
the procurement
and manufacturing
cycle
and
through
the
use
of effective
corrective
action
systems.
These
procedures
are
in no way intended
to foster
the belief
that
NASA will
accept
nonconformances
as a normal
practice.
9.2
9.3
APPLICABILITY
a.
Review
and
disposition
of nonconforming
material,
usually
through
Material
Review
Board
(MRB)
action,
are the combined
responsibilities
of contractor
personnel
and
Government
representatives
under
the
direction
of the cognizant
NASA
installation.
This
section,
therefore,
amplifies
the requirements
of applicable
sections
of NPC
200-2,
Quality
Program
Provisions
for
Space
System
Contractors,
NPC
200-1A,
Quality
Assurance
Provisions
for
Government
Agencies
and,
when
MRB
is specifically
authorized
by the contract,
paragraph
3.8
of
NPC
200-3,
Inspection
System
Provisions
for
Suppliers
of
Space
Materials,
Parts,
Components,
and Services.
b.
Where
any
conflict
exists
between
this
section
and specific
requirements
of the
contract,
the contract
shall
apply.
Similarly,
a letter
of
delegation
to a Government
Agency
will take
precedence
in case
of a
conflict
with provisions
of this
section.
MATERIAL
9.3.1
REVIEW
BOARD
MEMBERSHIP
GENERAL.
Each
Material
Review
Board
will
be composed
of one
contractor
representative
whose
primary
responsibility
is design,
one
contractor
representative
whose
primary
responsibility
is
product
quality,
and one
Government
representative
actong
on behalf
of the
cognizant
NASA
installation.
There
may
be alternates
for
each
Board
member.
The
selection
of Government
Agency
Board
members
shall
be subject
to disapproval
by the cognizant
NASA
installation,
NASA
representative,
or the delegating
agency.
Similarly,
the
NASA
installation
or its
delegated
representative
will have
the right
of disapproval
of contractor
members.
Resumes,
showing
the
qualifications
of all Govei'nment
and contractor
Board
members,
will
be submitted,
as
directed,
to the
cognizant
NASA
9-1
9.3.2
Nonconforming
Material
Control
9.4
a.
The
Design
Representative
will
have
a thorough
knowledge
the
design
requirements
of the
article
and be able
to appraise
accurately
the
effect
of the nonconformance
on those
requirements.
He will also
be responsible
for initiating
any corrective
action
falling
in the area
of design
change.
b.
The
Contractor
Quality
Representative
will
be responsible
for
obtaining
an
analysis
of
the
nonconformance
as to probable
cause
and
shall
also
assure
the
initiation
and
control
of all
necessary
corrective
action.
He
will
assure
that
the
Board
receives
a complete
and
accurate
description
of the nonconformance
in a documented
form
together
with
recommendations
for disposition.
c.
The
Government
Quality
Representative
will
pursue
an
independent
investigation
of the
nonconformance
including
the
probable
cause,
needed
corrective
action,
and the possible
disposition
alternatives.
For
a complete
list
of the duties
of the
Government
Quality
Representative
on the MRB,
see paragraph
3.6.2
of NPC
200-1A.
PROCEDURE
The
sequence
in flow
chart
9.4.1
of material
review
actions,
format
in Figure
9-1.
IDENTIFICATION
to depart
fied
as
practical,
essing.
9.4.Z
AND
from
specified
nonconforming
isolated
from
as
ISOLATION.
described
When
material
below,
is
are
shown
first
found
requirements,
it will be properly
identifor
purposes
of disposition,
and
where
normal
channels
of fabrication
and proc-
INITIAL
REVIEW
BY CONTRACTOR.
All nonconforming
material
or
articles
will
be reviewed
initially
by contractor
quality
personnel
{and
engineering
personnel
as
deemed
necessary).
This
contractor
review
will
result
in one of the following
actions:
a.
9-2
of
Scrap.
scrapped
If
the
in
material
accordance
is
obviously
with
the
unfit
for
contractor's
use,
it may be
procedure
for
Nonconforming
Material
9.4.2
Control
identifying
and
disposing
of scrap.
Such procedures
should
give
consideration
to any special
contract
restrictions
concerning
the
scrapping
of Government
furnished
material
or material
acquired
on
cost
plus
fee
contracts.
Consideration
should
be given
to
alternative
uses
of the scrapped
article for contractor
training
programs,
engineering
laboratory
work,
etc., in order
to minimize
the
financial
loss
resulting
from
scrap
dispositions.
hi
C.
Rework
or Complete
to Drawing.
If the material
is found
to be
incomplete
or lacking
operations,
it may
be returned
for completion or reworked
using normal
operations
not requiring
additional
written
procedures.
Following
such rework,
the material
will be resubmitted
to normal
contractor
inspection
and/or
test
operations.
Repair.
If correction
with
specific
repair
of the non-conformance
procedures
previously
such
repair
repair,
the
authorized
and performed.
Following
such
will be
resubmitted
to normal
contractor
inspection
de
"Use
As
may
be
material
and/or
Is."
test
All
operations,
nonconformances
and
can be accomplished
approved
by MRB,
to MRB
after
for
disposition.
initial contractor
re-
view,
are
generally
submitted
to MRB
except
for rework
or
scrap.
However,
when
a contractor
demonstrates
quality
controls which
continually
result
in a presentation
of conforming
material
for Government
acceptance
he may
be contractually
authorized
to make
"use
as is" dispositions
of occasional
nonconformances
without
formal
MRB
action.
These
nonconformances
which,
in the judgment
of the contractor's
design
and
quality
representatives,
are
not
of sufficient
significance
to
warrant
rework
or repair
and will not have adverse
influence
on
the usability, performance,
durability,
reliability, interchangeability, or safety of the product
maybe
authorized
by contract
for
"use as is." Such authorizations
are subject to periodic
review
by
the cognizant
Government
Agency,
or NASA
installation. Articles
dispositioned
under
these
provisions
will be _dentified
as nonconforming
in accordance
with regular
MRB
procedures.
e.
Submit
to Material
Review
Board.
When
the contractor
decides
that the defective
article or material
should
notbe
scrapped
and
the
conditions
for
rework,
repair,
or "use
as is" described
above,
can not be satisfied,
the article
or material
should
be
submitted
to a Material
Review
Board.
Articles
submitted
for
material
review
action
will be identified
with an MRB
number
and
routed
to holding
areas,
mutually
acceptable
to the contractor
and
the Government
representative,
unless
removal
to
such
an
area
is impractical
due
to size or configuration.
In
either
case,
marking
and/or
tagging
will be accomplished
in a
positive
manner
to assure
identification
as nonconforming.
9-3
9.4.3
Nonconforming
9.4.3
MATERIAL
a.
REVIEW
BOARD
As
nonconformances
Board
will:
(i) Evaluate
(z)
(3)
all
Material
ACTIONS
are
material
presented
for
material
mending
disposition
Approve
required.
the
(5) Assure
actions
to the Contracting
method
results
and
procedure
MRB
of
Officer.
for
evaluation
repair
and
a.
b.
9-4
is
recommendations
to
actions
on
individual
Periodically
review
recor4s
the supplier's
performance
action
nonconformances,
Officer
when
for details).
Officer
Officer.
RULES
OF
the
MRB
of nonconformances
to determine
and
overall
effectiveness
of his
system.
(2) Maintain
records
in such a manner
as to show
crepancies
relative to individual
MRB
action.
MRB
such
Assure
that the supplier
accomplishes
disposition
determined
by MRB
and initiates prompt
and effective
corrective
action
on nonconformances
to prevent
recurrence.
corrective
9.4.4
when
that nonconformances
requiring
Contracting
are acted upon as directed
by the Contracting
In addition
will:
(1)
the
submitted.
(including
proposed
repairs)
to the Contracting
his approval
is required
(See paragraph
9.4.6
b.
review,
Determine
or recommend
disposition
such as scrap,
repair,
or "use-as-is"
(see paragraph
9.4.5 for details of these disposition
alternatives),
or
exercise
the
option
of recom-
(4) Provide
(6)
Control
recurring
dis-
PROCEDURE
A
decision
by
the
Board
to
accept
a
nonconforming
article
"as
is"
or
that
repair
be
attempted
requires
the
concurrence
of
all
three
members.
It is
not
mandatory
that
all
members
meet
concurrently
in order
to reach
a decision,
although
any
member
may
require
the
entire
Board
to convene.
Members
of the
Board
may
call
upon
other
supplier
or Government
personnel
to act
in a non-voting
advisory
or
consultant
capacity.
In
considering
the
Board
will
the
same
article
of those
actions.
alternative
dispositions
or
recommendations,
review
records
of earlier
MRB
actions
affecting
or material
and
the possible
cumulative
effect
Nonconforming
Co
Material
Actions
tions
Control
and
of
9.4.6
decisions
the
of
the
technical
Board
shouldbebased
aspects
of
each
on
considera-
nonconformance.
The
severity
and
importance
of
each
nonconformance
should
be
reviewed
using
such
criteria
as
failure
effects
and
criticality
analyses
performed
during
the design
phase
and the mandatory
characteristics
listing as prepared
by the cognizant
Government
Agency
or NASA
installation.
9.4.5
MRB
of the
a.
DISPOSITION.
four
(4) options
"Use
As
be
usable
Is"
"as
Following
possible
Disposition.
is"
will
MRB
number,
so
levels
of assembly
and test points.
b.
Repair
are
detail
considerations
through
MRB
action:
be
Nonconforming
identified
a re-evaluation
maybe
made
as
that
as
later
at
for
material
nonconforming
three
(3)
determined
with
to
the
to the
effect
assembly,
on higher
inspection,
Disposition
(1) Nonconforming
material
which,
in the opinion
of the Material
Review
Board,
can
be
made
acceptable
by
repair
under
existing
approved
processes
or assembly
procedures
previously
authorized
by the MRB
action
for that application
will be
so
repaired.
W_nere
special
techniques
appear
to
offer the possibility
of satisfactory
repair,
disposition
may
be delayed
while
the contractor
develops
and documents
the
repair
technique
and obtains
approval
of the Board.
(2) Repaired
articles
will
be
reinspected
by
the
contractor
and
Government
Agency
personnel
to the standards
established
by
the
approved
repair
procedure.
All paperwork
related
to acceptable
repaired
articles
will be forwarded
to the cognizant
Material
Review
Boards
to insure
continuity
of records.
Unacceptable
repaired
articles
and
their
related paperwork
will be resubmitted
to the Board
for disposition. Material
which
has
received
a repair
disposition
will
be identified
by MRB
number
to permit
re-evaluation
as to
the effect of the repair
on higher
levels of assembly.
Co
9.4.6
Scrap
Disposition.
forming
material
repaired,
it will
for consideration
MATERIAL
al
When
the Board
determines
that the nonconcannot
be accepted
"as is," nor satisfactorily
be dispositioned
scrap
(See paragraph
9.4.2a
of alternative
uses
of scrapped
articles).
DISPOSITION
BY
CONTRACTING
The
fourth
option
of the MRB
tractor
request
disposition
by
dispositions
are:
(1)
Repair
cost
or
which
delivery
a repair
must
is
be
so extensive
schedule
obtained
OFFICER
is to recommend
the Contracting
will
prior
or time
consuming
that
be affected.
Authority
to
initiation
of
contract
for
such
work.
9-5
Nonconforming
9.5.1
(2)
Waiver
of
nonconformances
requirements
personnel,
(a)
by acceptance
could,
in
the
that
result
Material
of articles
judgment
Harzardous
or
or
maintaining
article is to be
Adverse
unsafe
conditions
the contractual
installed,
or,
effect
(d) Adverse
forming
versely
b.
end
for
individuals
item
into
or
DESIGN
TOR.
by
Material
Review
the
repair
responsibility
must
requirements
and
DOCUMENTATION
request.
by the
may
be
such
cases,
and
coordinate
responsible
NASA
design
representatives
with the responsible
GENERAL.
will
be
able
to
In
RESPONSIBILITY
those
instances
In
design
sentative
9.5.1
performance
or,
effect on weight
when
the weight
of the noncon=
article
is a critical
factor
and
the repair
adaffects this individual
weight
requirement.
tracting
Officer.
repair
review.
9.5
interchangeability
using
the
Board
action.
Under
certain
circumstances,
a repair
disposition
may
be made
by the Material
Review
Board
on a nonconformance
which
when
initially discovered,
would
normally
require
waiver
action
by
the Contracting
Officer.
When
it is the opinion
of the Board
that
repair
will
restore
the article
to a usable
condition
with the
nonconformance
then being
of a minor
nature,
and
the repair
is
not
so
extensive
that
contract
cost
or
schedule
will be
affected,
9.4.7
on
or
which
The
terms
"major"
and
"minor"
are
commonly
used
by both
industry
and Government
Agencies
to differentiate
between
nonconformances
of greater
or lesser
importance.
Major
nonconformances
would
be
as
defined
above,
paragraph
9.4.6a(2).
Nonconformances
which
do not affect the above
four elements
are
classed
as minor
and
are handled
through
contractor
procedures
c.
containing
qualified
in:
(b) Adverse
effect
on reliability,
durability
of the contractual
end item or,
(c)
of
Control
AND
made
RETAINED
where
the
authority,
all
without
the Board
referral
will
to the
conduct
BY
NASA
OR
procuring
NASA
CONTRACCenter
the
contractor
design
engineering
decisions
Center
design
group.
Similarly,
must
coordinate
all
engineering
contractor
design
group.
Con-
a post-
has
reprewith
the
subcontractor
decisions
RECORDS
Records
of all
nonconformances
and
their
dispositions
maintained
by
the
supplier
and
be provided
or made
availlocal
NASA
or
Government
agency
representative,
upon
In addition,
supplier
and
all
records
beprDvided
of
or
MRB
made
actions
available
9-6
will
to
be maintained
local
NASA
or
Nonconforming
Material
Control
9.5.4
Government
agency
representative,
upon
request.
In addition,
all
records
of MRB
actions
will be maintained
and available
for ready
reference.
Forms
and
records
used
to document
MRB
actions
will
be
as
those
of
a minimum:
(a) A
unique
the
supplier
and
traceable
(b) A
complete
MRB
report
(c)The
(d) A
(e)
or
date
paragraph
reference
code
of
8.4.
or
the
stamp
number
on
and
nonconforming
repair
lot
number,
article(s)in
procedures,
as
of person
the
to eliminate
(h)
The
of
nonconforming
article.
CONTRACTING
OFFICER
action
by the
Contracting
cating
the
recommendations
Agency
Contractor
of the
Material
approval
Space
or
Officer's
the
Review
ACTION.
Nonconformances
Officer
will
be documented
of the
contractor
and the
representative.
Officer
applicable.
report.
implemented
signatures
num-
accordance
(Contracting
originating
to an
serial
nonconformances
required).
the
form.
identified
action
disposition
information
each
nonconformance
The
corrective
dis crepancy.
will
also
disapproval
cause
Board
of the
mem-
requiring
on forms
indilocal
NASA
or
be
provided
for
of the request
NONCONFORMANCE
ACTION
SUMMARIES
A summary
of nonconformances
and
the
resulting
dispositions
will be
prepared
and
periodically
updated
by the contractor.
The
summary
should
also
include
a tabulation
in such
a form
as to show
recurring
discrepancies.
This summary
will be a part of the data reporting
and corrective
action
system
as required
by Section
14 of NPC
200-2
or
Paragraph
3.14 of NPC
to facilitate
a
review
actual
implementation
those nonconformances.
9.5.4
the following
(g)
Government
indicating
for
action.
9.5.3
of
the
number
to documented
(i) The
authorizing
bers.
9.5.2
of
the
contain
report
drawing
Classification
action
required/not
(f) Signature
will
MRB
description
number.
identification
ber
with
and
200-3.
The purpose
of this summary
will be
of past
nonconformances
and
to audit the
of planned
corrective
action
resulting
from
DD FORM
250. All departures
ments
will be included
in the
of NPC
500-I.
from
contractual
acceptance
DD-250,
in accordance
with
requireExhibit
XI
9-7
9.6
9.6
Nonconforming
SUBCONTRACTOR
Material
Control
MRB
This
section
also
provides
guidance
for
contractors
to whom
MRB
responsibility
is
delegated.
The
contractor
will
limit
the
authority
of
the
subcontractor's
MRB
dispositions
to nonconformances
not requiring
waiver
action
(See
paragraph
9.4.6).
Where
the NASA
installation
has
delegated
MRB
authority
to a Government
Agency
at the contractor's
facility,
the
Agency
may
be authorized
to redelegate
MRB authority
to
the Government
Agency
at a subcontractor's
location.
9-8
Nonconforming
Material
9.6
Control
0
0
0
o_
_._
_u
0
o
r...)
alli_
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
r-4
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
L ....
FIGURE
9-1.
ACTION
SEQUENCE
FOR
NONCONFORMING
MATERIAL
.I
DISPOSITION
9-9
APPENDIX
REFERENCE DOCUMENTS
The following
NASA
documents
are pertinentto
this publication.
Some
may
be
specifically
referenced
herein,
but are listed, nevertheless,
because
provide
the basic
authority
for management
of, or have technical
impact
the Apollo
Program.
NMI
4-1.1
Planning
and
Implementation
March
8, 1963.1
NMI
1052.12
NASA
- Air Force
Agreement
curement
and
Field
Service
tember
15, 1960. I
NMI
1052.15
NASA
- Navy
Agreement
Service
Functions,
March
NMI
i052.18
Department
Performance
tions,
NMI
_/
i052.38
DoD
tive
l, 1960.1
NASA
Services
Agreement
for NASA,
NASA
Projects,
relating to R&D
Functions,
for Performance
i, 1962. I
of the
Armyof Procurement
August
of
not
they
on,
ProSep-
of Field
NASA
Agreement
Administration
for
Func-
for Contract
AdministraRevised
January
15, 1965. l
NMI 5310.1
Rep0r_ing
of
tion Problems,
NMI
5320.1
Reliability
February
NMI
5330.I
Quality
grams,
NMI
5330.2
Quality
1963. l
NMI
5330.4
Policies
NMI
5330.5
Policies
and Procedures
for Training
and Certification _of Personnel
for Fabrication
and Inspection
Processes,
June
29, 1965. I
NMI
8020.3A
Manned
1965. I
NASA
P_arts and
Materials
February
15, 1964. I
Policy
I, 1961.i
Assurance
October
Status
as
Applied
to
NASA
Policy
as Applied
13, 1961. I
Stamping
Requirements,
Applica-
Programs
to NASA
August
Pro-
30,
Hand
and
Soldering
Space
Procedures
Personnel,
Flight
Flash
for
Recertification
December
Reports,
21,
of
1964. I
November
I0,
a-i
IqHB
5300.2
Apollo
Metrology
ber 1965. i
NHB
5320.2
Manual
for Evaluating
Apollo Contractor
bility Plans and Performance,
June 1965. i
NHB
7500.1
Apollo
Logistics
1965. 1
NPC
107
NASA
Basic
1964 Edition.
200- IA
Quality
Agencies,
200-2
Quality
Program
tractors, April
L/ iNPC
- /
tw-
--" NPC
Requirements
Manual,
Requirements
Plan,
Administrative
1
Assurance
June
1964
Relia-
November
Processes,
Provisions
Edition.
2
Decem-
February
for
Government
Provisions
for Space
1962 Edition. 2
System
Con-
_/
NPC
200-3
Inspection
Provisions
for
terials,
Parts,
Components
1962 Edition. 2
i"
NPC
250- 1
Reliability
Contractors,
Program
July
1963
Suppliers
and
Provisions
Edition.
for
400
NASA
NPC
500- 1
Apollo
NPC
500-6
Apollo
August
Documentation
I, 1964.1
Administration
NPG
500-7
Apollo
Documentation
Index
NPC
500-10
Apollo
Test
Apollo
Program
SE
005-001-I
Regulations,
Configuration
M-D
E 8000.005
Apollo
Flight
tion), i
M-D
E 80Z0.008
Natural
fication,
January
Manual,
Requirements,
May
Specification,
Environment
April
1,
1965.
System
1964.2
1964.1
Instruction,
Edition).
20,
April
Assignments
and
_
18,
(Latest
May
Mission
Space
MaApril
NPC
Procurement
of Space
Services,
Physical
1964.1
1965.1
(Latest
Edi-
Standards
Speci-
January
1966.1
M-D
MAS00
Apollo
M-D
lvLA 1400.006
Apollo
Program
Directive
No.
6, "Sequence
and
Flow
of Hardware
Development
and Key Inspection,
Review
and Certification
Gheckpoints",
August
12,
1965. z
Program
Development
Plan,
a-2
M-D
MA
3210.008
Apollo
Program
Directive
No.
8,
ness Review,
November
8, 1965. I
Ivl-D
M_A
1400.036
Apollo
Program
Directive
Evaluation
Requirements",
No.
June
"Flight
Readi-
19, "Apollo
6, 1966. I
Flight
M-I
MA
1450.045
Delegation
of Apollo
Parts
Responsibility
to Marshall
February
2, 1965. I
Information
Space
Flight
M-I
MP
9320.044
Preparation
Development
of
Program/Project
February
16, 1965. l
and
Plans
Revision
(PDP's),
Activity
Center,
9Z-900-000
NASA
Projects
Approval
Document,
Research
Development,
Apollo
(Latest
Edition). i
SP-6001
Apollo
SP-6003
Quality
September
RA
Apollo
1966. _
006-007-i
i Available
2 Available
activities
Printing
3 Available
USS),
20546.
from
from
and
Office,
from
National
Terminology,
August
Program
1963.3
Reliability
1963.3
Evaluation
Procedures,
E s t i m a t i o n
the Center
the Center
Administrative
Administrative
Distribution
Distribution
from
Superintendent
of
the
Documents,
Guidelines,
Point.
Point
U.S.
Washington,
D.C.
20402
for all contractors.
the
Scientific
and
Technical
Information
Aeronautics
and
Space
Administration,
and
June
Division
(Code
Washington,
D.C.
a-3
APPENDIX
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
ACE
Acceptance
ment
ADAI
Apollo
Documentation
Administration
Instruction
Apollo
Documentation
Index
Apollo
Par
t s Information
Center
Apollo Test Requirements
Critical
Design
Review
.Command
Module
Certification
of Flight
Wo rthine s s
ADI
APIC
ATR
CDR
CM
COFW
Checkout
Equip-
DCR
DoD
EMI
Design
Certification
Review
Department
of Defense
Electromagnetic
Interference
ESE
Electrical
ment
FACI
First
Article
Configuration
Inspection
Flight Anomalies
Reporting
Failure
Mode,
Effects and
Criticality Analys is
Flight Readiness
Review
Government
Agency
Ground
Operational
Support
System
Ground
Support
Equipment
Kennedy
Space Center
Launch
Complex
Lunar Module
Launch
Vehicle
Office o Associate
Admin-
FLARE
FMECA
FRR
GA
GOSS
GSE
KSC
LC
LM
LV
M
MAP
S u p p o r t Equip-
MAR
AKS
MAT
MLL
MRB
MSC
_MSE
MSF
MSFC
NASA
NHB
NMI
NPC
OMSF
PAD
PDP
B
AND
CODES
Apollo
Program
Office
R&QA
Apollo
Program
OfficeSystems
Engineering
Apollo
Program
Office
Test
Manned
Material
Lunar
Landing
Review
Board
Manned
Spacecraft
Center
Mechanical
Support
Equipment
Manned
Space
Flight
Marshall
Space
Flight
C enter
National
Aeronautics
and
Space
Administration
NASA
Handbook
NASA
Management
Instruction
NASA
Publication
Control
(Number)
Office
of Manned
Space
Flight
Project Approval
Document
Program/Project
Development
Plan
PDR
PR
R&D
R&Q
R&QA
Preliminary
Procurement
Research
Reliability
Reliability
Assurance
RFI
Radio
Frequency
ference
RFP
SC
SM
SP
UCR
Design
Review
Regulations
and Developm
ent
and Quality
and
Quality
Inter-
b-I
APPENDIX
GLOSSARY
The
reference
in
document(s)
from
erence
is
indicated,
of this
document.
The
the
documents
SP-6001,
ABORT.
degradation
return
as
Apollo
after
for
this
crew
definition
was
indicates
taken.
specifically
the
Where
to
glossarywere
as
no
fit
source
such
refthe
needs
follows:
Terminology
Quality
Program
Provisions
for
Reliability
Program
Provisions
500-i,
Apollo
Configuration
006-007-I,
Apollo
Reliability
the
each
wording
was
developed
sources
Premature
termination
of
mission
success
of
OF TERMS
parenthesis
the
definition
definition
used
NPC
200-2,
NPC
250-I,
tractors
"NPC
RA
the
which
the
primary
Management
Estimation
of a mission
accompanied
objective.
Space
for
Contractors
System
Con-
Manual
Guidelines
because
by
the
(RA
System
Space
of existing
decision
or imminent
to make
safe
006-007-I)
ACCEPTANCE.
The act of an authorized
representativeoftheGovernment
by
which
the Government
assents
to ownership
by it of existing
and identified
articles,
or approves
specific
services
rendered
as partial or complete
performance
of the contract.
(NPC
200-2)
ALTERNATE
a substitute
the anticipated
ANOMALY.
or
MISSION.
modified
capacity
Any
set
of
Deviation
from
the nominal
mission
plan,
of primary
and secondary
mission
objectives
the
system.
(RA
006-007-1)
irregularity
APPORTIONMENT.
See
recognized
Reliability
ARTICLE.
A unit of hardware
tract. (SP-6001,
NPC
200-2)
or
in flight operations.
Apportionment.
any
portion
thereof
ASSEMBLY.
A number
of parts or subassemblies
joined
together
to perform
a specific function.
(RA
ASSESSMENT.
AUDIT.
A
activities.
as a formal
See
generic
Day-to-day
audit.
Reliability
term
to pursue
within
required
by
or any combination
006-007-I)
the
con-
thereof
Assessment.
indicating
a
and
week-to-week
CHARACTERISTIC.
Any
dimensional,
trical, chemical,
physical,
or material
control
element
which
describes
and
operating
requirements
of an article.
formal
examination
monitoring
of
action
existing
is
not
R&QA
classed
visual,
functional,
mechanical,
elecfeature
or property;
and any processestablishes
the design,
fabrication,
and
(NPC
200-2)
c-1
COGNIZANT
NASA
INSTALLATION.
That
which
has direct
technical
and managerial
contract.
(NPC
250-1)
COMPONENT.
assemblies,
the operation
major
organizational
responsibility
for
unit of NASA
system
under
the
A part,
assembly,
or combination
of parts,
subassemblies,
or
usually
self-contained,
which
performs
a distinctive
function
in
of the overall
equipment.
A "black
box".
(NPC
200-2,
NPC
250-1)
CONDITIONAL
RELEASE.
Allows
the processing
with
only
partial
performance
to requirements
additional
requirements
that must
be completed
plete
performance
to contract.
CONFIGURATION.
The
technical
and
cate,
test,
accept,
operate,
maintain
equipment.
(NPC
500- 1)
physical
and
of hardware
and requires
before
acceptance
description
logistically
or equipment
stipulation
of
as a com-
required
to fabrisupport
systems
or
CONTRACT.
The
contractual
agreement
formally
executed
by the Government
and the prime
contractor
which
requires
performance
of services
and/or
delivery
of a product
at a cost
to the Government,
in accordance
with terms
and
conditions
set forth
therein,
and which_
in addition
to the terms
and conditions
thereof,
includes
by reference
or otherwise,
specificationst
drawings,
exhibits,
and
other
data
necessary
to its proper
performance.
(NPC
200-2,
NPC
250- 1)
CONTRACT
SCHEDULE.
describes
the articles
or
be confused
with
contract
CONTRACTOR.
corporation
(or
the United
States.
That
portion
of a Government
prime
contract
services
desired
for that particular
contract.
time-schedule
or delivei'y
schedule.
{NPC
"Contractor"
any
combination
(NPC
250-1)
CREW
SAFETY.
Safe
return
is completed.
(KA 006-007-1)
CRITICAL
FAILURE.
results
in mission
loss
CRITICAL
will result
PART.
inmission
DATE
CODE.
may
consist
DEFECT.
ments.
DEGREE
shall
be
A
of
Any
(SP-6001)
means
any
of these)
of all
crew
person,
which
is
members
Any
failure
which
results
or abort.
(NPC
500-10)
A part,
the failure
or abort
(NPC
number
series
which
indicates
of numbers
that
conconformance
OF
TRACEABILITY.
capable
of verifying
of which
500-10)
of the
unit
will
or
in loss
result
not
of life
in loss
the
The
depth
to which
the identitF
of an article
with
and/or
which
of life
specified
the
retrievable
or lot of articles.
or
with
mission
and/or
date in code.
A date
day,
week,
months
or
of product
DESIGN
SPECIFICATION.
A document
prescribing
in designing
a ]_rticular
componerrt,
subsystem,
or
criteria
include
performance
requirements
under
c-2
partnership,
company
a party
to a contract
whether
a specific
indicate
which
Not to
200-2)
code
year.
require-
records
criteria
to be satisfied
system
(or part).
Typical
specified
environments
interface
factors,
requirements,
and
size, weight,
apportioned
reliability
ruggedness,
goal
(with
safety
definition
margins,
derating
of failure).
(NPC
250-11
DESIGNATED
REPRESENTATIVE.
An
individual
(such
as
a NASA
plant
representative),
firm
(such
as an assessment
contractor),
or Government
Agency
designated
and authorized
by NASA
to perform
a specific
function(s)
relative
to the
contractor's
reliability
effort;
e.g.,
monitorship,
assessment,
design
review
participation,
and/or
approval
of certain
documents
or
actions.
(NPC
250-1)
DEVIATION.
A specific
authorization,
from
a
particular
requirement
of
(NPC
200-2)
DISCREPANCY.
See
granted
specifications
before
or
the fact,
to depart
related
documents.
Defect,
DISPOSITION.
The
documented
decision
to rework
or repair
a specific
nonconformance
on the specific
article(s),
or toacceptfor
use the article(s)
containing
a specific
nonconformance
or to scrap
or otherwise
disallow
the use
of the article
in its intended
application.
END
ITEM.
A space
system
or any of its principal
system
or subsystem
elements,
e.g.,
launch
vehicle,
spacecraft,
ground
support
system,
propulsion
engine,
or guidance
system.
Also,
articles
covered
by major
subcontracts
where
NPC
200-2
is invoked
by the NASA
installation
or by a system
prime
contractor.
Also,
articles
which
will
be delivered
direct
to a Government
installation
or provided
as GFP
to a contractor.
(NPC
200-2)
EQUIPMENT.
of performing
FAILURE.
perform
One
or more
assemblies,
or
a complete
function.
(SP-600.1)
The proven
inability
of a system,
required
function
during
test,
its
FAILURE
ANALYSIS.
in order
to determine
at a course
of corrective
RA 006-0071)
FAILURE
MODE,
sub-system,
operation
or
of items,
AND
CRITICALITY
capable
component
or part
end use.
(SP-6001)
The
study
of a specific
failure,
which
the circumstances
that caused
the failure
action
that willprevent
its recurrence.
EFFECT
FAILURE
MODE
interrelationships
tions
of operation
tion and mechanism,
a combination
to
has occurred,
and to arrive
(NPC
250-1,
ANALYSIS.
ANALYSIS.
The study of a space system
and working
of the parts
thereof
under
various
anticipated
condi(normal
and abnormal)
to determine
probable
locaby which
failures
wil! occur.
(NPC
250-1).
FAILURE
EFFECT
ANALYSIS.
Study
of the
potential
failures
which
might
occur
in any
part
of a space
system
to determine
the probable
effect
of each
on all other
parts
of the system
and on probable
mission
success
(NPC
250-1).
c-3
" FAILURE
CRITICALITY
ANALYSIS.
Study
of the potentialfailures
which
might
occur
in any
part of a space
system
in relation
to other parts
of
the system
to determine
the severity
of effect of each failure
in terms
of a probable
resultant
safety
hazard,
unacceptable
degradation
of performance,
or loss of mission
of a space
system.
(NPC
250-I)
FLIGHT
ASSURANCE
TEST.
Atestorseriesofteststo
ascertain
that an
of flight hardware
meets
specified
environmental
and performance
established
to confirm
that the specimen
in question
is flight-worthy.
item
criteria
Flight
assurance
tests are
conducted
at the component,
subsystem
or system
level
on specimens
of hardware
which
have not been previously
subjected
to severe
test or handling
treatments,
but which
are identical
to the qualification
test
specimens
in all physical
respects
and
in the methods
and controls
used
in
their fabrication.
(NPC
Z50-1)
HARDWARE.
or function.
HUMAN
criteria
factors.
The
physical
(SP-6001)
objects,
ERROR.
An
human
action
of acceptability,
or is based
(RA-006-0071)
HUMAN-INDUCED
FAILURES.
personnel
to accepted
and/or
commission,
such as improper
etc.; insufficient
or improper
ignorance;
or sabotage.
IDENTIFICATION
code,
or
combined
article,
assembly,
process,
torical
matched
data.
distinguished
their
that is outside
previously
on an incorrect
interpretation
capability
established
of a set of
(For
Traceability).
A controlled
serial, lot number,
date
serial
and
lot number
or
date code
which
relates
the
model,
or
system
to a particular
lot of raw
material,
date, receiving
data, calibration
operating
time,
The
examination,
including
testing,
to determine
conformance
to contract
INSPECTION
AGENCY.
A Government
Agency,
of the Government,
to determine
that contracted
to technical
from
Failures
attributable
to non-compliance
of
authorized
procedure,
either by omission
or
maintenance,
handling,
storage,
preservation,
direction; lack of safety precautions;
negligence;
manufacturing
data,
cure
record,
inspection
or test
articles,
expiration
date,
INSPECTION.
and services
as
requirements.
(NPC
date, purchased
data, assembly
X-ray,
or other
of contract
requirements.
lot, hisprocess,
pertinent
work,
articles,
(NPC
200-2)
or an agency
acting
articles and services
on behalf
conform
200-2)
INTERFACE.
The junction
points or the point s within or between
systems
or
subsystems
where
matching
or accommodation
must
be properly
achieved
in
order
to make
their operation
compatible
with the successful
operation
of all
other
functional
entities
in the space
vehicle
and
its ground
support.
(NPC
200-Z)
LAUNCH
specified
c-4
AVAILABILITY.
launch
window.
(RA
The
probability
006-007-i)
of
the
space
vehicle
meeting
LIMITED
LIFE
tion,
nonqualified
of a new
design
LIMITED
formed
LOT
articles
prior
ARTICLES.
All
articles
having
for
the
application,
and/or
are
or for
experimental
purposes.
TESTS.
Those
test
to final
acceptance
NUMBER.
that
are
A
number
produced
performed
and
release.
which
concurrently
a known
degradation,
deviabeing
used
for
development
using
identifies
and
limited
raw
are
life
material
identical
articles,
in
or
every
per-
a group
respect.
of
MAINTAINABILITY.
The
quality
of the
combined
features
of equipment
design
and
installation
that facilitates
the
accomplishment
of inspection,
test,
checkout,
servicing,
repair,
and
overhaul
with
a minimum
of time,
skill, and
resources
in the planned
maintenance
environments.
(NPC
200-2,
NPC
250- I)
MAJOR
COMPONENT.
A component
whose
reliability
larly
critical
to
the
reliability
of
the
subsystem
used
and
which
is designated
as a major
component
Program
Plan
for
the
contract.
(NPC
250-1)
MAJOR
SUBCONTRACT.
A subcontract
of a major
component
(or subsystem,
Reliability
Program
Plan. (NPC
250-i)
MALFUNCTION.
(SP-6001)
Failure
MANUFACTURING
manufacturer
intends
MATERIAL
REVIEW
board
established
forming
demanded
MODEL.
having
system
of
PROCESS.
to use
product
(regardless
or system)
to
give
is
satisfactory
and
performance.
methods
that the
(MRB).
A
formal
Contractor-Government
or
recommend
the disposition
of noncon-
articles
or
material.
One
or more
by volume
and diversity
of operations.
An
analytic
or
the
property
that
in the
characteristics
particuwhich
it
Reliability
The
equipment,
tooling
in production.
(SP-6001)
BOARD
determine
to
in
is considered
or
system
in
the
approved
physical
analogue
operations
with
of interest.
MRB's
may
or
representation
the
model
duplicate
(RA-006-007-1)
be
established
of the
those
as
system
with
the
MILESTONE.
Any
significant
event
in the
design
and
development
of a space
system
or
in the
associated
reliability
program
which
is used
as a control
point
for
measurement
of progress
and
effectiveness
or for
planning
or
redirecting
future
effort.
Reliability
program
milestones
should
be identified
in the
Reliability
Program
Plan.
(NPC
250-1)
MISSION
spacecraft
PROFILE.
showing
A
all
graphic
pertinent
or tabular
presentation
events
scheduled
to
of
occur.
the
flight
(SP-6001)
plan
of
MISSION
RELIABILITY
PROFILE.
A graphic
or tabular
description
of the
nominal
and
contingent
mission
flight plan showing
the occurrence
of scheduled events,
their sequence
and duration,
the environments
expected
to be encountered,
and other parameters
describing
the mission.
(RA
006-007-I)
c-5
MISSION
SUCCESS.
as
defined
in the
006-007-I)
The
attainment
of
mission
and
flight
NASA'S
DESIGNATED
installation
stationed
spection
agency
(NPC
200-2)
to
all major
directive
REPRESENTATIVE.
at the supplier's
whom
quality
objectives
of the mission
with no crew
fatality. (RA
A
plant
assurance
or
representative
of
a representative
functions
have
been
the NASA
of the indelegated.
NASA
INSTALLATION.
A major
organizational
unit of the NASA;
Headquarters
and field installations.
Field installations
are assigned
missions
in the NASA
space
program.
(NPC
200-2)
NONCONFORMANCE.
A
condition
of any material,
one or more
characteristics
do not conform
to the
PART.
normally
200-2,
One
piece,
subject
NPC
250-
PREDICTION.
or
to
I)
See
PROCURING
two
Reliability
INSPECTION
supplier
placing
or
AGENCY.
whether
part,
quirements.
articles
which
designed
are
use.
not
(NPC
agency
at
the
plant
of
the
of
is
requirements
prescribed
in the purchase
specifying
what
constitutes
adequate
perin question.
(NPC
250-i)
or
of data obtained
or system.
(NPC
series
subsystem,
of
or
tests
in the qualifica250-i)
conducted
system
meets
to determine
qualification
re-
250-I)
CONTROL.
to conform
QUICK
or
in
FIX.
A
the
field
repair
which
original
design.
(NPC
RECORDS.
of
by a series
of tests and
examinations
part,
component,
subsystem,
or system
test
component,
(NPC
QUALITY
ASSURANCE.
necessary
to provide
satisfactorily
in actual
QUALITY
together,
200-2)
DATA
The
complete
body
of a part, component,
subsystem
TEST.
joined
destruction
Inspection
(NPC
Determination
processes
that
QUALIFICATION
part, or product
in which
specified
requirements.
Prediction.
capable
of meeting
performance
specification
or other
documents
formance
capability
for the item
QUALIFICATION
tion testing
pieces
without
a subcontract.
QUALIFICATION.
documents
and
more
disassembly
includes
specific
Documented
procurement,
stock,
test, and shipping.
A
planned
and
systematic
adequate
confidence
that the
operations.
(NPC
200-2)
A
management
to quality
made,
makes
function
standards.
usually
on
the
equipment
(NPC
the
pattern
of all actions
end
items
will perform
to
control
the
quality
of
200-2)
spot,
different
to
correct
in some
a failure
degree
in
from
test
its
250-1)
data
storage,
and
information
manufacturing,
relative
process
to
source
control,
c-6
IN
control,
inspection,
RECURRENCE
CONTROL
ACTION.
The corrective
or
minimize
the possibility
of failure
in follow-on
failure causes.
REDUNDANCY
(of
Design).
The
use
ing
a given
task or function
where
failure of the system.
(NPC
250-1)
REDUNDANCY
(NPC
250-
(of
Duplication
or
than
one
fail before
extensive
means
of accomplishthere is an over-all
overlapping
of
effort.
I)
RELIABILITY.
part
nated
Effort).
of more
all must
The
probability
that
will perform
its required
functions
time
and for a specified
operating
system,
under
period.
subsystem,
component,
defined
conditions
(NPC
200-2,
NPC
or
at a desig250-i)
RELIABILITY
APPORTIONMENT.
The
assignment
(by derivation
from
the
contractual
reliability
requirement)
of reliability
goals to systems,
subsystems,
and
components
within
a space
system
which
will
result
in meeting
the
over-all
contractual
reliability
requirement
for the space
system
if each of
these
goals is attained.
(NPC
250-i)
RELIABILITY
ASSESSMENT.
bility
of a system
or
mathematical
modeling,
hardware,
and some
use
RELIABILITY
field
confidence
reliability
An analytical
determination
of numerical
portion
thereof.
Such
assessments
usually
use of directly
applicable
results
of tests on
of estimated
reliability figures.
(NPC
250-I)
DEMONSTRATION.
Statistically
level,
to
demonstrate
that
requirement.
(NPC
an
designed
item
testing,
meets
the
reliaemploy
system
with
speciestablished
250-1)
RELIABILITY
ESTIMATION
A determination
of the reliability of a system
or portion
thereof
utilizing either direct measurement
or modeling
techniques
and appropriate
apportionment,
prediction,
or assessment
data. (RA 006-007-i)
RELIABILITY
associated
with
phase
to perform
LOGIC
DIAGRAM
A
network
depicting
specific
equipment
operating
during
a required
function.
(RA 006-007-i)
the
success
a defined
mission
paths
sub-
RELIABILITY
PREDICTION
An
analytical
estimation
of numerical
reliability
of a system
or
portion
thereof
similar
to a reliability assessment,
except
that the prediction
is normally
madeinthe
earlier
design
stages
where
very
little directly
applicable
test data is available.
(NPC
250-I)
REMEDIAL
status.
ACTION.
The
action
to restore
an item
of equipment
to operational
REQUALIFICATION.
Repetition
of qualification
testing of an item using new
test specimens
to determine
whether
the item
still meets
qualification
requirements.
Usually
conducted
after a design
or material
change
in the item
or
when
there
is reason
to doubt
that it is still representative
of the item
originally
qualified.
(NPC
250- I)
c-7
REQUEST
FOR
tive contractors
PROPOSAL
to submit
(RFP).
proposals
formal
or bids
request
from
NASA
to prospecon a prospective
contract.
(NPC
250-I)
SERIAL
NUMBER.
blies,
and
number
which
identifies
individual
articles,
SINGLE
FAILURE
POINT.
A single item
of hardware
lead directly
to loss of life or loss of mission.
which,
SOFTWARE.
documentation
reviews,
(hardware)
Activities,
relating
capabilities
and
SOURCE
to
such
both
DRAWING.
INSPECTION
producer
of the purchased
AGENCY.
SYSTEM.
VEHICLE.
design,
suppliers.
launch
services
contract,
and
or
product
contractor
or
a
NPC
the
supplier
and
agency
at the
plant
of the actual
and
its associated
A
spacecraft.(NPC
drawing
for
the
contract
between
or individual(s)(firsttier
that
item;
a prime
200-2)
specifies
the
designed
and
contractor
subcontract)
conmanu-
to the Govrequiring
delivery
of a product
required
in connection
similar
contractual
agreement
between
a first
concern
(second
tier),
etc.
(NPC
200-2,
concern
with
or
individual(s)
a subcontractor
required
for
entering
in a
prime
the
tier
or
into
a
a contract
with
higher
than
subcontract.
his
own
(NPC
250-1)
A
contractor,
providing
articles
tract.
(NPC
200-2,
One
and
or
NPC
of
the
related
subcontractor
services
250-1}
required
principle
operational
a system
is
subsystem
is
a
be an organized
reporting
system.)
the
major
and
functioning
services
first
major
functioning
disciplined
(NPC
200-2,
=
c-8
identifies
I)
prime
services
Ordinarily,
larly,
a
may
also
a failure
vehicle
and/or
or a
another
the
for
SYSTEM.
hardware
and
their
200-2)
requirements
formal
concern
SUPPLIER.
services
and
of equipment
consisting
of
launch
vehicle(s),
equipment,
and
test hardware,
used
in ground
and
maintaining
space
vehicles
or spacecraft.
test
SUBCONTRACTOR.
200-2,
(NPC
DRAWING.
and
another
performance
of
with
the
prime
tier
subcontractor
250-
that
Inspection
CONTROL
SUBCONTRACT.
ernment
and
NPC
analyses,
objects
drawing
articles.
system
SPECIFICATION
by
studies,
physical
spacecraft,
ground
support
testing
launching,
operating
(NPC
200-2,
NPC
250-i)
figuration,
factured
the
tested
and
approved
for use in specific
equipment.
Eliminates
of the item without
prior testing and approvals.
(SP-6001)
SOURCE
SPACE
as
if it fails, would
functions.
CONTROL
part
number,
substitution
SPACE
assem-
equipment.
or
in
other
source
connection
with
entities
comprising
within
a project
or
producing
the
prime
the
flight
subdivision
of project
entity
within
a system.
approach
to accomplish
NPC
250-1)
or
con-
project
mission.
work.
Simi(A system
a task,
e.g.,
SYSTEMS
INTEGRATION.
The management
process
by which the systems
of a project
(for example,
the launch vehicle, the spacecraft, and its supporting ground
equipment
and operational procedures)
are made
compatible,
in order
to achieve the purpose
of the project or the given flight mission.
(NPC
200-2)
TRACEABILITY.
The
ability to trace the history, application,
use, and
location of an individual article or characteristic
lot of articles, through
use of the recorded
identification numbers.
UNSATISFACTORY
CONDITION.
cedures or accepted
standards,
WAIVER.
specified
GPO
Granted
requirements.
use
Any nonconformance
to requirements,
including defects and failures.
or
acceptance
(NPC
200-2}
of
an
article
which
does
not
pro-
meet
913-550
c-9
I
i
i
],