Inmigración y políticas de desarrollo

html. (All Category 1 projects; all Category 2 projects that have Class A or Class B payload risk classification per NPR 8705.4, Risk Classification

for NASA Payloads; and projects specifically selected by the NASA Chief,

Safety and Mission Assurance are required to do software IV&V. See NPR 7120.5E and Section 4.1 in this handbook for project categorization guidelines.)

4.1.4 Project Evolution and Recycle

A project may evolve over time in ways that require it to go back and restart parts of its life cycle. A project may evolve as a result of a planned series of upgrades, when the need for new capabilities is identified, or when the project includes reflights.

When the requirements imposed on a project significantly change, the project needs to evaluate whether the changes impact its current approved approach and/or system design and performance. In these cases, the project may be asked by the Decision Authority to go back through the necessary life-cycle phases and reviews and to update project documentation to ensure that the changes have been properly considered in light of the overall project/system performance. Each case is likely to be different and thus may not require completely restarting the process at the beginning. The decision on when and where to recycle through the life-cycle reviews will be based on a discussion between the project, the program, the Mission Directorate, and the Decision Authority. For example, a project may need to refurbish operational reusable systems after each flight, or a project may be required to make modifications between flights. A project going back through a part of its life cycle is depicted in the project life-cycle figure on the “Reflights” line (Figure 4-1). “Reflight” may involve updates of the Project Plan and other documentation.

4.1.5 Project Tailoring

Project teams are expected to tailor the requirements of NPR 7120.5 to meet the specific needs of the project. In general, all the requirements would be expected to be applicable to Category 1 projects, while Category 3 projects, for example, may only need some of the more significant requirements for success. Small Category 3, Class D projects with a life-cycle cost of under $150 million should refer to guidance on tailoring NPR 7120.5 require- ments from the NASA AA, which can be found on the OCE tab in NODIS under “Other Policy Documents” at http/nodis3.gsfc.nasa.gov/OCE_docs/ OCE_25.pdf. When a project team and its management determine that a requirement is not needed, the process for tailoring that requirement requires getting permission from the requirement owner to waive the requirement

4.1 nAsA Projects

as described in Section 5.4. This can be done using the required Compli- ance Matrix in the Project Plan, which also shows the requirement owner. Tailoring allows projects to perform only those activities that are needed for mission success while still meeting Agency external requirements and receiving the benefits of NASA policy, reflecting lessons learned and best practice. Project managers and their management are encouraged to thought- fully examine and tailor the requirements so projects perform only those requirements that contribute to achieving mission success. Requirements imposed by Federal law or external entities generally cannot be waived. Management tools to guide project managers in tailoring the requirements for their project category can be found on the Engineering Program and Project Management Division (EPPMD) community of practice site on the NASA Engineering Network (NEN). Four areas that often need tailoring are areas where (1) requirements do not apply, such as requirements for nuclear materials if the spacecraft does not use nuclear materials, requirements for a different category of project, or requirements for projects in a different cost category; (2) documents can be combined, such as smaller projects, including all their control plans within their Project Plan; (3) type and timing of reviews are adjusted, such as combining reviews; (4) projects do not need to satisfy the requirement at the same level as a Category 1 project would; and (5) the intent of the requirement is met by other means, given the solution that has been decided upon.

Tailoring can also be applied at a more detailed level for both programmatic and technical areas. As an example, a Category 3 project may not need or wish to:

⦁ Develop a WBS structure and attendant schedules to the fourth or fifth level due to the increased time needed to manage to this level of detail;

⦁ Develop requirements for the fourth or fifth levels if sufficient definition exists to satisfactorily describe what needs to be developed at the third or fourth level; or

⦁ Conduct Verification and Validation (V&V) on heritage systems if the heritage systems are sufficiently understood and the changes sufficiently minor that the performance of the heritage systems will not be affected. Changes such as these typically are documented in the project’s Formu- lation Agreement and the Project Plan so that the project’s management can assess the rationale and agree to the tailoring. (See Section 4.3.2.1 for a detailed description of the Formulation Agreement.) Tailoring documented in the Formulation Agreement or Project Plan is approved when the proper authorities for those documents and the requirement holders have signed

4.1 nAsA Projects

developed to assist the project managers in achieving project mission success by establishing requirements and best practices. It is not possible to generate the proper requirements and guidelines for every possible scenario. Project managers and their teams need to use good common sense when developing their plans, processes, and tools so that they can be effective, efficient, and successful with acceptable risk. Managers work with their Center and the Mission Directorate when tailoring to ensure that all parties are in agreement with the proposed approach. Table 4-2 illustrates tailoring for a small-scale, low risk, Category 3, Class D project with a life-cycle cost estimate of less than $250 million for a technology demonstration program being planned and implemented under NPR 7120.5. The example shows a summarized Compli- ance Matrix (see complete Compliance Matrix template in Appendix C of 7120.5E) that reflects coordination with the requirements owners.

Table 4-2 Example of Tailoring for small Projects

Requirement/Paragraph Comply justification Approval

Table I-4: 10. ELV Payload

Safety FC Projects that fall under the applicability of NPR 8715.7 will produce the Safety Process Deliverables as defined. Projects that do not fall

under the applicability of NPR 8715.7 will comply with NPR 8715.3 to ensure adherence to appropriate local requirements.

Table I-4: 11. V&V Report FC

Table I-4: 12. Operations

Handbook T List of Operations Procedures for launch site, on-orbit verification and checkout, and demonstration operations to be provided as

part of review briefing package

OCE

Table I-4: 13. Orbital debris, 14. End of Mission Plan, 15. Mission Report, 1. Formulation Agreement, 2. Project Plan

FC

Table I-4: 3. Plans for work T Sufficient detail to be provided in the project IMS tasks/

milestones to define plans for work to be accomplished in the next phase.

OCE

Table I-4: 4. Performance

against plan FC

Table I-4: 5.a. techn, cost,

schedule, and safety risks T To be provided in review briefing package. OCE

Table I-4: 5.b Staffing

requirements and plans T To be provided as part of the basis of estimate that goes along with the cost and schedule package generated for each life-cycle

review.

OCE

Table I-4: 5.c Infrastruc- ture plans and business case

FC

NA

(FC) Infrastructure requirements/plans—To be provided as part of the basis of estimate that goes along with the cost and schedule package generated for each life-cycle review. Project to coordinate infrastructure plan content with affected Center(s). (NA) Business Case Analysis & AFUQ–Deemed not necessary for Class D missions due to low dollar value.

OSI (EMD) Approved OCFO Approved Table I-4: 5.d Schedule,

5.e. Cost estimate, 5.f. BoE

FC Basis of Estimate provided as part of the cost and schedule pack-

4.1 NASA Projects

Table 4-2 Example of Tailoring for Small Projects

Requirement/Paragraph Comply Justification Approval

Table I-4: 5.g. JCL NA JCL not required for projects with an LCCE less than $250 million CAD approved

Table I-4: 5.h. External Cost and Schedule com- mitments

NA This requirement is Not Applicable since this product is

applicable only to projects with LCCs of $250 million or greater (which would have an externally reported baseline).  The projects covered under this compliance matrix will establish an LCC baseline at KDP C in accordance with requirements 2.4.1, 2.4.1.1, 2.4.1.2, 2.4.1.3, and 2.4.1.5 of this compliance matrix.

OCE OCFO

Concurred with N/A and rationale

Table I-4: 5.i. CADRe T Program office is working with HQ/CAD to produce a CADRe

for projects where it is feasible as agreed to by HQ/CAD and the program office.

A tailored CADRe format for technology missions, as defined by HQ/CAD, is used.

CAD approved

Table I-5: Project Plan Control Plans

FC Projects were compliant with all control plans except for the

three exceptions below.

Table I-5: 6. SEMP T Plan included in project plan section. Approach summarized in

review briefing package. OCE

Table I-5: 12. Environ-

mental Management Plan T Plan included in project plan section. Approach summarized in review briefing package. Project to coordinate plan content

with affected Center Environmental Manager. Plan content to be consistent with the form provided by OSI.

OSI (EMD) Approved Table I-5: 13. Integrated

Logistics Support Plan T Primarily concerning Packaging, Handling Storage, Transporta-tion, and GSE. Plan included in project plan section. Approach

summarized in review briefing package. Project to coordinate plan content with affected Center logistics manager.

OSI (LMD) Approved

2.2.8–2.3.1 FC

2.3.1.1 ABC NA Projects have an LCCE less than $250 million. OCE concurred

OCFO Approved

2.3.2–2.4.1.5 FC

2.4.1.6 5 Tightly coupled programs shall document their life-cycle cost estimate…

NA Not applicable to projects. This requirement is for programs. OCE concurred

2.4.1.7, 2.4.2 FC

2.4.3–2.4.4.2 NA Not applicable for projects with an LCCE less than $250 million. CAD approved

3.3.1–3.7.1 FC

Note: The tables and sections referenced here are in NPR 7120.5E.