NHB5300.

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

.........................

Level I - Apollo Program

Office .................
Level II - Center Apollo Program
Offices ...........
Level IIIA- Government
Agencies
.........
Level III/IV - Contractors/Subcontractors
[. [ [. [ ]..
Procedures

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

. . . . . . ................

Identification and Isolation .....................

Initial Review
by Contractor ....................
Material Review
Board Actions
MRB
Rules of Procedure
MRB
Disposition
Material
Disposition by Contracting
Officer .........
Design Responsibility
Retained by NASA
or Contractor

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

RELIABILITY AND QUALITY

REQUIREMENTS

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

of need for redundancy

250-1,
NPC
500-I)
for

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

Reliability and Quality

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

Reliability and Quality

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

Reliability and Quality Assurance

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

test and checkout

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

of final inputs to FRR.

(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

200 and 250

Series
Requirements

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

for the pro-

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

Reliability and Quality

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

(only those items

in defect
reporting)

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

FIGURE 3-1. RELATIONSHIP

3-2

Level
I

"t co.

or

Leve ls

III/IIIA

t' nlI
_J

Agency

Plans

l aove=mentl

OF PLANS AND APPROVAL REQUIREMENTS

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

for the Apollo

proprocedures
as ex-

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:

RELIABILITY AND QUALITY

STATUS REPORTING

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:

RELIABILITY AND QUALITY

AUDITING

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

NASA resiand sup-

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

and Quality As surance Auditing

ACTIVITY
PERFORMING
AUDIT

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

CPM, GA, CTR 3,

Code MAR

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

with the 1"equirements

for the review
and concontract
requirements;
and the assessment
and
of contractor
R&QA
functions
and activities.
requirements
standards
and

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

the first of October

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.

Reliability and Quality

6.5

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

follow-up action, or the severity of the problems

encountered
during
the audit so indicate, a formal visit and another audit will be employed to ensure
the successful accomplishment
of the prescribed
corrective action.
6.5.4 REPORTS
OF FOLLOW-UP
ACTIONS.
Reports
of formalfollow-up
actions
or re-audits
will be issued
in the same
manner
and general
format
described
in the preceding
paragraph
6.4.

6-9

Section 7: PARTS, MATERIALS

COMPONENTS
PROGRAM
7.1

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.

will be prein accord-

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

Identification for Traceability

8.2.3 LIMITATIONS.
No statement
a waiver
to the contractual
logistics
requirements.
8.3

REQUIREMENTS

FOR

herein will be interpreted to indicate

quality, reliability, configuration,
or

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.

Articles requiring unique

data to be recorded,
such as: reliability data, in-process
variable data under restrained conditions,
variable
test data, specific environmental
testing, X-ray, etc.

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

lot will have

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

installation or to the resident NASA

respresentative
in the contractor's
plant. Where
MRB
authority
has been
delegated
to a
Government
Agency,
copies of the resumes
of contractor representatives will be furnished to the Agency.
9.3.2 QUALIFICATIONS
AND
DUTIES.
Members
of a Material
Review
Board
will be selected on the basis of technical competence
to make
decisions and commitments
necessary
to achieve effective preventive
and corrective action and appropriate
disposition of the articles involved. Qualifications of each member
should enable him to perform
as a minimum
the specific duties described
below:

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

that the ConOfficer.

These

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

for all NASA

Government

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-

istrator for Manned

Space
Flight
Apollo Program
Office
Apollo
Program
Office Flight Operations
Apollo
Program
Office Program
Control

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

Request for Proposals

Spacecraft
Service Module
Special Publication
Unsatisfactory
Condition
Report

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

of tier) for procurement

and so identified in the

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

action taken to preclude

hardware
by correcting

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
],