Application Guide for Tailoring MIL-STD-1521

100.1 Scope. This appendix sets forth guidance for the cost effective application of the requirements of this standard when this standard is contractually invoked during the acquisition process. This appendix serves as guidance for the activity responsible for the preparation of contract requirements and does not form a part of the contract.

100.2 Purpose. The guidelines contained herein implement the Department of Defense Directive 4120.21, Specification and Standards Application, which requires all DOD components to apply selectively and tailor military specifications and standards prior to their contractual imposition and:

? a. Eliminate inapplicable and unnecessary requirements.

? b. Provide for adding/modifying necessary technical review and audit factors not included in MIL-STD-1521.

? c. Eliminate redundancy and inconsistency with other contract specifications and standards.

100.3 Objective. The objective of this guide is to establish the applications and limitations of tailoring MIL-STD-1521. MIL-STD-1521 is not a stand-alone document. It is dependent upon the work effort specified in the contractual requirements (e.g., SOW, etc.) The tailoring of specifications should take place in all phases of military procurement, but is especially applicable to the initial stages of solicitation package preparation and contract negotiation. Depending upon the type of end-item(s) under procurement, the reviews and audits outlined by MIL-STD-1521 may or may not be required for all programs.

100.4 Considerations for Tailoring.

100.4.1 Relationship to the Statement of work.
The Program Manager must keep in mind that technical reviews provide visibility into the contractor's implementation of the work effort required under the terms of the SOW and the contract to assure timely and effective attention to the technical interpretation of contract requirements.
The key to tailoring MIL-STD-1521 is to match the MIL-STD-1521 requirements against the details of the applicable SOW/Contractual task requirements. It will become immediately obvious that MIL-STD-1521 may contain technical review factors that are not applicable to the contract under consideration. (For example, if a contract does not include computer software, all references to the review of Computer Software materials in MIL-STD-1521 will not apply.) When MIL-STD-1521 is used, then a task containing the applicable requirements will be specified in the SOW. Review factors not set forth in MIL-STD-1521 but considered necessary because of the nature of the particular program should be added in the SOW. By carefully going through this evaluative process the technical review and audit requirements will become program specific rather than an all purpose document to be continually negotiated during contract performance.

100.4.2 Elimination of Redundancy and Ambiguity.
While MIL-STD-1521 is the broad program document for technical reviews and audits, other standards in existence also require technical reviews or audits. For example, MIL-STDs for reliability, maintainability, system engineering and others can require reviews and/or audits. Review of these aspects of the design would also be required under MIL-STD-1521; therefore, if such standards are contractually stipulated together with MIL-STD-1521, the SOW should include a provision to show how and whether the technical review requirements of these other standards can be combined with technical reviews/audits in MIL-STD-1521. Combining reviews does not nullify other MIL-STD(s), "Plans", etc, which contain requirements for reviews/audits. The contract should require the minimal integrated, comprehensive technical design review effort that will provide the desired visibility and assurance of contract compliance.

100.4.3 Contractor Participation in Tailoring.
When requiring a particular review or audit, it is important that the topics to be reviewed are aligned to the program requirements. Therefore, the offerer should be given an opportunity to recommend changes and identify topics/items he considers appropriate. The program office should request, in the instructions for proposal preparation, that the offerer recommend the MIL-STD-1521 topics/items and their related details to be covered at the various reviews or audits required by the SOW. This will allow the offerer to tailor the topics/ items and details by additions and deletions for the particular review/audit. In addition, it must be recognized that effective tailoring requires several points of review. The requirement, however, for the review/audit must be finalized prior to contract award.

100.4.4 Complexity

? a. System/Subsystem/subsystem/configuration item complexity and type of program is central in determining both the need for and the number of such reviews. When developing a small non-complex system some reviews may not be required, or, if required, may be limited in Scope. The tailoring procedures discussed earlier should result either in the exclusion of MIL-STD-1521 or in a tailored MIL-STD-1521 that reflects a limited scope technical review effort. Conversely, in a very complex development the review process will increase in levels and numbers of reviews.

? b. In addition to the above, the degree of application is dependent upon the configuration item state of development (example, new design vs. commercially available) or the degree of any modifications, if involved. For example: a newly developed item may require the majority of the review topics/items and audits, while a commercially available configuration item with the appropriate documentation, i.e., verified test results, specifications, drawings, etc. may require reviews or audits limited to its application to the program and its interfaces. In the case of modified designs one must consider the degree and effect of the modifications. Reviews and audits may be limited to the modifications and their interfaces.

100.5 Scheduling of Technical Reviews and Audits.
The schedule for Technical Reviews and Audits is extremely important. If they are conducted too early, the item for review will not be adequately defined. Conversely, if the review is too late, the program commitments could have been made erroneously, and correction will be both difficult and costly. For planning purposes, a good method for scheduling technical reviews is to relate them to the documentation requirements. For example, schedule a PDR after the hardware Development Specification or Software Design Description and Software Test Plan are available, since the essence of the PDR is to assess the contractor's approach to meeting these requirements of these documents. Scheduling of audits are dependent not only on documentation availability but also on hardware/software availability, and the completion of the acceptance qualification tests. Table 1 contains a list of the primary documentation associated with each review or audit and the estimated time phasing:

100.6 Tailoring Guidance for Engineering Data Reviews. Engineering Data reviews are conducted as part of the formal design reviews/audits in MIL-STD-1521. Use Figure 5, Review Checklist for Engineering Data, to help prepare for and conduct these reviews and audits. Note discrepancies on Figure 6, Engineering Data Discrepancy Sheet. Because reviews and audits are successively more detailed, more items on the checklist will apply as the program progresses. When all reviews and audits are completed, all items on the tailored checklist should be accomplished.

TABLE 1

SCHEDULING REVIEWS AND AUDITS

Date: 2016-06-13; view: 42