[insert briefing type here][insert program name here]
for[insert name and organization of
person(s) to be briefed here]
[insert “month day, year” of brief here]
Briefed by:[insert briefer’s name here]
[insert briefer’s organization code here]
[insert briefer’s phone number here]
[Insert briefer’s e-mail address here]
Insert program logo in this area
Distribution Statement
Insert program
logo herePurpose of Briefing
Insert program
logo hereExit Criteria
Insert program
logo hereBriefing Outline
Insert program
logo hereConcept/Requirement
Insert program
logo here
[insert program name]Program Overview
DATE OF REPORT: MM/DD/YYYY
PM / Sponsor Cost Schedule PerformanceProgrammaticCompliance
Logistics Overall
Contact Info hereContact Info here
Description:Program Start Date: MM / YY[Insert program description here]
Issues:[Insert significant program issues here]
Key Performance ParametersKPP Objective Threshold DemoOP Avail .90 .90 .98S/W Reliability 200 hrs 200 hrs 1000 hrsS/W Mean 5 sec 5 sec 3.2 secxxxx x x x
Acquisition ObjectivesQuantity 650IOC 12 / 99Target Price (unit) $Various$M (FY XX) $610.12
Contractor DataContractor Litton DSDValue / Type $NA / GSAStart / Complete APR97 / APR03
Contractor XXXValue / Type $XX / XXXStart / Complete XXX / XXX
Cost Data ($ in M)*Cost Objective Threshold Current Est.R&D 0 0 0Proc 300.3 300.3 380O&S 250.5 250.5 276.1xxxx x x x
* Values from last approved APB
(IT) ACAT Level:MDA:
XXXXXX
Budget Source:
SCHEDULEFY by QuartersMilestones
TestingDevelopmentProductionInstallation
R&D / Studies
FY 00I II III IV
FY 01I II III IV
FY 02I II III IV
FY 03I II III IV
FY 04I II III IV
FY 05I II III IV
FY 06I II III IV
FY 07I II III IV
201
CDR
3 3
SVR
MS IIIDMS-IIB&C
FOT&E
LRIP
OPEVAL
BUDGET ($M)RDT&EProcurement
TOTALOM&N
$5.0
$17.5$2.0
$7
$20$3
FY 02
$8.5
$23$4.5
FY 03
$8
$23.5$5.5
FY 04
$7
$11$4
FY 05
$4
$9$5
FY 06
$0
$3$3
FY 07
$0
$3$3
FY 01FY 00$10.5 $10 $10 $10 $0$0 $0 $0
145
Total Program Cost*$20
$27.5$25
$72.5
*Note: Total Program Cost shown is FY 02 through FY 07
5
Insert program
logo here
Program Assessment Indicators/Program Manager’s Assessment (indicate Green/Yellow/Red, Program managers comments, an assessment based on current funding profile and current approved Acquisition Program Baseline)
Program Assessment Indicators
Performance Characteristics Green Schedule Green
Test & Evaluation Green Contracts Green
Logistics Reqts & Readiness Obj Green Production Green
Cost Green Management Structure Green
Funding Green Interoperability Green
Managers’ Assessment (for each Assessment Indicator rated Green Advisory, Yellow, Yellow Advisory, or Red).
PM:
PEO:
Program Assessment
Insert program
logo here
Program OverviewComponent Illustration
Insert program
logo here
Program OverviewCapability Enabler
Insert program
logo here
Deployed/MobileUnits
BASE
IMAFISC
PierConnections
CLINIC
TRNG CENHQ
TELEPORT/STEPLong Haul (DISN & Commercial)
TRAININGCENTER
USN/USMCLOGISTIC BASE
NAVALAMPHIBIOUS
BASE
NOC
BASE
MC AIRSTATION
End-to-End Connectivity
NMCI atthe Pier
10
Development StrategyEnd-to-End Capability
Insert program
logo hereInteroperability & Supportability
Net Ready
Insert program
logo hereProgram Schedule
Insert program
logo here
Program OverviewRecent Accomplishments
Insert program
logo here
Program OverviewSignificant Challenges
Insert program
logo hereProgram Information Status
R Required at this time, but does not exist B Requires development or updating w/in 12 months
O Required at this time and under development/update G Current, with all required approvals
Y In approval cycle. Expected Date in Comments NR Not required. Rationale in Comments
Program Information Status Date CommentsMission Need Statement/Initial Capabilities Document NR * DMS MROC 3-88 was 1988 equivalent to MNS for AIS program.Acquisition Decision Memorandum G Jul 02 * MS III for DMS Release 3.0 (MDA: ASD C3I)Acquisition Coordination Team (ACT) NR Documentation accomplished by DISA -- ACT requirement for Navy ACATAnalysis of Alternatives G May 02 * Joint AoA updated for DMS 3.0 Gold MS IIITechnology Development Strategy (TDS) O * DISA action to include in next update to Acquisition StrategyACAT Designation Letter NR * Designated Joint ACAT I by OSD listing, pre-1990 (no letter available)ORD/Capabilities Development Document G Aug 01 * DMS MROC 3-88 Ch 2 (Oct 97), revalidated by JROCCAIV Objectives NR CAIV requirements not invoked by MDA (ASD C3I)Risk Assessment G Jun 02 * Included in Acquisition Strategy and CARDProgram Envornmental Safety & Health Evaluation (PESHE) G Jun 02 * Requirement met in Acquisition Strategy documentLife Cycle Cost Estimate/Economic Analysis G Jun 02 * Navy LCCE included in Joint LCCE as part of Joint EA for DMS 3.0Affordability Assessment G Jun 02 * Part of Joint Economic AnalysisAcquisition Strategy G Jun 02 * Joint AS updated for DMS 3.0 Gold MS IIIAcquisition Program Baseline G Jun 02 * DISA APB with ASD(C3I)Information Support Plan (ISP) G Jun 02 * Joint C4ISP developed for DMS 3.0 Gold MS III and CCA complianceClinger-Cohen Compliance G Jun 02 * Confirmed by DoD CIO and ASD(C3I) in MS III ADM for DMS 3. 0 GoldTest & Evaluation Master Plan G Mar 05 * Capstone TEMP updated for upcoming DMS 3.1 OAInteroperability Certification B Oct 02 * (Part of DMS 3.0 Gold OT) DMS 3.1 Interop Cert projected Jul 05Information Security Certification and Accreditation B Mar 05 * (DMS 3.0 Gold ATO Feb 04) DMS 3.1 IATO (ATO projected Sep 05)Program Protection Plan NR Not a Navy ACAT, PPP letter not required though (FYI, no CPIs)Logistics Assessment Certification G Feb 99 Navy DMS program ILA conducted by SPAWAR 04 (Nov 98)Operational Test & Readiness Review B Apr 02 * (DMS 3.0 Gold OT) DMS 3.1 OARR scheduled May 05Test Results (DT&E/OT&E/FOT&E) B Jul 02 * (DMS 3.0 Gold OT) DMS 3.1 OA to be conducted May 05Capability Production Document G Jun 02 *Fulfilled by Joint Performance Measures Assessment, MS C ProgramLow Rate Initial Prod (LRIP) Decision G Oct 97 * MAISRC ADM for DMS 1.0Post-Deployment Performance Review G Feb 05 * DMS Post Implementation Review (PIR) Final ReportInitial Operational Capability G Jul 98 Navy DMS IOC -- NCTAMS EURCENT Area Control Center (ACC)
* Joint program document prepared by DISA or ASD(C3I)
Insert program
logo hereClinger Cohen Compliance
• Address the certification (ACAT IAC/IAM) or confirmation (ACAT ID/IC/II/III/IV) status and issues.– Add the following statement “Receipt of CCA
Confirmation/Compliance from PEO C4I and Space CIO (enter date (mm/dd/yy))”.
• State whether or not this system has been registered in the DoN CIO database.
• Discuss the Information Assurance Strategy.
Insert program
logo hereAnalysis of Alternatives
KPP ALT 1 ALT 2 ALT 3 ALT 4
KPP 1
KPP 2
KPP 3
KPP 4
LCC ($TYM)Then Year Millions
$ $ $ $
Insert program
logo here
Acquisition Strategy (Requirements and Approach)
• Source Documents:
• Approach: Single Step or Evolutionary
Insert program
logo here
Acquisition Strategy (Program Structure)
Concept Decision
Milestone A
RFP Development
Milestone B
Contract Award
Development Test/OA
Milestone C/LRIP Decision
Operational Test
IOC
FRP Decision
FY03 FY04 FY05 FY06 FY07 FY08 FY09 FY10
Insert program
logo here
Acquisition Strategy (Business Approach)
Current ContractsProgram Product or Service Total Contract ValueCompeted Contract Type Period of Performance Approved AP
Y or N FFP 10/1/03 - 9/30/04 Y or N
New Procurement Actions• Proposed [name of effort] Contract
– Competitive or Sole Source (if sole source provide justification– Contract Type:– Estimated contract value: – Period of Performance:– Acquisition Objectives:– Estimated Contract Award:– Status of Acquisition Plan:
Insert program
logo hereAcquisition Strategy (Competition)
Insert program
logo hereContracting Strategy
Insert program
logo here
Contractor Name, Contract Number, Contract Type, Short Contract Title
Contract Metrics and Performance Projections
YSolvency (Provide
comments in notes page)
PEO and Program Manager/PMS-XXX, Program Acronym, ACAT XX, Date Reported
Microsoft Excel Worksheet
Cost Schedule Variance Trends
($30,000)
($25,000)
($20,000)
($15,000)
($10,000)
($5,000)
$0
$5,000
J-98
J-98
A-98
S-98
O-98
N-98
D-98
J-99
F-99
M-99
A-99
M-99
J-99
J-99
A-99
S-99
O-99
N-99
D-99
J-00
F-00
M-00
A-00
M-00
J-00
J-00
A-00
S-00
O-00
N-00
D-00
Do
lla
rs i
n T
ho
us
an
ds
Cost Variance ($1,460) Sched Variance ($809) Mgmt Reserve $1,968 10% Thresholds PM VAC ($24,000) CONTR VAC ($22,500)
START
COMPLETE
Insert program
logo here
BudgetPEO C4I and Space
Programmed (% Obligated)
Note: All amounts in $M
Source: FY2004 DoN President’s Budget January 2003.
Y Solvency
Insert program
logo here
Budget(By Functional Area)
Programmed (% Obligated)
Note: All amounts in $M
Source: FY2004 DoN President’s Budget January 2003.
Y Solvency
INVENTORY OBJECTIVE: _____________
Insert program
logo here
Cost as an Independent Variable(CAIV)
Insert program
logo here
Testing Strategy
Insert program
logo hereTesting BudgetProgrammed (% Obligated)
Insert program
logo here
Developmental Testing &Evaluation (DT&E) Results
Insert program
logo here
Proposed DT&E Corrective Actions
Insert program
logo hereT&E Exceptions
• Waivers
• Deferrals
Insert program
logo here
Software MaturityS/W Trouble Reports (STRs)
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
- 360Days
- 270Days
- 180Days
- 90Days
- 45Days
Present
PRI 1's
PRI 2's
PRI 3's
PRI 4's
Others
S/W BuildVersion x.xx
# of STRs
Insert program
logo hereEducation & Training Efforts
Insert program
logo hereLimitations to the Scope of Testing
Insert program
logo hereTesting Waivers
Insert program
logo here
Bullets on projections for the contract completion plan (use additional slide for comments if necessary). For example:• Company is consolidating two facilities into one and reducing unnecessary redundancy, which is anticipated to
improve cost and schedule efficiency by about 5%.• Government is accelerating GFE delivery, which better supports the contractor’s performance measurement baseline
and is intended to reduce the cost variance at completion and time to complete.
Contractor Name, Contract Number, Contract Type, Short Contract Title
Contract Metrics and Performance Projections
YSolvency (Provide
comments in notes page)
Provide notations of CPI/SPI as of the current (or latest available) month of the briefing and for the previous 3 months and show the dates. If the contractor is in an OTB, the the CPI/SPI should reflect performance since the new baseline.Also, note in this chart the TAB and cumulative BCWP, ACWP, and BCWS since beginning of contract and since the most recent rebaselining (if any) of the contract.
CPI SPI (Cum Since Rebaselining to OTB)Dec 01 0.842 0.873Jan 02 0.840 0.870Feb 02 0.835 0.880Mar 02 0.835 0.890
PEO and Program Manager/PMS-XXX, Program Acronym, ACAT XX, Date Reported
Amount of overrunbuilt into the new contract baseline, if in OTB
New Contract Baseline
If EVM is not reported, PMs will still provide the rest of the information required on this slide, including contract start and completion dates.
Insert program
logo hereCPARS/IPARS/Award Fee MatrixContractor PM Name/Gov’t PM Name Date of Review: ddmmmyy
Contractor:
Program:
Contract Number:
Item: (CPAR, IPAR or AF) AF CPAR AF AF IPAR CPAR IPAR AF IPAR IPAR IPAR CPAR IPAR
Period Ending: (Mmm YY) Jan 02 Apr 02 Jul 02 Jan 03 Mar 03 Apr 03 Jun 03 Jul 03 Sep 03 Dec 03 Mar 04 Apr 04 Jun 04
Months Covered: (NR) 6 12 6 6 3 12 3 6 3 3 3 12 3
Areas to Evaluate
a. Technical (Quality of Product) EXC EXC EXC EXC
(1) Product Performance VG VG VG VG
(2) Systems Engineering SAT SAT SAT SAT
(3) Software Engineering MARG MARG MARG MARG
(4) Logistics Support/Sustainment UNSAT UNSAT UNSAT UNSAT
(5) Product Assurance EXC EXC EXC EXC
(6) Other Technical Performance EXC EXC EXC EXC
b. Schedule SAT SAT SAT SAT
c. Cost Control MARG MARG MARG MARG
d. Management UNSAT UNSAT UNSAT UNSAT
(1) Management Responsiveness EXC EXC EXC EXC
(2) SubContract Management VG VG VG VG
(3) Program Mgmt and Other Mgmt SAT SAT SAT SAT
e. Other Areas MARG MARG MARG MARG
(1) Communications EXC EXC EXC EXC
(2) Support to Government Tests EXC EXC EXC EXC
Award Fee Percentage: 85% 70% 90% 84%
N00000-00-C-0000
Contract Start Date:
Estimated Completion Date:
MMM YY
MMM YY
((Contractor Name))
((Program Name))
Insert program
logo here
e
LIK
EL
IHO
OD
e
d
c
b
a
CONSEQUENCEdcba
HighMedium
Low Medium
Risk Advisory Board:[Mr. X, PMA xxx][Ms. Y, XYZ Corp][Ms. Z, DASN YY]
• •
•
• A brief description of Issue # 4 and rationale for its rating.
• Approach to remedy/mitigation
• A brief description of Issue # 4 and rationale for its rating.
• Approach to remedy/mitigation• A brief description of Issue # 3 and rationale for its rating.
• Approach to remedy/mitigation
• A brief description of Issue # 3 and rationale for its rating.
• Approach to remedy/mitigation
• A brief description of Issue # 2 and rationale for its rating.
• Approach to remedy/mitigation
• A brief description of Issue # 2 and rationale for its rating.
• Approach to remedy/mitigation
• A brief description of Issue # 1 and rationale for its rating.
• Approach to remedy/mitigation
• A brief description of Issue # 1 and rationale for its rating.
• Approach to remedy/mitigation
• A brief description of Issue # 5 and rationale for its rating.
• Approach to remedy/mitigation
• A brief description of Issue # 5 and rationale for its rating.
• Approach to remedy/mitigation
• A brief description of Issue # 6 and rationale for its rating.
• Approach to remedy/mitigation
• A brief description of Issue # 6 and rationale for its rating.
• Approach to remedy/mitigation
•
• •
Acronyms:[IMA= Intermediate Maintenance Activity]
Program Risk Assessment
Acrobat Document
Insert program
logo hereLife-Cycle Support
Insert program
logo hereLife-Cycle Support
Insert program
logo hereLogistics Risk Assessment
e
LIK
EL
IHO
OD
e
d
c
b
a
CONSEQUENCEdcba
HighMedium
Low Medium
: Overall Assessment1: Training2: Support Equipment3: Publications4: Facilities5: Maintenance Concept6: Supply Support7: MTBF
Logistics Areas Logistics Areas (examples)4
1
2
6
5
3
7
RISK # 4
Brief description of Issue and rationale for its rating.
Approach to remedy/mitigation.
Risk mitigation funding.
RISK # 5
Brief description of Issue and rationale for its rating.
Approach to remedy/mitigation.
Risk mitigation funding.
RISK # 6
Brief description of Issue and rationale for its rating.
Approach to remedy/mitigation.
Risk mitigation funding.
Acrobat Document
Insert program
logo here
[Combat capability]
Threshold Objective
[C4I Interoperability, (Strategic, Theater, Force Coord.)]
[Endurance]
[Cost]
[Manning]
[Sustained Speed]
KPP “Sliding Diamond” ORD Compliance Status
Insert program
logo hereManning and Qualification
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
Jun 03 Sep 03 Dec 03 Mar 04 Jun 04 Sep 04 Dec 04 Mar 05
MIL Billet Unfilled
MIL Not Certified
MIL Fully Certified
MIL No DAWIARequiredCIV Billet Unfilled
CIV Not Certified
CIV Fully Certified
CIV No DAWIARequired
MIL
CIV
MIL
CIV
GOALGOAL
GOALGOAL
Insert program
logo here
Add Title Appn/Add Status/Actions TakenCommittee(s)/ Member(s)
Hokum Processor RDT&E/$ 5M HAC/SmythOSD Hold / Release Requested
Outyear Impact
Program accelerated-$5M in FY XX likely
FYXX Congressional Adds
Insert program
logo hereKey Issues
No further action required
Significant interest outside Program
Cannot be solved within the Program
Legend
Issue Due Date Response Status
Insert program
logo hereOther Decision Factors
Insert program
logo here
Desired Capability(Requirements)
• Summary description of the requirements• Source Documents:
– Examples: • MNS/ICD• ORD/CDD • ADMs – what decisions have been made and when
• Identify the approach the program will use to achieve full capability: an evolutionary approach or a single step approach
Insert program
logo here
Acquisition Coordination Team(ACT)
• The following (Program Name) ACT members have been briefed on the program status and concur with the fielding of (Program Name).
Functional Area Name OrganizationProgram Manager Acquisition PM Project Engineer Resource Sponsor Requirements Sponsor Contracts Legal Operational Test Coord./Director (OTC/OTD) PEO Acquisition Management Lois Harper PEO C4IPEO T&E John Hartford PEO C4IPEO Installation Susan Senese PEO C4IPEO Logistics CAPT Pete Bauman PEO C4IPEO Business Financial Manager (BFM) Susie Drew/Program BFM PEO C4I
Cost Analysis Mourad Yacoub SPAWAR 01-6Command Information Officer Scott Saunders SPAWAR 08
Counterintelligence Kurt Fabrizio SPAWAR 00-NCIS
Environmental Safety and Health Jerry Olen SPAWAR/NFESC
System Security/Information Assurance Dave Crotty PMW 161
Spectrum Management Mike Stewart SPAWAR 05Interoperability Certification Kevin Wu SPAWAR 05Information Support CDR Leon Stone SPAWAR 05Manpower Analysis Human Systems Integration Joe Berkely SPAWAR 05
Insert program
logo hereMajor Program Review
Readiness Sheet
Insert program
logo herePEO C4I and Space
Major Review Checklist
Insert program
logo here
PEO C4I and Space Major Review Checklist
Insert program
logo herePEO C4I and Space
Major Review Checklist
Insert program
logo here
PEO C4I and Space Major Review Checklist
Insert program
logo here
Program Manger’sOTRR Checklist
Navy Criteria for Certification: The following criteria for certification of readiness applies to all OT&E for all Navy Programs (EOA, OA, IOT&E, FOT&E). The program manager with the concurrence of the OTA, may tailor criteria listed below ( with the exception of item #1). The MDA may add criteria as necessary to determine the readiness for OT.
Yes No N/A Approval
Date
1. The TEMP is current and approved. OT prior to Milestone B shall have
an approved T&E Strategy (TES).
2. DT&E results indicate DT objectives and performance thresholds
identified in the TEMP have been satisfied for the ORD/CDD/CPD, as
appropriate.
a. If no, are they projected to be at system maturity, and do the results
indicate that the system will perform successfully in OT&E?
b. In addition, will they meet the criteria for approval at the next program
decision milestone (e.g., full rate production on completion of
IOT&E)?
3. All significant areas of risk have been identified and corrected, or
mitigation pans are in place.
4. DT&E data and reports have been provided to the OTA not less than
30 days prior to the commencement of OT, unless otherwise agreed to
by the OTA.
5. Entrance criteria for OT identified in the TEMP have been satisfied.
Insert program
logo here
Program Manger’sOTRR Checklist (con’t)
Navy Criteria for Certification: The following criteria for certification of readiness applies to all OT&E for all Navy Programs (EOA, OA, IOT&E, FOT&E). The program manager with the concurrence of the OTA, may tailor criteria listed below ( with the exception of item #1). The MDA may add criteria as necessary to determine the readiness for OT.
Yes No N/A Approval
Date
6. System operating, maintenance, and training documents have been
provided to the OTA 30 days prior to the OTRR, unless otherwise
agreed to by the OTA.
7. Logistic support, including spares, repair parts, and support/ground
support equipment is available as documented.
a. Is there any logistics support which will be used during OT&E, but will
not be used with the system when fielded (e.g., contractor provided
depot level maintenance)?
8. The OT&E manning of the system is adequate in numbers, rates,
ratings, and experience level to simulate normal operating conditions.
9. Training has been completed and is representative of that planned for
fleet units.
10. All resources required to execute OT including instrumentation,
simulators, targets, and expendables have been identified and are
available.
11. Models, simulators, and targets have been accredited for intended
use.
Insert program
logo here
Program Manger’sOTRR Checklist (con’t)
Navy Criteria for Certification: The following criteria for certification of readiness applies to all OT&E for all Navy Programs (EOA, OA, IOT&E, FOT&E). The program manager with the concurrence of the OTA, may tailor criteria listed below ( with the exception of item #1). The MDA may add criteria as necessary to determine the readiness for OT.
Yes No N/A Approval
Date
12. The system provided for OT&E, including software, is production
representative. Differences between the system provided for test and
production configuration shall be addressed at the OTRR.
13. Threat information (e.g., threat system characteristics and
performance, electronic countermeasures, force levels, scenarios, and
tactics), to include security classification, required for OT&E is
available to satisfy OTA test planning.
14. The system is safe to use as planned in the concept of employment.
Any restrictions to safe employment are stated.
a. The environmental, safety, and occupational health (ESOH) program
requirements have been satisfied.
b. The system complies with Navy/Marine Corps environmental, safety,
and occupational health/hazardous waste requirements, where
applicable.
c. Environmental, safety, and occupational health/hazardous waste
reviews and reports have been provided to the OTA.
Insert program
logo here
Program Manger’sOTRR Checklist (con’t)
Navy Criteria for Certification: The following criteria for certification of readiness applies to all OT&E for all Navy Programs (EOA, OA, IOT&E, FOT&E). The program manager with the concurrence of the OTA, may tailor criteria listed below ( with the exception of item #1). The MDA may add criteria as necessary to determine the readiness for OT.
Yes No N/A Approval
Date
15. All software is sufficiently mature and stable for fleet introduction.
a. All software Trouble Reports are documented with appropriate impact
analyses. There are no outstanding Trouble Reports that:
1) Prevent the accomplishment of an essential capability.
2) Jeopardize safety, security, or other requirement designated "critical“.
3) Adversely affect the accomplishment of an essential capability and no
work-around solution is known, or
4) Adversely affect technical, cost, or schedule risks to the project or to
life-cycle support of the system, and no work-around solution is
known.
16. For software qualification testing (SQT), a Statement of Functionality
that describes the software capability has been provided to the OTA
and CNO (N091).
Insert program
logo here
Program Manger’sOTRR Checklist (con’t)
Navy Criteria for Certification: The following criteria for certification of readiness applies to all OT&E for all Navy Programs (EOA, OA, IOT&E, FOT&E). The program manager with the concurrence of the OTA, may tailor criteria listed below ( with the exception of item #1). The MDA may add criteria as necessary to determine the readiness for OT.
Yes No N/A Approval
Date
17. For programs with interoperability requirements (e.g., NR-KPP
ORD/CDD/CPD), appropriate authority has approved the ISP.
a. JITC concurs that program interoperability demonstrated in
development has progressed sufficiently for the phase of OT to be
conducted.
18. Approval of spectrum certification compliance and spectrum
supportability has been obtained.
19. For IT systems, including NSS, the system has been assigned a MAC
and Confidentiality Level.
a. System certification accreditation documents, including the SSAA and
the Authority to Operate (ATO) or Interim Authority to Operate (IATO),
has been provided to the OTA.
20. Other(s)…
Insert program
logo here
Program Manger’sOTRR Checklist (con’t)
Navy Criteria for Certification: The following criteria for certification of readiness applies to all OT&E for all Navy Programs (EOA, OA, IOT&E, FOT&E). The program manager with the concurrence of the OTA, may tailor criteria listed below ( with the exception of item #1). The MDA may add criteria as necessary to determine the readiness for OT.
Yes No N/A Approval
Date
21. For aircraft programs, there are no unresolved NAVAIRSYSCOM
deficiencies that affect:
a. Airworthiness
b. Capability to accomplish the primary or secondary mission(s)
c. Safety of the aircrew/operator/maintainer
d. Integrity of the system or an essential subsystem
e. Effectiveness of the operator as an essential subsystem
Insert program
logo hereRecommendations
Top Related