DSOC Program Review

1
DSOC Program Review

• Acquisition and Technology Programs
• Task Force
• Mr. Nicholas Torelli, Chair
• Ms. Elizabeth Rodriguez-Johnson, Deputy Chair
• April 23, 2009

2
SAFE PRODUCTSFOR WARFIGHTERS
Safety Community Working Collaboratively
MILDEPsSafety Orgs
IE Safety Org.(ATL)
AT Safety Org.(ATL)
DSOC
DoD Acquisition Process
JCIDS Process
Warfighter Needs
1
3
ATP TF Driving Safety Early in the Acquisition
Process (e.g., JCIDS)
2
4
APT TF Approach
MAXIMIZING CAPABILITY THROUGH SYSTEM SAFETY
OUSD(AT) ATP TF Focus Areas
5
ATPTF Maximizing Capability Through System Safety
Integrating System Safety Across the Life Cycle
Management Framework
MS C
MS B
MS A
Engineering and Manufacturing Development
CBA
Joint Concepts
ICD
CDD
CPD
Materiel Solution Analysis
Technology Development
Strategic Guidance
MDD
Full Rate Production Decision Review
CDR
Sustainment
System Acquisition
Pre-System Acquisition

• Unmanned System Safety Guide
• Systems EngineeringV Model
• System Safety-ESOH Evaluation Tool
• CLE 009
• Safety Technologies in Tactical Vehicles

• System Safety - ESOH Eval Tool
• CLE 009
• Unmanned System Safety Guide
• Systems EngineeringV Model
• Safety Technologies in Tactical Vehicles

• 5 USD(ATL) policy memos
• Unmanned System Safety Guide
• DoD SOCOM JSWLSSR Guides
• Safety Technologies in Tactical Vehicles

• System Safety-ESOH Evaluation Tool
• Systems EngineeringV Model
• CLE 009
• 16 DAU Courses Updated

Completed

• DoDI 5000.02 and DAG SystemSafety updates
• Software SafetyGuide Updates
• ESOH Risk Reporting Guide
• MIL-STD-882D update
• JSWLSSP Instruction

• JCIDS Process
• JCIDS Guide
• CJCSI 3170.01F update
• 5 Assessment Tools
• Joint Safety Test Reqmts
• Guidance on use of CPLD
• Safety Technology Insertion Study

• DODI 6055.7
• 2 Assessment Tools
• ESOH Risk Reporting Guide
• MIL-STD-882D update

• JCIDS Process
• JCIDS Guide
• CJCSI 3170.01F update
• MIL-STD-882D update
• Safety Technology Insertion Study

Ongoing
6
ATP TF Maximizing Capability Through System
Safety (Examples)

• Joint Service Weapon/Laser System Safety
  Certification Process
• Proven at SOCOM (ROI 59 cycle time reduction,
  56
• cost reduction)
• Expanded DoD-wide applied on MRAP
• Barriers to insertion of high-payoff safety
  technologies (Valley of
• Death syndrome)
• Aviation Safety Technologies Report (PBR 10
  -15, PDM 1 task)
• Reporting high and serious risks at DABs, per
  DoDI 5000.02
• Guidance for Industry acquisition community
  System Safety
• Metrics Method
• Addressing safety in JCIDS process

7
ATP TF Maximizing Capability Through System
SafetyNext Years Focus ATP Master Plan

• Workshop identified DoD-wide safety gaps
• Top four gaps
• Acquisition programs are not getting/utilizing
  safety information for decisions
• Lack of OSD/Service HQ visibility on safety
  policy implementation
• Cooperation across the Services on safety-related
  issues
• Effectiveness of mishap investigation reporting
  and root cause analysis

8
Working Together
To Provide Safer Productsto the Warfighter
7
9
ATP TF Initiatives Summary

• Acquisition Tools and Demonstrations
• 2008
• Safety Into JCIDS
• Joint Service Safety Test Standards
• ESOH into DAU Phase III
• Joint Weapons/Laser Systems Safety Review Guide
• Joint Software Systems Safety MIL-Handbook
• 2007
• Develop GSA and DLA procurement guidelines for
  tools and gloves that will reduce hand-arm
  vibration disease
• Develop a web-based software tool to be used by
  acquisition analysts to perform risk assessments
  for multiple DoD programs
• Demonstration/Validation to Improve Ladders on
  Ships

10
ATP TF Initiatives Summary

• Acquisition Tools and Demonstrations
• 2006
• Noise Exposure Acquisition Tool (NEAT)
• System Safety Metrics Method (SSMM)
• ESOH Programmatic Risk Tool
• 2005
• Quantify Economic, Productivity Injury Issues
  for Human Factors in Acquisition
• ESOH Into DAU Phases I and II

11
ATP TF Initiatives Summary

• Aviation Safety Improvements Initiatives
• 2008
• Joint Fly Awake
• 2007
• Tech Support Collision Avoidance Validation Tool
  (Unmanned Aerial systems)
• Flight Data Management System Demonstration
  (OSD/Army)
• Dem/Val Rotary Wing Terrain Awareness technology
  to reduce Controlled Flight Into Terrain
• Joint Low Level Deconfliction Tool
• Joint Maintenance Resource Management (MRM)
  web-based tools
• 2006
• Mid Air Collision Avoidance Website
• AF and ANG MRM web-based courseware
• Global War on Error Aircrew Training (OSD/USMC)
• 2005
• Small Bird Radar
• Slips Trips and Falls on Ice

12
Safety into Joint Capabilities Integration and
Development System (JCIDS) ATP TF (DSOC Year 4
2008) POC Mr. Sherman Forbes
(Sherman.forbes_at_pentagon.af.mil)

• Objectives
• Develop a training package for use by the
  Services ESOH Subject Matter Experts (SMEs) to
  understand how to successfully provide inputs to
  the JCIDS as well as provide an understanding of
  the JCIDS process. The training will at a
  minimum be web-accessible.
• Justification
• Provides the opportunity to preserve combat
  capability through the identification of system
  specific ESOH requirements that can contribute to
  the reduction of mishaps that could otherwise
  damage or destroy the system itself, injure or
  kill operation of maintenance personnel and
  damage the natural infrastructure required to
  support the system.

• Anticipated ROI
• This training will allow for a timelier submittal
  of ESOH input, which can influence the JCIDS
  design in its earlier stages when it is more
  effective. This training will communicate the
  process for incorporating ESOH requirements into
  JCIDS and will assist in establishing appropriate
  and effective ESOH requirements and minimize
  repeating past mistakes in future designs.
• Next Steps
• Identify key stakeholders and SMEs for invitation
  to the workshops
• Begin coordinating the agenda and presentation
  for the workshops and conduct a planning meeting
• Continue populating the database with known ESOH
  issues and system-tailored requirements to
  address the issue

• Approach
• Conduct of multiple National Defense Industrial
  Association (NDIA) Systems Engineering Workshops
  related to establishing effective safety
  requirements for JCIDS documentation
• Conduct of multiple SME workshops to develop the
  training material and incorporate feedback on the
  JCIDS process into the training.
• Develop a detailed outline of the training
  documentation.
• Ensure training is available to end-users
• Recent Accomplishments
• Held a meeting to review comments on the database
  tool
• Reviewed the sample weapon systems that will be
  analyzed under this initiative
• Developed requirements and hazards for the sample
  weapon system to help further develop the
  database tool
• Planning for workshops continues

JCIDS represents the identification of needed
capabilities upon which acquisition programs are
built.
13
Establish Joint Service Safety Testing
Requirements Standards for the Joint Service
Safety Technical Advisory Panel (JWSTAP) - ATP TF
(DSOC Year 4 2008) POC Mr. James D. Gerber
(james.gerber1_at_navy.mil)

• Objectives
• To develop a common set of system-level safety
  testing standards for weapon/explosive systems to
  preclude unnecessary testing costs and delays in
  fielding Services system testing requirements.
• Justification
• Historically, the Services have used their own
  safety testing standards to certify that a
  weapon/explosive system is safe once fielded.
  Given the need for weapon/explosive systems to
  operate in a more joint operating environment, it
  has become apparent that similar, but duplicate,
  safety testing occurs.

• Anticipated ROI
• Reduce the time to field weapon/explosive
  systems yielding cost savings by not repeating
  similar but duplicate safety testing
  requirements.
• Next Steps
• Pursue an Army co-lead for the task
• Pursue government co-lead for Drop Test Workshop
  among SMEs at Army Developmental Test Command
  (DTC) and Army Test and Evaluation Comment (ATEC)
• Gain consensus on terms of reference
• Start planning and preparations for 2nd workshop
  on Electromagnetic Environmental Effects (EEE,
  E3) Testing

• Approach
• Perform an analysis of current system-level
  safety tests and the conduct of safety testing
  workshops with the associated test Subject Matter
  Experts (SMEs).
• Conduct analyses to identify duplicate and
  inconsistent system/subsystem/component safety
  tests among the Services.
• Coordinate various SME workshops to build
  consensus on safety tests by lifecycle mode.
• Establish common safety testing requirements for
  Service weapon/explosive systems with the
  assistance of the Service SMEs.
• Update the Joint Service Safety Advisory
  Technical Panel Manual, upon agreement and
  establishment of common safety testing
  requirements by the Services.
• Recent Accomplishments
• Preparing for the April 2009 meeting of the JWSWG
• Continued updating Microsoft Access database to
  allow assessment for a standard set of
  classifications
• Initiated joint development of definitions for
  the following terms of reference
• Safe to Use
• Safe to Dispose
• Safe and Operable

14
Integration of Environment, Safety, and
Occupational Health (ESOH) into Defense
Acquisition University Curriculum, Phase III -
ATP TF (DSOC Year 4 2008) POC Mr. David
Asiello, ODUSD(IE) (David.asiello_at_osd.mil)

• Objectives
• Provide ESOH requirements and guidance into DAU
  Curricula as a follow on to previous DSOC funded
  initiatives, ESOH in DAU Curricula Phase I and
  Phase II.
• Justification
• Integration of ESOH content in DAU curricula
  raises awareness of ESOH requirements in the
  acquisition workforce and can help ensure
  effective integration of ESOH considerations into
  the systems engineering and overall risk
  management processes.
• Overarching DoD goal is to have ESOH considered
  as part of the design and trades process rather
  than as a post design requirement that often
  requires costly retrofits or work-arounds that
  negatively impact system performance,
  supportability, safety, and total ownership cost.
  

• Anticipated ROI
• Help ensure effective integration of ESOH
  considerations into the systems engineering and
  overall risk management processes.
• Recent Accomplishments
• Confirmed courses to revise
• Commenced efforts on SYS101
• Next Steps
• Report status of changes from Phases I and II in
  DAU courseware
• Ensure that DAU does not already have process in
  place for updating courses in conjunction with
  new DoDI.
• Complete SYS101
• Begin preparing for review of SYS202

• Approach
• Review/revise materials for the following
  courses
• TST102, "Fundamentals of Test and Evaluation.
• SYS101- "Fundamentals of Systems Planning,
  Research, Development, and Engineering
• SYS202, "Systems Engineering Management, 
• SYS203, "Intermediate Systems Planning, Research,
  Development and Engineering (Part 2),"
• SYS302, "Advanced Systems Planning, Research,
  Development and Engineering (Part 1),"
• Commit experienced SMEs in the appropriate
  acquisition and ESOH discipline to review and
  make recommendations for revisions
• Coordinate with the Acquisition ESOH Lead in the
  Office of the Assistant Deputy Under Secretary of
  Defense (ESOH) as appropriate to ensure the most
  current policy and guidance is incorporated into
  the courseware.
• Deliver annotated course materials with proposed
  revision within the original document/ materials,
  as well as a written summary of proposed changes
  with the rationale for the change for each of the
  identified courses.
• Provide revised course content to the Technical
  Management Career Fields Functional Advisors
  staff for coordination with DAU.
• Update additional courseware time permitting (PMT
  352, IRM 101, CON 111, and CON 112)

15
Weapons/Laser Systems Safety Review Guide ATP TF
(DSOC Year 4 - FY2008) POC Mary Ellen Caro
(mary.caro_at_navy.mil)

• Anticipated ROI
• Acquisition Program Managers will be able to
  engage the weapon safety community once to get a
  single, adjudicated position from the Service
  safety review authorities. This will replace the
  serial path for reviews with potential
  conflicting requirements.
• Joint reviews proven at USSOCOM (ROI 59 cycle
  time reduction, 56 cost reduction)
• Next Steps
• The final 1.0 version of the Joint Services
  Weapons and Laser Safety Review Guide will be
  published on the DSOC ATP TF web site
• Execute the joint safety review process for pilot
  programs to evaluate against guide criteria and
  update as necessary
• Transition
• Draft DoD Instruction to institutionalize the
  Joint weapon safety review process has been
  developed and is being coordinated within Joint
  weapon safety community, in preparation for
  formal OSD staffing.

• Objectives
• Develop, refine, and document processes for Joint
  Service safety reviews of weapon systems and
  laser systems
• Justification
• Weapons are being used in Joint warfighting
  environments
• JROCM 102-05, 20 May 2005 states weapons and
  weapons systems will be considered joint
  systems
• Joint Service weapon and laser safety review
  process already implemented in support of
  USSOCOM this initiative expands process DoD-wide
• One Joint Service review, vice independent,
  serial reviews by each Service
• Requirements from one Service may conflict with
  those of another
• PM responsible for adjudication of conflicting
  safety requirements
• Long term interoperability benefit

• Approach
• Joint Weapon Safety Working Group (JWSWG)
  established with representatives from each of the
  Services safety review authorities, and from OSD.
  
• Develop a weapon and laser safety review guide
  for PMs to apply
• Review guide will identify data requirements that
  will meet criteria for each of the DoD Services
  safety review authorities
• Recent Accomplishments
• The .99 version of the draft Joint Services
  Weapons and Laser Safety Review Guide has been
  approved by each of the Services representatives
  to the JWSWG
• A joint meeting of the Service safety review
  authorities was held the week of 30 March to
  review two programs for application of the Joint
  review guide criteria
• Several laser systems are currently in process
  and being reviewed per the guide

16
Joint Software Systems Safety Handbook ATP TF
(DSOC Year 4 - FY2008) POC Arch McKinlay
(archibald.mckinlay_at_navy.mil)

• Objectives
• Update the 1999 Joint Services Software Systems
  Safety Handbook for todays software, complex
  circuits, and network environments
• Justification
• Software is being used in more safety critical
  functions
• Weapon and combat system developers must consider
  safety within the architecture and design of
  weapon systems
• Handbook will provide government and industry
  criteria and best practices for the development
  of software that will fulfill its mission
  functions while also operating safely

• Anticipated ROI
• Requirements for the development of safe
  software, firmware, and COTS will be available
  for system engineers and software developers to
  incorporate into the specifications and system
  designs early rather than correcting safety
  issues late in the development and testing phase.
• Next Steps
• The final 1.0 version of the Joint Software
  Systems Safety Handbook will be published on the
  DSOC ATP TF web site
• Reformat Handbook into Military format and enter
  it into the formal standards coordination process
• Transition
• Handbook will be available through ASSIST for use
  by the DoD and wider community

• Approach
• A group of software safety experts from DoD,
  other Government departments (FAA, NASA) and
  industry collaborate on best practices
• Processes and best practices for modern software
  implementation (e.g. networks, open architecture,
  system of systems) are being developed.
• Coordinate update with NATO standards updates.
• Industry collaboration and coordination
  throughout update.
• Flow charts with entrance and exit criteria for
  software safety activities being defined
• Recent Accomplishments
• System of systems chapter is in draft
• Chapter on use of Complex Programmable Logic
  Devices (CPLDs) in draft
• Graphics and process charts are being updated and
  formatted for MIL-HDBK level of development

17
Web Based Risk Assessment Tool (CREATe) ATP TF
(DSOC Year 3 2007) POC Mr. Bill Edmonds, Army
Combat Readiness Center (bill.edmonds_at_us.army.mil)

• Objectives
• Develop a web-based software tool to be used by
  safety analysts to perform hazard analyses and
  risk assessments (not compliance) for multiple
  DoD programs
• Justification
• Typically, the safety professionals perform
  hazard analyses however, the efficacy of this
  process is directly proportional to the
  experience of the practitioner in selecting the
  appropriate analytical technique, access to
  similar data from like systems and engineering
  prowess in selecting the most appropriate control
  to provide the best cost benefit risk
  reduction.
• A web-based tool offers a central repository for
  hazard analyses for multiple programs.
• Tool could be used as a basis for standardizing
  hazard tracking and risk assessment in DoD
  programs enabling Program Executive
  Offices/Program Managers (PEOs/PMs) to look
  across systems to identify trends and use
  probability elements as a leading indicators of
  mishap occurrence, providing a starting point in
  developing preliminary hazard analyses from
  similar systems, and allowing leadership to
  assess risk management for high/serious risk
  hazards across the system life cycles.

• Anticipated ROI
• Shared communication reduced duplication of
  effort if information on hazard identified and
  mitigated in System A can be leveraged for System
  B
• Program cost savings
• Consistency across DoD programs
• Facilitate informed decision making at the right
  level of authority
• Next Steps
• Complete Software Beta test
• Develop final version of software based on
  feedback
• Conduct Software acceptance testing
• Develop users manual
• Work with Services and end users to identify
  hosting solutions and long term maintenance plans

• Approach
• Conduct workshop for Services, Government
  Agencies, and Industry to refine and review
  safety system risk assessment tool requirements
• Develop and beta test tool
• Collect feedback and refine tool
• Determine host (s) and prepare tool for
  deployment
• Progress
• Computerized Risk Evaluation and Assessment Tool
  electronic (CREATe) developed based on
  requirements
• Principal purposes of CREATe are to serve as a
  user-friendly software tool for providing a
  common foundation for hazard risk analyses,
  supporting standardized hazard tracking and risk
  assessment across complex programs, and improving
  analyses of program data while reducing risk of
  data corruption.
• End Users requested to test CREATe and return
  feedback questionnaire

18
Hand Arm Vibration (HAV) Criteria for Tools
Glove Selection - ATP TF (DSOC Year 3
2007) POC Mark Geiger (mark.geiger1_at_navy.mil)

• Progress
• Conducted two half-day workshop on topic at Navy
  and Marine Corps Public Health (NMCPH) Conference
  March 21, 2009 in Hampton, VA. HAV related
  brochure and occupational exposure to HAV fact
  sheet were developed.
• GSA issued two NSNs for Low-Vibration tools
  Rivet guns powered shears
• Continued work to ensure ISO 10819 A/V certified
  glove standard and American National Standards
  Institute (ANSI) S2.70-2006 HAV exposure
  standard, used to evaluate HAV power tool
  vibration. Also providing input to Military
  Standard 1472 (DOD Ergonomics standard).
• Continue to work to get (AV) gloves cataloged in
  the Federal Supply System. Currently, the only
  manufacturers of certified ISO 10819 AV gloves
  are all non-compliant with the law regarding the
  stipulation that all assembly and components must
  be made in the US. A DLA waiver was submitted.
  Two vendors are willing to make certified
  anti-vibration gloves in US. Process has proven
  very difficult.
• The Air Force is continuing to review past
  ergonomic evaluations and considering approaches
  to updated hand-arm vibration evaluations.
• Next Steps/Transition
• Collect glove use data from depots to justify DLA
  Supply Support Request and NSNs assigned to ISO
  10819 certified anti-vibration gloves
• Identify major high risk/high use tools and major
  tool users
• ID manufacturers compliant with Title 10
  USC/Berry Amendment (Made in USA)
• Educate DoD about HAVS via outreach program.
• Modify Service-specific safety rules and
  regulations so it is mandatory to use proper
  safety gear on specific jobs
• Reclassify gloves currently in the DoD system
  that are not ISO10819 certified

• Objectives
• Develop and implement procurement guidelines for
  power hand tools and anti-vibration gloves to
  reduce the risk of permanent disability from
  circulation and nerve damage in the hands and
  arms (Reynauds Syndrome or Hand Arm Vibration
  Syndrome - HAVS).
• Justification
• Lack of procurement guidelines allows a
  preventable health risk to continue
• New ANSI standards exist and are being applied in
  commercial sector
• Low vibration tools/anti-vibration gloves are now
  available and need to become available in
  government market
• Proven relationship between reduced exposure and
  disease avoidancelack of action increases
  potential liabilities

• Approach
• Identify/gather DoD stakeholders, team members,
  SMEs, and POCs
• Conduct initial conference at the National
  Institute for Occupational
• Safety and Health (NIOSH) in Feb 2008 to
  understand problems and
• draft revised procurement guidelines
• Establish tool and glove safety standards and
  3rd party certification criteria
• Identify major users of power hand tools (ex.
  military depots)
• Identify major high-use/high-risk tools
• Work with Defense Logistics Agency and General
  Services
• Administration (GSA) and Services to support
  new tools/gloves and
• improve ordering process
• Initiate new tool and glove National Stock
  Numbers (NSN) into
• DLA/GSA channels
• Publish new procurement guidelines/safety
  standards
• Distribute educational materials through
  acquisition/supply channels
• Conduct outreach to community users and leaders
  DoD-wide to educate civilian workers and military
  members to be more informed and demanding
  customers

Reduction in vibration exposures WILL result in
reduced injury rates
19
Development of Common Design and Evaluation
Guidelines for the Access Aids (Ladders) for
Shipboard Inclined Ladders ATP TF (DSOC Year 3
- FY2007) POC Mark Geiger (mark.geiger1_at_navy.mil)

• Objectives
• Mishap evaluation and identification and trial
  deployment of alternative
• ladder technologies, including retractable
  handrails, for shipboard
• inclined ladders stairs for both retrofits and
  new systems.
• Justification
• Limitations of the handrail at the top of the
  inclined ship board
• ladders. In cases where the ladder penetrates
  a space that will
• require hatch closure, the fixed section of
  the handrail ends before plane of the hatch.
• A removable chain and stanchion arrangements
  spans the gap.
• The rigging of these chains often does not
  provide a secure
• handhold at the top of the ladder.
• Carrying of materials that limit the ability of
  the sailor to get a firm grasp on a handrail
  often increases the challenges.

• Anticipated ROI
• Common designs problems lead to frequent injuries
  to sailors and marines at sea as well as civilian
  personnel during shore maintenance periods reduce
  readiness and productivity. Relatively low-cost
  retrofit solution is intended to reduce these
  injuries for existing ships and may be applicable
  to new vessels.
• Next Steps
• NSWC continue support of concept proposal
  investigation
• Assemble ladder drawing/spec package for
  reference/review
• Investigate ladder problem and various
  concepts/designs as required
• Prepare design drawings, as required
• Provide overall technical oversight and system
  integration
• Provide preliminary direction to OEM and review
  recommendations
• Identify potential solution and prepare final
  report/presentation for DSOC/ladder team
• Transition
• Cost Benefit analysis to provide validation for
  platform procurement. NAVSEA Technical
  authorities for system safety and Hull Outfitting
  as well as PMS 278 plan is to develop design and
  ship design change document to installation of
  Navy surface ships, if demo is successful.

• Approach
• 1. Obtained/ analyzed injuries related to ladders
  from Naval Safety
• Center.
• 2. Identified relevant criteria for ladders and
  related access aids.
• Identify design alternatives, including
  product-specific information
• where available. Identify possible
  limitations (weight, mobility, etc.)
• and advantages of each product.
• 3. Design demonstration/validation to test
  down-selected alternatives
• Implement plan and complete detailed
  cost-benefit analysis
• 4. Communicate results to designers, developers
  and program reviewers.
• Work with logistics representatives to ensure
  that best products are in
• the system and available for use.
• Recent Accomplishments
• Project commencement with Naval Surface Warfare
  Center
• Carderock Division Ships Systems Engineering
  Station (NSWCCD) to
• evaluate investigate a retractable and/or quick
  removable handrail
• extension for use on inclined ladders accessing
  watertight hatches to
• mitigate the risks associated with shipboard
  mishaps.

FALL DATA INVOLVING AIRCRAFT CARRIER (CVN) by
LADDER TYPEAnalysis of 203 incidents over 10
years
20
NEW HANDRAIL DESIGN FOR INCLINED LADDERSProvides
for extendible handrail that collapses when hatch
closes

Hatch open, handrail extended
Handrail extends above deck, provides secure
handhold
Hatch
open
Handrail
Hatch closed Rail collapsed
Stantions
21
Noise Exposure Acquisition Tool (NEAT) ATP TF
(DSOC Year 2 2006) POC Mark Geiger
(mark.geiger1_at_navy.mil)

• Objectives
• Develop, demonstrate, and evaluate a general
  noise exposure life cycle tool to assist the
  acquisition community in building a business case
  for addressing noise induced hearing loss during
  the design/plan phase of development of major
  weapon system acquisitions
• Help answer- What does noise cost the DoD and
  taxpayers?
• Justification
• Noise exposure impacts operational readiness
  (Speech intelligibility, Human performance)
• Hearing loss is the most prevalent occupational
  health disability in the DoD
• Veterans Affairs compensation costs 1.102
  billion (FY2005)
• 760,228 cases 78,463 new cases in FY2005
• DoD civilian worker compensation costs 56
  million (FY2003)
• The significance of noise exposure on human
  performance and the long-term medical effects of
  hearing loss have not been consistently
  communicated to the acquisition community. Note
  Does not include legal costs.

• ROI
• Use of NEAT supports early and quantifiable
  identification of noise as a health and human
  performance risk factor
• Next Steps/Transition
• Work with PMs to validate the NEAT tool for
  current military systems and apply to future
  developments
• Work with program reviewers (during milestone
  reviews) and independent test and evaluation
  contacts to address life cycle costs and risk.
• Consider follow-on to widen application to
  facilities, communications systems and possibly
  environmental noise
• Make the NEAT tool available to potential users
  via ATP TF, Navy, and other Service websites.
  (Currently posted on Naval Safety Center
  website).
• Conduct technical and educational outreach to
  increase awareness and tool use

Costs without Engineering Solutions and/or
Advanced Hearing Protective Devices

• Approach
• Work with ATP TF and DoD Noise Working Group
  members to develop requirements, review and test
  functionality of tool
• Use existing information and methods to extend
  model applied to shipboard noise control to other
  systems and equipment
• Provide more clear link to system safety risk
  management, including identification of the level
  of management risk acceptance
• Results
• Developed and evaluated easy-to-use Excel-based
  tool to calculate life cycle cost of noise
  exposures. User Guide created. NEAT
  demonstrated to
• Summarize costs of hearing loss linked to noise
  exposure
• Describe reduced costs associated with reduced
  exposures
• Calculates life-cycle costs due to hearing loss
  caused by dynamic steady-state noise exposure
  (military tactical vehicle) and constant
  steady-state noise exposure (mechanical room,
  cockpit)
• Determine system safety risks (MIL-STD 882) for
  noise exposure with and without noise reduction
  devices
• Calculate speech interference levels for noisy
  environments
• Illustrate the potential cost savings from
  integrating noise controls in the acquisition
  phase of military system procurements
• Incorporate realistic approach to de-rate
  protective equipment effectiveness (actual
  (field) versus ideal (lab) noise reduction
  rating)

Costs without Engineering Solutions and/or
Advanced Hearing Protective Devices
Sample Output - Note fiscal costs only weakly
reflect the human health and social impacts of
hearing loss
22
System Safety Metrics Method (SSMM) ATP TF
(DSOC Year 2 2006) POC Mr. Bill Edmonds, Army
CRC (bill.edmonds_at_us.army.mil)

• Objectives
• Develop a method for safety managers to gauge the
  health or goodness of a safety program at any
  stage of the lifecycle of the program. Provide
  a set of questions to be used to gather
  information about the current state of a program
  or organization and to guide the safety program
  to continuous improvement.
• Justification
• The rationale for the need to develop such a
  method is based on the current rate for accidents
  attributed to human error which lies in a range
  of 80-90.
• Enable system safety practitioners, primarily
  contractors, to assess the effectiveness of
  system safety while a program is up and running
  and not an "after the fact analysis" at a
  decision review. This method will enable the
  practitioner to make improvements on the move
  before the "eleventh hour"which is in line with
  a continuous improvement assessment tool, rather
  than a programmatic assessment tool that often
  focuses on whether or not goals are met at the
  end of the project, when it is too late to
  address any issues.

• Anticipated ROI
• Provides prompt results at a low development cost
  and no cost to maintain (SSMM and question set is
  Excel Based)
• No special expertise required to administer
• Next Steps/Transition
• AMCOM Safety Office has beta tested model and
  plans to continue use of the model on other
  safety efforts.
• Post executable SSMM on web sites OSD ATP Task
  Force, the ATL Knowledge Sharing System/Defense
  Acquisition University, Defensereadiness.org,
  etc.
• Continue outreach and awareness to encourage use
  of tool
• ATP TF co-authored article to appear in National
  Defense Industry Association magazine in May 2009

• Approach
• 2 workshops consisting of system safety
  practitioners (individuals who are hands-on
  analysts)
• Poll taken among system safety professionals
  regarding optimization of program measurements
• Beta test consisting of program practitioners
  (individuals with management responsibilities)
• Results
• Can be easily used to gauge the health of a
  system safety program throughout its lifecycle
• Can identify safety inadequacies and provide
  feedback to direct positive corrective action
• Gives tight focus of results on specific areas
  needing improvement
• Provides Mature industry and Government programs
  a means to gauge existing program health and
  immature industry and/or Government programs a
  way ahead
• Offers a common language supporting effective
  execution for system safety at each phase in the
  life cycle effort for acquisition programs.

23
Environment, Safety, and Occupational Health
(ESOH) Programmatic Risk Tool ATP TF (DSOC Year
2 2006) POC Alex Briskin (alex.briskin_at_wpafb.a
f.mil)

• Objectives
• Modify the current programmatic risk tool (PRT)
  employed by the Air Force Aeronautical Systems
  Center (ASC) to evaluate the acquisitions program
  for up to two other Services
• Justification
• PRT is used to evaluate ESOH programmatic risks
  for weapon system programs and to provide a
  template for completing a Programmatic
  Environmental, Safety and Health Evaluation
  (PESHE) for DoDI 5000.2

• Next Steps/Transition
• Project was assessment onlyto serve as a basis
  for defining the scope of a follow-on program, as
  appropriate
• Redesign and streamlining of tool for Air Force
  is underway
• Transforming from 5-M model to acquisition phased
  based model and reducing size and complexity
• As the next release of the tool is deployed
  reengage with ATP TF
• A true multi-service PRT would likely need
  modules to address Service-specific requirements
  and would have to be completed as part of a
  follow-on effort. Once the new version of the
  Air Force PRT has been deployed, it is
  recommended that the DoD Acquisition Integrated
  Product Team (IPT) be briefed to determine if
  there is interest in reengaging NAVSEA, USMC, and
  also Army acquisition programs for further
  evaluation, development, and/or adoption.
• ESOH Programmatic Risk Tool Summary

• Approach
• Adapt/Initialize Air Force Tool for Navy and US
  Marine Corps (USMC)
• Demonstrate PRT and train users
• Evaluation by Navy and USMC
• Results
• PRT modified and assessment identified the gaps
  that need to be bridged if the tool is to be
  successfully adopted by the other Services
• Feedback indicates that PRT methodology is
  effective and beneficial
• The model was very effective for our program
  USMC
• The PRT provides a good structure/baseline for
  establishing a programs ESOH efforts, especially
  during beginning/planning stages. The risk
  waterfalls and lessons learned are useful and
  informative. The visual risk matrix tool may be
  very beneficial for communicating risk NAVSEA
• Those programs who conduct monthly Program
  Reviews would definitely find the PRT outputs
  /reports beneficial when disseminating the ESOH
  progress in the overall risk management
  strategy. USMC
• Feedback also indicates that PRT is too
  cumbersome and would not likely be widely used
  as-is
• Although most of my comments show favorable
  resultsI strongly doubt the PRT will be a good
  fit for MARCORSYSCOM Time consuming not enough
  value added - USMC
• given resource constraints, unsure how
  effective the Tool would be if the ESOH manager
  did not routinely populate and update - USMC
• Tool potentially would become outdated quickly
  if it were not supported and managedA lot of
  time to enter relevant information NAVSEA
• intimidating and creates an overwhelming
  reactiontraining is crucial to understanding the
  Tools nuances, but is also intensive - NAVSEA

24
Quantify Economic, Productivity Injury Issues
for Human Factors in Acquisition ATP TF (DSOC
Year 1 2005) POC Mark Geiger
(mark.geiger1_at_navy.mil)

• Objectives
• Develop a Human Engineering and Ergonomics
  Analysis Process (HEERAP) and Human Injury Risk
  Matrix, which together can be used as a tool by
  human factors and safety professionals involved
  in DoD system acquisition to identify human
  safety and health hazards risks and mitigation
  recommendations based on ergonomic principles.
• Ensure tool provides guidance suitable for
  multiple audiences to understand ergonomics/
  human systems integration risk factors and apply
  human engineering approaches to improve designs
  proactively. Describe potential life-cycle risks
  and potential return on investments (savings)
  provided by optimal designs .
• Justification
• Ergonomics is considered to represent the single
  largest source of claims and costs to the Navy
  and roughly 90 million annually or one-third of
  all recent Navy compensation claims.
• Continued high incidence of human injury
  associated with poor system design. (Designs are
  inconsistent DoD-wide and in industry).

• Anticipated ROI
• Reduce preventable injuries and overuse syndromes
• Link efficiency, manpower optimization and system
  safety
• Save life cycle costs
• Evaluate a hypothetical process to illustrate
  potential impact of reducing injury risk and
  manpower costs. By demonstrating an alternative
  way to handle a possible injury risk situation,
  the person significantly reduces their
  possibility of sustaining an injury and
  demonstrate return on early investment.
• Next Steps/Transition
• Continue distribution to ergonomics contacts
  (Army), human systems integration contacts (Navy)
  and system safety society contacts (multiple
  service)
• Continued professional outreach
• Ensure tool available via various Website
  postings
• Possible work with program reviewers to apply
  methodology (Test and Evaluation Organizations
  Integrated Logistics Assessment Process Manpower
  Reviews)

• Analysis as related to discipline
• Human systems integration (HSI)
• Ineffective use of manpower
• Would training help?
• System Safety
• Will they drop it?
• If so, what happens?
• Ergonomics (and occupational safety)
• Will this create a back injury?

• Approach
• Develop a methodology for identification and
  review of human factors/ ergonomic risk factors
  that could be understood and applied by multiple
  audiences
• Provide a primer on how ergonomics can be
  integrated into the acquisition process
• Identify common design and evaluation criteria
  and provide examples
• Conduct outreach to improve pilot and encourage
  use of tool
• Results
• Tool that provides comprehensive process overview
  of risk factors through all acquisition phases
  completed and available
• Part 1Human Injury Risk Analysis
  Procedurefocuses on identifying system specific
  injury risks and determining their significance
  in terms of likelihood and severity at the task
  level
• Part 2Human Injury Risk Matrixused to provide
  examples of potential risks associated with
  generic tasks to sensitize the user to risk
  issues, and to provide a model for how to
  identify risks

Objective is to help varied disciplines
collaborate to support the warfighter and support
personnel
25
Integration of Environment, Safety, and
Occupational Health (ESOH) into Defense
Acquisition University Curricula, Phase I and II
- ATP TF (DSOC Year 1 2005) POC Trish Huheey
(patricia.huheey_at_osd.mil)

• Objectives
• Ensure acquisition program personnel receive the
  necessary training to manage ESOH hazards and
  associated risks as elements of the programs
  systems engineering and risk management processes
  through the evaluation and incorporation of ESOH
  content in DAU curricula.
• Justification
• Supports emphasis of ESOH considerations during
  system design, reducing need for workarounds
• Supports reduction in accidents/mishaps due to
  system hazards

• Anticipated ROI
• Proper ESOH training in DAU curricula can ensure
  effective integration of ESOH considerations
  throughout the systems life cycle design,
  providing for optimal user training, performance,
  supportability, and safety, at a potentially
  reduced total ownership cost
• Next Steps/Transition
• No feedback mechanism to know when DAU Course
  Manager reviews, Accept/Declines, and incorporate
  comments into the course materialsmust review
  each course to see if changes incorporated.
• Follow on-effort under DSOC Year 4 (FY2008) to
  continue process on additional courses/case
  studies

• Approach
• ODUSD(IE) provided all of the ESOH-related
  comments/revised course content to the DAU
  Technical Management Career Fields Functional
  Advisors staff,
• Incorporation into curricula is dependent upon
  DAU revision schedule
• Results
• Phase I completed Apr 07. Reviewed and provided
  ESOH comments/content for the following courses
• LOG 102, ACQ 101, SAM 201, LOG 235 A B, SYS
  101, SYS 202, CLM 035 and ACQ 201A
• Phase II completed Jan 08. Reviewed and provided
  ESOH comments/content for the following courses
• SYS 203, Intermediate Systems Planning, Research,
  Development Engineering (Part 2)
• FE 201, Intermediate Facilities Engineering
• SYS 302, Technical Leadership in Systems
  Engineering
• LOG 101, Acquisition Logistics Fundamentals
• CLE 009, Systems Safety Systems Engineering
• PQM 101, Production, Quality Assurance, and
  Manufacturing
• SAM 101, Basic IT and Software Acquisition
  Management
• CON 110, Mission Support Planning
• PMT 401, Project Management Tools, DDG1000 -
  Destroyer/CIGS case study

26
Fly Awake Aviation Fatigue Mitigation - ATP
TF/ASTWG (DSOC Year 4 2008) POC Captain Lynn
Lee (lynn.lee_at_ang.af.mil)

• Objectives
• Provide the Warfighter with a usable tool to
  assess and mitigate fatigue in joint aviation
  operations
• Justification
• Fatigue represented in 500M of AF aviation
  mishaps FY06-FY08.
• Causal/contributory in 28 of Naval aviation
  mishaps.
• Existing fatigue modeling software (FAST)
  technically excellent, but unusable by field unit
  aviators and schedulers due to interface.
• Proactive fatigue modeling shown effective at
  201AS (DCANG) in operational risk mitigation

• Anticipated ROI
• 15-25 drop in fatigue-related mishaps - ROI
  greater than 5001
• Avoidance of one significant Class B mishap will
  recoup entire cost of program
• Next Steps
• Integration with scheduling systems
• Continued outreach to operators via medical and
  safety community
• Ground fatigue identified as significant issue --
  WorkAwake coming next
• Will target shift work fatigue in maintenance,
  security forces, more

• Approach
• Put fatigue modeling in the hands of the
  Warfighter, where it will be used
• Make it available, automated, and simple to
  understand
• Design FlyAwake based on ongoing feedback from
  flight surgeons, physiologists, researchers,
  pilots and schedulers
• Results
• Critical mass reached to make significant inroads
  on fatigue
• Naval Safety Center has joined partnership
• Naval Postgraduate School leading integration of
  FlyAwake with Navys SHARP scheduling system
• Walter Reed Army Institute of Research validating
  work/sleep estimates with actigraphy using
  volunteer aircrew
• Army, Navy, Air Force units participating
• Air Mobility Command integrating with TACCs ORM
  matrix
• FlyAwake 2.0 on target to be released in June

27
Technical Support for Collision Avoidance
Validation Tool for Unmanned Aerial Systems ATP
TF / ASTWG - (DSOC Year 3 - FY2007) POC Mr.
Mark Wilkins, OSD RPA (mark.wilkins_at_osd.mil)

• Objectives
• Provide technical support for the development of
  a validation tool to simulate a broad range of
  air platform characteristics, collision avoidance
  algorithms, and sensor algorithms for use with
  Unmanned Aerial System (UAS) aircraft.
• Justification
• The DoDs warfighters have become increasingly
  reliant on unmanned aircraft for a wide variety
  of missions. Many of those missions have been
  carried out in geographies that have no or
  minimal civil aviation traffic. In those
  locations, military air traffic control does not
  have to interface and comply with civil
  authorities requirements to manage manned and
  unmanned air traffic. Developing a collision
  avoidance capability is essential to minimize the
  potential for UAS mishaps and support mission
  success.

• Anticipated ROI
• Continued codification of UAS policy and
  development of tools to support world-wide UAS
  operations and minimize potential for UAS
  mishaps.
• Next Steps
• The technical support provided through this
  initiative facilitated the continued funding and
  development of the Collision Avoidance Tool
  through NASA/DFRC, and potentially funding for
  flight testing.

• Approach
• Provide technical support to assist NASA Dryden
  Flight Research Center (DFRC) with development of
  their simulation and validation tool, including
  coordination with the various stakeholder
  agencies in an effort to solicit program support
  and advocacy.
• Accomplishments
• Worked hand-in-hand with personnel from OSD and
  NASA/DFRC to develop a National Automatic
  Collision Avoidance Technology (NACAT) Advocacy
  briefing.
• Conducted conversations with numerous influential
  individuals, including the Assistant Secretary of
  the Air Force for Acquisition, advocating
  pursuance of this technology.
• The Assistant Secretary of the USAF for
  Acquisition shared vision for an
  open-architecture, non-proprietary Collision
  Avoidance solution that can be transported across
  any/all air platforms with the OSD UAS community,
  and the NASA Administrator.

Predator Unmanned Aerial Vehicle
28
Flight Data Management Demonstration/Validation-
ASTWG/OSD/Army (DSOC Year 3 2007)POC Mr.
Cary Pool, Concepts and Requirements Directorate
Fort Rucker (cary.pool_at_us.army.mil)

• Potential Benefits
• ALERTS allows viewing of the entire flight with
  3D or 2D flight-path and satellite imagery
• Data analysis may reveal potential trends and
  predictors that could lead to Aviation
  mishapsenabling proactive safety measures
• Foster a change of culture for both experienced
  pilots and new students to take with them to the
  field in support of future MFOQA processes
• Develop training procedures to take full
  advantage of objective Flight Analysis and
  Visualization technology
• Identify potential attributes of an MFOQA program
  for non-bussed aircraft
• Provide operational knowledge and understanding
  of how the ALERTS system can be used on training
  aircraft
• Next Steps
• Complete the collection and analysis of data
• Complete final report and recommendations
• Facilitate a transfer of the equipment following
  data collection completion
• Provide results and insight to PM TH67 for follow
  on effort

• Objectives
• Conduct a demonstration/validation of 28 Aircraft
  Logging and Event Recording for Training and
  Safety (ALERTSTM) system on Fort Ruckers TH-67,
  a non-bussed training aircraft.
• Justification
• The DoD loses up to 1.5B to aviation mishaps.
  Approximately 80 of mishaps are due to human
  error.
• The low cost Commercial Off the Shelf (COTS)
  Flight Data Management (FDM) ALERTS tool could
  lead to reducing human error in non-bussed
  aircraft
• ALERTS helps to identify training or safety
  issues by reviewing individual flights and
  trending the larger group of flights

• Approach
• Install and maintain equipment for 28 ALERTS
  systems at Fort Rucker
• Assess ALERTS during the Flight School XXI
  Instrument Phase of flight training to evaluate
  the potential of this technology to enhance
  safety and training effectiveness for Army
  Aviations training aircraft, specifically
• Assess the workload associated with employing the
  tool
• Survey flight instructor pilots (IPs) to
  determine performance of FDM system to allow
  precise de-brief of maneuvers, leading to
  enhanced overall student performance
• Monitor impacts and trends through use of data
  analysis and user surveys.
• Based on analysis and feasibility of capabilities
  tested during the demonstration period
  incorporate requirements into other programs.
• Progress
• 28 units installed and testing underway
• Instructor Pilot (IPs) receptive survey data
  analysis in process
• IPs requested information that the current ALERTS
  system does not offer (e.g., airspeed)
• Time constraint prevents some IPs from using the
  tool for every debrief students provided access
  to flight data files via the AKO web site to
  allow at-home review

29
Rotary Wing Terrain Awareness Dem/Val - ATP
TF/ASTWG (DSOC Year 3 - FY2007) POC Col Peter
Mapes (Peter.Mapes_at_osd.mil)

• Objectives
• To demonstrate and validate a Global Positioning
  System (GPS) Commercial Off The Shelf (COTS)
  terrain and weather advisory system with a
  vertical obstruction database capability on H-60
  helicopters to reduce Controlled Flight Into
  Terrain (CFIT) mishaps.
• Justification
• This capability directly addresses conditions of
  rotary wing flight contributing to over 17 of
  non-human factor mishaps and 97 of human factor
  mishaps in the Army and the Air Force. This is
  67.4 of all mishaps in those Services.

• Anticipated ROI
• ROM investment of 750K plus 150M/- in fleet
  system acquisition costs could yield savings of
  38M and 5 lives/year initially. Full payback
  would be achieved in 4 years with the additional
  benefit of saving 20 lives.
• Next Steps
• Commence survey collection and analysis at
  Andrews Air Force Base
• Complete installation for Army helicopters and
  commence survey collection
• Transition
• If results determine through pilots objective
  evaluation that technology has mishap prevention
  value, OSD will start to work with the supplier
  to militarize the capability and make
  recommendations to the Services to POM for,
  procure and employ the capability.

• Approach
• System to be delivered, installed and tested on 2
  Army (Ft Eustis and Ft Rucker) and 1 Air Force
  (Andrews Air Force Base ) TH-60 helicopters
• Letter requesting Service engagement was sent to
  each Service DUS for IES. (Navy declined)
• Recent Accomplishments
• Completed IRB process received waiver
• Developed detailed Dem/Val Plan
• Shipped equipment
• Funded assistance to aid the Services in
  installing the equipment
• Completed installation for Air Force
• Assisting Army with installation
• Finalized survey and plans for survey
  implementation developed

30
Joint Low Level Deconfliction Tool ASI TF /
ASTWG (DSOC Year 3 FY2007) POC Lt Col Gary
Smith, AETC (gary.smith_at_ang.af.mil)

• Potential ROI
• Ability to standardize disparate manual and
  automated scheduling processes, versus the
  current process of looking at the FLIP A1/BP
  manual and trying to locate a contact name and
  phone number to deconflict a low level route,
  will increase the consistency and safety of the
  process of deconfliction potentially reducing
  both midair and near-midair incidents and
  eliminating overlooked conflicts from disparate
  users and systems.
• Next Steps/Transition
• Secure partnership with FAA and sponsorship from
  the Pentagon Airspace and Range agency AF/A3O-AR
  to build a planning scheduling application.
• Obtain budget approval for next iteration of
  JLLDT as scheduling tool and determine DSOCs
  participation if necessary.
• Ensure that JLLDT is live with MADE by June 09
  when MADE updated / launched.
• Continue to educate each Base on the use and
  input for Low Levels into MADE
• Move to CAC authenticated secure military server.
• Track number of conflicts identified prior to
  flight and users per month any increase
  airspace usage.

• Objectives
• Provide secure, widely accessible real-time,
  graphic display of low-level route status to
  deconflict scheduling of military fl