+-----------------+
| NON-MEASUREMENT |
| SENSITIVE |
+-----------------+
MIL-HDBK-59A
28 September 1990
-----------------
SUPERSEDING
MIL-HDBK-59
20 December 1988
MILITARY HANDBOOK
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
COMPUTER-AIDED ACQUISITION AND LOGISTIC SUPPORT (CALS)
PROGRAM IMPLEMENTATION GUIDE
AMSC N/A AREA ILSS
DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT A. Approved for public release;
distribution is unlimited.
MIL-HDBK-59A
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20301
Department of Defense
Computer-aided Acquisition and Logistic Support (CALS)
Program Implementation Guide
1. This military handbook was developed by the Department of
Defense with the assistance of the military departments, federal
agencies, and industry. This handbook is approved for use by all
departments and agencies of the Department of Defense.
2. Beneficial comments (recommendations, additions, deletions)
and any pertinent data that may be of use in improving this
document should be addressed to: Office of the Secretary of
Defense, CALS Policy Office, DASD(PR)CALS, Pentagon, Room 2B322,
Washington, D.C. 20301-8000 by using the self-addressed
Standardization Document Improvement Proposal (DD Form 1426)
appearing at the end of this document or by letter.
3. This handbook provides information and guidance to personnel |
responsible for the acquisition and use of weapon system |
technical data. Its purpose is to assist acquisition managers in |
transitioning from paper-intensive processes to digital data |
delivery and access. It also supports the structuring of |
contract requirements to achieve integration of various |
contractor automated capabilities for design, manufacturing, and |
logistic support. |
|
4. The scope of this handbook continues to increase as CALS |
strategies are refined, methodologies for implementation are |
developed, and new material for inclusion is received from |
government and industry. Future revisions to this handbook are |
under consideration, as is the organization of the handbook |
itself. Comments and proposals on this, or any other subjects |
related to the handbook and CALS in general are encouraged. |
i
MIL-HDBK-59A
FOREWORD |
|
Revision A to MIL-HDBK-59 clarifies as well as updates the |
original document dated 20 December 1988. Government and industry |
developed these updates to reflect the evolving strategies for |
CALS implementation based on continuing review and assessment of |
acquisition programs, and a growing experience base in measures |
developed to take advantage of current and future technology |
applications. Significant government and industry efforts are |
underway in the acquisition and definition of technical manuals |
and technical data packages; development of a Contractor |
Integrated Technical Information Services (CITIS) functional |
requirements specification; evolutionary upgrade from MIL-STD- |
1388-2A LSAR to MIL-STD-1388-2B (currently in draft form); |
specification and standardization of communications networks and |
protocols; and increased attention to data protection and |
integrity. These efforts have begun to produce planning and |
documentation critical to the successful implementation and use |
of CALS requirements by acquisition programs. Material from |
several of these efforts is included in this revision. The |
following list summarizes the major updates/modifications to MIL- |
HDBK-59 dated 20 December 1988: |
|
1. Contracting for CALS/Cost Benefits/Incentives - |
Guidance to help the acquisition manager specify contractor- |
developed CALS implementation plans as part of the |
contractor's proposal, and for conducting cost benefit |
analyses and developing incentives for CALS implementation. |
Guidance, Sections 4 and 5; and Appendix A, Section 40.3.4. |
|
2. Definitions - Improved and additional definitions that |
clarify previous ambiguous definitions. Appendix A, Section |
30. |
|
3. Technical Data Acquisition - Provides more specific |
guidance on DoD policy and procedures for the acquisition of |
technical data on digital media, and updates information |
relating to the use of MIL-M-28001, MIL-M-29532(EC), and |
MIL-STD-1388-2B (Draft). Appendix B, Section 50. |
|
4. Electrical/Electronic Item Product Data Packages - This |
new section provides a definition of and requirements for |
delivery of electrical/electronic item product data |
packages. Appendix B, Section 50.3.4. |
|
5. OSI/GOSIP Communication Protocols - This new section |
provides detailed information for the implementation and |
transition to the Government Open Systems Interconnection |
Profile (GOSIP) protocols. Appendix D, Section 50.4. |
ii
MIL-HDBK-59A
6. Data Protection and Integrity, Data Rights, and Related |
Issues - Additional information and definition covering the |
systems approach to data protection and integrity, and a |
new section on risk assessment procedures have been added. |
|
7. Configuration Management of Technical Data - This new |
section provides configuration management techniques to be |
appropriately applied to information structures and data |
base architecture. Configuration Management assures |
integrity of CALS digital data by providing for controlled |
access, assuring correct data element relationships without |
respect to update timeliness, modifications and versions. |
Appendix C, Section 50.4. |
iii
MIL-HDBK-59A
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY |
Computer-aided Acquisition and Logistic Support (CALS) is a DoD
and Industry strategy to enable, and to accelerate, the
integration of digital technical information for weapon system
acquisition, design, manufacture, and support. CALS will provide
for an effective transition from current paper-intensive weapon
system life cycle processes to the efficient use of digital
information technology. The purpose of CALS is to improve
industry and DoD productivity and quality, and thus improve
supportability, military readiness, and combat effectiveness.
The objectives of CALS are:
a. To accelerate the integration of design tools such as
those for reliability and maintainability into contrac-
tor computer-aided design (CAD) and engineering systems
as part of a systematic approach that simultaneously
addresses the product and its life-cycle manufacturing
and support requirements.
b. To encourage the reduction and eventual elimination of |
duplication of data, and to accelerate the automation |
and integration of contractor processes for generating
weapon system technical data in digital form.
c. To rapidly increase DoD's capabilities to receive,
store, distribute, and use weapon system technical data
in digital form to improve life-cycle maintenance,
training, and spare parts reprocurement, and other
support processes.
Currently, a variety of automated systems are used by weapon
system contractors working as a production team to enter, update,
manage, and retrieve data from data bases associated with speci-
fic acquisition programs. Many of these systems are incompatible
with one another as well as with similar systems employed by the
government to receive, store, process, and use delivered
technical data. The functional capabilities supported by these
diverse systems vary greatly. Data created in one functional
process is often manually re-entered or re-created in subsequent
functional processes, thereby introducing errors and increasing
costs.
The near-term goals for CALS implementation are attainment of
increased levels of interfaced, or integrated, functional
capabilities, and specification of requirements for authorized
government access to contractor technical data bases, or for
delivery of technical data to the government in digital form.
iv
MIL-HDBK-59A
These specifications are designed to comply with widely accepted
commercial standards developed for these purposes.
The longer-term goal of CALS is integration of industry and DoD
data bases to share common data in an Integrated Weapon System
Data Base (IWSDB) structure that is implemented through
Contractor Integrated Technical Information Services (CITIS).
Data deliverables from, or government access to, specified
segments of CITIS data will be explicitly required in future
contracts, developed in accordance with CALS standards and
procedures. The technology to accomplish this will be
incrementally implemented as emerging technologies are developed
and proven.
A major objective of CALS is to facilitate concurrent |
engineering. This process examines and modifies design and |
engineering processes to integrate other disciplines, such as |
producibility, reliability, maintainability, and supportability, |
into each phase of the weapon system design and production |
process. This can significantly shorten the acquisition cycle and |
allow earlier fielding of new weapon systems. At the same time |
concurrent engineering actually reduces the risk of failure by |
ensuring that manufacturing, maintainability, supportability, and |
other factors are considered along with performance, cost, and |
schedule to avoid costly delays and redesign during development, |
and loss of availability during the operational phase. |
This handbook applies to programs for acquisition and support of
weapon systems and related major equipment items (including
support systems) to which DoDD 5000.1, DoDI 5000.2, or DoDD
5000.39 apply. Policy guidance issued by the Deputy Secretary of
Defense on August 5, 1988, (Appendix A, Figure 3) requires
acquisition managers to evaluate CALS capabilities in source
selection decisions and to implement cost effective CALS
requirements in contracts for weapon systems and related major
equipment items. To aid acquisition managers in implementing
this policy, this military handbook provides the following
detailed information:
o Appendix A - Includes an overview of CALS strategies |
and requirements, as well as a list of Federal and |
Military standards, specifications, definitions, and |
acronyms relating to CALS implementation. Use of CALS |
standards and specifications supports digital data |
interchange in a neutral (i.e., vendor independent) |
format within and among DoD components, and between DoD |
and industry. Available CALS digital capabilities are |
being applied to enhance high impact acquisition and |
logistic functions, including improved management of |
v
MIL-HDBK-59A
engineering drawings used to support competitive spares |
acquisition, and technical manuals required for weapon |
system maintenance. |
|
o Appendix B - Provides decision guidance and model |
contracting language for tailoring the wording of DoD |
Requests for Proposal (RFPs) and Contract Data |
Requirements Lists (CDRLs) to enable integrated |
preparation and delivery of, or access to, digitized |
data required for design, manufacturing, and support |
applications. When data is generated in CALS digital |
raster format in accordance with MIL-STD-1840A it can |
be acquired using the same Data Item Description (DID) |
that would be used if the data were acquired in hard |
copy. Technical data can also be acquired as a CAD data |
base, as specified in a new DID which can be approved |
in accordance with existing DoD policies and |
procedures. |
|
o Appendix C - Provides guidance for establishing RFP and |
CDRL requirements for integrating computer-based |
methods and supporting technologies to incorporate |
reliability and maintainability engineering (R&M) and |
logistic support analysis (LSA) within computer-aided |
concurrent engineering environments. No additional CDRL |
items or DIDs are required. CDRL items and DIDs |
normally invoked to acquire data can be tailored in |
ways that encourage the contractor to develop means for |
acquisition of data in digitized format. |
|
o Appendix D - Includes detailed guidance and technical |
information for establishing RFP and CDRL requirements |
for using physical media and telecommunication networks |
to deliver technical data in digital form, or to gain |
access to contractor data bases. Physical media options |
include magnetic tape, magnetic disk, and optical |
media. Telecommunication options include Defense Data |
Network (DDN) protocols, and the Government Open System |
Interconnection Profile (GOSIP) standard. |
|
o Appendix E - Provides guidance and model contracting |
language for tailoring RFP and CDRL requirements to |
ensure the integrity and confidentiality of CALS assets |
to the maximum extent practical within existing |
regulations, procedures, and technology. A system |
security engineering approach, as outlined in MIL-STD- |
1785, is advocated for use by the acquisition office |
security manager to ensure that data protection and |
integrity requirements are addressed early and |
vi
MIL-HDBK-59A
continuously throughout the life of the weapon system, |
for the complete range of classified and otherwise |
sensitive information relative to that system. |
vii
MIL-HDBK-59A
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1 SCOPE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
1.1 Purpose. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
1.2 Scope. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
2 REFERENCED DOCUMENTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
3 DEFINITIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
4 GENERAL GUIDANCE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
4.1 Purpose. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
4.2 Digital technical data. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
4.3 CALS requirements in weapon system acquisition. . . . . 2
4.4 CALS requirements in automated data processing system
acquisition. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
4.5 Application guidance. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
4.6 Government receiving systems. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
4.7 Functional capabilities. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
4.8 Data protection and integrity. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
4.9 Configuration Management. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
5 DETAILED GUIDANCE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
5.1 Acquisition requirements. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
5.2 Acquisition of digital data products. . . . . . . . . . 17
5.3 Contract deliverables. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
5.4 Data protection and integrity, data rights, and related
issues. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
5.5 Post-award orientation conference. . . . . . . . . . . . 31
5.6 Detailed guidance for applications. . . . . . . . . . . 32
viii
MIL-HDBK-59A
6 NOTES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
6.1 Intended use. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
6.2 Subject term (key word) listing. . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
6.3 Changes from previous issue. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
ix
MIL-HDBK-59A
APPENDIX A
CALS OVERVIEW . . . . . . . . . . . 35
10 SCOPE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
10.1 Purpose. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
20 REFERENCED DOCUMENTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
20.1 Government documents. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
20.2 Non-Government publications. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
20.3 Order of precedence. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
30 DEFINITIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
30.1 Acquisition manager. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
30.2 CALS Core Requirement. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
30.3 Information systems. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44
30.4 Forms of technical data. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44
30.5 Contract data deliverables and access. . . . . . . . . 46
30.6 File types. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47
30.7 Item levels of equipment indenture. . . . . . . . . . . 47
30.8 Delivery, verification, and acceptance. . . . . . . . . 48
30.9 Acronyms and abbreviations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
40 OVERVIEW OF COMPUTER-AIDED ACQUISITION AND LOGISTIC
SUPPORT (CALS) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
40.1 CALS overview. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
40.2 CALS concepts. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52
40.3 CALS implementation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57
40.4 CALS management organizations. . . . . . . . . . . . . 65
x
MIL-HDBK-59A
APPENDIX B
APPLICATION GUIDANCE FOR
ACQUISITION OF DIGITAL DELIVERABLES . . . . . 71
10 SCOPE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73
10.1 Applicability. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73
10.2 Purpose. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73
20 REFERENCED DOCUMENTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73
30 DEFINITIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73
40 GENERAL GUIDANCE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74
40.1 Contracting for digital data. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74
40.2 Development of the Government Concept of Operations
(GCO). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74
40.3 Tailoring and revision of functional standards. . . . . 75
40.4 Application of the master decision template. . . . . . 75
40.5 Technology development and insertion. . . . . . . . . . 78
50 DETAILED GUIDANCE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79
50.1 Organization of guidance sections. . . . . . . . . . . 79
50.2 Acquisition of technical manuals . . . . . . . . . . . 79
50.3 Acquisition of technical data packages (TDP). . . . . . 89
50.3.1 Scope. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89
50.3.2 Engineering drawings. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89
50.3.3 Product specifications and book form drawings. . . . 96
50.3.4 Electrical/electronic item product data. . . . . . . 100
50.3.5 Other TDP components (RESERVED). . . . . . . . . . . 109
50.4 Acquisition of logistic support analysis records
(LSAR). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109
xi
MIL-HDBK-59A
50.5 Acquisition of training products. . . . . . . . . . . . 122
50.6 Acquisition of technical specifications and reports
(RESERVED). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 129
50.7 Acquisition of maintenance information for interactive
presentation (RESERVED). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 129
50.8 Acquisition of integrated diagnostics (RESERVED). . . . 129
xii
MIL-HDBK-59A
APPENDIX C
FUNCTIONAL REQUIREMENTS FOR
INTEGRATION OF CONTRACTOR PROCESSES . . . . . 131
10 SCOPE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 133
10.1 Applicability. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 133
10.2 Purpose. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 133
20 REFERENCED DOCUMENTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 133
30 DEFINITIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 133
40 GENERAL GUIDANCE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 134
40.1 Contracting for integration of functional processes. . 134
40.2 Strategic approach. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 134
40.3 Application environment. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 134
40.4 R&M integration with CAD/CAE. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 135
40.5 Integration of contractor LSA processes with R&M and
design engineering. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 135
40.6 Configuration management of technical data. . . . . . . 136
50 DETAILED GUIDANCE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 137
50.1 Organization of guidance sections. . . . . . . . . . . 137
50.2 Functional requirements for R&M integration with
CAD/CAE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 137
50.3 Functional requirements for integration of contractor
LSA processes with R&M and design engineering. . . . . 147
50.4 Functional requirements for configuration management
of technical data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 148
xiii
MIL-HDBK-59A
APPENDIX D
CONTRACT REQUIREMENTS FOR DELIVERY MODES . . . . 171
10 SCOPE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 173
10.1 Applicability. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 173
10.2 Purpose. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 173
20 REFERENCED DOCUMENTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 173
30 DEFINITIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 173
40 GENERAL GUIDANCE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 173
40.1 Access and delivery of digital data. . . . . . . . . . 173
50 DETAILED GUIDANCE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 174
50.1 Organization of guidance sections. . . . . . . . . . . 174
50.2 Physical media. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 175
50.3 Telecommunications. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 177
50.4 Transition to or Implementation of CALS GOSIP
Protocols. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 185
xiv
MIL-HDBK-59A
APPENDIX E
DATA PROTECTION AND INTEGRITY,
DATA RIGHTS, AND RELATED ISSUES . . . . . . 201
10 SCOPE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 203
10.1 Applicability. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 203
10.2 Purpose. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 203
20 REFERENCED DOCUMENTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 203
30 DEFINITIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 203
40 GENERAL GUIDANCE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 203
40.1 Contracting for digital data. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 203
50 DETAILED GUIDANCE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 204
50.1 Data protection and integrity. . . . . . . . . . . . . 204
50.2 Data rights, privacy, and legal liability. . . . . . . 214
xv
MIL-HDBK-59A
FIGURES
FIGURE 1. Decision template for acquisition of digital
data. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
FIGURE 2. Digital information exchange. . . . . . . . . . . 53
FIGURE 3. CALS Implementation Requirements . . . . . . . . . 68
FIGURE 4. Decision template for technical manuals. . . . . . 81
FIGURE 5. Decision template for engineering drawings. . . . 92
FIGURE 6. Decision template for product specifications and
book form drawings. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 97
FIGURE 7. Decision template for electrical/electronic
items . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 101
FIGURE 8. Decision template for logistic support analysis
records (LSAR). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 112
FIGURE 9. Decision template for training products. . . . . . 125
FIGURE 10. CALS/MAP/TOP/GOSIP Relationship . . . . . . . . . 187
FIGURE 11. CALS Lower Layer Telecommunications Building
Blocks FIPS 146 (GOSIP) Version 1 . . . . . . . . 189
TABLES
TABLE I. CALS Considerations by Phase . . . . . . . . . . 23
TABLE II. Contract Incentives by Acquisition Phase . . . . 62
TABLE III. CALS Points of Contact . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67
TABLE IV. Technical manual forms and standards. . . . . . 88
TABLE V. Summary of engineering drawing forms and
standards. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 96
TABLE VI. Summary of LSAR forms and standards. . . . . . . 119
TABLE VII. Summary of training products forms and
standards. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 129
TABLE VIII. Identification of security by data item. . . . . 210
xvi
MIL-HDBK-59A
1 SCOPE
1.1 Purpose. The purpose of this military handbook is to provide
general information and detailed application guidance for con-
tractually implementing CALS requirements in weapon system and
related major equipment procurements.
1.2 Scope. This handbook describes functional requirements and
technical standards applicable to all programs for acquisition
and support of weapon systems and related major equipment items
(including support systems) to which DoDD 5000.1, DoDI 5000.2, or
DoDD 5000.39 apply, and for which the acquisition of technical
data in digital form is required in accordance with MIL-STD-1840,
MIL-STD-1388-2, and supporting military specifications. This
handbook also addresses those specific functional capabilities
requiring integration by the contractor to support weapon system
acquisition.
2 REFERENCED DOCUMENTS
See list of references appearing in Appendix A.
3 DEFINITIONS
See list of terms and acronyms appearing in Appendix A.
1
MIL-HDBK-59A
4 GENERAL GUIDANCE
4.1 Purpose. CALS is a DoD and industry strategy to enable, and
to accelerate, the integration of digital technical data in
standard form for weapon system acquisition, design, manufacture,
and support. The intent of CALS is to improve industry and DoD
productivity and quality. This leads to improved supportability,
and to increased readiness and operational effectiveness.
4.2 Digital technical data. A primary CALS thrust is automation
and integration of the generation, delivery, and use of weapon
system technical data over the weapon system's life cycle. This
technical data includes the part descriptions, product specifica-
tions, and standards that the initial designer draws upon; the
engineering drawings and product data used in design and
manufacturing, including product descriptions and specifications |
data used for design reviews; the information needed to guide the |
people who operate the system in the field, or who support and
maintain it at all echelons of the logistic support structure;
the materials needed to train new operators, maintainers and
other technicians; and the information needed for reprocurement,
remanufacturing, modification, and feedback to industry for
future design. CALS has published technical standards which
enable either delivery of this information in digital form or
government access to contractor-maintained technical data bases.
A more complete discussion of the CALS initiative is found in
Appendix A.
4.3 CALS requirements in weapon system acquisition.
Requirements issued through the Federal Acquisition Regulations |
(FAR) on 3 October 1989 and the DoD FAR Supplement DAC #88-1, |
Section 207.1-5, state that an acquisition manager must describe |
the extent of CALS implementation in approved weapon system |
acquisition plans. Policy guidance issued by the Deputy Secretary |
of Defense (see Appendix A, Figure 3) requires that plans for new
weapon systems and related major equipment items include use of
the CALS standards. Specifically:
a. For systems entering full scale development or
production prior to September 1988, acquisition
managers are required to review specific opportunities
for cost savings or quality improvements that could
result from changing paper deliverables to digital
delivery or access using the CALS standards.
b. For systems entering development after September 1988,
specific cost and schedule proposals should be obtained
for: (1) integration of contractor technical
information systems and processes, (2) authorized
2
MIL-HDBK-59A
government access to contractor data bases, and (3)
delivery of technical information in digital form.
These proposals shall be given significant weight for
their cost and quality implications in source selection
decisions. The CALS standards are to be applied for
digital data deliverables.
4.4 CALS requirements in automated data processing system
acquisition. CALS implementation involves the participation of
both weapon system acquisition managers, and government and
industry automated data processing system managers. Acquisitions
of future computer hardware, software, and telecommunications
must address CALS data interchange and access requirements. The
key to supporting these requirements is an open architecture that
can cost effectively support future as well as current data
interchange and access needs. Although the primary audience for |
this handbook is the acquisition manager for weapon systems and |
related major equipment, automated data processing system |
managers should be well versed in its contents. The Deputy |
Secretary of Defense policy guidance provided as Appendix A,
Figure 3, requires DoD components to program for automated
systems to receive, store, distribute, and use weapon system
technical data in digital form in accordance with the CALS
standards.
4.5 Application guidance. A general framework for implementing
CALS requirements is provided in Section 5.1, followed by
detailed guidance on choices among digital data delivery and
access alternatives. Information on digital data requirements
for specific functional areas, functional integration
requirements, and delivery modes is provided in Appendices B, C,
and D, respectively. Other acquisition issues, including data
protection and integrity, are addressed in Appendix E. |
|
4.5.1 Contract data requirements. The solicitation document is |
the vehicle for the government to communicate its mandatory and |
desirable requirements to those interested in bidding on the |
design, development, production, operation, management, and/or |
maintenance of a specific item or collection of items of military |
hardware or software. For CALS to succeed, acquisition managers |
must ensure that the intent, language, evaluation criteria, and |
the products of the solicitation clearly and consistently reflect |
CALS requirements of the government. DIDs can take advantage of |
concurrent engineering, as long as the format requirements are |
properly annotated on the CDRL. Previous contracts may not have |
taken advantage of concurrent engineering practices and automated |
integration capabilities available today. Acquisition managers |
should identify new CALS requirements in Invitations For Bid |
(IFBs). In developing Requests for Proposal (RFPs), the |
3
MIL-HDBK-59A
acquisition manager should use Section C, entitled |
"Description/Specifications/ Statement of Work", to articulate |
what the government's CALS requirements are, and Section L, |
entitled "Instructions to Offerors" (ITO), to amplify upon |
alternatives for satisfying CALS requirements. |
4.5.2 CALS implementation planning. Section L also should be used |
for instructing potential contractors to provide a comprehensive |
CALS plan, which should include quantification of opportunities |
and risks as supported by tradeoff studies of improved methods |
for data delivery or on-line access to contractor information. |
The plan should state how the contractor intends to work with |
acquisition managers and contract administration activities to |
implement on-line access to data files. The plan should also |
recommend guidelines defining the actions on the part of the |
contractor and government that constitute delivery, verification |
and acceptance of data which may remain resident at the |
contractor's or the government's facility. Contractors should |
also identify formal procedures for integrating applications and |
data bases to improve engineering, manufacturing, and support |
processes, and eliminate redundant data deliverables or multiple |
reports which can be produced from a single data file. |
Contractors should propose implementation of alternative delivery |
methods, for example, by proposing digital delivery of LSAR |
Master Files to fulfill multiple CDRL items for hard copy |
reports. In some cases, technical data in digital form can be |
acquired with existing DIDs, while in other cases new DIDs must |
be developed. In summary, the contractor's plan should reflect |
the extent to which the offeror is prepared to implement his |
proposed CALS strategy as an inherent feature of the concurrent |
engineering and logistic support capability required for the |
program. |
4.5.3 Government furnished information (GFI). An important
subset of data required to support the acquisition of weapon
systems is generated by the government and provided to the
contractor as GFI. The acquisition manager should provide this
information in digital form whenever possible. RFPs should
specify contractor responsibilities for the integration of GFI
with contractor-generated data in preparation of documents,
processable files, or data bases for interactive access.
4.5.3.1 Contract guidance for non-developmental item (NDI) and |
commercial off-the-shelf (COTS) data. Non-developmental item |
(NDI) contracting promotes the usage of previously developed end |
items for specific weapon system or subsystem procurements if the |
end item meets the specific program requirements. Many of these |
developed items have already been certified by recognized |
4
MIL-HDBK-59A
authorities (either domestic or non-domestic). Acquisition |
managers are encouraged to use COTS procurements since |
engineering and support data items that have been developed under |
commercial programs are often applicable for meeting DoD |
requirements. |
|
Tailoring of NDI/COTS data requirements may be necessary to |
accept commercially available data. Although digital input is |
preferred, final data requirements should be determined on the |
basis of life-cycle cost and benefits anticipated. Important |
factors to consider during the determination of requirements |
tailoring are type, availability, volume, format, and proprietary |
nature of product drawings and related data. Additional factors |
include life expectancy of the NDI/COTS item and suitability for |
technology insertion. Requirements tailoring should be |
considered during the proposal phase to reduce costs and help |
avoid the basis for disputes. |
4.5.4 Guidance for subcontracting. Both the acquisition manager |
and potential prime contractors must clearly identify how data |
delivery requirements will flow down to subcontractors and |
lower-tier vendors. Although digital delivery is preferred IAW |
CALS standards and specifications, requirements for digital |
delivery should consider subcontractor and lower-tier vendor |
capabilities, the cost effectiveness of electronic data delivery, |
and the risks associated with lower-tier vendor CALS compliance. |
Hard copy, microfilm, and non-standard digital delivery should be |
evaluated when life cycle costs do not support digital delivery |
across all subcontractor and lower-tier vendors. It may be |
feasible for a contractor other than the data originator to |
convert data to standard digital form. Block 16 (Remarks) of the |
CDRL, DD Form 1423 should indicate the mix of format |
requirements, before contract award where possible. |
4.5.5 CALS application to small business. Small business makes
up a substantial portion of DoD contractors and subcontractors.
The policy guidance by the Deputy Secretary of Defense (Appendix
A, Figure 3) directs special attention to opportunities and
safeguards for small businesses operating in a CALS environment.
Small business should not be put at a disadvantage because of
limited resources for the investments needed to comply with CALS
data delivery, data access, and functional integration
requirements. Consideration should be given to financing |
alternatives, including the use of government-furnished equipment |
(GFE) and eventual purchase of GFE by small business contractors. |
4.6 Government receiving systems. Contractor-generated digital
data must be supported by government receiving systems that can
access, receive, process, and distribute digital technical data
5
MIL-HDBK-59A
using CALS specifications and standards. Government receiving
systems are being established in the military departments and
agencies during 1989-1995 for digital receipt and processing of
engineering drawings, technical manuals, and other technical
data. Acquisition and delivery of, or access to, this digital
data must be phased to coincide with incremental upgrades to the
government hardware, software, and procedures which constitute
the receiving infrastructure. The acquisition manager must |
consider the status of the receiving infrastructure within the
acquiring Service, other Services, and the Defense Logistics
Agency (DLA). Service and DLA CALS offices listed in Appendix A
can provide status information and additional guidance on time
phasing.
4.7 Functional capabilities. The functional capabilities
described in Appendix C constitute an evolutionary program to
achieve functional integration within contractor data and |
processes and access to these data and processes through the |
supporting CITIS. The acquisition manager should apply the
general guidance of Appendix C in the preparation of solicitation
documents and resulting contracts. The acquisition manager may
tailor the detailed requirements as necessary to support the
acquisition strategy selected for the weapon system.
4.8 Data protection and integrity. DoD policies and acquisition
regulations regarding data protection and integrity in the paper-
based environment also apply to the CALS digital environment.
Control of the system, data base, and associated data maintenance
and configuration control responsibilities are important issues.
These issues require consideration in the design of CITIS. This |
includes restricted access/change procedures, audit trails, and
electronic marking of digital deliverables where appropriate. As
an early contractual task, acquisition managers should require
the contractor to provide a detailed plan that describes the
procedures and specifications to be used in the integration,
digital exchange, and sharing of data with the government and
other contractors, including satisfactory security requirements.
Government information system managers must share with CITIS
managers responsibility for protection of classified,
proprietary, or otherwise sensitive information (see Appendix E).
4.9 Configuration Management. As product data communication |
evolves from a paper-based culture to the CALS environment, |
configuration management application includes all digital |
technical data necessary for the acquisition, design, |
development, production, delivery, operation, maintenance, |
logistic support and replacement of the product. Configuration |
management must be considered in the design of both CITIS and |
government information systems. It ensures data integrity by |
6
MIL-HDBK-59A
providing correctly maintained data relationships, indexing and |
data dictionaries. Configuration management must be an integral |
part of detailed planning, procedures and specifications for |
integration, digital exchange, and data sharing (see Appendix C). |
7
MIL-HDBK-59A
5 DETAILED GUIDANCE
|
5.1 Acquisition requirements. Section 4 of this handbook |
established the requirement for digital delivery or access of |
data items required on weapon system development and procurement |
contracts. It is a companion requirement of CALS (and a key |
element of the CALS implementation strategy) that digital data |
may be accessed through CITIS. CITIS includes information |
services established and managed by a contractor. Its purpose is |
to serve as an entry point for receipt, storage, maintenance, and |
access (through a uniform format and procedure) to technical data |
and other support information describing the weapon system, its |
development history, and support requirements of relevance to the |
program office. CITIS will allow authorized users, with a need |
to know, to access files and extract the information required |
with a high degree of confidence in the accuracy, currency, and |
meaning of that information. New weapon system contracts should |
emphasize integration of diverse data bases (contractor, sub- |
contractor and government) consistent with the state of |
technology at the time of weapon system development and use. |
|
CITIS will serve the acquisition manager, the weapon system |
contractor, and life cycle managers requiring data in their |
respective areas of responsibility. The services provided by |
CITIS will include both access to information and management of |
information. In the first case, CITIS will focus on what |
information authorized users will have access to, the form it |
will take, and its degree of availability. In the second case, |
CITIS management will ensure the availability, integrity, and |
security of the information retrieved from the integrated data |
base. |
|
To take advantage of current contractor CITIS capabilities, |
the government acquisition manager should request contractor |
proposals as described in the following paragraphs. These |
contractor proposals will be evaluated for their impact on |
overall program cost and quality as part of the source selection |
process, and will be required under the subsequently awarded |
contract. (A Functional Specification for CITIS is under |
development by the DoD CALS Policy Office. A draft release for |
government and industry review is expected in early 1991.) |
|
5.1.1 Government Concept of Operations. Prior to issuance of an |
RFP, the government acquisition manager should develop an |
information strategy, or Government Concept of Operations (GCO), |
which includes integration and use of digital data in standard |
CALS format for weapon system acquisition, design, manufacture |
and support. This strategy should be aimed at taking advantage |
of automation and integration capabilities to establish a |
8
MIL-HDBK-59A
computer-based environment for generating and storing a data |
element once for multiple applications. The objective of the GCO |
is to provide potential offerors an understanding of specific |
user needs for technical data and information throughout relevant |
life cycle activities. |
|
In order for the government to receive the correct version and |
format of data, at the right place and time, the GCO must address |
the following factors.: |
|
a. The hardware and software systems the government has or |
is developing to manage and use the data; |
|
b. Data users, types of data, frequency of data needed, |
and timeliness of data delivery to each user; |
|
c. How the data will be used and the review and/or |
approval processes to support life cycle functions; |
|
d. Users locations; |
|
e. Data interchange requirements including applicable |
standards and existing telecommunications capabilities; |
and, |
|
f. Access authorizations and restrictions. |
|
In considering the above to generate a GCO, the acquisition |
manager should consider requirements for conducting in-process |
reviews of contractor-generated data; accomplishing government |
inspection and acceptance of digitized information submitted by |
the contractor; and, for accessing data which is to be used in |
functional software applications. The acquisition manager should |
work with appropriate Service/Agency CALS focal points (See |
Appendix A) to identify government capabilities for receiving, |
accessing and controlling data products delivered by the |
contractor. |
|
The acquisition manager should consider use of deferred delivery |
and deferred ordering, in accordance with the provisions of DoD |
FAR Supplement Part 27 and attendant clauses 252.227-7026 and |
252.227-7027, to ensure contractor compliance with CALS |
requirements when it is known that government capabilities to use |
the data in digital form will be put in place during the contract |
period of performance. If the government will not have receiving |
systems for updating, storing, controlling, reproducing, and |
distributing digital data, the acquisition manager should |
consider use of contractor services for performing these |
functions. These CITIS services can be specified in a contract |
9
MIL-HDBK-59A
statement of work (SOW) and listed as contract line items for use |
on an interim basis until the appropriate government systems have |
been put in place, or they can be continued as the foundation on |
which to implement the acquisition's life cycle technical data |
management support. The GCO should be prepared early in program |
development, concurrent with preparation of the program |
acquisition strategy and plan. The acquisition manager should |
clearly articulate the GCO in the weapon system RFP. |
5.1.2 General contract requirements. The solicitation or
contract should state that an objective of the acquisition is to
require the contractor to generate information products from all
development and production functions in an integrated information
system and a shared data environment to the maximum extent
practicable. Ideally, this integration should be achieved as
part of a comprehensive concurrent engineering strategy. The
integrated environment will provide for generation, storage,
indexing, distribution, and delivery of technical data products,
in support of weapon system development and production functions
and processes. The objective is to create each data element once
and use it repeatedly in subsequent processes without manual re-
entry. The contractor should be required to provide and adhere
to a comprehensive plan for meeting this objective.
5.1.2.1 RFP and source selection guidance. The following |
additional guidance is provided on contracting for functional |
integration and digital data development/acquisition. |
|
5.1.2.1.1 Instructions to offerors. Section L of the RFP should |
require the contractor to provide a comprehensive CALS |
Implementation Plan (CALSIP), either as a separate plan, or as |
part of some other program plan associated with the proposal. |
This plan, which will serve as the "road-map" for contractor CALS |
implementation, should recommend specific actions (or alternative |
approaches) to activities to be accomplished within the contract |
period of performance, as well as outline proposed actions and |
capabilities to be pursued in later weapon system life-cycle |
phases as CALS is fully implemented. The CALSIP submitted should |
be evaluated technically using criteria/factors that measure |
quality and schedule in fulfilling RFP CALS requirements |
consistent with the information strategy identified in the GCO. |
Recommended wording for Section L is provided in 5.1.2.2. A |
CALSIP should include the following information: |
|
a. Describe the contractor's detailed approach to |
implementing CALS requirements, including integration |
of functional processes, such as system engineering, |
design, logistic support, configuration management and |
manufacturing, using data base integration techniques. |
10
MIL-HDBK-59A
b. Through tradeoff studies, identify opportunities and |
risks of improved methods for data delivery and/or |
on-line access through CITIS. |
|
c. Describe the procedures for integrating applications |
and data processes that improve product quality and |
eliminate data and deliverable redundancy. |
|
d. Propose guidelines defining the actions on the part of |
the contractor and government that constitute delivery |
and acceptance of data which may remain resident at the |
contractor's facility throughout the acquisition and |
beyond delivery of the weapon system. |
|
The following specific topics also should be addressed by the |
offeror: |
|
a. Introduction and responsibilities, including a |
statement of the plan's purpose and scope, CALS support |
hardware and software architecture, reference documents |
and definitions, and government, industry and |
contractor points of contact. |
|
b. Operations, including operational requirements of the |
system, concept and phasing. |
|
c. CALS program management, including program objectives |
and strategy, program management responsibilities, and |
program management approach. |
|
d. System engineering management, including strategy and |
management approach. Other areas that should be |
included are requirements definition, implementation |
planning, benefits evaluation, and strategic |
assessment. |
|
e. Candidate information system description, including |
source and destination systems, relationship with |
government receiving systems, IWSDB, and access to the |
IWSDB through the CITIS. |
|
f. System test and evaluation, including test management |
concept, pilot demonstrations, and inspection and |
acceptance of CITIS. |
|
g. Manpower and organization, including relationships and |
roles of subcontractors and vendors. |
11
MIL-HDBK-59A
i. Data protection and integrity, including risk |
assessment and system security certification. |
|
j. Implementation, including CALS near-term and long-term |
capabilities, identification of available technology, |
dissemination of information, coordination of current |
CALS and acquisition standards and specifications, and |
contract delivery and acceptance of data. |
|
5.1.2.1.2 Evaluation criteria. Section M (Evaluation Criteria) |
should be structured to emphasize the above issues. Evaluation |
factors should give preference to integration of functional |
processes, government access of contractor data bases, and |
digital data delivery. Moreover, the acquisition manager should |
provide special emphasis and give an increased consideration to |
the following: |
|
a. Proposals demonstrating significant life cycle cost |
improvement from digital data management; |
|
b. Quality improvements resulting from functional |
integration; |
|
c. Program schedule improvements through use of CITIS |
services; and |
|
d. Program risk reduction from improved government and |
contractor access to analytic tools. |
|
5.1.2.1.3 Contractual application. The offeror's proposed |
capability and CALSIP should be made part of the final contract |
and should be subject to contractual controls. |
|
5.1.2.2 Sample language. The following subparagraphs contain |
sample language that is recommended for incorporation in Section |
L of an RFP. |
|
The offeror shall submit a plan describing the way in which |
CALS techniques are to be used throughout the term of this |
contract to satisfy requirements delineated in the GCO. The |
offeror shall also address actions recommended in later |
life-cycle phases to fully realize CALS benefits from |
integration and standardization. The offerors should |
describe their concurrent engineering approach to integrate |
system engineering, design, manufacturing, and logistic |
support functions and identify key functional and data |
relationships. The offeror shall also describe the |
supporting ADP environment that will be used to generate, |
store, and deliver system engineering, design, |
12
MIL-HDBK-59A
manufacturing, and logistic support data and information |
products, access rights, limitations, and responsibilities |
for all contractor, subcontractor, and government-furnished |
data. |
|
The description of the integrated data base system/service |
shall include, at a minimum, the following: |
|
a. Current and planned system architecture (hardware, |
software, data base description). Describe the |
resources available to the program, including |
percentage availability of shared resources, |
application software available to the program, |
including source of commercial software, identification |
of proprietary software, and methods used to assure |
software quality; and information about the data |
base(s) to be used, including access, storage, and |
retrieval procedures. |
|
b. Integration approach, including communications |
networking, data base sharing and management, security |
and protection of classified/proprietary information |
and configuration control. |
|
c. Data and technical standards available for delivery of |
technical data to the government in digital form. |
|
d. Policies, procedures, and organizational responsibility |
for control of process automation. |
|
The contractor shall also propose how functional processes, |
such as design, engineering, manufacturing, LSA, R&M, and |
logistic support product development will be efficiently |
integrated through the use of the data base system/service. |
Include in the proposal a description of the procedures for |
integrating applications and data processes. |
|
A proposal for the elimination of redundant data development |
and delivery shall be provided and be supported by trade-off |
studies and risk assessments that provide sufficient |
rationale for proposed methods. |
|
The contractor shall propose rules defining types of data |
(working, released, submitted, and approved) and ownership |
(contractor, government) to be maintained by the contractor |
and for how long (during design phases only, throughout the |
acquisition, or throughout the life cycle). The contractor |
shall also propose rules for data review, release, |
configuration control, and maintenance. |
13
MIL-HDBK-59A
5.1.3 Contract implementation of digital data sharing and
exchange. The contractor's CITIS should provide for access,
digital exchange, and sharing of data with the government and
associated contractor(s). CITIS data base(s) should have the
capability of distinguishing among, and providing visibility and
accessibility of, the following data iterations:
a. Working Data - This data is developed from work in |
progress; it has not been formally submitted to the |
government, but may be provided for information |
purposes with the understanding that it is preliminary |
and subject to further iteration. These data are |
subject only to internal contractor configuration |
management (version control) practices. This category |
also applies to working copies of data that are in the |
released, submitted, or approved categories. |
|
b. Released Data - Configuration management controlled |
version of the data that has been released in |
accordance with government CM standards, after review |
and internal approvals, as required by corporate |
procedure. Released data may be selectively provided to |
the government for purposes such as design review. |
|
c. Submitted Data - This data is the configuration |
management controlled master version of the data |
formally submitted to the government in processable |
data file form. |
d. Approved Data - This data is the configuration |
management controlled master version of data formally |
submitted to and approved by the government. |
The contractor plan should provide a cost-effective method of
managing the CITIS such that appropriate configuration and
version control of technical information is maintained, while
providing current data for design, engineering analysis,
manufacturing, and product support planning. The plan should
address capabilities for on-demand reproduction of digital
CAE/CAD/CIM/logistic technical data, and provide for digital
exchange and integration among the logistics and other functional
areas. The contractor should address his plan for ensuring that
no proprietary data is passed among contract team members and the
government without proper evaluation of need-to-know requirements
and clear markings defining proprietary data rights.
5.1.4 CALS integration of Computer-Aided Engineering (CAE),
Computer-Aided Design (CAD), and Computer-Integrated Manufac-
turing (CIM). The contractor should be encouraged to provide for |
14
MIL-HDBK-59A
integration of logistics processes with CAE, CAD, and CIM
processes. This includes other computer-aided technologies, such |
as computer-aided testing (CAT) and computer-aided process |
planning (CAPP). This will assure that logistic resources are
developed consistent with the configuration of the weapon system
and changes thereto. Process integration should be accompanied
by integration of the data elements supporting those processes.
This will facilitate both integration and configuration control |
of the data that supports the processes, and access to these data |
and processes through the CITIS. Changes in the as-designed, as- |
manufactured, as-delivered, and as-supported configurations of
the product can be reduced, associated technical data changes can
be better controlled, and the quality of both the product and
data describing the product will be improved.
5.1.5 Reliability, maintainability, and supportability. The
inclusion of CAE capability in support of R&M development is best
accomplished by making CAE support of R&M a source selection
factor. The contractor should be required to describe the
intended use of computer systems to provide:
a. Automated R&M and supportability analysis procedures |
tightly coupled to parts libraries and to material
characteristics data bases.
b. Automated R&M and supportability synthesis based on |
design rules incorporating lessons learned from prior
design experience and field use.
c. Fully characterized (tested and validated) component
performance and R&M characteristics data bases.
d. Consistent data management procedures that link major
design decisions affecting the R&M and supportability |
characteristics of the end item to the CAE software and
data bases used to develop decision criteria and
otherwise support the evolving configuration of the
product.
e. A structure of hardware, software, and computer net-
works adequate to support the procedures and processes
of "a" through "d" above, and to closely couple R&M and |
supportability resources (including personnel) with the |
rest of the design team.
5.1.6 Integrated Logistic Support (ILS) management information.
The contractor should be encouraged to establish an on-line |
direct access system capable of recording, planning, scheduling,
and reporting status of ILS program requirements. This system
15
MIL-HDBK-59A
should provide visibility of the contractor's logistic support
development performance, highlighting potential problems, and
should provide schedule compatibility to assure logistic support
integration. The on-line system should identify change impacts
on related areas of logistic support and status of retrofit
program deliverables.
5.1.6.1 Interim/phased contractor support. The contractor
should be responsible for providing on-line detailed status and
accounting for interim/phased support programs as contracted.
This will include status of all items inducted into a repair or
maintenance program. Program status and accounting should be
provided by digital means for accountability, and allow for
transitioning interim support to the customer. The contractor
should be required to conform with exchange standards for digital
data transmissions between government and contractor activities.
5.1.6.2 Government furnished equipment and information. The
contractor should provide for update and maintenance of the
government furnished-equipment (GFE) portions of the weapon
system based on government review, and for input of other GFI
such as usage data and reports of installed population by
operating site. Wherever possible, GFI should be provided in
digital form for access and manipulation through the CITIS. |
5.1.7 Supplier/vendor/subcontractor data requirements. The
contractor should provide for capture and incorporation of
required supplier/vendor/subcontractor data. This should include
consideration of the capability of the supplier to use neutral
interchange standards to deliver digital data that is compatible
with the structure of prime contractor's system and architecture |
in conformance with the applicable CALS standards. The |
government, subcontractors, and lower-tier vendors will be |
provided access to this information as needed through the |
contractor maintained CITIS. It should also include alternatives |
such as providing terminals and/or access to lower-tier
subcontractors. While subcontractors' and lower-tier vendors' |
data may not be digital, IAW CALS, the prime contractor will be |
responsible for the data encompassing the entire weapon system |
configuration, regardless of the data media. |
5.1.8 Logistic Support Analysis (LSA) and Logistic Support
Analysis Record (LSAR). The contract should require that data
generated from the LSA program in accordance with MIL-STD-1388-1
and maintained in the LSAR in accordance with MIL-STD-1388-2 be
the basis for logistic resource determinations.
a. Support equipment - The contractor should be able to
respond to government agency requirements for
16
MIL-HDBK-59A
submission in digital form of support equipment
recommendation data, with provision for visibility of
government changes/approvals without loss of original
documentation.
b. Technical manuals/data - The contractor should provide
for computer-assisted generation of technical data.
These data are to be derived, to the maximum extent
possible, from integrated digital data files, e.g.,
CAD/CAE/CIM/LSAR. These data should be provided in
accordance with contractually imposed functional
specifications for technical manuals and other data
(e.g., MIL-M-38784), the appropriate technical
specifications (e.g., MIL-M-28001), in conformance with
MIL-STD-1840.
c. Training and training equipment - The contractor should
provide training system development with data generated
and derived, to the maximum extent possible, from LSAR
in accordance with MIL-STD-1388-1/-2 and from technical
data in 5.1.8.b. |
d. Supply support - The contractor should provide
provisioning technical documentation in accordance with
MIL-STD-1388-2 to facilitate automated ordering, supply
management, and distribution, and should provide on-
line identification of spares, repair parts, and
source/maintenance/recoverability coding linked to
provisioning technical documentation. If on-line |
access is supported, initial spares provisioning and |
procurement directly from the on-line data base should |
be considered. |
e. Facilities - The contractor should provide facilities
requirements data in digital form.
5.2 Acquisition of digital data products. A weapon system |
acquisition consists of a range of data products, including |
program management and technical review reports, acquisition |
planning documents, engineering documentation, and integrated |
logistic support data. For program management reports and other |
documents having a relatively short life-cycle and limited user |
community, the acquisition manager should consider delivery of |
the data in digital form in accordance with a mutually agreeable |
word processing package capable of performing any required data |
translations. This section provides guidelines for acquisition |
(including both delivery and access) of weapon system engineering |
and integrated logistic support information in digital form. |
These types of technical data generally have a long life cycle, |
17
MIL-HDBK-59A
are stored in engineering data repositories, and are accessed by |
a broad user community using dissimilar hardware. A master |
template and decision process has been developed for use by the |
acquisition manager in acquiring these types of information. |
Appendix B applies this decision process to specific logistic |
functional areas and data products, such as technical manuals and |
engineering drawings. Appendix D provides additional guidance on |
delivery and access mode options. |
5.2.1 Acquisition considerations. CALS is a strategy for
accomplishing the transition from paper-intensive weapon system
support processes to an automated and integrated form. It is not
a mandate to accomplish all data acquisition digitally, regard-
less of other considerations. The acquisition manager must base
decisions concerning acquisition of data in digital form in any
life-cycle phase on acquisition policy, on technology
availability, and on analysis of costs and benefits.
5.2.1.1 Data acquisition policy. DoD component policies and
directives regarding the acquisition of digital data deliverables
may govern preferred choices for specific applications and weapon
system programs. These policies may address specific acquisition
strategies, prime contractor/subcontractor/vendor relationships |
and capabilities, existing Department/Agency automated data
processing systems and other technical investments, future plans
for automated CITIS and government systems, or other management
considerations. Acquisition managers should contact the
appropriate Military Department or Agency CALS Office listed in
Appendix A for the most current policy directives to determine
whether certain categories of data are already mandated for
procurement as digital document images, processable files, or on-
line access.
5.2.1.2 Available technology. The availability of digital data
processing and telecommunications technology, and approved
standards for creation, storage, transmission, data protection
and integrity, etc., of data at the time of delivery or access
are important criteria for acquisition decisions. The current
and projected capabilities of both the contractor and DoD
components (Military Services and DLA) must be assessed with |
respect to program needs and schedules. Acquisition managers
should plan to acquire digital data products rather than hard
copy unless a clear case can be made that the costs will outweigh
the life cycle benefits.
5.2.1.3 Heterogeneous environment. The rapid introduction of
new technology will cause DoD and industry to operate in a mixed-
mode, heterogeneous environment for many years. Some contractors
with advanced capabilities will be on the leading edge of CALS
18
MIL-HDBK-59A
IWSDB technology well before DoD is ready to put IWSDB specifi-
cations and standards in place. Many contractors are ready to
implement current technology now, but will lag in the implemen-
tation of future capabilities. DoD has some near-term CALS
capabilities in place, but generally is not yet ready to take
advantage of all of the technology that is routinely used by
defense contractors. Finally, there is still a legacy of hard
copy technical data: data produced for older weapon systems and
still being maintained in hard copy form, hard copy data being
generated now in response to contract requirements established
several years ago, and hard copy data that will be generated in
parallel with the introduction of digital data technology. The
government must be prepared to support all of these technology
levels, and contractor teams must expect to deal with several
different levels of capability among team members.
5.2.1.4 Cost/benefit analysis. Large productivity and quality
gains are typically realized when technical data are created,
stored, retrieved, distributed, and used in digital form.
However, initial investment expenses in automation and
integration may not be offset by accrued benefits until later in
the weapon system life cycle. It is important that the
acquisition manager request bidders to provide comparisons of
costs, cost avoidances, and benefits for alternative approaches
for deliverables in their proposal. These comparisons should
identify significant costs and benefits that are expected to
accrue throughout the weapon system life from both a contractor |
and government perspective. The associated risks and |
tradeoffs/should also be provided. |
|
The analyses should be based upon program-specific guidance |
and factors provided by the government, and should consider |
government planned capabilities to receive, distribute, and use |
digital technical information. Results of the analyses should |
enable acquisition managers to assess relative risk as well as |
comparative costs, anticipated benefits, and return on |
investments associated with implementing each alternative. |
|
Estimated costs should reflect one-time investment and |
transition costs as well as a comparison of recurring operational |
expenses associated with the various CALS alternative approaches. |
Time-phased estimates of cost may consider, where applicable, |
categories such as: |
|
a. Capital costs associated with new equipment required |
for implementation and use. |
|
b. One-time and recurring costs for equipment operation, |
maintenance, and user training. |
19
MIL-HDBK-59A
c. Contractor data creation costs. |
|
d. Delivery and access expenses. |
|
e. Government distribution and use costs. |
|
f. Ongoing data update, storage and maintenance costs. |
|
Benefits should be identified in terms of anticipated |
improvements in productivity and military operations. |
|
a. In terms of productivity, identify cost savings or |
avoidances associated with labor, materials and |
equipment, as well as time reduction for the actual |
data creation, delivery, distribution, update, |
maintenance, and use of technical information. In |
addition, program schedule impacts should be evaluated. |
For example, the ability to expedite engineering change |
proposals within full-scale development may help to |
reduce the overall development time, or at least reduce |
the risk of costly program slippages. Other benefits |
associated with improved functional processes and |
technical information should be identified (and |
quantified if at all possible). |
|
b. Improvements to military operations may result due to |
increases in weapon system quality and performance, |
data accuracy, industrial and military responsiveness, |
readiness and sustainability. For example, fewer |
design problems should lead to more producible, |
reliable, maintainable weapon systems which ultimately |
affects readiness and sustainability. Improved data |
accuracy in technical manuals should improve the |
responsiveness and effectiveness of the maintenance |
process. Estimates of benefits should be quantified |
where possible. |
|
5.2.1.5 Incentives. Acquisition managers are continually faced |
with the challenge of accomplishing more with less funds. While |
much focus is placed on the acquisition cost of weapon systems, |
the life cycle cost of the system will have a greater impact on |
military readiness. The acquisition manager is continually |
updating and modifying his acquisition strategy based upon |
resource requirements, program changes or problem areas or the |
transition of a program from one acquisition phase to another. |
It is important that the acquisition manager consider CALS as an |
opportunity for cost savings or quality improvements throughout |
the acquisition cycle. |
20
MIL-HDBK-59A
Although competition is the principal motivator for CALS |
implementation on new weapon systems, other weapon systems will |
be affected dependent upon several factors such as: |
|
a. The time needed to develop the CALS capability as it |
relates to the specific program; |
|
b. The capability of the recipient of the data to receive |
and use the data; |
|
c. The benefits of CALS not only in terms of acquisition |
cost, but more importantly, in terms of life cycle |
costs; and |
|
d. The potential application of the specific CALS |
opportunity to other weapon system programs. |
|
The acquisition manager must be alert to the potential value |
of CALS implementation for the overall program. If implementing |
CALS will burden the contractor to an unacceptable level, the |
acquisition manager may be required to offer the contractor a |
reasonable incentive in the interests of long-term benefits that |
would accrue to the program. Appendix A provides detailed |
guidance for applying various incentives to achieve CALS |
implementation within weapon system acquisitions. |
|
5.2.2 Life-cycle phases. Planning for application of CALS |
requirements for functional integration and digital data |
acquisition in support of a weapon system program should begin at |
the earliest phase of the program and carry through continuously |
during the acquisition life cycle. Detailed implementation of |
CALS will change over the life cycle to reflect the changing |
nature of program requirements. Opportunities for functional |
integration and on-line access and use of digital data should be |
identified as early as possible in the acquisition process. Early |
identification and subsequent analysis of these opportunities |
must take into account government and contractor requirements for |
putting in place automated tools needed to create information in |
the appropriate digital form for use in downstream processes. |
Additionally, requirements relating to the characteristics and |
uses of the data must be evaluated. For example, in the early |
phases (e.g., Concept Exploration and Demonstration/Validation) |
of a program, data volatility is a key issue, and design changes |
are a frequent occurrence. Hence the government could utilize |
interactive computing techniques to access contractor design |
information, thus obviating the need for delivery of static |
information which may quickly become outdated. In later phases of |
the program, as the design stabilizes, the government might |
implement a suitable receiving system for support of digital data |
21
MIL-HDBK-59A
delivery. Similar approaches can be pursued for functional |
integration. In the early phase of a program design influence can |
be exerted through the use of R&M analysis tools integrated with |
the CAE data base. In the later phases, as design changes become |
negligible, additional CIM resources such as computer-aided |
process planning (CAPP) and computer-aided testing (CAT) can be |
put in place to support manufacturing requirements. Similarly, |
the LSA/LSAR data base can be integrated with automated |
publishing capabilities for preparation of logistic data |
products. Table I identifies the life cycle phases for a weapon |
system and depicts the linkage between these phases and |
consideration of CALS integration requirements and digital data |
acquisition alternatives. |
5.2.2.1 Full-scale development phase. As the program moves into
full-scale development, the volume of changes that require
acquisition office approval rapidly increases. Interactive
access could be justified to permit faster turnaround of change
approvals and to help the program maintain schedule.
5.2.2.2 Production phase. The majority of data is delivered
during the production phase. Major data acquisition issues |
include the volume and types of technical data being procured, |
and appropriate configuration management requirements. Major
considerations for the acquisition manager are: how will the
data be used during the operational and support phase, and how
will the data be delivered and distributed throughout the
logistics organizations.
5.2.2.3 Operation and support phase. The operation and support
phase, which encompasses the longest period of time of any of the
life-cycle phases, sees the greatest use of old data and a
continuing need for additional new data as product improvements
and other changes evolve. Acquisition managers must plan
carefully for the government organizations' ability to receive
data in a form appropriate for its revision and use for many
years downstream. Even if data was acquired through a contractor |
CITIS, physical delivery of the data must be planned for at some
point, such as when the weapon system finally goes out of
production.
22
MIL-HDBK-59A
TABLE I. CALS Considerations By Phase
+--------------------------------------+
| This table is presented on page 23a, |
| |
| which is necessary in this digital |
| |
| representation. Page 23a does not |
| |
| exist in the hard copy version. |
| |
+--------------------------------------+
5.2.3 Data processing categories. The acquisition manager must
consider how data will be processed in order to make good deci-
sions on digital data requirements and format. The five defined
categories of data processing typical of most weapon system
programs are archive, view, annotate/excerpt, update/maintain,
and process/transform. In the following discussion, the five
categories have been sequenced by level of sophistication, from
simple archiving to very complex information processing and
transformation.
5.2.3.1 Archive. Archiving is the placing of data in a reposi-
tory to preserve it for future use. Data may be archived in hard
copy; however, future use of the data is enhanced when the data
are prepared in digital form on media that allows automated
23
MIL-HDBK-59A
TABLE I. CALS Considerations By Phase
+------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| | PRE |CONCEPT| DEMVAL| FSD |PRODUC-| POST |
| |CONCEPT| | | | TION |PRODUCTN|
| | | | | | |DEPLOYMT|
|------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| A. MANAGEMENT: | | | | | | |
| CALS Strategy | x | x | x | x | x | x |
| CALS Plan of Action| | x | x | x | x | x |
| ILS Mgt Information| | x | x | x | x | x |
| | | | | | | |
| B. FUNCTIONAL | | | | | | |
| INTEGRATION/DESIGN | | | | | | |
| INFLUENCE: | | | | | | |
| Trade Studies | | x | x | x | x | x |
| R&M/CAD/CAE | | | x | x | | x |
| LSA/R&M | | x | x | x | | x |
| CAE/CAPP/CAT | | | x | x | | x |
| CAPP/CAT/CAM | | | | x | x | x |
| LSA Auto Publish | | | | x | x | x |
| | | | | | | |
| C. INTERACTVE ACCESS: | | | | | | |
| LSAR | | x | x | x | x | x |
| Engineering | | x | x | x | x | x |
| Drawings | | | | x | | |
| Tech Manuals | | | x | x | x | x |
| Training Materials | | | x | x | x | x |
| Technical Reports | | | x | x | x | x |
| | | | | | | |
| D. DIGITAL DATA | | | | | | |
| DELIVERY: | | | | | | |
| LSAR | | x | x | x | x | x |
| Engineering | | x | x | x | x | x |
| Drawings | | | | | | |
| Tech Manuals | | | x | x | x | x |
| Training Materials | | | x | x | x | x |
| Technical Reports | | | x | x | x | x |
+------------------------------------------------------------------------+
23a
MIL-HDBK-59A
retrieval. Digital data storage is also much more space
efficient than any hard copy storage media. Legal questions
remain on the certification of electronic records (digital data)
as originals in lieu of hard copy. Use of digital deliverables
may be limited for certain contract administration and accounting
functions. Data quality is usually more important than when
immediate use of the data is planned, because the data may not be
retrieved until after the experts who created it are no longer
available to correct shortcomings. Early identification of the
data repository for each life-cycle phase is necessary to lay the
foundation for required government and industry access for weapon
system support.
5.2.3.2 View. View is the ability to examine a data file
without the ability to change it. It is the traditional service
offered by early automated systems. It normally offers the
options of screen display or hard copy output from a printer.
Modern workstations and terminals, however, often include a local
storage device, i.e., either a hard or floppy disk drive, so that
anything displayed on the screen or output to a printer or
plotter can be stored locally for later retrieval at the
workstation without reestablishing a connection with the host
computer.
5.2.3.3 Annotate/excerpt. Annotate/excerpt is the ability to
evaluate and highlight for future reference or to make annota-
tions, approvals, and comments without the ability to change the
original file. This capability is especially useful for |
conducting on-line program design reviews and support for |
approval of documentation submissions. The extraction of |
relevant data for use in other documents, or for summarization
purposes, is also provided at this level. The essential
difference between annotate/excerpt and view is that annotations
can be returned either as an overlay file or as a revised
original file for processing by the host computer. This
effectively allows changes to be made to the data while
maintaining configuration control, although it is often
cumbersome. For audit trails and version control, the
acquisition manager should consider archiving these overlay and
backup files, or requiring the contractor to do so through
appropriate contractual tasking.
5.2.3.4 Update/maintain. Update/maintain is the ability to
change data, either directly or through controlling software, in
the active files on the host computer. An example of this data
processing type would be updating the GFE portion of an assembly
drawing and associated parts lists. The service life of weapon
systems may extend for 30 years or more; this longevity means
24
MIL-HDBK-59A
that the supporting data has a similarly long life during which
it must be updated, maintained, and controlled.
5.2.3.5 Process/transform. Process/transform is the ability to
extract and modify the format, composition, and structure of the
data into another useable form. Process/transform entails the
most complex processing of technical data. For example, CAD data
may be transformed into CIM data for making spare parts on
numerical control machines, or technical manual text and graphics
data may be transformed into very specific troubleshooting
maintenance aids for weapon system repair.
5.2.4 Data acquisition decision process. Figure 1, page 27, is |
the master template that should be used by the acquisition
manager to systematically determine how data should be delivered,
or made accessible, to the government by the contractor.
Application guidance for use of the master template for specific
functional areas is provided in Appendix B. The decision points
on the template are not always exclusive and indicate a range of
alternatives open to the acquisition manager. That is, selecting
one option at a decision point for a particular data product
within one life cycle phase does not necessarily preclude the
selection of other options for that same or other data products
in other life cycle phases. On each weapon system program, the
delivery media and technical use for each data product, contract
line item, and CDRL item must be carefully evaluated. The
evaluation process involves making four sets of decisions, as
shown in Figure 1, and explained in the following text.
5.2.4.1 Decision 1 - data deliverable type. The first decision
point involves evaluation of three data deliverable types:
human-interpretable documents, processable data files, and
interactive access through CITIS. These three types differ in |
their flexibility and in the variety of data applications they
can effectively accommodate. The first option is a document
(such as a drawing, manual, or report) in either hard copy or
digital form. Utility of documents is much more limited than the
other deliverable forms because the data has already been
processed into a finished technical data product. The second
option is delivery of digital data as a processable data file.
Such data files can provide the source data for multiple data
applications, allowing standard and custom documents to be
created, as well as allowing manipulation of the data for
annotate/excerpt or update/maintain purposes. The third option
is interactive access, which provides an agreed-upon type(s) of |
access to data bases through the contractor's CITIS. This option |
can provide the greatest flexibility of use, with immediate and
timely data access for custom report generation and document
creation, as well as on-line transactions to request transmittal
25
MIL-HDBK-59A
of information, via physical media, as documents or processable
data files. The following guidelines apply:
a. If a data product is currently ordered as hard copy,
consider its digital equivalent, a digital document
file.
b. If a source data deliverable is currently ordered,
consider a processable data file.
c. If drafts or preliminary data products are currently
ordered, consider on-line interactive access through
CITIS to annotate/excerpt the contractor's file to
perform the review and provide comments.
5.2.4.2 Decision 2 - data form. The next options are the forms
in which each data deliverable type can be procured.
5.2.4.2.1 Document. As shown at the top of Figure 1, the
document options are hard copy (e.g., paper and microfilm), or a
digital document image (e.g., raster) file for printout and
display. Both of these are static data forms. Application of
this data is limited to archive, view, or annotate/excerpt only.
The digital document image file option is more flexible than the
hard copy option because the data can be more easily stored,
transported, and managed. Neither hard copy nor digital
documents can be easily modified or updated.
5.2.4.2.2 Processable data files. As shown in the middle of
Figure 1, the processable data files option provides a dynamic
form of the source data with two possibilities: separated files
for text, graphics, alphanumeric, and audio/visual data; or
integrated files consolidating the different data representations
(text, graphics, etc.). Either can be much more easily
manipulated and changed by users than can digital document
images. Text files may contain free-form or structured text,
depending on users and intended applications. Manuals and
reports are typical examples of text files. Graphics files may
contain illustrations, design data, schematics, etc., in vector
format.
A technical data product delivered as digital data may contain a
combination of data types and forms. The technology for
converting text in hard copy or digital document image form into
processable data files is rapidly maturing, and is becoming cost
effective for many applications. The technology for converting
document graphics into processable data is also improving, but it
is not yet as capable as the technology for text conversion. The
choice between processable vector graphics and non-processable
26
MIL-HDBK-59A
raster graphics is dependent on the creation and application of
the data. For example, one alternative for creation of a
technical manual may be the combination of a processable data
file of text, together with raster document image illustrations.
Whether processable data files are to be delivered as separate or
integrated files is largely dependent on technology, the func-
tional application, and the data creation process. Technology to
FIGURE 1. Decision template for acquisition of digital data.
enable integration of separate text and graphics data files is
progressing rapidly. Appropriate data standards are emerging,
although they are only beginning to enter the commercial market.
5.2.4.2.3 CITIS. The options shown at the bottom of Figure 1
present choices for interactive access into contractors' data |
base(s) through CITIS. There are 4 levels of service available |
to the acquisition manager through CITIS. CITIS Level 1 service |
provides access to an automated index or accession list for data |
selection and ordering. CITIS Level 2 service provides the |
capability for the government to perform predefined queries and |
extractions and ability to conduct on-line review, comment, and |
27
MIL-HDBK-59A
approval of contractor-generated data and products. CITIS Level |
3 service provides the capability for the government to perform |
ad-hoc queries for information. CITIS Level 4 provides the |
capability for the government to use contractor application |
software available from the contractor's system(s) for processing |
and analysis of data. Through interactive access, the user can |
tailor presentation of the data to meet the user's immediate
needs. As the data are needed, they can be accessed in their
most current authorized version. Although this is the most
powerful data type, its use is constrained by the cost of
available technology, and not all contractors have an automated
data processing infrastructure that provides interactive access
capability. When interactive access is used, the absence of
standardized access query tools among many CITIS data bases may
limit the ability to use the ad hoc query form. The contractor
CITIS should provide the standardized access query tools needed.
5.2.4.3 Decision 3 - specifications and standards. Relevant
specifications and standards must be selected to contract for
access and the delivery of contractor-generated data products. |
The CITIS design should be flexible so that as the standards for |
query tools mature they can be incorporated into the contract |
CITIS. The third column of Figure 1 presents available |
alternatives for the three deliverable options. Here, the
decision template becomes application specific. In some cases,
specifications and standards apply to a single functional
application; MIL-STD-1388-2 is a standard that applies only to
logistic support analysis records, for example. In other cases,
a single standard can apply to several functional applications;
MIL-STD-1840 is a standard that defines data organization and
file layouts for technical manuals, engineering drawings, and
other types of technical data.
5.2.4.3.1 Functional and technical standards. In a paper-based
environment, functional requirements (what data to create and how
it should appear) and technical requirements (how to organize and
encode that data in a digital file) were commonly combined in a
single document. Computer programmers and users have both found
that separating functional requirements and technical
requirements into separate standards makes it easier to manage
changes in technology. Functional specifications and standards
must be cited to govern the data creation process and, within the
context of specific applications, determine the data contents and
structure. Examples of functional specifications are MIL-M-38784
for technical manuals and MIL-T-31000 for technical data
packages. Technical specifications and standards must be cited
to govern data structures and formats, file transfer procedures,
interchange requirements, and presentation formats. Examples of
technical specifications are MIL-M-28001 for technical manual
28
MIL-HDBK-59A
text, MIL-D-28003 for technical manual vector graphics, and MIL- |
R-28002 for engineering drawing raster graphics. |
5.2.4.3.2 Predefined and ad hoc queries. Options for interac-
tive access through CITIS to contractors' data bases are shown at |
the bottom of the third column of Figure 1. Distributed
relational data base technology is new, and is evolving so
rapidly, that contractor data bases usually have unique data
organizations and unique access methods, depending on what
technology the contractor has implemented, and how recently the
supporting architecture was designed. The contractors' |
capability should provide the means to accommodate the |
differences in these systems and data bases so that the unique |
data organizations and data access methods are transparent to the |
user as accessed through the CITIS. Many different data base |
management systems, data base query languages, and software
systems support these access methods. The options for
interactive access recognize this situation. Predefined queries,
the first option, retrieve and display information from the
contractor data bases through the CITIS using formats that are |
tailored to a specific application and fixed in advance. Some
latitude is provided by allowing user-defined keys to select,
sequence, or summarize data. However, the information retrieval
requirements are well defined in advance, and can be incorporated
into the CITIS architecture even if this must be done in a CITIS-
unique manner. The second option for interactive access is the
ad hoc query. By definition, an ad hoc query is application-
independent. Therefore ad hoc query options are driven by
technology rather than application. This leads to two
alternatives for ad hoc queries: contractor-unique, and data
standards. Currently, the unique data access capabilities of
many contractors' CITIS may require the acquisition manager to
evaluate a variety of non-standard proposals for ad hoc queries.
This is the first alternative, but it is not the long-term
solution.
5.2.4.3.3 Data standards. Data standards, the second
alternative for ad hoc queries, address emerging technology and
standards that govern the basic data, independent of their
creation processes and their internal relationships with each
subcomponent. These concepts will form the basis for development
and implementation of longer term CALS capabilities. The goal of
these data standards is a neutral view of data that is consistent
for all applications needing the data. When this goal is
achieved, data definitions, relationships, and rules for consis-
tency and integrity will be controlled by a master data model and
an active data dictionary, permitting uniform, standard access
techniques for both computers and computer users. Data access
methods can then be hardware and software independent, not
29
MIL-HDBK-59A
requiring the user to be familiar with multiple, different data
base access methods.
5.2.4.4 Decision 4 - digital delivery mode. The final options
are the delivery modes in which to procure the technical data in
digital form. The right side of Figure 1 presents two alterna-
tives for delivery: physical media and telecommunications.
Physical media forms for delivery of digital data consist of
magnetic tape, magnetic disk, and optical disk. Delivery of
documents or processable data using telecommunications is not the
same as interactive access, but rather is simply one-way
electronic mail. Telecommunications delivery alternatives
include high-speed dedicated lines, public or private networks, |
and satellite links. The protocols necessary to accomplish data |
transfer via telecommunications links are discussed in Appendix |
D. The best medium of delivery is dependent on an analysis of |
data volumes, urgency, and frequency of use versus the cost and
security of each delivery medium. With current technology,
physical media transfer is generally the most cost-effective
means of transferring large data files. Telecommunication
networks are in increasingly widespread commercial as well as DoD
use. However, CALS introduces new problems because of the volume
of digital data that will be transmitted, and associated
requirements for data protection and integrity. Therefore,
telecommunications is currently most appropriate for interactive
access or special low volume use.
5.3 Contract deliverables. The contractor's CALS Implementation |
Plan should reflect the acquisition manager's data management |
strategy and deliverables plan. Supported by necessary trade
studies, the CALSIP should enumerate and describe the framework |
for CALS implementation activities to be accomplished during each
phase of weapon system development. It should list the technical
data that will be acquired in digital form, and describe the
actions to be taken by the contractor to achieve functional
process integration. The implementation strategy will serve as a
guide in developing contract requirements in later program
development phases. It should be updated at the beginning of
each program phase to define implementation plans for the
upcoming phase in greater detail, resolve outstanding strategy
issues, respond to strategic changes, and define appropriate
contract language for the upcoming development phase.
5.4 Data protection and integrity, data rights, and related
issues.
5.4.1 Industry. Contractors may choose to limit access to data
documenting products, procedures, and processes for which the
government or other contractors do not possess the data rights.
30
MIL-HDBK-59A
Where government access of a contractor data base is desired, |
contractors will be concerned about such access to data that have |
not been validated by the contractor, data that include |
proprietary information, and data outside the scope of the |
relevant contract. In addition, much of the data documenting |
weapon systems is subject to technology transfer limitations,
such as the Arms Export Control Act, that impose restrictions on
free release of such data. Contractors must develop and follow
procedures which ensure that digital data delivered to, or
accessed by, the government are properly marked and that controls
and safeguards in the digital environment provide at least the
level of protection provided in the paper-based environment.
Where classified information is developed or used by industry,
additional oversight, programmatic controls, and special handling
procedures will be imposed by the acquisition manager, who will
be supported by an extensive community of security organizations.
Technology and standards are still being developed to address the
newly-emerging issues associated with data protection and
integrity in a digital environment. Procedures for ensuring data
protection and integrity are extensive; selected areas that
require review during planning for the acquisition of digital
information are discussed in Appendix E.
5.4.2 Government. The government must address during
acquisition planning the procedures that should be developed for
effective management of classified, sensitive, or limited rights
data. Successful implementation will require clear contractual
agreement on how data will be safeguarded, both by the contractor
and subsequently by the government. In addition, where govern-
ment access of a contractor data base is desired, contractors
will be concerned about government access to data that have not
been validated by the contractor, data that contains proprietary |
information, and data that is outside the scope of the
contractual agreement. In such cases the government should
consider acquiring access to a separate data base of validated
data that has been delivered in place, until proven procedures
are developed for managing government access to contractor data
systems.
5.5 Post-award orientation conference. The contract statement |
of work should task the contractor to participate in a post-award |
orientation conference aimed at reviewing all CALS implementation |
activities to be accomplished during the contract period. The |
contractor should be required to fully discuss the contract |
requirements including plans for acquisition of digital data |
deliverables, functional integration of contractor processes, |
delivery modes, and protection of classified or otherwise |
sensitive information. Additional matters that need to be |
clarified or otherwise discussed with the contractor should be |
31
MIL-HDBK-59A
included on the conference agenda, such as required technical |
specifications, other work requirements, quality control and |
testing procedures, special contract provisions, and procedures |
for monitoring and measuring progress. |
5.6 Detailed guidance for applications. The preceding section
provides general guidelines for procurement and integration of
technical data in weapon system acquisition contracts. The
transition from paper to digital data deliverables and digital
data access requires review and revision of traditional ways of
procuring data, and development of new contractual approaches.
To aid the acquisition manager in accomplishing the evolutionary
transition to a contractor/government shared data environment,
initial CALS attention has been focused on functional areas that
are large generators or users of technical data. Appendices to
this handbook are provided for the following topics:
Appendix A, CALS Overview.
Appendix B, Application Guidance for Acquisition of Digital
Deliverables.
Appendix C, Functional Requirements for Integration of
Contractor Processes.
Appendix D, Contract Requirements for Delivery Modes.
Appendix E, Data Protection and Integrity, Data Rights, and
Related Issues.
32
MIL-HDBK-59A
6 NOTES
6.1 Intended use. The purpose of this military handbook is to
provide weapon system and equipment acquisition managers with
general information and detailed application guidance for con-
tractually implementing CALS requirements in weapon system and
related major equipment procurements. This military handbook
also describes CALS, aids in the implementation of functional
integration requirements for contractors, and provides guidance
to facilitate the generation, access, and delivery of digital
technical information.
6.2 Subject term (key word) listing.
Acquisition management
Computer-aided acquisition and logistic support (CALS)
Computer-aided design (CAD)
Computer-aided engineering (CAE)
Computer-aided manufacturing (CAM)
Computer-integrated manufacturing (CIM)
Computer security
Configuration Management (CM)
Contract requirements
Contractor integrated technical information services (CITIS)
Concurrent engineering
Costs and benefits
Data base management
Data management
Data protection and integrity
Integrated logistic support (ILS)
Integrated Weapon System Data Base (IWSDB)
Life cycle
Logistic support analysis (LSA)
Logistic support analysis record (LSAR)
Reliability and Maintainability (R&M)
Weapon systems
6.3 Changes from previous issue. The margins of this handbook
are marked with dashed vertical lines to indicate where changes
(additions, modifications, corrections, deletions) from the
previous issue were made. This was done as a convenience only
and the government assumes no liability whatsoever for any
inaccuracies in these notations. Bidders and contractors are
cautioned to evaluate the requirements of this document based on
the entire content irrespective of the marginal notation and
relationships to the last previous issue.
33
MIL-HDBK-59A
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
34