曝光台 注意防骗
网曝天猫店富美金盛家居专营店坑蒙拐骗欺诈消费者
Several paragraphs in each specification are safety related. These include:
Health and Safety Criteria. This paragraph concerns the health of
operations personnel. It should include firm requirements for radiation
levels (such as X-rays from high-power amplifiers and antenna radiation
patterns), toxic gases, and high noise environments. Each system has its
unique operating environment. In so far as possible, associated health
problems must be anticipated and a firm requirement for solving those
problems should be included in this section. Those problems missed may
be identified by the contractor's SSP. The advantage of identifying actual
or anticipated health problems in this section of the system specification is
that their solution will be included in the contract price and be a design
requirement.
Safety Requirements. This paragraph should contain general systemlevel
safety requirements. Some examples of these requirements can be
found in requirement 1 of MIL-STD-454 and paragraph 5.13 of MILSTD-
1472. Citing an entire document or design handbook and expecting
the contractor to comply with every thing therein is unrealistic. Where
practical, assigned acceptable probability numbers for Category I and II
hazards, should be included in this paragraph.
Functional Area Characteristics. This paragraph has subparagraphs
that address more specific lower-level safety requirements, such as safety
equipment. Paragraph 3.7 of MIL-STD-490 defines specifications and
identifies all emergency-use hardware, such as fire extinguishers, smoke
detection systems, and overheat sensors for the system operating
environment.
Quality Conformance Inspections. This paragraph requires the
contractor to verify by inspection, analysis, or actual test, each
requirement in section 3 of the system specification including systems
safety. Paragraph 4.2, often requires verification of corrective actions
taken to manage the risk of all Category I and II hazards. The corrective
measures would be verified by inspection, analysis, or demonstration.
FAA System Safety Handbook, Chapter 6: System Safety Guidelines for Contracting
August 2, 2000
6 -
6
6.2.4 Statement of Work (SOW)
The SOW, usually Section C of the RFP, defines the work anticipated to be necessary to complete the
contract. This is the only means the procuring activity has available to communicate the scope of the
system safety task. There are two viable approaches to preparing a SOW for a bid package. The first is to
specify adherence to Section 4 of MIL-STD-882D which provides the minimum components of a SSP but
not specific analyses or deliverables. The second includes these details in the SOW as part of the
procurement package. The first approach increases the complexity of the source selection and negotiation
processes, but may reduce acquisition costs. The latter is more traditional but is in conflict with current
trends of increasing flexibility. In either case, the negotiated SOW must be explicit. The following
discussion is applicable to an explicit SOW whether it be submitted with RFP package or negotiated.
The SOW task descriptions can consist of a detailed statement of the task or contain only references to
paragraphs in other documents such as MIL-STD-882 or this handbook. Elaborate task descriptions are
not required. A simple statement, however, in the body of the SOW such as, "The contractor shall conduct
a System Safety Program to identify and control accident risk" does not define the safety requirements
adequately. A contractor might argue that it is only required to caution it’s design team to look out for and
minimize hazards.
System Safety Section
This section of the SOW must contain enough detail to tell the contractor exactly what kind of SSP is
required. Some SSP issues that could be detailed in the SOW follow:
· The requirement for planning and implementing an SSP tailored to the requirements of
MIL-STD-882.
· Defining relationships among the prime contractor and associate contractors,
integrating contractors, and subcontractors i.e. "Who's the Boss?".
· The requirement for contractor support of safety meetings such as System Safety
Working Groups (SSWG). If extensive travel is anticipated, either the FAA should
estimate the number of trips and locations or structure the contract to have this
element on a cost reimbursable basis.
· Definition of number and schedule of safety reviews, with a statement of what should
be covered at the reviews. Safety reviews are best scheduled for major design reviews,
such as the system design review, preliminary design review, and critical design
中国航空网 www.aero.cn
航空翻译 www.aviation.cn
本文链接地址：
System Safety Handbook系统安全手册上(116)
