DEF STAN 00-60 (PART 11)/3

PART 11: GUIDANCE ON THE APPLICATION OF ELECTRONIC DOCUMENTATION IN AN ILS ENVIRONMENT

Section One. General

0 Introduction

0.1This part of this Standard gives guidance on the approach to the procurement, format, transfer media and maintenance of Electronic Documentation (ED).

0.2This Part of this Standard makes reference to AECMA Specification 1000D (S1000D) which is the source document used for Technical Publications utilising a Common Source Database (CSDB) within the MOD.

1 Scope

1.1 This Part of this Defence Standard provides guidance on Part 10 of this Defence Standard which profiles S1000D for MOD use.

2 Related Documents

2.1Reference in this Part of the Defence Standard to any related documents means, in any ITT or contract the edition and all amendments current at the date of such tender or contract, unless a specific edition is indicated in Part 0 of this Defence Standard or contract.

2.2Documents that are related to MOD requirements for ED will be defined in the contract.

2.3The documents and publications referred to in this Part of the Defence Standard are shown at Part 0 of this Defence Standard.

2.4A list of sources to obtain copies of related documents is detailed in Part 0 of this Defence Standard.

3 Definitions

3.1 A glossary of terms used throughout this Defence Standard is included at annex A to Part 0 of this Defence Standard.

4 Abbreviations

4.1 A list of abbreviations used throughout this part of this Defence Standard is included at annex A to Part 0 of this Defence Standard.

5

DEF STAN 00-60 (PART 11)/3

5 Policy

5.1 It is MOD policy to procure technical documentation in electronic form for use within the emerging MOD Logistic IT systems. The intention is to achieve the most cost-effective method of procuring and maintaining such information.

6

DEF STAN 00-60 (PART 11)/3

Section Two. Electronic Documentation Process

6 Introduction

6.1 This Section of this Defence Standard outlines the relationship between ED, Logistic Support Analysis (LSA) and Integrated Supply Support Procedures (ISSP). It amplifies Figure 2 of Part 0 of this Defence Standard to illustrate the more detailed relationships between the engineering design data base, Logistic Support Analysis Record (LSAR) and ED, followed by a description of In-Process Review.

7 General

7.1 The parts data and technical data contained in the LSAR will be used by the technical author to produce a data module (DM). The electronic documentation process uses information from LSA and engineering design and other sources. The data elements common to the ILS process have been harmonised so that they can be shared, for example, between the engineering design, LSAR, provisioning and publications data bases. The results of the LSA process are held in the LSAR which may be interrogated to extract information for the electronic documentation process. This does not however cover the full range of documentation requirements. Information is required from the engineering design data base to compile illustrations and to construct the descriptive and operator DM. Table 1 gives an example of this relationship for a procedural DM.

Table 1 Links from LSA Report to Procedural Data Module

7

DEF STAN 00-60 (PART 11)/3

Table 1 - Concluded

8 In-Process Review

8.1In-Process Review consists of three stages (see Figure 1), for which the management document is the Documentation Management Plan (DMP). The Contractor is responsible for providing DM following production of the DMP, a part of which is the Data Module Requirements List (DMRL). Examples of the DMP and DMRL are at Annexes A and B respectively. During In-Process Review the Customer will review the material supplied. Any relevant comments will be returned to the Contractor. The Contractor in turn will respond to the comments either by producing a new deliverable or by rejecting the comment, for which justification is required.

8.2The responsibility for the information at all times resides with the Contractor and any comments made by the Customer are advisory. It should be recognised that the Customer might only sample the deliverables supplied and will not normally comment on the totality of the information. It should also be noted that the process of second verification is an optional Customer activity which will have no contractual dependencies.

8.3The stages of In-Process Review are as follows:

8.3.1 Stage One. The first stage will be to review the DMRL, including a comparison with LSAR data and the requirements for Operator specific DM.

8.3.1.1 It is expected, that within this Defence Standard , the DMRL will be derived in part from LSAR data, eg LSA Report 674 provides a task summary, whilst LSA Report 652 gives details of the spares required. The LSAR does not capture all the engineering design data used to populate Operator specific DM. This means the DMRL will require additional input to cater for these requirements. The DMRL will be raised and issued to the Customer at an agreed milestone which will be detailed in the contract and this would normally be after the initial population of the LSAR and updated thereafter at each subsequent update, change to design or operational characteristics.

8.3.2 Stage Two. The second stage is for the Customer to comment on First Verified DM (First Verification is a responsibility of the Contractor). Scope, depth, and compliance with LSA and contract requirements will be examined. This stage is split into two parts, Second Verification and commenting.

8

Figure 1 In-Process Review

9

DEF STAN 00-60 (PART 11)/3

8.3.2.1Second Verification is co-ordinated by the Customer who may require the equipment to be made available to carry out this task. Where the equipment cannot be made available, the Customer may elect to carry out Second Verification, in conjunction with the First Verification. However, Second Verification remains the Customer’s responsibility.

8.3.2.2Commenting is carried out by the Customer. Comments are returned to the Contractor in Standard Generalised Mark-up Language (SGML) format.

8.3.3 Stage Three. In stage three, the Customer reviews and comments on the Delivered Publications Data Base (DPDB) and proposed final deliverable. The following are examples of features that may be included in this review:

(a) The verification of the range of DM included in the DPDB.

(b) The screen presentation.

(c) The embedded links between DM, between DM and graphics and other links as specified in the Publications Module (PM).

(d) The compilation of hard copy.

(e) The presentation of hard copy.

10