+-----------------+ | 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