UNLIMITED FREE ACCESS TO THE WORLD'S BEST IDEAS

SUBMIT
Already a GlobalSpec user? Log in.

This is embarrasing...

An error occurred while processing the form. Please try again in a few minutes.

Customize Your GlobalSpec Experience

Finish!
Privacy Policy

This is embarrasing...

An error occurred while processing the form. Please try again in a few minutes.

- Trained on our vast library of engineering resources.

MODUK - DEF STAN 00-56: PART 2

Safety Management Requirements for Defence Systems Part 2 Guidance on Establishing a Means of Complying with Part 1 THIS GUIDANCE IS NOT MANDATORY

inactive
Organization: MODUK
Publication Date: 17 December 2004
Status: inactive
Page Count: 82
scope:

SCOPE AND APPLICABILITY

This Standard specifies requirements that apply to the Contractor. However, the responsibility for safety is shared by all parties. The requirements placed on the Duty Holder are set down in the relevant Joint Service Publications (JSPs). This Standard has been written to align the requirements placed on the Contractor with the requirements placed on the Duty Holder. The Contractor should discuss the requirements of the relevant JSPs with the Duty Holder when applying this Standard as domain-specific issues may affect the interpretation and scope of application of this Standard. They may also be the source of specific contractual safety requirements. Relevant JSPs may be specified in the contract, but, in any case, specific requirements arising from the JSPs should be clarified and agreed.

The principle of proportionality is fundamental to this Standard. The level of effort expended on safety management and the detail of the analysis should be commensurate with the potential risk posed by the system (i.e. the risk identified before any mitigation has taken place) and its complexity. For example, simple systems may have few safety requirements because of their limited functionality; consequently, compliance with this Standard may be easier to achieve, resulting in a simpler Safety Case. In general, the more complex the system and/or the more onerous the operational requirement, the greater the risk, hence more effort will be required to achieve a safe system and to demonstrate that it is safe. The ultimate test of sufficiency of effort and adequacy of evidence will be the acceptance of the Safety Case; discussion with the Duty Holder and any regulatory authorities should be ongoing through the life of the project to enable effective planning and resource allocation to increase the likelihood that the Safety Case produced at the end of the process is acceptable.

Systems will include a combination of elements. The two main elements will usually be equipment and people. Human Factors should receive appropriate consideration including where they relate to the use of tools and techniques; ref Def Stan 00-25, Human Factors for Designers of Systems.

The term 'system' is used in this Standard to cover all different types of acquisition, including both the supply of equipment and the provision of services (such as acquisition through a Public Private Partnership). This Standard also covers other activities carried out by a Contractor on behalf of the MOD. It is possible that not all clauses can be applied to, or are appropriate for, all situations. Clauses 1.5 to 1.7 allow this Standard to be tailored to specific situations. 1.4 There may need to be separate safety considerations for different scenarios due to changing legislative or operational requirements. Agreement will be needed between the Duty Holder and the Contractor if there are conflicting safety requirements between different scenarios. There will need to be a balance between safety and operational effectiveness; in particular, the issue of survivability may be significant.

Wartime Risk

The term wartime is used in this Standard to refer to periods of conflict. However, it should be noted that, legally, most conflicts do not occur during a period of war. As a result therefore, even if legislation does not apply during a period of war, it should not be assumed that the legislation would not apply to conflict situations.

In circumstances where legislative requirements do not apply to particular systems, activities or operational scenarios, the Secretary of State's policy statement will usually apply. Consequently, the objective should be for the level of safety to be at least as good as that required by legislation, so agreed targets and criteria should be based on the principle that wartime and other operational risk should be no higher than risk during peacetime. However, where higher levels of risk are absolutely essential for the maintenance of operational capability (i.e. the targets or criteria cannot be met), these may be accepted by the Duty Holder.

The Safety Case should address wartime risks in accordance with domain specific requirements with clarification from the MOD Duty Holder, taking account of other relevant work, e.g. Availability, Reliability, Maintainability, (ARM), Operational Effectiveness studies etc.

In the response to an Invitation to Tender (ITT), a contractor has the opportunity to state any intended non-compliance with the Standard, as well as to explain how compliance will be achieved. The Duty Holder will assess the response against both the requirements and the key objectives of this Standard (see Part 1, Clause 0.3). The objective of the assessment will be to generate confidence that a demonstrably safe system will be produced and that compliance with the intent of this Standard will be achieved. It is important that full consideration is given to both parts of this Standard. It may be that any proposed noncompliances will be negotiated prior to the issue of the contract. Following the issue of the contract, it will be assumed that, unless otherwise agreed, the Contractor will be fully compliant with this Standard.

Potential deviations from the Standard should be discussed and agreed with the Duty Holder. Discussion may take place both before and after contract acceptance, but see clause 1.5 above. The following points should be considered:

a. Where there is a proposal not to meet requirements deriving from legislation, specialist advice (probably including legal advice) should be sought to determine whether this is acceptable and/or appropriate.

b. There may be circumstances when alternatives are offered, or demands are made to use alternative approaches to those required by this Standard. For example, it may be that more stringent demands are required for specific developments, or alternative standards are required to meet international requirements. Provided the intent of this Standard is met, such alternative approaches may be agreed between the Contractor and the Duty Holder. Any such agreement should meet the requirements of clause 1.8.

Most clauses within this Standard do not specify the means by which compliance should be achieved, so there should be little cause for non-compliance on technical grounds. However, there are a number of potential reasons for non-compliance with certain clauses. For example, where the scope of a contracted activity is limited to a part of the acquisition lifecycle or a part of the acquisition activity, the Duty Holder and the Contractor may agree not to apply clauses that are assessed as being inappropriate. More stringent requirements than those covered by this Standard may apply as a result of legislative or other demands. Whatever the reason for non-compliance, care should be taken not to weaken the safety requirements; the spirit of this Standard, as expressed in the key objectives, should always be considered. The following should be noted:

Where individual clauses are not applied because they are outside the scope of the contract, the Contractor should carry out activities, or provide information, that is necessary to allow those clauses to be met by another party, where relevant or practical. It is important that safety for the whole life of the system is planned, even though the Contractor may change through the phases of the project. Any such requirements should be agreed with the Duty Holder and appropriate contractual action taken.

The compliance matrix for this Standard should be a deliverable, initially as part of a tender response, then as a contracted item.

There may be proposals to adopt alternative safety standards, which have different requirements to this Standard. These will be acceptable where they meet the intent of this Standard. However it is possible that meeting the requirements of the alternative standards may not be sufficient to satisfy UK legislation or MOD policy in which case the alternative standards, if accepted, shall be augmented to meet the intent of this Standard. There may also be conflicts between safety requirements and requirements arising from other sources, such as performance requirements. In such cases, both the Duty Holder and any regulatory authority should be consulted.

Document History

February 28, 2017
Safety Management Requirements for Defence Systems - Part 2 : Guidance on Establishing a Means of Complying with Part 1
Scope and Applicability Defence Standard 00-056 Part 1 specifies the requirements for achieving, assuring and managing the safety of Products, Services and/or Systems (PSS) defined by the scope of...
June 1, 2007
Safety Management Requirements for Defence Systems Part 2 : Guidance on Establishing a Means of Complying with Part 1
SCOPE AND APPLICABILITY This Standard specifies requirements that apply to the Contractor. However, the responsibility for safety is shared by all parties. The requirements placed on the Duty Holder...
June 1, 2007
Safety Management Requirements for Defence Systems - Part 2 : Guidance on Establishing a Means of Complying with Part 1
SCOPE AND APPLICABILITY This Standard specifies requirements that apply to the Contractor. However, the responsibility for safety is shared by all parties. The requirements placed on the Duty Holder...
DEF STAN 00-56: PART 2
December 17, 2004
Safety Management Requirements for Defence Systems Part 2 Guidance on Establishing a Means of Complying with Part 1 THIS GUIDANCE IS NOT MANDATORY
SCOPE AND APPLICABILITY This Standard specifies requirements that apply to the Contractor. However, the responsibility for safety is shared by all parties. The requirements placed on the Duty Holder...
December 13, 1996
Safety Management Requirements for Defence Systems Part 2: Guidance
Scope and Applicability This Part of the Standard provides generic information and guidance on the safety management requirements for systems. Any design rules, methods or techniques contained in...

References

Advertisement