Splinter Utilization Planning Discussion Notice ： This technical data is furnished on the condition that it will be used by and disclosed to the receiving Cooperating agency and its contractors and sub contractors only for the purposes of fulfilling the cooperating agency’s responsibilities under the Space Station Intergovernmental Agreement (IGA) and Memorandum of Understanding (MOU). It shall not be used for any other purpose, nor disclosed or retransferred to any other entity or government without prior written permission of the Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA).

Contents 1. Inc35/36 Utilization Planning Status 2. PTP Table Blank Book Update 3. Method of Crew time addition

1. Utilization Planning Status CategoryCrew time (hrs)Comments Nominal Task92.74Maintenance task : hrs (30.5%) Reserved Task45.60Maintenance task : 1.33 hrs (2.9%) Total138.34Maintenance Task : hrs (21.4%) –Comparison with Inc33/34, and maintenance task takes higher percentage and it accounts for approximately 30% of nominal crew time. (The maintenance task accounts for around 2% in Inc33/34.) This is because the SpX-3 flight slip to Inc37/38 causes a reduction of experiment tasks. –The reserved crew time is 45.6hrs. However most of the crew task has prerequisite/conditions. It might be hard to use all the JAXA crew time allocation if HTV4 flight was slipped to the next increment or some JAXA payload facilities were down. Increment35/36 JAXA Utilization Plan Overview –In the latest JAXA utilization plan, the nominal crew time requirement is hrs including about 28hrs of payload maintenance tasks. InvestigationFacilityReserve Crewtime(hrs)Pre-requisite/conditions Marangoni ExpFPEF IPU 4.17 Place Hold (This is Increment34 task. If not performed in Inc34, this must be moved to Nominal and performed before Marangoni UVP.) Dynamic Surf115.83Not possible to perform when Marangoni UVP is active. Aniso Tubule MELFI, AQH Microscope 5.68HTV4 launch Ice Crystal2SCOF, IPU1.50 HTV4 launch The reserve task is Close-out task. HicariGHF7.84Not possible to perform when Alloy Semiconductor is active. Alloy SemiconductorGHF runs are Nominal and 3 runs are reserve. (Considering experiment duration per run, it is hard to perform more than 3runs.) Ryutai L&MRytai1.33 One of task is FPEF Lamp exchange, another is MMA reconfiguration. The lamp exchange is not necessary if Dynamic Surf is not moved to Nominal. The MMA Recon is not necessary if Alloy Semiconductor 3rd run is not move to Nominal.

2. PTP Blank Book –Purposal IDRD Annex5 (PTP table) covers a lot of requirement data items, and IPMs/IPEs make a lots of efforts to make and maintain this document. To reduce the efforts as much as possible, JAXA proposes restarting PTP Blank Book updates. As shown in JAXA comments in 2011, JAXA requested deleting all tables other than below. (Refer to JAXA comments in 2011 for details.) ・ Table3.0-7: Overview/Purpose/Constrains of each payload ・ Table4.1: Manifest ・ Table5.2-1 : Crewtime ・ Table5.2-3 : Resource request of Gas/ Water etc ・ Table9.1-1 : SSE table –Status : Proposal of update PTP Blank Book 2011/5 : Sent back JAXA Comment /8 : Sent back JAXA Comment /8 : Sent back JAXA Comment /10 : Sent back JAXA Comment 4 -> No Progress PTP Blank Book update

2. PTP Blank Book Payload manifest data input process –JAXA Proposal For manifesting Payload HDWs, change to inputting into MIDAS directly instead of submitting MR Loader. –Purpose /Background Under the current payload manifesting/changing process, MR Loader is required. However, for manifesting System HDWs, they are directly inputted into MIDAS. This is “OC process”. Recently, JAXA IPM transfer into JAXA Operation Management team, JEM Mission Operations and Integration Center (NASA OC counterpart). It means both NASA and JAXA IPM teams are under Mission Ops&Inte Office. Therefore, for payload HDWs manifesting, JAXA would like to apply the same manner as OC (System HDWs manifest process), and this process will save time for making MR Loader and reduce data inputting errors. With request from JAXA IPM Manager, JAXA would like NASA to consider this proposal. –Issue for NASA If there is any issue for JAXA proposal, we will have discussion for solving an issue.

3. Method of Crew time addition Standardizing a method of adding crewtime in the real time phase –JAXA Proposal In the real time phase, sometime planned crewtime is expanded by Houston FD’s order considering crew’s physical condition and so on. However, the method/process of crewtime padding to reduce crew work load is different in each increment. (e.g.) Inc 33/34: Additional 25% Crew time for first look task Past Increment : 5 min task -> 10min task Everytime in this situation, it takes a time for coordination among IPs. Therefore, we suggest making guideline of padding crewtime. –Future work The guideline of padding time need to be defined in GGR&C.

Crewtime estimation for NASA payload activities. –JAXA request About “Pad time” for Kevin, the Huston FD required us for adding 25% for first look crew task. We knew this padtime method was applied to only Kevin’s tasks. JAXA planned crew time already include pad time. This means the planned duration is always for the crew who assigned to the task for the first time. Therefore, it was not necessary to add “Pad time” to JAXA payload activities. At the same time, we thought the estimation method of crewtime might be different from NASA. Therefore, we want to know the way of NASA crewtime estimation. –JAXA method of crewtime estimation First activity: Based on the time performed by a stuff who never see the ODF and add a margin (considering under microgravity). For task performed in a previous increment: Based on an actual crewtime in a previous increment. 3. Method of Crew time addition (Cont’d)

Backup Chart

IDRD Annex 5: Payload Tactical Plan Blank Book Updates Consolidated MPMIT Proposals Sponsoring Org/Office Code: OZ2 Name of Forum: PMIT Date: 5/23/2011 Christian Maender / OZ2 NASA ISS Payloads Office

Background & Purpose SSP 54504: Increment Definition and Requirements Document, Annex 5: Payload Tactical Plan Blank Book, Revision B was baselined in November Since that time - multiple updates to the blank book have been identified or proposed to make our Annex 5 documents match the way we currently do business. This presentation includes the consolidated proposals from all partner agencies for blank book updates.

MPCB Approval of PTP Blank Book revision by October 15, 2011 to support Increment 35/36 Research Planning (PTP Table templates due October 2012). Proposed Schedule: –Finalization of planned updatesTBD –June 3: Draft revision completeTBD –“Internal Review” complete: TBD –CR ReleaseTBD –Comments DueTBD –TCMTBD –Submit to DQATBD –PCBTBD –MPCB (ATP)TBD Proposed Update Schedule

Required Changes: –Update preface to list correct revision of SPIP Vol. 2 –Change “Mission Design Engineer” to “Mission Design Specialist” on Concurrence Page –Update ESA job titles and org codes as appropriate (TBD) Proposed Changes: –none Document Introduction & Signatures

Required Changes: –Review document lists and update to identify current versions for all. –Add any new documents that are relevant Lean Payloads Process? Proposed Changes: –none Section 2: Applicable & Reference Documents

Required Changes: –Add instructions to document details of early unpack or late transfer requirements in the “Unique Payloads Constraints” of the Research Objectives Table. Proposed Changes: –Build a checklist to follow when filling out Unique Payload Constraints. Document checklist in the blank book and incorporate into the PAT. –Update “Payload Acronym” to “Payload Name” or Payload OpNom”. Update instructions to list both payload name and payload OpNom (when different) Section 3: Payload Summaries

Required Changes: –Add column for “Resupply/Outfitting” to Manifest Tables along with definitions of both “resupply” and “outfitting” to the blank book. –Make units and number of decimal places for mass and volume consistent across manifest tables and across PTP and MR. Make volume cm 3 to match MR Loaders. Round to nearest 0.1 cm 3 Mass will be in kg and rounded to the nearest 0.1 kg –Remove EEOM columns (Shuttle retirement) –Clarify definitions for Sortie and Crossover in light of Shuttle retirement to reflect planned mission durations for Visiting Vehicles. –Add column to document Early Unpack & Late Transfer requirements in terms of Docking + X Days. –Add column that clarifies type of cargo stowage required (soft stow, hard mount, locker location) –For unpressurized cargo, add appropriate cargo categories to clarify whether it’s a FRAM based external payload or Vehicle mounted deployable payload. –Delete resupply/outfitting from descent manifests. –Delete Transfer Classification columns. This is legacy data from Shuttle manifests when docked missions were only 4-12 days long. –Reduce flavors of Volume to cm 3 only. (Show appropriate conversion to MLE?) –Add column to document requirement for ascent/descent cold stowage accommodation. If yes – document temperature requirement in terms of what cold stowage assets can provide. Section 4: Utilization Manifests

Required Changes: –Update Crewtime Allocations Table to document any outfitting requirements that will “come off the top” –Reformat Table 5.2-1: to reflect current database format. Update instructions for Module ID column so that payloads that operate in multiple segments can be identified in this table. –Add new table or update Table to document utilization outfitting crewtime requirements. –Provide directions to Table list in the comments section if a payload is "Deployed" or "Inactive". –Remove or retire Section 5.3: Shuttle Crew Time Requirements –Rewrite Section 5.4 to document power requirements for Visiting Vehicles (SpaceX and Orbital) –Add column (y/n) for on-orbit Cold Stowage required. Proposed Changes: –Delete Section 5.5: Payload Requirements for Cold Stowage. (Accepted by all partners, some CS requirements will be put into Section 4 and some into Section 5.2-1) –Revisit requirement for documenting on-orbit power, comm and passive stowage information in Table or in the PTP at all. Open action to investigate who uses this data. If no users – it will be deleted) –Define crewtime by stage in order to find over-subscribed timeframes. PROPOSAL Section 5: Utilization On-Orbit Allocations and Resources

Required Changes: –Update format of blank book Priority table to be more database friendly. Proposed Changes: –Remove agency priorities and incorporate stage operations information into crewtime table. (open) Inter- and Intra-agency priorities will still be addressed via IRT processes. Stage applicability information could be incorporated into Table –Clarify whether facility maintenance activities should be prioritized along with science/utilization requirements in the priorities table. Section 6: Utilization Priorities

Required Changes: –TBD Proposed Changes: –Determine if there is a better way to document Lean Payload location in the the Payload Topologies. Section 7: On-Orbit Payload Topologies

Required Changes: –Delete Section 8.3: Shuttle Crew Training and BDC Requirements –Clarify instructions for BDC and Training Tables about which crew’s requirements should be documented: For training: Document ALL training requirements for crews launching in defined increment period. This includes training for experiments documented in the next increment’s PTP performed by crew launching is current increment. For BDC: Document pre-flight BDC for all crew launching in the defined increment period and post-flight BDC only for crew returning at end of defined increment period. (i.e. pre & post for I29/30 crew, pre only for I30/31 crew) Proposed Changes: –Somehow simplify Section 8.2: BDC Allocations and Requirements to synchronize Mini-EDs BDC requirement information? –Should we delete training tables? Open action to determine if there are any stakeholders that use the data in this table. Section 8: ISS and Shuttle Crew Training

Required Changes: –Clarify definitions for “Shared” and “Proprietary” Special Handling requirements. Build these definitions into PAT with appropriate drop down menus. Add the ability to document restricted video downlink configurations as defined by Imagery teams –Clarify instructions for documenting which crew the BDC requirement applies to. Proposed Changes: Section 9: SSE, Imagery and Attached Payloads

Required Changes: –Clarify whether 2 different tables are required in this section. Either combine or clarify content. Proposed Changes: Section 10: Interpartner Agreements

Required Changes: –Add Table to document list of incorporated CEFs Proposed Changes: –Add information about microgravity sensitive payloads and their constraints either to an existing table or in a new table. –Add a new table or to existing table – information about payload “tools” (SNFM, SAMS, MAMS, etc.) that are available for use but may not have explicit requirements defined every increment. Other Required & Proposed Changes