本文へ移動
cccskills
無料GitHub で公開

mil-std-882

Knowledge base from MIL-STD-882E (DoD System Safety). Use for the system safety process, hazard analysis tasks (PHA/SSHA/SHA/O&SHA), the risk assessment matrix (severity x probability), software safety criticality, and risk acceptance. US-gov public domain.

インストール方法を見る

含まれるファイル(14)

  • SKILL.md10.9 KB
  • chapters/ch01-scope-purpose-definitions.md5.0 KB
  • chapters/ch02-system-safety-process.md6.4 KB
  • chapters/ch03-risk-assessment.md7.4 KB
  • chapters/ch04-software-system-safety.md8.4 KB
  • chapters/ch05-task-100-management.md7.9 KB
  • chapters/ch06-task-200-analysis.md9.3 KB
  • chapters/ch07-task-300-evaluation.md7.7 KB
  • chapters/ch08-task-400-verification.md7.6 KB
  • cheatsheet.md7.7 KB
  • glossary.md13.8 KB
  • LICENSE1.1 KB
  • PACK.yaml948 B
  • patterns.md14.1 KB

SKILL.md(原文)

インストールする前に、エージェントに与えられる指示の中身を確認できます。

<!-- argument-hint: [topic, task, or chapter number] -->

MIL-STD-882E — DoD Standard Practice: System Safety

Source: US Department of Defense, MIL-STD-882E w/Change 1 (27 September 2023) | Public Domain, Distribution A | Chapters: 8

When to use

Use this skill when working on DoD defence system safety programmes, designing or reviewing hazard analysis processes, applying the risk assessment matrix (severity × probability → High/Serious/Medium/Low), assessing software safety criticality (SCC × severity → SwCI), or determining appropriate risk acceptance authorities. Also use when cross-referencing NASA or civil aviation safety frameworks against DoD practice.

Prerequisites: none — plain Markdown; no MCP server, API key, or licence tier needed at runtime.

How to Use This Skill

  • Without arguments — load the core frameworks: the 8-element safety process, risk matrix, design order of precedence, and software criticality matrix.
  • With a topic — ask about hazard analysis (PHA, SHA, FHA), software safety (SCC, SwCI, LOR tasks), risk acceptance authorities, HAZMAT management, T&E participation, or life-cycle risk.
  • With a chapter — ask for ch01 (scope/definitions), ch02 (system safety process), ch03 (risk assessment), ch04 (software safety), ch05 (Task 100 management), ch06 (Task 200 analysis), ch07 (Task 300 evaluation), ch08 (Task 400 verification).
  • With a task number — ask for Task 101 (SSPP), Task 202 (PHA), Task 208 (FHA), Task 401 (safety verification), etc.

Supporting files: glossary.md, patterns.md, cheatsheet.md.

Core Frameworks & Mental Models

The Eight-Element System Safety Process (Section 4.3)

Iterative, closed-loop process applicable to all DoD systems from concept through disposal:

  1. Document the system safety approach — PM and contractor document risk management approach, applicable requirements (IM, E3, CHMR), HTS procedures, and risk acceptance authority chain.
  2. Identify and document hazards — systematic analysis of hardware, software, human interfaces, operational environment, and all life-cycle phases; lessons learned from legacy systems.
  3. Assess and document risk — assign Severity (I–IV) and Probability (A–F) to each hazard; express as RAC; map to risk level (High/Serious/Medium/Low) per Table III.
  4. Identify and document risk mitigation measures — apply design order of precedence; estimate expected risk reduction for each candidate mitigation.
  5. Reduce risk — implement selected mitigations; present hazard status at SRR, PDR, CDR, TRR, PRR.
  6. Verify, validate, and document risk reduction — confirm implementation and effectiveness through analysis, test, demonstration, or inspection.
  7. Accept risk and document — formal acceptance by appropriate DoDI 5000 series authority before exposing people/equipment/environment to known hazards; user representative concurrence for all Serious and High risks.
  8. Manage life-cycle risk — continues after fielding; incorporates mishap data, configuration changes, user feedback; new or elevated risk requires fresh formal acceptance.

Risk Assessment Matrix (Table III)

Severity I (Catastrophic: death/permanent total disability/irreversible environmental impact/>=$10M) through IV (Negligible: no lost work day/minimal env/<$100K). Probability A (Frequent: >=10^-1) through F (Eliminated: physically incapable of occurrence — PPE/procedures cannot achieve F). Risk levels: High (worst), Serious, Medium, Low. Every hazard carries three RACs: initial (baseline), target (post-mitigation), and event (configuration-specific).

Design Order of Precedence (4.3.4)

Five levels, applied in order: (1) eliminate via design selection; (2) reduce risk via design alteration; (3) engineered features or devices; (4) warning devices; (5) signage/procedures/training/PPE. Level 5 alone is prohibited as the sole mitigation for Cat I/II (Catastrophic/Critical) hazards.

Software Safety Criticality Matrix (Tables IV–VI)

Software risk cannot use probability-based assessment. Instead: assign Software Control Category (SCC 1=Autonomous through 5=No Safety Impact) crossed with Severity (I–IV) to produce Software Criticality Index (SwCI 1–5). SwCI drives Level of Rigor (LOR) tasks: SwCI 1 = full requirements/architecture/design/code analysis + in-depth testing; SwCI 5 = no analysis required. If LOR tasks incomplete: SwCI 1 → HIGH risk; SwCI 2 → SERIOUS; SwCI 3 → MEDIUM; SwCI 4 → LOW. The SSCM assigns rigor, not risk — risk from software contributions uses Appendix B Table B-I criteria.

Task Structure

  • 100-series (Management): SSPP (102) / HMP (103), HTS (106), HMMP (108), progress reports (107), IPT/WG support (105).
  • 200-series (Analysis): PHL (201) → PHA (202) → SRHA (203) → SSHA (204) → SHA (205) → O&SHA (206); specialised: HHA (207), FHA (208), SoSHA (209), EHA (210).
  • 300-series (Evaluation): SAR (301), HMAR (302), T&E Participation (303), ECP/Mishap Review (304).
  • 400-series (Verification): Safety Verification (401), Explosives Hazard Classification (402), EOD Data (403).

Key Distinctions

  • Safety-critical (SCF/SCI) = Cat I/II severity consequence. Safety-related = Cat III/IV. Safety-significant = either.
  • SSPP vs. HMP: SSPP is system-safety-discipline-centric; HMP coordinates multiple SE disciplines using the same methodology.
  • SAR vs. HMAR: SAR is system-safety-only; HMAR covers all disciplines, includes explosives/EOD HAZMAT detail.
  • Probability F requires physical hazard elimination — no administrative path to F exists.
  • Task invocation: only Sections 3 and 4 are mandatory when MIL-STD-882E is cited without specific tasks; 100–400 series tasks must be individually called out in the RFP/SOW.

Chapter Index

#SectionKey content
ch01Scope, Purpose & Key DefinitionsMandatory vs. optional sections, definitions of hazard/mishap/risk/safety/ESOH, life-cycle scope
ch02System Safety Process & General Requirements8-element process, design order of precedence, HTS requirements, risk acceptance obligations
ch03Risk AssessmentSeverity I–IV, Probability A–F (with quantitative thresholds), Risk Assessment Matrix Table III, RAC codes, acceptance authorities
ch04Software System SafetySCC 1–5, SSCM Table V, SwCI 1–5, LOR task requirements, Table VI default risk levels, Appendix B guidance
ch05Task Section 100 — ManagementTasks 101–108: SSPP, HMP, HTS, IPT/WG support, HMMP, progress reporting, Govt reviews
ch06Task Section 200 — AnalysisTasks 201–210: PHL, PHA, SRHA, SSHA, SHA, O&SHA, HHA, FHA, SoSHA, EHA
ch07Task Section 300 — EvaluationTasks 301–304: SAR, HMAR, T&E participation, ECP/mishap/deviation review
ch08Task Section 400 — VerificationTasks 401–403: safety verification, explosives hazard classification, EOD data

Topic Index

  • Acceptable risk → ch01, ch02, ch03
  • COTS/GOTS/NDI/GFE safety → ch06 (every 200-series task), patterns.md Pattern 11
  • Design order of precedence → ch02, cheatsheet.md
  • ECP / change management → ch07 (Task 304)
  • Engineering Change Proposal review → ch07 (Task 304)
  • Environmental hazard analysis (EHA) → ch06 (Task 210)
  • Explosives / ordnance → ch08 (Tasks 402, 403)
  • FHA (Functional Hazard Analysis) → ch06 (Task 208), ch04
  • HAZMAT management → ch05 (Task 108), ch06 (Tasks 207, 210)
  • Health hazard analysis → ch06 (Task 207)
  • HTS (Hazard Tracking System) → ch02, ch05 (Task 106), cheatsheet.md
  • LOR tasks (software) → ch04, cheatsheet.md
  • Mishap → ch01, ch03
  • O&SHA → ch06 (Task 206)
  • PHA (Preliminary Hazard Analysis) → ch06 (Task 202)
  • PHL (Preliminary Hazard List) → ch06 (Task 201)
  • Probability levels (A–F) → ch03, cheatsheet.md
  • RAC (Risk Assessment Code) → ch03, cheatsheet.md
  • Risk acceptance → ch02, ch03, ch05, cheatsheet.md
  • Risk assessment matrix → ch03, cheatsheet.md
  • Safety Assessment Report (SAR) → ch07 (Task 301)
  • Safety Release → ch07 (Task 303)
  • Safety-critical / safety-related / safety-significant → ch01
  • SCC (Software Control Category) → ch04, cheatsheet.md
  • Severity categories (I–IV) → ch03, cheatsheet.md
  • SHA (System Hazard Analysis) → ch06 (Task 205)
  • Software safety → ch04
  • SoS (System-of-Systems) → ch01, ch06 (Task 209)
  • SRHA → ch06 (Task 203)
  • SSPP → ch05 (Task 102)
  • SSHA (Subsystem Hazard Analysis) → ch06 (Task 204)
  • SSCM → ch04, cheatsheet.md
  • SwCI → ch04, cheatsheet.md
  • T&E participation → ch07 (Task 303)
  • Task application by programme phase → cheatsheet.md, Appendix A
  • User representative → ch03

Supporting Files

  • glossary.md — ~55 defined terms from MIL-STD-882E Sections 3.1–3.2, cross-referenced to standard paragraphs
  • patterns.md — 16 reusable patterns and techniques with When/How/Trade-offs structure; covers hazard identification, risk assessment, design order of precedence, HTS management, analysis hierarchy, software criticality, T&E risk, ECP review, life-cycle continuity
  • cheatsheet.md — Risk Assessment Matrix, SSCM, task-by-phase matrix, severity/probability quick reference, HTS minimum data elements, tells and smells

Scope & Limits

This knowledge pack covers MIL-STD-882E w/Change 1 (27 September 2023) only. The standard is DoD-specific and US Government public domain. It does not cover:

  • Specific DoDI 5000 series acceptance authority thresholds (these are in acquisition policy documents, not in MIL-STD-882E itself)
  • Detailed LOR task content (refer to the Joint Software Systems Safety Engineering Handbook and AOP 52)
  • Civil aviation safety (DO-178C, ARP 4761) or nuclear safety standards
  • ISO/IEC 61508 functional safety levels, though conceptual cross-walk with SILs is feasible
  • FAA, OSHA, or EPA regulatory requirements referenced in Task 207 (HHA) reference lists

Claims about risk levels, severity thresholds, and task applicability are grounded in the standard text. Programme-specific tailoring (alternative matrices, modified probability definitions) requires formal DoD Component policy approval and is outside this knowledge pack's scope.

レビュー

まだレビューはありません。使ってみた感想をお寄せください。

同じリポジトリのスキル

概要と使いどころ

Signpost (not a knowledge pack) for the automotive standards landscape: ISO 26262, ASPICE, SAE J3016, UNECE R155, UNECE R156, and the NHTSA vehicle set. Contains NO source content: designation, edition, owner, status, and an official catalogue URL only. Use when you need to identify or locate an automotive standard. Most are paywalled or carry no redistribution grant and cannot be packaged; the one open path is the nhtsa-vehicle pack.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

jgsystemsconsulting/jgs-se-knowledge-packs82026年10月9日 更新

cisa-cpg

無料

Knowledge base from CISA Cross-Sector Cybersecurity Performance Goals 2.0. Use for prioritized IT/OT baseline cyber goals aligned to NIST CSF 2.0 (including GOVERN), critical-infrastructure hygiene, MSP/supply-chain expectations, and board-friendly outcome language. Covers CPG 2.0 goals only; does not replace full CSF programs, sector-specific goals (SSGs), or CSET tooling detail.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

jgsystemsconsulting/jgs-se-knowledge-packs82026年10月9日 更新

Knowledge base from DAFMAN 63-119 (15 April 2021), Mission-Oriented Test Readiness Certification. Use for continuous MOTRC replacing single-point OTRR thinking: framework/applicability, Certification Official vs PM roles, review cycle and exit criteria, certification memo/decertify gates, DT&E/contractor evidence, ITT integration and cyber resiliency, and the 31-template matrix. DAF T&E readiness process only—does not replace DoDI 5000.89, AFI 99-103, or multi-service lead policies.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

jgsystemsconsulting/jgs-se-knowledge-packs82026年10月9日 更新

Knowledge base from the DoD Systems Engineering Guidebook (OUSD R&E, February 2022). Use for the DoD SE process model — the 16 SE processes (8 technical management + 8 technical) mapped to ISO/IEC/IEEE 15288, the event-driven technical reviews and audits across the Major Capability Acquisition life cycle (ASR, SRR, SFR, PDR, CDR, SVR/FCA, PRR, PCA), the Systems Engineering Plan (SEP), risk/issue/opportunity management, TPMs and leading indicators, system-of-systems and digital engineering, and the 24 design considerations (RAM, system safety, HSI, system security engineering, MOSA, supportability, etc.). Acquisition-program oriented: thin on detailed cost estimating, contracting law, and non-DoD or commercial life cycles.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

jgsystemsconsulting/jgs-se-knowledge-packs82026年10月9日 更新

Knowledge pack from 'Towards Digital Engineering: The Advent of Digital Systems Engineering' (Huang et al., Old Dominion University, arXiv:2002.11672, 2020). Use when reasoning about digital engineering, the DoD Digital Engineering Strategy and its five goals, the Authoritative Source of Truth, digitalization vs. digitization, digital augmentation, digitalized models, provenance, unique identification, and the four-level (vision/strategy/action/foundation) DSE research framework. Covers the conceptual/vision layer of the field. SCOPE LIMITS: this is a single ~28-page vision paper, not a methods handbook — it is thin on step-by-step procedures, tooling, case studies, and quantitative evaluation, and it predates 2020 so it does not cover later digital-engineering standards or recent AI/LLM advances. Use the sebok pack for established SE canon and MBSE depth.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

jgsystemsconsulting/jgs-se-knowledge-packs82026年10月9日 更新

Knowledge base from the DoD Digital Engineering Strategy (2018, OUSD/ODASD(SE)). Use for the Department of Defense's five digital engineering goals — (1) formalize the development, integration, and use of models; (2) provide an enduring authoritative source of truth; (3) incorporate technological innovation; (4) establish supporting infrastructure and environments; (5) transform the culture and workforce — plus their focus areas, the document-to-model and design-build-test→model-analyze-build shifts, model formalisms/provenance, governance and access control of the authoritative source of truth, and the coordinate→plan→pilot→sustain rollout. A vision-and-policy strategy, deliberately non-prescriptive. Does NOT provide a how-to method, tool tutorials, MBSE/SysML mechanics, or implementation-plan content; thin on metrics, acquisition-policy detail, and step-by-step procedure. Excludes the CAC-gated Digital Engineering Body of Knowledge (DEBoK).

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

jgsystemsconsulting/jgs-se-knowledge-packs82026年10月9日 更新

jgsystemsconsulting のスキルをすべて見る

このスキルの問題を報告する