Home - Search - Browse - Alphabetic Index: 0- 1- 2- 3- 4- 5- 6- 7- 8- 9
A- B- C- D- E- F- G- H- I- J- K- L- M- N- O- P- Q- R- S- T- U- V- W- X- Y- Z

---

More Details for 1967-09-18

---

Garrett Corp. Vice President Mark E. Bradley sent recommendations of the Garrett-AiResearch Safety Audit Review Board to Dale D. Myers, Vice President and Project Manager, Apollo Program, North American Aviation.

Bradley said the Board had been appointed in May 1967 to make "an independent review of ECS (environmental control system) systems and components from a crew safety standpoint" and that the recommendations were "based on the considered professional judgment of the Board members without bias or prejudice with regard to cost or schedule."

In a reply to Bradley on October 21, Myers said: "Your letter has been reviewed in detail and it has been determined in some cases the recommendations are of a design improvement nature. . . . Because of the seriousness of your conclusions and recommendations, I believe it necessary and pertinent the following comments be made. . . . The magnitude and complexity of the Apollo program precludes any single system subcontractor the capability of full and knowledgeable assessment of the effects his system has on the whole. . . . This is not a criticism of your Safety Board function, rather a criticism of the charter and ground rules on which the Board's recommendations are based. . . . It is disturbing to me to find your letter is being used as a vehicle to attempt reconsideration of Engineering Design Change Proposals (EDCP's) already given careful consideration and a subsequent disposition made. . . . I must insist that future Board comments be channeled through your Apollo project group for processing by the established EDCP procedures. If the EDCP affects Crew Safety or Mission success, it should be so indicated in the EDCP and will be given proper consideration by the management of NAR and NASA. . . . Because of the seriousness of your conclusions and recommendations, I am asking the NASA ASPO to form a Board with me to review your recommendations with you for disposition. . . ."

Myers also wrote ASPO Manager George Low on October 21, enclosing the AiResearch recommendations. He said: "I found that AiResearch had used different criteria for evaluation than we use, but I felt we have a situation that requires immediate and joint top-level review by us. . . . The Board made significant recommendations that could constrain a manned flight with the current configuration of the ECS. I hope that this is not the case and that the recommendations were meant to be in the area of design improvement rather than constraints of Crew Safety or Mission Success nature. . . . If you agree with the need for this NASA NAR joint ECS Safety Review Board, I will arrange such a meeting with the AiResearch Review Board."

Low replied to Myers on October 30, saying, "I agree with you that we should give serious consideration to each of the AiResearch recommendations and that a joint NASA/NAR Safety Review Board would be the best means of accomplishing this. I would be pleased to serve on such a board with you. . . ." Low asked Myers to set up the meeting following the Apollo 4 mission.

In a November 7 meeting at MSC the AiResearch Safety Board recommendations were discussed and initial dispositions made, with AiResearch being asked to provide a written acceptance or rejection of each.