NOT MEASUREMENT

SENSITIVE

MIL-HDBK-237D
20 May 2005

SUPERSEDING
MIL-HDBK-237C
17 July 2001


DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
HANDBOOK


ELECTROMAGNETIC ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS
AND SPECTRUM SUPPORTABILITY GUIDANCE FOR
THE ACQUISITION PROCESS






This handbook is for guidance only.
Do not cite this document as a requirement.


AMSC N/A AREA EMCS



DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT A. Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited.
Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D
ii
Foreword


1. This handbook is approved for use by all Departments and Agencies of the Department of
Defense.

2. This handbook is for guidance only. This handbook cannot be cited as a requirement. If it is,
the contractor does not have to comply.

3. This handbook provides guidance for establishing effective electromagnetic environmental
effects (E3) and spectrum supportability (SS) programs throughout the life cycle of platforms,
systems, subsystems, and equipment.

4. Comments, recommendations, additions, or deletions and any other pertinent data that may
improve this document should be emailed to J 5@jsc.mil or addressed to:

Defense Information Systems Agency (DISA)
J oint Spectrum Center (J SC)
Attn: J SC/J 5
2004 Turbot Landing
Annapolis, MD 21402-5064

Since contact information can change, you may want to verify the currency of this address
information using the ASSIST Online database at http://assist.daps.dla.mil.
.


Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D
iii
CONTENTS

Paragraph Page

1. SCOPE..................................................................................................................................... 1
1.1 Purpose.................................................................................................................................... 1
1.2 Background............................................................................................................................. 1
1.3 Structure.................................................................................................................................. 2

2. APPLICABLE DOCUMENTS.............................................................................................. 3
2.1 General .................................................................................................................................... 3
2.2 Government Documents......................................................................................................... 3
2.2.1 Specifications, Standards, and Handbooks.................................................................. 3
2.2.2 Other Government Documents and Publications......................................................... 3
2.3 Non-Government Publications................................................................................................ 4

3. DEFINITIONS........................................................................................................................ 7
3.1 General .................................................................................................................................... 7
3.2 Definitions............................................................................................................................... 7
3.2.1 Electromagnetic Environment (EME) ......................................................................... 7
3.2.2 Electromagnetic Environmental Effects (E3).............................................................. 7
3.2.3 Equipment Spectrum Certification (ESC) ................................................................... 7
3.2.4 Spectrum Management (SM)....................................................................................... 7
3.2.5 Spectrum Supportability (SS)...................................................................................... 8

4. OVERVIEW OF E3................................................................................................................ 9
4.1 EME........................................................................................................................................ 9
4.1.1 General......................................................................................................................... 9
4.1.2 EME Effects................................................................................................................. 9
4.1.3 Contributors to the EME............................................................................................ 10
4.1.4 Defining the EME..................................................................................................... 11
4.1.4.1 Specifying the Intended EME............................................................................. 12
4.2 EMC...................................................................................................................................... 12
4.3 EMI ....................................................................................................................................... 13
4.4 EMP...................................................................................................................................... 13
4.5 Electromagnetic Radiation (EMR) Hazards (RADHAZ)..................................................... 14
4.5.1 HERP......................................................................................................................... 14
4.5.2 HERF ......................................................................................................................... 14
4.5.3 HERO......................................................................................................................... 15
4.6 EMV...................................................................................................................................... 15
Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D
iv
4.7 Lightning............................................................................................................................... 15
4.8 Precipitation Static................................................................................................................ 16
4.9 ESD....................................................................................................................................... 16

5. OVERVIEW OF SPECTRUM MANAGEMENT............................................................. 19
5.1 General .................................................................................................................................. 19
5.2 Spectrum Supportability (SS)............................................................................................... 20
5.2.1 J oint Missions and Host Nation Agreements............................................................. 20
5.2.2 Equipment Spectrum Certification of CI ................................................................... 21
5.3 Regulatory Organizations..................................................................................................... 22
5.3.1 International Telecommunication Union (ITU)......................................................... 22
5.3.2 National...................................................................................................................... 23
5.3.2.1 Federal Communications Commission (FCC).................................................... 23
5.3.2.2 National Telecommunication & Information Administration (NTIA)............... 24
5.3.2.3 Interdepartment Radio Advisory Committee (IRAC)......................................... 25
5.3.3 Department of Defense.............................................................................................. 26
5.3.3.1 Assistant Secretary of Defense for Networks and Information Integration
(ASD(NII))..26
5.3.3.2 J oint Chiefs of Staff (J CS).................................................................................. 26
5.3.3.2.1 Military Communications Electronics Board (MCEB) ................................27
5.3.3.3 Defense Spectrum Office (DSO) ........................................................................ 27
5.3.3.4 J oint Spectrum Center (J SC)............................................................................... 27
5.3.3.5 U.S. Army Spectrum Management Office.......................................................... 27
5.3.3.6 Air Force Frequency Management Agency (AFFMA) ...................................... 28
5.3.3.7 Navy and Marine Corps Spectrum Center.......................................................... 28
5.3.3.8 Combined Communications Electronics Board (CCEB).................................... 28

6. INCORPORATING E3/SS IN THE ACQUISITION PROCESS.................................... 29
6.1 General .................................................................................................................................. 29
6.1.1 Prior to Milestone A................................................................................................... 29
6.1.2 Before Milestone B (or before the first Milestone that authorizes contract award) .. 29
6.1.3 Prior to Milestone C................................................................................................... 30
6.1.4 After Milestone C...................................................................................................... 30
6.2 Pre-Acquisition Technology Projects................................................................................... 30
6.3 Incorporating E3 Control and SS Requirements in J CIDS Documents................................ 31
6.3.1 Mission Area ICD...................................................................................................... 31
6.3.2 CDD........................................................................................................................... 31
6.3.3 CPD............................................................................................................................ 33
6.4 ISP......................................................................................................................................... 34
6.5 TEMP.................................................................................................................................... 35
6.5.1 General....................................................................................................................... 35
6.5.2 Content....................................................................................................................... 35
Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D
v
6.6 Incorporating E3 Control and SS Requirements in Program Office Tasks and Products.... 36
6.6.1 General....................................................................................................................... 36
6.6.2 E3/SS Considerations in Integrated Product Teams (IPTs)....................................... 36
6.6.2.1 Members............................................................................................................. 37
6.6.2.2 Responsibilities................................................................................................... 37
6.6.2.3 Charter................................................................................................................. 38
6.6.3 Specifying Requirements in Solicitation Documents................................................ 38
6.6.3.1 General................................................................................................................ 38
6.6.3.2 Performance Specifications................................................................................ 38
6.6.3.2.1 General ..........................................................................................................38
6.6.3.2.2 Subsystem/Equipment Military E3 Standards..............................................38
6.6.3.2.3 Platform/System Military E3 Standards.......................................................39
6.6.3.2.4 Tailoring........................................................................................................39
6.6.3.3 Statement of Work (SOW).................................................................................. 40
6.6.3.4 Contract Data Requirements List (CDRL) ......................................................... 41
6.6.3.4.1 Applicable E3 Data Item Descriptions (DIDs).............................................41
6.7 Commercial Items and Non-Developmental Items (CI/NDI)............................................... 41
6.7.1 SS Concerns............................................................................................................... 41
6.7.2 E3 Concerns............................................................................................................... 41
6.7.2.1 Assessment of CI/NDI ........................................................................................ 42
6.7.2.1.1 Commercial Specifications and Standards....................................................42
6.7.2.1.2 Comparisons.................................................................................................43
6.7.2.1.3 Alternatives...................................................................................................43
6.8 The Equipment Spectrum Certification Process................................................................... 43
6.8.1 General....................................................................................................................... 43
6.8.2 Overview of the Process............................................................................................ 44
6.8.3 Submission of DD Form 1494................................................................................... 45
6.8.3.1 Selection of Frequency Band.............................................................................. 45
6.8.3.2 Completing the Form.......................................................................................... 47
6.8.4 Frequency Assignments............................................................................................. 48
6.8.5 Note-To-Holders........................................................................................................ 49
6.9 Systems Engineering Technical Reviews with Recommended E3/SS Actions.................... 49
6.9.1 Initial Technical Review (ITR).................................................................................. 49
6.9.2 Alternative Systems Review (ASR)........................................................................... 49
6.9.3 System Requirements Review (SRR)........................................................................ 50
6.9.4 System Functional Review (SFR).............................................................................. 50
6.9.5 Preliminary Design Review (PDR)............................................................................ 51
6.9.6 Critical Design Review (CDR).................................................................................. 51
6.9.7 Test Readiness Review (TRR)................................................................................... 52
6.9.8 Readiness Reviews (RR)............................................................................................ 53
6.9.8.1 Flight RR............................................................................................................. 53
6.9.8.2 Fleet RR.............................................................................................................. 53
6.9.8.3 Operational Test Readiness Review (OTRR)..................................................... 54
6.9.8.4 Technical Evaluation.......................................................................................... 54
6.9.8.5 Operational Evaluation....................................................................................... 54
Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D
vi
6.9.9 System Verification Review/Production Readiness Review (SVR/PRR)................. 55
6.9.10 Physical Configuration Review (PCR)..................................................................... 56
6.9.11 Engineering Change Proposal Review...................................................................... 56
6.10 Summary Matrices of E3/SS Tasks and Applicable Documents......................................... 57

7. E3/SS TEST STRATEGY.................................................................................................... 63
7.1 General .................................................................................................................................. 63
7.2 Developmental Test & Evaluation (DT&E)........................................................................ 64
7.2.1 General....................................................................................................................... 64
7.2.2 Subsystems and Equipment....................................................................................... 64
7.2.3 Platforms and Systems............................................................................................... 64
7.2.3.1 Intra-Platform/System EMI Testing................................................................... 65
7.2.3.2 Inter-Platform/System EMI Evaluations............................................................. 65
7.2.3.3 EMV.................................................................................................................... 66
7.2.4 Verification of Special E3 Requirements.................................................................. 66
7.2.4.1 P-Static................................................................................................................ 66
7.2.4.2 Lightning............................................................................................................. 66
7.2.4.3 EMP.................................................................................................................... 67
7.2.4.4 EMR Hazards...................................................................................................... 67
7.2.4.4.1 HERP............................................................................................................67
7.2.4.4.2 HERF ............................................................................................................68
7.2.4.4.3 HERO............................................................................................................68
7.3 Operational Test and Evaluation (OT&E)............................................................................ 69
7.3.1 General....................................................................................................................... 69
7.3.2 Intra-Platform/System EMI Testing.......................................................................... 70
7.3.2.1 Additional Intra-Ship Concerns.......................................................................... 71
7.3.2.1.1 Intermodulation Interference (IMI)..71
7.3.2.1.2 Shipboard HERO and EME Surveys...71
7.3.3 Inter-Platform/System E3 Evaluations...................................................................... 72
7.3.3.1 Additional Ordnance Concerns........................................................................... 72
7.3.3.2 Additional Aircraft Concerns.............................................................................. 73
7.4 E3/SS Analyses and Predictions........................................................................................... 73
7.4.1 General....................................................................................................................... 73
7.4.2 E3/SS Analyses and Predictions Throughout the Acquisition Life Cycle................. 73
7.4.3 E3/SS Analysis Process............................................................................................. 75
7.4.4 Cost of Analysis......................................................................................................... 75
7.5 DOT&E Policy Memorandum of 25 Oct 1999..................................................................... 75
7.5.1 General....................................................................................................................... 75
7.5.2 Responsibilities.......................................................................................................... 76
7.5.2.1 DOT&E Responsibilities.................................................................................... 76
7.5.2.2 OTA Responsibilities.......................................................................................... 76
7.5.2.3 PM Responsibilities............................................................................................ 77
7.5.3 Process....................................................................................................................... 77
Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D
vii
7.6 Summary E3/SS T&E Checklist........................................................................................... 77

8. NOTES................................................................................................................................... 79
8.1 Intended Use........................................................................................................................ 79
8.2 Supersession.......................................................................................................................... 79
8.3 Changes From Previous Issues............................................................................................. 79
8.4 Subject Term (Key Word) Listing........................................................................................ 79

APPENDICES

APPENDIX A............................................................................................................................... 81
APPENDIX B............................................................................................................................... 97
APPENDIX C............................................................................................................................. 103
APPENDIX D............................................................................................................................. 121
APPENDIX E............................................................................................................................. 153

FIGURES and TABLES

FIGURES Page

FIGURE 1. The Overlap Between E3 and SS..2
FIGURE 2. Spectrum Management Organizations 23
FIGURE 3. Communications Act of 1934 .24
FIGURE 4. Relationship Between the Acquisition Process and the ESC Process.44
FIGURE 5. Overview of the Equipment Spectrum Certification Process..46

TABLES Page

TABLE 1. E3/ESC Checkpoints..58
TABLE 2. Milestone A (Concept and Technology Development Approval) Data
Requirements Checklist59
TABLE 3. Milestone B (System Development and Demonstration Approval) Data
Requirements Checklist60
TABLE 4. Milestone C (Production and Deployment Approval) Data Requirements/OT&E
E3/SS Assessment Checklist... .61
TABLE 5. E3/SS Tasks and Applicable Documents..62


CONCLUDING MATERIAL.................................................................................................. 163





Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D
viii















This page left intentionally blank.
Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D




1

1. SCOPE
1.1 Purpose

This handbook provides guidance for establishing and implementing effective electromagnetic
environmental effects (E3) control and spectrum supportability (SS) for the design, development,
and procurement of Department of Defense (DoD) platforms, systems, subsystems, or equipment.
This handbook is intended for DoD personnel responsible for requirements generation and
acquisition life cycle processes, including test and evaluation of these end items.

This handbook is consistent with the policies, responsibilities, and procedures of DoD Directives
(DoDD) 5000.1, 3222.3, and 4650.1, DoD Instruction (DoDI) 5000.2, and the latest Chairman,
J oint Chiefs of Staff Instructions (CJ CSI) 3170.01 and 6212.01 and Chairman, J oint Chiefs of Staff
Manual (CJ CSM) 3170.01. Provisions of this handbook apply to research, development and
acquisition activities for any electrical or electronic device which emits or which can be susceptible
to electromagnetic (EM) energy either through intentional antenna coupling or through
unintentional EM coupling mechanisms such as radiation penetration through the case and cable.
Most electrical and electronic devices procured by DoD fall into these categories. The handbook
may be used either to assure visibility, accountability, and control of the E3/SS effort, as well as its
integration into the overall program, or to assure management awareness and cost effective tailoring
of applicable E3 and SS interface and performance standards.

This handbook is for guidance only. This handbook cannot be cited as a requirement. If it is, the
contractor does not have to comply.
1.2 Background

The E3 and spectrum management (SM) disciplines are often represented by different organizations
in military agencies; however, there is substantial commonality between the concerns of the two
disciplines. E3, as defined in paragraph 3.2.2, is concerned with minimizing the impact of the
electromagnetic environment (EME) on equipment, subsystems, systems, and platforms. The
complex military EME is composed of radiated and conducted emissions from intentional and
unintentional sources, including high-powered transmitters from military forces and the civilian
infrastructure, lightning, electromagnetic pulse (EMP), precipitation static (p-static), electrostatic
discharge (ESD), and so forth. SM, as defined in paragraph 3.2.4, is involved with planning,
coordinating, and managing J oint use of the EM spectrum by subsystems and equipment that
radiate or receive EM energy. SM includes operational, engineering, and administrative procedures
to accomplish electromagnetic compatibility (EMC) and preclude electromagnetic interference
(EMI). The relationship between E3 and SS is depicted in Figure 1. SS is defined in 3.2.5. As
shown, an overlap occurs, primarily, in the equipment spectrum certification (ESC) area, which is
concerned with assuring the EMC and preventing EMI with spectrum-dependent equipment.

The increase in operational E3 and SS issues made it necessary for the Director, Operational Test
and Evaluation (DOT&E) to place greater emphasis on these requirements during Developmental
Test and Evaluation (DT&E) and Operational Test and Evaluation (OT&E) events of oversight
Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D




2















FIGURE 1. The Overlap Between E3 and SS.

programs. J oint and Allied operations have encountered E3 problems and spectrum conflicts
between forces that have reduced mission effectiveness and increased operational restrictions.
Furthermore, deployments of United States (U.S.) military command, control, communications,
computers, and intelligence (C4I) assets to foreign nations have resulted in the denial to operate
these assets and even confiscation due to lack of SS, including Host Nation Approval (HNA).
Operational impact assessments of E3 and SS issues need to be accomplished during all life cycle
phases of the acquisition process and reviewed at each milestone decision point. The DoD can
reduce this negative impact to military operations by ensuring that platform, system, subsystem, and
equipment limitations and vulnerabilities are mitigated and sufficiently documented for the
warfighter.
1.3 Structure

This handbook is structured for both the Program Manager (PM) and E3/SM engineers. Sections 4
and 5 provide the PM with general overviews of E3 and SM concepts, requirements, and concerns.
Section 6 provides the PM with guidance for incorporating E3 and SS requirements and
considerations into the acquisition within the framework of the acquisition program. E3/SM
engineers are provided in Appendix C general information on the acquisition process so that their
requirements can be incorporated into the PMs tasks and associated documents at appropriate
points during the acquisition life cycle. Descriptions of E3 test and analysis capabilities and
facilities are provided in Appendix D. Guidance on the use of commercial standards is included in
Appendix E.
EMC
EMI
EQUIPMENT SPECTRUM
CERTIFICATION
(SUPPORTABILITY)
E3 SS
Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D




3

2. APPLICABLE DOCUMENTS
2.1 General

The documents listed below are not necessarily all of the documents referenced herein, but are
those needed to understand the information provided by this handbook. A detailed bibliography is
presented in Appendix A and in the Engineering Practice Study (EPS) report referenced herein.
2.2 Government Documents
2.2.1 Specifications, Standards, and Handbooks

The following standards form a part of this document to the extent specified herein.

Department of Defense

MIL-STD-461 Interface Standard, Requirements for the Control of
Electromagnetic Interference Characteristics of
Subsystems and Equipment
MIL-STD-464 Interface Standard, Electromagnetic Environmental
Effects Requirements for Systems
MIL-STD-469 Interface Standard, Radar Engineering Design
Requirements, Electromagnetic Compatibility

(Copies of these documents are available online at http://assist.daps.dla.mil/quicksearch/ from the
Standardization Document Order Desk, 700 Robbins Avenue, Building 4D, Philadelphia, PA
19111-5094.)
2.2.2 Other Government Documents and Publications

The following other Government documents and publications form a part of this document to the
extent specified herein. They are referenced solely to provide supplemental data and are for
informational purposes only.

Department of Defense

DoDD 3222.3 DoD Electromagnetic Environmental Effects (E3)
Program
DoDD 4630.5 Interoperability and Supportability of Information
Technology (IT) and National Security Systems (NSS)

DoDI 4630.8 Procedures for Interoperability and Supportability of
Information Technology and National Security Systems
Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D




4

DoDD 4650.1 Policy for the Management and Use of the
Electromagnetic Spectrum
DoDD 5000.1 The Defense Acquisition System
DoDI 5000.2 Operation of the Defense Acquisition System
DoDI 6055.11 Protection of DoD Personnel from Exposure to Radio
Frequency Radiation and Military Exempt Lasers
Chairman J oint Chiefs of
Staff Instruction (CJ CSI)
3170.01
J oint Capabilities Integration and Development System
CJ CSI 6212.01 Interoperability and Supportability of Information
Technology and National Security Systems
CJ CSM 3170.01 Operation of the J oint Capabilities Integration and
Development System
DOT&E E3 Policy
Memorandum
Policy on Operational Test and Evaluation of Electro-
magnetic Environmental Effects and Spectrum
Management, dated 25 October 1999
EPS-0178 Results of Detailed Comparisons of Individual EMC
Requirements and Test Procedures Delineated in Major
National and International Commercial Standards with
Military Standard MIL-STD-461E
J oint Chiefs of Staff (J CS)
Pub. No. 1-02
Department of Defense Dictionary of Military and
Associated Terms

National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA)

NTIA Manual Manual of Regulations and Procedures for Federal
Radio Frequency Management

(Copies of DoD Directives and Instructions are available from the Document Automation and
Production Service, Building 4/D, 700 Robbins Avenue, Philadelphia, PA 19111-5094. If you have
any questions, please contact the appropriate ASSIST-Help Desk team: Account/Password Issues:
215-697-6257 [DSN: 442-6257]). CJ CSM 3170.01 can also be found at www.dau.mil. Copies of
the NTIA Manual are available from the U.S. Government Printing Office, Superintendent of
Documents, P.O. Box 371954, Pittsburgh, PA 15250-7954 or it may be downloaded from
www.ntia.doc.gov/osmhome/redbook/redbook.html. Copies of the EPS are available on the J oint
Spectrum Center (J SC) web site: http://www.jsc.mil).
2.3 Non-Government Publications

The following document forms a part of this guide to the extent specified herein.


Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D




5

American National Standards Institute (ANSI)

ANSI/IEEE C63.14

Standard Dictionary for Technologies of Electro-
magnetic Compatibility (EMC), Electromagnetic
Pulse (EMP), and Electrostatic Discharge (ESD)

(Copies of this document are available from Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE)
on www.ieee.org or IEEE Service Center, 445 Hoes Lane, Piscataway, NJ 08854-1331.)
Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D




6








This page left intentionally blank.
Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D




7

3. DEFINITIONS
3.1 General

A glossary of acronyms and abbreviations used in this handbook, including the appendices, is
contained in Appendix B of this handbook.
3.2 Definitions

Many terms used in this handbook are defined in ANSI/IEEE C63.14, J CS Pub. 1-02, DoDD
3222.3, DoDD 4650.1, or the DoD 5000 series of documents. The following definitions are
repeated herein for ready reference. Additional terms unique to a specific section of this handbook
are defined in that section.
3.2.1 Electromagnetic Environment (EME)

EME is the resulting product of the power and time distribution, in various frequency ranges, of the
radiated or conducted electromagnetic emission levels that may be encountered by a military force,
system, or platform when performing its assigned mission in its intended operational environment.
3.2.2 Electromagnetic Environmental Effects (E3)

E3 is the impact of the EME upon the operational capability of military forces, equipment, systems,
and platforms. It encompasses all electromagnetic disciplines, including electromagnetic
compatibility (EMC); electromagnetic interference (EMI); electromagnetic vulnerability (EMV);
electromagnetic pulse (EMP); electrostatic discharge (ESD); hazards of electromagnetic radiation to
personnel (HERP), ordnance (HERO), and volatile materials such as fuel (HERF); and natural
phenomena effects of lightning and precipitation static (p-static). (J CS Pub 1-02)
3.2.3 Equipment Spectrum Certification (ESC)

ESC is the statement(s) of adequacy received from authorities of sovereign nations after their
review of the technical characteristics of a spectrum-dependent equipment or system regarding
compliance with their national spectrum management policy, allocations, regulations, and technical
standards. Equipment Spectrum Certification is alternately called spectrum certification.
3.2.4 Spectrum Management (SM)

SM is the planning, coordinating, and managing J oint use of the electromagnetic spectrum through
operational, engineering, and administrative procedures, with the objective of enabling electronic
systems to perform their functions in the intended EME without causing or suffering unacceptable
EMI. (J CS Pub 1-02)
Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D




8

3.2.5 Spectrum Supportability (SS)

SS is the assurance that the necessary frequencies and bandwidth are available to military systems
in order to maintain effective interoperability in the operational EME. The assessment of an
equipment or system as having spectrum supportability is based upon, as a minimum, receipt of
equipment spectrum certification (ESC), reasonable assurance of the availability of sufficient
frequencies for operation, Host Nation Approval (HNA), and consideration of EMC.
Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D




9

4. OVERVIEW OF E3
4.1 EME
4.1.1 General

The EME, as defined earlier in 3.2.1, is the resulting product of the power and time distribution,
within various frequency ranges, and includes the radiated and conducted EM emission levels that
may be encountered. It is the totality of EM energy, from man made and natural sources, to which
a platform, system, subsystem, or equipment (hereby collectively referred to as items) will be
exposed within any domain (that is, land, air, space, sea) while performing its intended mission
throughout its operational life cycle. When defined, the EME will be for a particular time and
place. Specific equipment characteristics (such as emitter power levels, operating frequencies, and
receiver sensitivity), operational factors (such as distances between platforms, systems, and force
structure), and frequency coordination all contribute to the EME. In addition, transient emissions
and their associated rise and fall times (such as from EMP, lightning, and p-static) also contribute to
the EME.

EMC and SS, which are basic tenets to ensure interoperability, are critical to maximizing mission
operational effectiveness in the intended EME for all military items. Undesired EM energy may
degrade the performance of an item temporarily, in which case the item may operate in a degraded
mode when sufficient EM energy is present. Alternatively, the EM energy may cause permanent
damage, in which case the item will not operate until it is either repaired or replaced and the E3
problem has been resolved. Examples of the effects that can be caused by undesired EM energy,
depending on the victim, are:

Burnout or voltage breakdown of components, antennas, and so forth,
Performance degradation of receiver signal processing circuits,
Erroneous or inadvertent operation of electromechanical equipment, electronic circuits,
components, ordnance, and so forth,
Unintentional detonation or ignition of ordnance and flammable materials, and
Personnel injuries.
4.1.2 EME Effects

The effects of undesired EM energy on an item that operates in a specific environment are
dependent upon the item's susceptibility (or immunity) characteristics, and the amplitude,
frequency, and time-dependent characteristics of the EME. To prevent E3 problems from
occurring, the possible effects of undesired EM energy should be considered for each item when
operating in its intended EME. Furthermore, compliance with the National Environmental Policy
Act requires Environmental Impact assessments for many types of systems and installations. These
assessments must address the potential impact of the EME on personnel, ordnance and fueling
areas. As we will see later in this handbook, a requirement to demonstrate satisfactory performance
in a defined EME should be included in all acquisition documents, including the test and evaluation
master plan (TEMP).
Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D




10

4.1.3 Contributors to the EME

The EME in which military platforms, systems, subsystems, and equipment must operate is
comprised of a multitude of natural and manmade sources. Natural sources consist of:

Galactic noise,
Atmospheric noise,
Solar noise,
P-static,
Lightning, and
ESD.

Manmade sources consist of friendly and hostile emitters, both intentional and unintentional, and
spurious emissions such as motor noise and intermodulation products. Intentional emitters include,
but are not limited to the following types of subsystems/equipment:

Communications,
Navigation,
Meteorology,
Radar,
Weapon, and
Electronic Warfare (EW).

Unintentional emitters encompass subsystems and equipment that uses, transforms, or generates
undesired EM energy as a by-product of performing its mission. Therefore, any electrical,
electronic, electromechanical, or electro-optic device can be an unintentional emitter. Examples of
unintentional emitters include the following:

Intentional radiators emitting other than the intended emission,
Computers and associated peripherals,
Televisions, cameras, and video equipment,
Microwave ovens,
Radio and radar receivers,
Power supplies and frequency converters,
Motors and generators, and
Electrical hand tools.

Power levels and source locations relative to the item are the two main considerations used for
determining which sources are the dominant contributors to the operational EME. For example,
during normal, non-combat operations the primary sources of EM energy would be primarily from
intentional and spurious emissions from own, co-located equipment. In a combat scenario, enemy
transmissions could be another major contributor. Hence, the EME within which an item must
operate and survive is both mission-dependent and scenario-dependent.
Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D




11

4.1.4 Defining the EME

The EME in which the item is most likely to operate must be defined early in the acquisition
process. The initial step is to identify the major geographic regions in which the system will
operate, that is, the U.S., Atlantic, Pacific, Europe, Middle East, or possibly, worldwide. The next
step is to identify the specific countries in each major region in which the item is likely to be
deployed, since obtaining host nation approval to operate may be more challenging in some
countries. Once that is done, the theater and missions must be defined. Then, individual host
platforms and systems on or near the item to be deployed must be identified. Following this, the
types and characteristics of any spectrum-dependent item present or planned that could possibly
interact with the proposed item should be identified. This identification addresses both items
affected by and those that affect the item. The identification must address both the military and
commercial EME alike. The information on interacting items will be used as an initial input for
frequency allocation and E3 analyses.

Although the EME is defined early in the program, continuous update of the EME is necessary
throughout the entire life cycle because the environment is not static. Other entities (friendly and
hostile) will be simultaneously developing or fielding items that will operate within the same EME.
Data concerning these "new" items must be sought out and added to the EME definitions. In
addition, the original mission of the proposed item may be changed, forcing additional geographic
regions, countries, host platforms, and nearby equipment to be considered. As EME definitions are
updated, they should be used to refine E3 analyses and frequency allocation requests. MIL-HDBK-
235 and MIL-STD-464 describe land-based, ship-based, airborne, and battle space EME levels,
including friendly and hostile levels that may be encountered by an item during its life cycle. One
of the difficulties encountered when specifying the performance requirements of an item is that the
quantitative characteristics of the intended operational EME may be unknown.

Each item, in all likelihood, will be exposed to several different EME levels during its life cycle.
MIL-HDBK-235 and MIL-STD-464 provide general information on the EME. Referring to these
publications can be useful when defining the power levels of the EME to which an item may be
exposed. However, the tables should be tailored for specific applications. Specifying an EME level
that is too stringent may result in additional costs that are unnecessary. Each distinctive EME that
an item will be exposed to during its life cycle should be defined before specifying its performance
requirements. For example, a missile will be exposed to different EME levels during shipment,
storage, checkout, launch, and the approach to a target. The specified E3 control performance
requirements should ensure the item's performance is not adversely affected by any of the EME
levels that will be encountered.

The physical configuration of an item may vary depending on its intended location. An item's
immunity or susceptibility to the EME may also vary depending on its physical configuration and
location relative to the intended operational EME. Therefore, when developing E3 performance
requirements, both the physical configuration and the location of the item within each of its
intended operational EME should be considered.
Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D




12

4.1.4.1 Specifying the Intended EME

There is usually a significant difference between the levels of EM energy that will temporarily
degrade or limit the effective performance of an item (operational) and those levels that will
permanently damage an item (survivability). The requirement to control any effects from the EME
under all circumstances should be, by necessity, more stringent than just to ensure that the item will
not be permanently damaged. When specifying E3 control requirements, the item's function and
how critical it is to the intended mission should be taken into account. There are also precautions
that can be taken to protect equipment from being permanently damaged by EM energy when not in
use that cannot be implemented when they are in an operational mode.

The susceptibility characteristics of an item depend on its design characteristics. For example, the
item may respond to a broad frequency range or be frequency selective. Also, some victims have
response times in microseconds and are affected by the peak power levels of short-term signals,
whereas other victims are affected by heating and respond more slowly to the average power levels
of signals. The design characteristics of an item, as well as the shielding integrity, choice of
components, and use of filtering should be considered when evaluating EM effects on an item.

Possible changes in the intended operational EME and future applications of an item also should be
considered when defining the EME that an item may encounter. An item designed to operate in a
specific EME may, in the future, be required to operate in another, or used to perform functions and
missions that were not planned for when the item was originally designed. Although the cost of an
item may increase when designed for an EME that is more severe than the EME that is currently
being predicted to be encountered by the item, the increase in cost may be justified in terms of
adaptability for future applications. This is particularly true for items designed by a Service that
may, ultimately, be used in a J oint operation.

When defining the operational EME that an item will be required to operate or survive in during its
life cycle, operational and installation conditions that can preclude or reduce exposure to the EME
and any added information that may affect an item's exposure to the EME should be considered.
For example, the complement of emitters on a platform or site will determine the frequency bands
within which high levels of EM energy will probably be encountered. Dimensional restrictions and
intervening structures may exist that cause an item to operate in the near or induction field region of
an antenna. Other factors that should be considered are the platform on which an item is installed
and its operational use.
4.2 EMC

EMC is the ability of a system, equipment, and devices that use the spectrum to operate in their
intended operational EME without experiencing unintentional degradation from co-located systems
or causing unintentional degradation because of EM radiation or response. It involves the
application of sound EM principles; SM; system, equipment, and device design configuration that
ensures interference-free operation; and clear concepts and doctrines that maximizes operational
effectiveness. It is apparent, then, that the lack of EMC due to the presence of EMI is the concern.
Increased multi-National military operations, proliferation of both friendly and hostile weapons
Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D




13

systems, and the expanded use of the spectrum worldwide have resulted in an operational EME not
previously encountered. The growing presence of intentional emitters worldwide poses significant
challenges for the military. Therefore, it is essential that the EME created by these emitters be
defined and used to establish system E3 requirements. Documents such as MIL-HDBK-235 and
MIL-STD-464 list various land, ship, airborne, and battle force EME levels. The EM fields, which
may illuminate platforms or systems, are very high and can degrade overall performance if they are
not properly addressed. Operational problems resulting from the adverse effects of EM energy on
systems or platforms are well documented. Problems include premature detonation of ordnance, loss
of communications, loss of guidance and tracking radar, component failure, and unreliable built-in-test
indications. These problems underscore the importance of designing platforms and systems that are
compatible with their intended operational EME. Joint operations further increase the potential for
safety and reliability problems since the system is likely to be exposed to an operational EME different
from that for which they were designed.
4.3 EMI

EMI is any EM disturbance that interrupts, obstructs, or otherwise degrades or limits the effective
performance of electronics and electrical equipment. It can be induced intentionally, as in some
forms of EW, or unintentionally, as a result of spurious emissions and responses, intermodulation
products, and the like. Related to EMI is susceptibility which is the inability of an item to
perform its function without degradation while in the presence of an EM disturbance. EM
disturbances can be in the form of either radiated or conducted emissions. The EMI characteristics
(emission and susceptibility) of individual equipment and subsystems must be controlled to obtain a
high degree of assurance that these items will function in their intended installations without
unintentional EM interactions with other equipment, subsystems, or the external EME. The EME
within a system is complex and variable depending upon the operating modes and frequencies of
the onboard equipment. Also, configurations are continuously changing as new or upgraded
equipment is installed. Furthermore, items developed for one platform may be used for other
platforms. MIL-STD-461 provides a standardized set of EMI control and test requirements that
form a common basis for assessing the EMI characteristics of subsystems and equipment.
Adherence to these EMI requirements will afford a high degree of confidence that the item will
operate compatibly upon integration and would minimize potential cost impact and scheduling
delays. A further concern is the need for equipment using power to control transients to levels that
will not cause upset or damage to other power users. Related to EMI is EMV. (See 4.6)
4.4 EMP

EMP, as used herein, is the non-ionizing EM radiation (EMR) from a nuclear explosion caused by
Compton-recoil electrons and photoelectrons from photons scattered in the materials of the nuclear
device or in a surrounding medium. The resulting electric and magnetic fields may couple with
electrical or electronic systems and associated interfaces to produce damaging current and voltage
surges. A nuclear burst above the atmosphere that produces coverage over a large area is called a
high-altitude EMP, or HEMP. In a nuclear conflict, it is possible that many military systems will be
exposed to an EMP. The resultant EM field is characterized by high amplitude, short duration, and
short rise time pulse for a very brief time. There are two types of EMP, each distinguished by the
height of the burst. One type is exo-atmospheric where the detonation is outside of the atmosphere
Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D




14

but which can produce coverage over large geographical areas; and the other is endo-atmospheric
which results from a low altitude detonation. In either case, the effects can be detrimental to the
performance of many electrical and electronic items. MIL-STD-2169 describes the predicted EMP
waveforms. EMP waveform criteria are also provided in MIL-STD-461 and 464. EMP may also
be caused by non-nuclear means. EME levels generated by the normal operation of systems,
subsystems, or equipment (such as from EM launchers or guns) are not currently addressed in these
standards.
4.5 Electromagnetic Radiation (EMR) Hazards (RADHAZ)

EMR can have harmful effects on personnel, fuels, and ordnance if uncontrolled. These effects
are discussed below.
4.5.1 HERP

HERP is the potential hazard that exists when personnel are exposed to an EM field of sufficient
intensity to heat the human body. The fact that heating is associated with absorption of radio
frequency (RF) power by humans was known nearly 50 years ago and led to the introduction of RF
diathermy for medical and surgical purposes. The heat resulting from RF field interactions simply
adds to the metabolic heat load of the human. If the body's heat gain exceeds its ability to rid itself
of excess heat, the body temperature rises. Therefore, if significant power is absorbed, an increase
in body temperature can occur that could have a competing effect on metabolic processes, with
potentially deleterious effects. Radar and EW systems present the greatest potential for personnel
hazard due to their high transmitter output powers and antenna characteristics. Personnel assigned
to repair, maintenance, and test facilities have a higher potential for being overexposed due to their
tasks, the proximity to radiating elements, and the pressures for rapid maintenance response. Safety
tolerance levels for personnel exposure to EMR are defined in MIL-STD-464 and DoDI 6055.11.
4.5.2 HERF

HERF is the potential hazard that is created when volatile combustibles, such as fuel, are exposed to
EM fields of sufficient energy to cause ignition. For fuel vapors to ignite, a flammable fuel-air
mixture must be present, in addition to an intense EM field. EMR can induce currents into any
metal object. The amount of current, and thus the strength of a spark across a gap between two
conductors, depends on the field intensity of the energy and how well the conductors act as a
receiving antenna. Many parts of a system, a refueling vehicle, or a static grounding conductor can
act as receiving antennas. The induced current depends, mainly, on the conductor length in relation
to the wavelength of the RF energy and the orientation of the field. It is neither feasible to predict
nor control these factors. The hazard criteria must then be based on the assumption that an ideal
receiving antenna could be inadvertently created with the required spark gap. The existence and
extent of a fuel hazard are determined by comparing the actual RF power density to an established
safety criterion. Requirements to control EMR hazards to fuels are in MIL-STD-464. T.O. 31Z-
10-4 and OP 3565 provide procedures for establishing safe operating distances.
Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D




15

4.5.3 HERO

HERO is the potential hazard that exists when ordnance that contains electrically initiated devices
(EIDs) is adversely impacted by the EME. Ordnance includes weapons, rockets, explosives, EIDs
themselves, squibs, flares, igniters, explosive bolts, electric primed cartridges, destructive devices, and
jet-assisted take-off bottles. Modern transmitters can produce a high EME that can be hazardous to
ordnance. These EME levels can cause premature actuation of ordnance. RF energy of sufficient
magnitude to fire or dud EIDs can be coupled from the external EME, either by explosive subsystem
wiring or by capacitive coupling from nearby radiated objects. Possible consequences include both
hazards to safety and performance degradation. EIDs should be selected to be the least sensitive that
will meet system requirements. Each EID must be categorized as to whether its inadvertent ignition
would lead to either safety or performance degradation problems. The PM should determine this
categorization. HERO requirements and evaluation guidance are in MIL-STD-464 and MIL-
HDBK-240. Additional guidance can be found in OP-3565 and OD 30393. MIL-STD-1576
provides guidance on the use and test of ordnance devices in space and launch vehicles.
4.6 EMV

EMV is the characteristic of an item that causes it to suffer degraded performance, or the inability
to perform its specified task, as a result of the operational EME. An item is said to be vulnerable if
its performance is degraded below a satisfactory level because of exposure to the stress of an
operational EME or transient. There are many different EME levels that an item will be exposed to
during its life cycle. Many threats will be seen only infrequently. However, if the item encounters
an operational EME corresponding to its susceptibility characteristics as observed in a laboratory
test, it may suffer degradation in performance, or not be able to perform its specified task at all in
that operational environment. An EMV analysis is usually required to determine the impact of a
laboratory-observed susceptibility on actual operational performance. The results of the EMV
analysis guide the possible need for hardware modification, additional analyses, or testing.
4.7 Lightning

Lightning is an electric discharge that occurs in the atmosphere between clouds or between clouds
and grounds. The EM radiation associated with a lightning discharge produces electric and
magnetic elds that may couple with electrical or electronic items to produce damaging current and
voltage surges. Lightning effects can be divided into direct (physical) and indirect (EM) effects;
both effects may occur to the same component.

Direct effects of lightning are any physical damage to the system structure or equipment due
to the direct attachment of the lightning channel. These effects include tearing, bending,
burning, vaporization, or blasting of hardware, as well as the high-pressure shock waves and
magnetic forces produced by the associated high currents.

Indirect effects are those resulting from electrical transients induced in electrical circuits due
to coupling of the EM fields associated with lightning and the interaction of these fields
with equipment in the system.
Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D




16

For example, a lightning strike to an antenna could cause physical damage and send damaging
voltages into the transmitter or receiver connected to that antenna. Also, currents and voltages
conducted by cables or wiring in aircraft may cause serious electrical shock. Lightning pulse
characteristics and additional guidance are contained in MIL-STD-464.
4.8 Precipitation Static

P-static is an EM disturbance caused by a random ESD buildup as a result of the flow of air,
moisture, or airborne particles over the structure or components of a vehicle moving in the
atmosphere, such as an aircraft or spacecraft. As systems in motion encounter dust, rain, snow, and
ice, an electrostatic charge builds up. This buildup of static electricity causes significant voltages to
be present which can result in interference to equipment and constitute a shock hazard to personnel.
For aircraft applications, air crew personnel may be affected during flight, and ground personnel
may be affected after landing. P-static deserves special emphasis because of increased sensitivity
of electronic equipment, wider frequency spectrum for new communications systems, and increased
use of composite materials.
4.9 ESD

ESD occurs when the static electric field between two objects exceeds the dielectric strength of the
air between them. The discharge is a complex event involving a localized transfer of charge at the
point of discharge, EM near field coupling between the objects involved, induced current flow in
the object receiving the discharge, and radiated EM energy from the charged object as well as from
the arc of the discharge. All of these phenomena are capable of causing malfunctions and, in some
cases, damage in electronic equipment. Examples of sensitive components that can be damaged are
microcircuits, discrete semiconductors, thick film resistors, hybrid devices, and piezo-electric
crystals. ESD can cause intermittent or upset (transient) failures as well as hard failures.
Intermittent failures occur when the equipment is in operation and is usually characterized by a loss
of information or temporary distortion of its functions. No apparent hardware damage occurs and
proper operation resumes automatically after the ESD exposure or in the case of some digital
equipment, after re-entry of the information by re-sequencing the equipment. Catastrophic (hard)
ESD failures can be the result of electrical overstress of electronic parts caused by a discharge from
a person or object, an electrostatic field, or a high voltage spark discharge. ESD can also cause
hazardous conditions in fuels and ordnance, as well as presenting a shock hazard to personnel.

Sloshing fuel in tanks and fuel flowing in lines can both create a charge buildup resulting in
a possible fuel hazard due to sparking. Any other fluid or gas flowing in the system (such as
cooling fluid or air) can likewise deposit a charge with potentially hazardous consequences.

Ordnance is potentially susceptible to inadvertent ignition from ESD. The primary concern
is discharge through the bridgewire of the EID used to initiate the explosive.

During maintenance, personnel contact with the structure and various materials can create
an electrostatic charge buildup on both the personnel and structure (particularly on non-
conductive surfaces). This buildup can constitute a safety hazard to personnel or fuel or
may damage electronics.
Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D




17

Requirements and guidance are contained in MIL-STD-464 and 1686 and MIL-HDBK-263. ANSI/
ESD-S20.20 provides guidance for establishing an ESD control program to minimize ESD hazards
to sensitive devices. ESD TR 20.20 provides guidance for applying ANSI/ESD-S20.20.
Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D




18









This page left intentionally blank.
Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D




19

5. OVERVIEW OF SPECTRUM MANAGEMENT
5.1 General

Use of the EM spectrum by DoD is expanding based on emerging advanced technologies and J oint
warfighting strategies. The DoD employs a large number of weapon systems in executing military
missions, and most, if not all, depend upon the EM spectrum. Loss of spectrum access, however,
has the potential to derail efforts to exploit available technology. DoD is provided access to
spectrum by the Federal Government and shares spectrum with other Federal Agencies, local
Governments and private Industry. Consequently, the DoD must demonstrate critical needs to
maintain specific portions of the spectrum for exclusive use. This is truer now more than ever
before considering the wide use of wireless technologies in the market-place. Expanding
commercial access to spectrum is a reality. Spectrum use is governed by International agreements
and national laws since DoD operations are conducted worldwide, bringing new challenges to
efforts involved in planning and coordinating J oint missions. Relocation of systems to new bands is
difficult and costly because an equipment may interact with many other equipment. In addition to
the increased likelihood of operational EMI because of overcrowding in the remaining spectrum,
equipment redesign, additional testing, re-certification for spectrum use, and training all may be
necessary. Further domino effects are also likely, forcing changes to other parts of the integrated
military system. Many frequencies used by DoD are those that work best for the intended purpose,
dictated by the laws of physics. DoD efforts to safeguard needed spectrum access depend on the
capability to demonstrate the criticality of targeted frequencies. The acquisition community plays a
key role since the data generated during the ESC process provides much of the information needed
to substantiate DoD positions.

The availability of adequate spectrum to support military electronic systems and equipment is
critical to maximizing mission effectiveness. Spectrum planning and management must be given
appropriate and timely consideration during the development, procurement, and deployment of
military assets that utilize the EM spectrum. To ensure maximum EMC among the various
worldwide users of the spectrum, it is essential that spectrum-dependent equipment and other
intentional radiators, including identification devices and stock control micro strips, comply with
spectrum usage and management requirements. Elements of spectrum management are:

Frequency Allocation. The designation of frequency bands for use by one or more radio
communication service, for example, fixed, land mobile, air-to-ground, or commercial
broadcast. (based on National and International agreements).

Frequency Assignment. The authorization for a spectrum-dependent system to use a
frequency under specified conditions or restrictions. (license to operate).

Equipment Spectrum Certification (ESC). The statement(s) of adequacy received from
authorities of sovereign nations after their review of the technical characteristics of a
spectrum-dependent equipment or system regarding compliance with their national
spectrum management policy, allocations, regulations, and technical standards. ESC is
alternately called spectrum certification.
Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D




20

Spectrum Supportability (SS). SS is the assurance that the necessary frequencies and
bandwidth are available to military systems in order to maintain effective interoperability in
the operational EME. The assessment of an equipment or system as having spectrum
supportability is based upon, as a minimum, receipt of ESC, reasonable assurance of the
availability of sufficient frequencies for operation, Host Nation Approval (HNA), and
consideration of EMC.
5.2 Spectrum Supportability (SS)

SS must be given appropriate and timely consideration in acquisition planning, development,
procurement, and deployment of spectrum-dependent systems or equipment. SS must be addressed
early in the conceptual phase of system development and be periodically reviewed and updated
throughout the system design. OMB Circular A-11 requires that spectrum support be obtained
before submitting funding estimates for the development or procurement of systems or equipment.
In addition, certification is required before funds are obligated for spectrum-dependent systems or
equipment. To accomplish this, a DD Form 1494 must be submitted to the appropriate Service
Frequency Management Office (FMO) in accordance with policies and procedures of DoDD
4650.1, DoDI 5000.2, and the form itself. The data required, and provided on the DD Form 1494 is
maintained at the J SC and benefits that portion of the DoD SM community involved in mission
planning and training operations. The data enables:

Frequency assignments for DoD operations, exercises, and training, including coordination
with foreign (host) nations for use of DoD systems overseas,
Mitigation or resolution of EMI problems,
Siting of new DoD or commercial systems on ships, aircraft, in space, and at shore sites,
Integration of CI into the intense EME found on military platforms and installations, and
Establishment of mutually beneficial parameters for spectrum sharing with Industry.
5.2.1 Joint Missions and Host Nation Agreements

The International Telecommunication Union (ITU), an approximately 200-nation member
organization, regulates the spectrum worldwide and promotes International cooperation in the
efficient use of the spectrum. In ever-increasing competition for limited frequency spectrum, the
DoD must provide for mutual compatibility and agreement regarding its use in the International
community. Spectrum is a national resource managed by each country. Approval to transmit
within a country is at the sole discretion of that country, based on the perceived potential for EMI to
local receivers. Use of military or commercial C4I systems in host nations requires coordination
and negotiation including approvals and certifications. Host nations have denied frequency
assignments to DoD systems because of EMI caused to in-country systems, such as cellular and
other mobile phones, civil aviation, civil defense, other civil and Government systems, sensors,
radar, military systems, and satellite communications. The military conducts operations in
territories of nations other than the U.S. In such situations, use of the spectrum for U.S. operations
is by permission of the host Government and is formalized in an agreement between the U.S. and
that nation. To ensure EMC, the host nation, in most cases, requires the U.S. to supply data
concerning the equipment characteristics from a spectrum usage standpoint. The data required in
Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D




21

most of these situations are the same data elements required in DD Form 1494. Failure to obtain
HNA can result in action as severe as confiscation of the equipment. As a minimum, such
equipment will not be allowed to operate. As indicated in 5.2.2, use of commercial items (CI) in
DoD operations overseas must also be coordinated through these negotiations.
5.2.2 Equipment Spectrum Certification of CI

Procurement and use of CI by DoD is encouraged as an alternative to the costly in-house
development process. However, the civilian spectrum is generally not authorized for military use.
When contracting for the acquisition of spectrum-dependent CI, particularly those that utilize
civilian frequencies, it is essential that ESC be addressed, in addition to the E3 issues discussed in
this handbook. DoD directives and instructions require acquisition personnel to obtain ESC
approval for all spectrum-dependent equipment, including CI emitters and receivers, particularly
where the Government relies on commercially provided services or secondary allocations, that is,
permission to use on a not-to-interfere basis for military purposes. This requirement extends to CI
used for military purposes, whether operating in Government exclusive bands, shared bands, or
non-Government exclusive frequency bands. Government requirements for use of the spectrum in
exclusive non-Government bands can be accommodated either by becoming a user of a commercial
service, such as cellular telephone, or by obtaining a secondary allocation.

When using a commercial service, a Government user may buy or lease CI equipment that has been
Type-Accepted in accordance with Federal Communications Commission (FCC) rules. As a
practical matter, and as discussed earlier, the limitations of CI and their potential for EMI problems
should be recognized. FCC requirements differ markedly from those imposed by the DoD and,
generally, do not provide the necessary data on equipment technical characteristics or system
performance. This data is important to the SM community, and is used for frequency planning of
J oint missions and training, EMI resolution efforts, HNA, and other related tasks. Secondary
allocations can be even more of a problem for the Government user who, in this case, is afforded no
protection at all from EMI. Furthermore, regulatory policy stipulates that primary allocation
operations will receive no EMI from secondary users. Consequently, operational EMI can be
expected in the absence of appropriate ESC considerations applied during acquisition. CI generally
enters the ESC process prior to Milestone C (see 6.8.1) since the development has already taken
place. In these cases, equipment manufacturers must supply the requisite technical characteristics
and performance data needed to complete the process for the following reasons:

The potential for EMI is increased, because most CI are not designed or tested for operation
in the extremely dense, high power EME found on DoD platforms and in mission battle
space situations. Conversely, the resolution of such problems is more difficult when ESC
data is not available for use in developing potential fixes.

Site planning, for installing CI systems in DoD platforms or land facilities, while
maintaining mutual compatibility between installed systems, becomes extremely difficult, if
not impossible to do efficiently in the absence of specific, spectrum performance data.

CI with unknown, out-of-band emission characteristics can inadvertently cause severe EMI
to critical C4I systems in the environment, requiring costly corrective action programs and
Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D




22

probably reducing operational effectiveness.

Spectrum planners, who develop frequency plans for DoD missions, are responsible for
assigning frequencies to preclude EMI among the multitude of emitters and receivers that
will operate in the battle space or in training exercises. Non-certified emitters and receivers
constitute unknown quantities that present a hazard to spectrum planning and overall
mission success, regardless of their operational frequencies.
5.3 Regulatory Organizations

The major organizations that work individually and collectively to maintain and implement
spectrum policy are discussed below. Their functions and responsibilities cover all aspects of SM,
from the regulatory aspects of spectrum use rules, to the specific procedural aspects of certifying
equipment and obtaining assigned operational frequencies. Figure 2 depicts the SM structure.
5.3.1 International Telecommunication Union (ITU)

The first regulations governing wireless telegraphy were adopted in 1906 by the International
Telegraph Convention after a widely recognized need to coordinate and control use of the spectrum.
This organization later became the ITU, currently with approximately 200-member nations. The
regulations, now known as the Radio Regulations, allocate the frequencies between 3 kHz and 300
GHz into bands for use by radio services worldwide. These regulations have been amended and
revised over the years at World Radio Conferences (WRCs). The ITU comprises the following:

The Plenipotentiary Conference is the supreme authority of the union and meets every four
years to adopt the strategic plan and fundamental policies of the organization.

The Council is composed of 46 members of the union and acts on behalf of the
plenipotentiary conference to consider broad telecommunication policy issues.

The World Conferences on International Telecommunications meet according to needs,
generally every 2-4 years, to establish the general principles related to the operation of
International telecommunication services.

The Radio Communication Sector ensures rational, equitable, efficient and economical use
of the spectrum by all radio communication services.

The Standardization Sector studies the technical, operating, and tariff questions and issues
recommendations for standardizing telecommunications on a worldwide basis.

The Development Sector facilitates and enhances telecommunications development by
offering, organizing and coordinating technical cooperation and assistance activities.

The General Secretariat handles all administrative and financial aspects of the ITU.

Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D




23


FIGURE 2. Spectrum Management Organizations.
5.3.2 National
5.3.2.1 Federal Communications Commission (FCC)

Congress has authority over civil portions of the spectrum. The Communications Act of 1934
established the FCC as an independent Government agency to control and manage civilian use of
the spectrum. (See Figure 3) The FCC is directly responsible to Congress for regulating civilian
use of the spectrum by radio, television, wire, satellite, and cable. Their jurisdiction covers the 50
states, the District of Columbia, and U.S. and its possessions. There are seven operating Bureaus:
Cable Services, Common Carrier, Consumer Information, Enforcement, International, Mass Media,
and Wireless Telecommunications. These Bureaus are responsible for developing and

International
Telecommunication Union
U.S. Federal Government
FCC


NTIA
Assistant
Secretary of
Commerce

DoD
Department
of
State

Commercial
Sector
IRAC
22 Federal
Agencies
MILDEPs
JCS
MCEB (JFP)
Unified
Commands,
COCOMs, &
CCEB
Non-Allied
Countries
Allied
Countries
LIAISON LIAISON
Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D




24



FIGURE 3. Communications Act of 1934

implementing regulatory programs, processing applications for licenses or other filings, analyzing
complaints, conducting investigations, and taking part in FCC hearings.
5.3.2.2 National Telecommunication & Information Administration (NTIA)

The NTIA was established in 1978 under the Secretary of Commerce as the Presidents principal
advisor on telecommunications policy. The Assistant Secretary acts as Administrator. Spectrum
management within the organization is under the direction of its Associate Administrator, the
Office of Spectrum Management. Among NTIA SM responsibilities are the following:

Serve as the Presidents principal advisor on telecommunications policies pertaining to
regulation of the telecommunications Industry,

Advise the Director, OMB on the development of policies for procurement and management
of Federal telecommunications systems,
U UN NC CL LA AS SS SI IF FI IE E
D D

COMMUNICATIONS ACT OF 1934
THE COURTS
WHITE HOUSE
CONGRESS
National Telecommunications and
Information Administration
(NTIA)
(Federal Government Spectrum Users)
Federal Communications
Commission (FCC)
(Non-Federal Government
Spectrum Users)
Coordination

NTIA Chairs, 22 Government
IRAC, and Departments/Agencies
Subcommittees are Members

Interdepartment
Radio Advisory
Committee (IRAC)
(Liaison)
Technical
Subcommittees
Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D




25

Conduct research and analysis of EM propagation, radio system characteristics and
operating techniques affecting spectrum use,

Establish policies concerning frequency allocations and assignments for telecommunication
systems owned and operated by the Government and provide guidance to various Agencies
to ensure their compliance with policy,

Develop, in cooperation with the FCC, a comprehensive long-range plan for improved
management of all EM spectrum resources, including jointly determining the National Table
of Frequency Allocations (TOA), and

Continues operation of the Interdepartment Radio Advisory Committee (IRAC) to serve in
an advisory capacity to the Assistant Secretary.
5.3.2.3 Interdepartment Radio Advisory Committee (IRAC)

The IRAC, now under jurisdiction of the NTIA, was originally formed in 1922 to manage the
Governments portion of the spectrum when Federal Departments and Agencies banded together
under the Secretary of Commerce to coordinate their use. The Assistant Secretary of Commerce,
under Executive Order 12046 of 1978 and the NTIA Organization Act, continued this relationship.
The basic functions of the IRAC are to support the Assistant Secretary in assigning frequencies to
U.S. Government radio stations and in developing and executing policies, programs, procedures,
and technical criteria pertaining to the allocation, management, and use of the spectrum. The
permanent substructure of the IRAC consists of the following:

Frequency Assignment Subcommittee that carries out those functions related to the
assignment and coordination of radio frequencies and the development and execution of
related procedures.

Spectrum Planning Subcommittee (SPS) that plans for use of the spectrum in the National
interest, to include the apportionment of spectrum space for the support of established or
anticipated radio services, as well as the apportionment of spectrum between or among
Government and non-Government activities.

Technical Subcommittee that carries out those functions related to technical aspects of use
of the EM spectrum, and such other matters as the IRAC may direct. This committee
evaluates and makes recommendations regarding EMC capabilities and the needs of the
Government in support of SM. They also develop and update recommended standards and
pertaining to spectrum use. These are published in the NTIA Manual.

Radio Conference Subcommittee that carries out functions related to preparing for ITU
conferences, including the development of recommended U.S. proposals and positions.

International Notification Group that prepares responses to the ITU concerning
questionnaires and other correspondence related to U.S. frequency assignments.
Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D




26

Secretariat that consists of the Executive Secretary, who is the principal officer, the
Assistant Executive Secretary, and the Secretaries of the Subcommittees. They, together
with the requisite technical and clerical personnel, carry out the work of the IRAC.

The IRAC has an active membership comprised of 22 Government Departments and Agencies,
including each military Department, effectively representing all Federal users. A representative
appointed by the FCC acts as liaison between the IRAC Subcommittees and the Commission,
thereby creating a forum for addressing civil and Federal spectrum use interests.
5.3.3 Department of Defense
5.3.3.1 Assistant Secretary of Defense for Networks and Information Integration (ASD(NII))

The ASD(NII) oversees SM within the DoD, including the following:

Provides capabilities to generate, use, and share information among DoD forces,
Provide direction and guidance for the development of DoD positions for, and DoD
participation in, international and regional spectrum forums, including all related national,
regional, and international preparatory activities for the ITU WRCs,
Provides direction and guidance within the DoD for managing and using the EM spectrum,
When appropriate, issue specific authorization for acquisitions and acquisition programs to
proceed without spectrum supportability,
For Major Defense Acquisition Programs and Major Automated Information Systems
provide SS assessments to the milestone decision authority (MDA) at acquisition
milestones,
Direct the establishment and maintenance of a capability to analyze and make
recommendations concerning whether spectrum-dependent systems, either being acquired or
procured, have, or will have, SS,
Directs the establishment and maintenance of a capability to document and manage existing
spectrum assets and to perform required EMC analyses and studies to support effective use
of spectrum-dependent systems in EMEs.
5.3.3.2 Joint Chiefs of Staff (JCS)

The rapid growth in sophisticated weapons systems, as well as intelligence, operations, and
information systems, has increased demand for spectrum that, if not carefully coordinated and
managed, will have an adverse effect upon J oint operations. The J oint Staff represents the interests
of the Combatant Commands (COCOMs) related to operational SM matters. They also identify,
assess, and recommend measures to ensure that EM spectrum use is mutually supporting and
effective in J oint and Combined operations. At the heart is J oint Vision 2020, which promotes
achieving the ultimate goal of our military forces through Full Spectrum Dominance across the full
range of operations. The Directorate for Command, Control, Communications, and Computer
Systems (J -6) ensures adequate support to the COCOMs and all warfighters for DoD and J oint
operations, provides a permanent Military Communications Electronics Board (MCEB) Secretariat,
and serves as chairman of the MCEB.
Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D




27

5.3.3.2.1 Military Communications Electronics Board (MCEB)

Although each of the Departments is represented in IRAC and its subcommittees, development of
common procedures for inter Service coordination is the responsibility of the MCEB. The MCEB
reports to the Secretary of Defense through the J CS and consists of the Chairman, senior
Communications-Electronics officers of the Army, Navy, Air Force, Marine Corps, and Coast
Guard, and Directors or senior representatives of Defense Information Systems Agency (DISA) and
National Security Agency. The MCEB is responsible for developing and promoting the DoD
position in negotiations with other host nations on matters for which it is responsible. The J oint
Frequency Panel (J FP) reviews, develops, and coordinates studies, reports, and DoD positions
regarding RF engineering and SM for MCEB consideration, with duties divided among eight
working groups. The Equipment Spectrum Guidance Permanent Working Group (ESGPWG)
reviews newly submitted DD Form 1494s for the J FP or submit them to the J FP for other actions.
5.3.3.3 Defense Spectrum Office (DSO)

The DSO, an office in DISA, in support of ASD(NII) determines DoDs future spectrum
requirements, supports the WRC and coordinates analytical support, and positions for the DoD to
ensure spectrum access in the 21st century.
5.3.3.4 Joint Spectrum Center (JSC)

The J SC provides technical guidance and assists the DoD in effective use of the EM spectrum in
support of National security and military objectives. It provides a National repository for spectrum
usage data and SM support to the DSO, the J oint Staff (J -6), ASD(NII), the Military Departments,
COCOMs, and J oint and Component Commands. In addition, the J SC:

Reviews DD Form 1494 frequency allocation applications for the Services,
Maintains spectrum use databases for planning and analysis, and
Provides interference prediction and analysis modeling and simulation support.
5.3.3.5 U.S. Army Spectrum Management Office

The U.S. Army Spectrum Management Office performs SM activities on behalf of the Army
Spectrum Manager. It is the focal point for acquisition personnel, Major Army Commands, Major
Subordinate and System Commands, and Materiel Support Commands who develop, purchase, or
lease telecommunications equipment for U.S. Army use. It exercises technical control over the
following Area Frequency Coordinators (AFC): Army FMO Continental United States, DoD AFC
Arizona, and DoD AFC White Sands Missile Range (WSMR). The Office is also responsible for
the following ESC functions:

Prepares, reviews, and distributes completed applications to the MCEB, the SPS, and the
COCOMs, as appropriate,
Coordinates applications with interested Army and other activities, and
Forwards applications to the MCEB ESGPWG for approval.
Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D




28

5.3.3.6 Air Force Frequency Management Agency (AFFMA)

AFFMA secures and protects access to the spectrum for all Air Force requirements, nationally and
internationally. With regard to ESC, the AFFMA:

Reviews DD Form 1494s for Air Force procurements,
Assigns J /F-12 numbers and forwards Air Force DD Form 1494s to the MCEB Secretariat
for distribution to all J /F-12 holders,
Coordinates applications with interested Air Force directorates and other designated
activities for review and comment, and
Coordinates responses and drafts and forwards approval memos to the MCEB ESGPWG.
5.3.3.7 Navy and Marine Corps Spectrum Center

The Chief of Naval Operations (CNO N71) has frequency approval authority for all Navy and
Marine Corps systems. The Navy and Marine Corps Spectrum Center is CNOs agent for
managing the Navys EM spectrum resources. Navy and Marine Corps Spectrum Center personnel
represent the Navy on the MCEB ESGPWG and IRAC SPS. With regard to ESC, the Center:

Coordinates the Navys spectrum resource usage,
Reviews, coordinates, and processes ESC applications, and
Provides guidance, training, and procedures for SM.
5.3.3.8 Combined Communications Electronics Board (CCEB)

The CCEB is a five-nation military communications-electronics (C-E) organization committed to
maximizing the effectiveness of combined operations, with regard to communication and
information systems. Their mission is to ensure interoperability among member nations through the
formulation of combined C-E policy and coordination of C-E issues. The current CCEB includes
the U.S., the United Kingdom, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand. Within the organization, the
Frequency Planners Meeting is one of the principal activities. This forum is directed towards
ensuring adequate spectrum support for forces of the CCEB nations. While the CCEB does not
control national procurement initiatives, or mandate the use of particular standards, it is expected
that future equipment acquisition will be strongly influenced by the standards, policies, and
procedures that the organization develops.
Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D




29

6. INCORPORATING E3/SS IN THE ACQUISITION PROCESS
6.1 General

The military faces increasingly more complex and challenging problems in developing and fielding
platforms, systems, subsystems, and equipment. Evolutionary acquisitions, including spiral and
incremental developments, are the preferred approach to satisfying operational needs; however, an
appropriate balance is required among key factors, such as operational needs, interoperability,
supportability, and affordability of alternative acquisition solutions.

DoD policy requires all electrical and electronic systems, subsystems, and equipment, including
ordnance containing EIDs, to be mutually compatible in their intended EME without causing or
suffering unacceptable mission degradation due to E3. Accordingly, appropriate E3 requirements
must be imposed to ensure a desired level of compatibility with other co-located equipment (intra-
system) and within the applicable external EME (inter-system, RF, lightning, EMP, and p-static)
and to address safety of personnel, ordnance, and fuel in these environments. In addition, national,
international, and DoD policies and procedures for the management and use of the EM spectrum
direct PMs developing spectrum-dependent systems or equipment to consider SS requirements and
E3 control early in the development process and throughout the acquisition life cycle. Mandatory
E3 and SS policies are discussed in Appendix A. In addition, Sections 4 and 5 provide overviews
of E3 and SM, including SS, concerns, respectively, Section 7 provides guidance on E3 and SS
testing, including analysis and prediction, and Appendix C describes the acquisition system.
Managers should take the following actions to obtain SS for spectrum-dependent equipment, and
minimize E3 on all equipment, systems, and platforms (both spectrum-dependent and non
spectrum-dependent). Detailed guidance is provided in subsequent portions of this handbook.
6.1.1 Prior to Milestone A

Develop SS and E3 control requirements and perform initial risk assessments to ensure
issues are addressed early in the program acquisition.
Complete and submit an initial Stage 1 (Conceptual) DD Form 1494 for coordination.
6.1.2 Before Milestone B (or before the first Milestone that authorizes contract award)

If the system or equipment is spectrum-dependent and has not yet obtained Certification of
Spectrum Support from NTIA or the MCEB to proceed into the System Development and
Demonstration (SDD) Phase, the PM must develop a justification and a proposed plan to
obtain SS. DoDD 4650.1 requires Milestone Decision Authorities (MDAs) and DoD
Component Acquisition Executives (CAEs) to provide such a justification and proposed
plan to the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics (USD
(AT&L)), the ASD(NII)/DoD Chief Information Officer (CIO), the Director, Operational
Test and Evaluation (DOT&E), and the Chair, MCEB.

Ensure E3 and SS requirements are addressed in the J oint Capabilities Integration and
Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D




30

Development System (J CIDS) documents (Mission Area Initial Capabilities Document
(ICD), Capability Development Document (CDD), and Capability Production Document
(CPD))

Address SS and E3 control requirements in the Statement of Work (SOW), Contract Data
Requirements List (CDRL), and Performance Specifications.

Ensure completion/update and submission of the DD Form 1494. If previously submitted,
ensure information is current.

Define E3 and SS requirements in the Information Support Plan (ISP).

Define in the Test and Evaluation Master Plan (TEMP), SS and E3 control requirements to
be tested during DT&E and the SS and E3 assessments to be performed during OT&E.
6.1.3 Prior to Milestone C

Review and update SS and E3 control requirements in the CPD, the ISP, and TEMP.

If the system is spectrum-dependent and has not yet obtained the SS required allowing it to
proceed into the Production and Deployment phase, the PM must develop a justification and
a proposed plan to obtain SS. DoDD 4650.1 requires MDAs and CAEs to provide such a
justification and proposed plan to the USD (AT&L), ASD(NII)/DoD(CIO), the DOT&E,
and the Chairman, MCEB.
6.1.4 After Milestone C

Monitor system changes to determine their impact on requirements for SS and E3 control.
Changes to operational parameters (such as, tuning range, emission characteristics, antenna
gain and height, bandwidth, or output power) or proposed operational locations may require
additional ESC actions through an updated DD Form 1494 or additional E3 analyses or
tests.
6.2 Pre-Acquisition Technology Projects

As noted in Appendix C, paragraph C.2.1, pre-acquisition projects include J oint Warfighting
Experiments, such as the warfighting experiments conduced by the military services and the J oint
Forces Command; Advanced Technology Demonstrations (ATDs); and Advanced Concept
Technology Demonstrations (ACTDs). The following concerns should be addressed early in these
projects:

Does the project address E3?
Does the project address a requirement for SS?
Does the project address the safety issues regarding HERO, if applicable?
Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D




31

6.3 Incorporating E3 Control and SS Requirements in JCIDS Documents

J CIDS documents are discussed in Section C.3 of this handbook. Both CJ CSM 3170.01 and CJ CSI
6212.01 require the Mission Area ICD, the CDD, and the CPD to address SS and E3 control. The
J oint Staff will employ the following assessment criteria when reviewing these documents.
6.3.1 Mission Area ICD

The Mission Area ICD is discussed in C.3.2. Mission Area ICDs typically address broad capability
gaps in joint warfighting functions that, in most cases, do not directly translate into EM spectrum
concerns such as E3 and SS functionality. However, it is appropriate to address E3 and SS
functionality in the ICD when the operational capabilities, gaps, or shortcomings involve EM
spectrum usage, access, or support areas such as cognitive radios that employ emerging spectrum
technology waveforms, ultra-wideband systems, frequency management issues, and so forth.

When addressing E3 and SS in the ICD, shortcomings or technology gaps of existing capabilities
that impact these requirements should be addressed. The ICD should explain how the deficiencies
noted will be resolved or mitigated by the planned capability or technology. The ICD should also
address regulatory compliance issues as applicable. For example, the J oint Tactical Radio System
bridges a technology gap but at the same time it presents numerous SS concerns from EMI to HNA.
These issues, in order to be effectively addressed, must be presented to decision-makers within the
DoD, National, and International regulatory structure early in the requirement generation and
acquisition process.

The following questions should be addressed when addressing E3 and SS in the ICD:

Will the capability comply with the DoD, National, and International SM policies and
regulations?
Can sufficient HNA be obtained?
Can operational frequency assignments be made when the capability is deployed?
Will the capability be compatible with existing systems?
Does the capability need to be hardened to withstand the EME?
6.3.2 CDD

The CDD is discussed in C.3.4. CJ CSM 3170.01 requires the CDD to address both E3 and SS.
The following requirements are excerpted from the CDD format template contained in Appendix A,
Enclosure E of the manual:

10. Electromagnetic Environmental Effects (E3) and Spectrum Supportability. Describe
the electromagnetic environment in which the system must operate and coexist with other
US, allied, coalition, government and non-government systems. Identify potential issues
regarding E3 interference from threat emitters. For systems that communicate via
electromagnetic energy, spectrum certification is necessary to ensure adequate access to the
electromagnetic spectrum.
Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D




32

14. Other System Attributes. As appropriate. Address safety issues regarding hazards of
electromagnetic radiation to ordnance (HERO). Define the expected mission capability
(e.g., full, percent degraded) in the various environments. Include applicable safety
parameters, such as those related to system, nuclear, explosive and flight safety.

In addition, the Threat Summary paragraph of the CDD, Section 4, should include a definition of
the EME, both friendly and hostile forces that the device may encounter such as specific high-
power emitters, EMP, directed energy weapons, and so forth. Further descriptions of some of these
threats can be found in MIL-STD-464 and 461.

CJ CSI 6212.01 establishes the assessment criteria for evaluating the CDD that will be employed
during the J oint Staff review. The following criteria should be addressed when preparing the CDD:

Does the CDD address E3?
Does the CDD identify a requirement for SS?

In addition, CJ CSI 6212.01 requires the Net-Ready Key Performance Parameter (NR-KPP)
assessment to address the following:

SS
E3
HNA

DoDI 5000.2 defines SC compliance as a statutory information requirement that must be addressed
during all program milestones and phases. The following is an excerpt from the Statutory
Compliance Table.

Spectrum Certification Compliance
(DD Form 1494)
(applicable to all systems/equipment
that require utilization of the
electromagnetic spectrum)
47 U.S.C. 305, reference
Pub. L. 102-538, 104, reference
47 U.S.C. 901-904, reference
DoD Directive 4650.1, reference
OMB Circular A-11, Part 2, reference
MS B
MS C (if no MS B)

Typical, E3 and SS statements for the CDD to ensure compliance with these requirements follow.

Electromagnetic Environmental Effects. The XXX system (or equipment) shall be
mutually compatible and operate compatibly in the electromagnetic environment. It shall
not be operationally degraded or fail due to exposure to electromagnetic environmental
effects, including high intensity radio frequency (HIRF) transmissions or high-altitude
electromagnetic pulse (HEMP). Ordnance systems will be integrated into the platform to
preclude unintentional detonation. (THRESHOLD)

Equipment Spectrum Certification. The XXX equipment will comply with the applicable
DoD, National, and International spectrum management policies and regulations and will
obtain spectrum certification prior to operational deployment. DD Form 1494 will be
submitted to the Military Communications Electronics Board J oint Frequency Panel via the
service/component E3/SM office. (THRESHOLD)
Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D




33

Hazards of Electromagnetic Radiation to Ordnance. All ordnance items shall be integrated
into the system in such a manner as to preclude all safety problems and performance
degradation when exposed to its operational EME. (THRESHOLD)
6.3.3 CPD

The CPD is discussed in C.3.5. CJ CSM 3170.01 requires the CPD to address both E3 and SS. The
following requirements are excerpted from the CPD format template contained in Appendix A,
Enclosure F of the manual:

10. Electromagnetic Environmental Effects (E3) and Spectrum Supportability. Describe
the electromagnetic environment in which the system must operate and coexist with other
US, allied, coalition, government and non-government systems. Identify potential issues
regarding E3 interference from threat emitters. For systems that communicate via
electromagnetic energy, spectrum certification is necessary to ensure adequate access to the
electromagnetic spectrum.

14. Other System Attributes. As appropriate. Address safety issues regarding hazards of
electromagnetic radiation to ordnance (HERO). Define the expected mission capability
(e.g., full, percent degraded) in the various environments. Include applicable safety
parameters, such as those related to system, nuclear, explosive and flight safety.

In addition, the Threat Summary paragraph of the CPD, Section 4, should include a definition of
the EME, both friendly and hostile forces that the device may encounter such as specific high-
power emitters, EMP, directed energy weapons, and so forth. Further descriptions of some of these
threats can be found in MIL-STD-464 and 461.

CJ CSI 6212.01 establishes the assessment criteria for evaluating the CPD that will be employed
during the J oint Staff review. The following criteria should be addressed when preparing the CPD:

Does the CPD address E3?
Does the CPD identify a requirement for SS?
Does the CPD address HNA?

In addition, CJ CSI 6212.01 requires the NR-KPP assessment to address the following:
SS
E3
HNA

As noted in 6.3.2, the Statutory Compliance Table in DoDI 5000.2 defines SC compliance as a
statutory information requirement that must be addressed during all program milestones and phases.
Typical, E3 and SS statements for the CPD to ensure compliance with these requirements are as
follows:

Electromagnetic Environmental Effects. The XXX system (or equipment) shall be
Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D




34

mutually compatible and operate compatibly in the electromagnetic environment. It shall
not be operationally degraded or fail due to exposure to electromagnetic environmental
effects, including high intensity radio frequency (HIRF) transmissions or high-altitude
electromagnetic pulse (HEMP). Ordnance systems will be integrated into the platform to
preclude unintentional detonation. (THRESHOLD)

Equipment Spectrum Certification. The XXX equipment will comply with the applicable
DoD, National, and International spectrum management policies and regulations and will
obtain spectrum certification prior to operational deployment. DD Form 1494 will be
submitted to the Military Communications Electronics Board J oint Frequency Panel via the
service or component E3/SM office. (THRESHOLD)

Hazards of Electromagnetic Radiation to Ordnance. All ordnance items shall be integrated
into the system in such a manner as to preclude all safety problems and performance
degradation when exposed to its operational EME. (THRESHOLD)
6.4 ISP

The ISP is discussed in Section C.3.6 of this handbook. According to DoDI 4630.8 and CJ CSI
6212.01, the ISP must address SS, including ESC, reasonable assurance of the availability of
operational frequencies, and consideration of E3 control. Enclosure (4) of DoDI 4630.8 stipulates
that when preparing the ISP, DoD Components shall ensure that SS requirements are addressed
through:

Submission of a DD Form 1494 by the acquiring activity.
Consideration of supportability comments provided by the ESGPWG
On-going reviews and assessments of ISPs within the SM community.

DoDI 4630.8 and CJ CSI 6212.01 define the steps in the ISP information needs discovery and
analysis process. The following is an excerpt from these instructions:

Step 9 Discuss RF Spectrum needs.

The ISP should identify and address implementation issues related to E3 and SS support
needs, dependencies, and interfaces related to net-readiness, interoperability, information
supportability, and information sufficiency concerns. The ISP must also discuss actions,
plans, or techniques to mitigate or resolve these issues. Specifically, the ISP should address
the following EM spectrum issues:

ESC problems
Status of HNA
Mitigation of known EMI problems

As noted in CJ CSI 6212.01, in the J oint Staffs review of the ISP, the following will be assessed:

Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D




35

Under Chapter 2, has a requirement for SS and a status of the ESC process been provided?
Has a separate Appendix that addresses E3, including the intended operational EME, SS,
and HNA been prepared? For platforms that employ RF emitters developed by a separate
acquisition program, spectrum documentation for those emitters may be cited here as
evidence of compliance with SS regulations. In addition, if applicable, there should be a
discussion of the impact of the loss of a planned spectrum-dependent command, control, or
communication link as a result of an unresolved spectrum supportability issue.
6.5 TEMP
6.5.1 General

The overall goals of the E3/SS portion of the test program, as discussed in Section 7 of this
handbook, are to ensure that E3 and SS evaluations are conducted during DT&E, and that these
assessments are performed during OT&E that define, for the MDA, performance and operational
limitations and vulnerabilities. As noted in Section C.3.8.1 of this handbook, the TEMP identifies a
tailored program of T&E tasks to demonstrate that the applicable KPPs, critical issues, and
technical parameters are met and that the platform, system, subsystem, or equipment demonstrates
effective performance in its intended environment. Test limitations such as platform availability,
test equipment, and personnel may lead towards the use of modeling and simulation (M&S) for the
required verification effort. The Service E3 offices and the J SC can be consulted to determine the
availability of such capabilities. Appendix D of this handbook describes the Services test facilities
and capabilities.

Recent reallocation of the EM spectrum from DoD and Government use to the private sector may
preclude operation of a system or equipment on specific frequencies. Approved frequency
allocations must be obtained for the development and procurement of the item, whereas the Service
Operational Test Agency (OTA) is responsible for obtaining frequency assignments for equipment
operated during operational testing.

E3/SS considerations for the TEMP are discussed in the following paragraphs.
6.5.2 Content

As noted in C.3.8.1, content requirements for the TEMP are defined in the Acquisition Guidebook
(Appendix 2). In preparing and reviewing the TEMP, the following issues should be addressed:

Under System Introduction:

Are measures of effectiveness and suitability established for E3/SS requirements that are
addressed in the CDD or CPD?
Is E3 identified as a critical operational effectiveness and suitability parameter?
Are Measures of Effectiveness (MOEs) and Measures of Performance (MOPs) stated
and evaluation criteria and data requirements defined that includes E3/SS
considerations?
Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D




36

Under Integrated Test Program Summary

Is the schedule for E3 verification events identified?
Is T&E responsibility for E3 verification established by organization?

Under Developmental Test and Evaluation Outline

Has emission and susceptibility testing been planned for the subsystems or equipment in
accordance with MIL-STD-461 or commercial EMI standards, as appropriate?
Are E3 tests planned for Commercial Items or Non-Developmental Items (CI/NDI)?
Have platform/system E3 verifications been planned in accordance with MIL-STD-
464? (Note that EMI, EMC, and EMV testing should be required for all platforms or
systems, whereas special E3 T&E efforts such as HERO, HERF, HERP, EMP, lightning,
and p-static may be required on a case-by-case basis, as noted in the CDD, CPD, TEMP,
or contract documents.)

Under Operational Test and Evaluation Outline

Are E3/SS issues addressed?
Have intra- and inter-subsystem and equipment E3 verifications been planned?
Have intra-and inter-platform and system E3 verifications been planned?
Are special E3 verifications required, depending on the results of DT&E?

Under Test and Evaluation Resource Summary

Have adequate resources, including M&S, been identified for the following efforts?

* Subsystem and equipment emission and susceptibility testing,
* Testing of CI/NDI,
* MIL-STD-464 verifications,
* Operational Intra-platform and system EMI evaluations, and
* Operational Inter-platform and system EMI evaluations.
6.6 Incorporating E3 Control and SS Requirements in Program Office Tasks and Products
6.6.1 General

This section provides general guidance for establishing a workable and effective E3/SS program to
ensure that an end-item will operate in its intended EME without causing or suffering unacceptable
performance degradation due to E3. Guidance is provided to ensure appropriate E3 and SS
requirements and considerations are addressed.
6.6.2 E3/SS Considerations in Integrated Product Teams (IPTs)

An E3/SS Working Level IPT (WIPT) should be established for each program that is either
Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D




37

designated as, or meets the criteria for, Acquisition Category (ACAT) I or II, or for any acquisition
when the end-item may affect, or be affected by its intended operational EME. It may also be
established for programs with complex, multi-discipline EM issues. An E3/SS WIPT is an advisory
body that may be established by the PM to assist him in assuring that the platform, system,
subsystem, or equipment under development has spectrum support and will be electromagnetically
compatible with itself and with the external EME. The E3/SS WIPT monitors the E3/SS program
associated with a project, provides assistance in formulating and implementing solutions for E3/SS
problems, and establishes high-level channels of coordination. It functions as a major resource for
review, advice, and technical consultation on program E3 or SS issues. The E3/SS WIPT should be
organized early in a program so that it can contribute to the trade-off studies of alternate concepts
and to assess the impact of design, budgetary, and scheduling decisions related to E3/SS
considerations. The E3/SS WIPT is usually comprised of Government and contractor personnel
empowered with the authority to make most decisions within their discipline while being held
accountable for meeting performance and cost requirements. The team is expected to make
decisions in a cooperative manner as compared to the adversarial relationships between
Government and contractor personnel that often existed in the past.
6.6.2.1 Members

The chairman of the E3/SS WIPT operates under the authority of the PM. Often, Government and
prime contractor personnel will co-chair the WIPT. Membership may often vary over time
depending on the status and phase of the development and the various E3-related disciplines that
are deemed appropriate for a particular acquisition. E3 and SS specialists from various
organizations, such as acquisition offices, modeling or test areas, and subcontractors, may be
involved. Specialists in other disciplines may also need to participate such as those with contracts,
safety, or system integration backgrounds. The total number of members is usually dependent upon
the complexity of the program. Industry participation must be consistent with the contract.
6.6.2.2 Responsibilities

Responsibilities of an E3/SS WIPT should be defined in a charter and may include the following:

Establishing E3 performance requirements for the system or equipment, by drawing from
and tailoring existing military and commercial standards,
Defining the flow of E3/SS requirements down to elements of the system,
Defining and updating the various aspects of the external EME,
Defining E3/SS requirements, verification methodology, such as analysis, M&S, and T&E,
Preparing and updating the DD Form 1494 for spectrum-dependent systems and equipment,
Defining E3/SS budget requirements,
Providing E3/SS inputs to acquisition documents and reviewing program documentation and
contract deliverables,
Assessing HERO, HERP, and HERF safety issues,
Performing E3 analyses and tests to identify potential E3/SS problems and solutions,
Identifying operational limitations for E3 problems not corrected, and
Evaluating the E3 impact of using CI/NDI on the overall performance of the end item.
Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D




38

6.6.2.3 Charter

The charter should delineate the responsibilities, objectives, membership, and operation of the
E3/SS WIPT, program authority, and relationships among participants for J oint procurements. It
should provide guidance for the WIPT to ensure that all pertinent E3/SS considerations are being
implemented and to establish confidence that the platform, system, subsystem, or equipment being
developed can operate compatibly in its intended EME. The charter should include a purpose and
scope, a description of the item being procured, its functions, intended uses, and installations. It
should also identify the E3 disciplines that are to be addressed during the program. The charter
should describe the responsibilities and role of the WIPT and its members and how its
recommendations will be handled, within the overall program. If there is more than one E3/SS
WIPT involved in an overall program, such as for individual subsystems or equipment and for the
overall platform or system, the relationship between the WIPTs should be clearly delineated.
Specific categories of representatives, such as Chairman, Vice-Chairman, Secretary, and Members,
should be defined and each of their individual responsibilities and functions should be detailed.
Technical specialists, contractors, and consulting members who are technical support individuals
that attend only when requested should also be identified. The charter should describe in detail the
activities and required schedules and milestones that should be formulated for these activities. It
should delineate all of the documentation requirements to be provided by the WIPT. Finally, the
charter should state that the WIPT will document all decisions which may later have an impact,
identify essential E3 features or qualities such as special components and specialized installation
techniques, and identify, as appropriate, any E3/SS deficiencies and the risks associated with them.
6.6.3 Specifying Requirements in Solicitation Documents
6.6.3.1 General

As discussed in C.3.9 of this handbook, performance specifications, SOWs, CDRLs, and Data Item
Descriptions (DIDs) are documents used in solicitations that become part of a contract. It is
essential that requirements be clearly articulated during the preparation of these documents. As
detailed below, E3 and SS requirements are to be included in each of these documents
6.6.3.2 Performance Specifications
6.6.3.2.1 General

This section discusses the applicable military standards that are to be invoked in the performance
specification. It also contains guidance for tailoring the requirements in the standards. (See
Appendix A of this handbook for additional applicable E3 and SS documents).
6.6.3.2.2 Subsystem/Equipment Military E3 Standards

Subsystems and equipment should not be susceptible to conducted or radiated EM emissions that
could degrade or render them ineffective. Likewise, they should not be sources of EMI to other
equipment within the platform or system. Developmental EMI requirements for subsystems and
Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D




39

equipment, that is, conducted and radiated, emission and susceptibility (immunity) requirements are
defined in MIL-STD-461. Many of the requirements in the standard are universally applicable to
all subsystems and equipment, regardless of end use, whereas a limited number of requirements are
structured to address specific concerns associated with the end platform or system. Tables in the
standard define the applicability of the requirements. The requirements contained therein are not to
be applied to subassemblies of equipment such as modules or circuit cards, nor are they intended
for platforms. The requirements in the standard are to be used as a baseline and should be tailored
to the specific item being procured. Verification of the EMI requirements is demonstrated by tests
based on those also in MIL-STD-461. The Appendix of the standard provides rationale and
guidance for implementing and tailoring the requirements contained therein. In addition, the
Appendix should be consulted for detailed guidance on tailoring and performing the required tests.
Compliance with the equipment or subsystem EMI requirements does not relieve the developing or
integrating activity of the responsibility for providing overall platform or system compatibility.
6.6.3.2.3 Platform/System Military E3 Standards

Developmental E3 requirements for airborne, sea, space, and ground platforms and systems,
including associated ordnance, are defined in MIL-STD-464. Ordnance includes weapons, rockets,
explosives, EIDs, EEDs, squibs, flares, igniters, explosive bolts, electric primed cartridges,
destructive devices, and jet-assisted take-off bottles. The standard applies to complete platforms or
systems, both new and modified. The platform or system E3 specification, although based on MIL-
STD-464, must be tailored for the specific acquisition and to the expected operational environment.
Verification of the tailored E3 requirements is done by test, analysis, inspection, or some
combination thereof, depending upon the degree of confidence in the particular method, the
technical appropriateness, associated costs, and availability of assets. The Appendix to the standard
provides rationale and guidance for implementing the requirements and verification procedures
contained therein. The basic requirements in MIL-STD-464 are at the platform or system level and
deal with both the integration and operation of subsystems and equipment in the platform or system
and with the operation of the platform or system in its operational EME. The requirements for
intra-platform/system EMC, inter-subsystem/equipment EMC, and EMV are universally applicable.
Additional, specialized E3 assessments, such as lightning, p-static, HERP, HERF, HERO, and
EMP, may also be required, depending on the type of item being procured, its mission, and its
intended operational EME. Appendix A of this handbook lists other documents that could be
referenced for an acquisition.
6.6.3.2.4 Tailoring

E3 requirements should be tailored to the specific needs of the mission and should be considered in
conjunction with program risks and costs when related to performance trade-offs. Tailoring is the
process by which the requirements of a standard are adapted to the characteristics or operational
requirements of an item under development. Since each platform, system, subsystem, or equipment
has its own requirements and characteristics, the general E3 performance requirements in MIL-STD
-461 or 464, for example, may not be adequate. Quite often the requirements for items that operate
in critical EME need to be made more stringent.

Tailoring involves modifying, deleting, or adding to the requirements in a basic military standard.
Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D




40

Tailoring the requirements of a standard should either result in improved performance of the item or
reduce the item's development or life cycle costs without compromising the item's operational
capabilities. Tailoring the requirements of a standard does not constitute a waiver or deviation from
the document. Tailored E3 performance requirements should be reflected in the solicitation
documents. The depth of detail, level of effort required, and the data expected should be defined
when tailoring therequirements. Subsequent tailoring of performance requirements may be
requested or recommended by a contractor but should be subject to Government approval.

Tailoring is an important step in preparing the SOW, CDRLs, and the requirement documents.
First, there should be an orderly process of reviewing all of the available specifications and
standards and selecting those that are considered pertinent to the particular item. Then, the
individual requirements from the sections and paragraphs of the selected standards, specifications,
or related documents should be evaluated to determine their suitability for an item's acquisition. As
required, individual requirements should be tailored for the specific application and use of the item
to ensure an optimal balance between the item's operational needs and acquisition costs.

The following two paragraphs are examples of how to address E3 performance requirements in a
subsystem or equipment specification:

EMI Control. The equipment shall comply with the applicable requirements of MIL-STD-
461.
EMI Test. The equipment shall be tested in accordance with the applicable test procedures
of MIL-STD-461.

As an alternative, the specific, applicable MIL-STD-461 conducted emission, radiated emission,
conducted susceptibility, and radiated susceptibility requirements may be specified, along with
modifications to the limits or applicable frequency ranges, as appropriate. Acceptable, equivalent
commercial standards may also be invoked.

A system or platform specification will call out the specific, applicable, E3 requirements of MIL-
STD-464 in a similar manner.
6.6.3.3 Statement of Work (SOW)

The SOW is described in C.3.9.2. Sample wording addressing the E3/SS area that might be
included in a contract for a system follows:

The contractor shall design, develop, integrate, and qualify the system such that it meets
the E3/SS performance requirements of the system specification. The contractor shall
perform analyses, studies, and testing to establish E3/SS controls and features to be
implemented in the design of the item. The contractor shall perform inspections, analyses,
and tests, as necessary, to verify that the system meets its E3/SS performance requirements.
The contractor shall prepare and update the DD Form 1494 throughout the development of
the system for spectrum-dependent equipment and shall perform analysis and testing to
characterize the equipment, where necessary. The contractor shall establish and support an
E3/SS WIPT to accomplish these tasks. MIL-HDBK-237 may be used for guidance.
Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D




41

6.6.3.4 Contract Data Requirements List (CDRL)

The CDRL and its relationship to the SOW and the Data Item Descriptions (DIDs) are discussed in
C.3.9.3. See 6.6.3.4.1 for applicable DIDs.
6.6.3.4.1 Applicable E3 Data Item Descriptions (DIDs)

DIDs are used for ordering data products associated with hardware development. The most
frequently ordered DIDs in subsystem or equipment procurements are associated with MIL-STD-
461. These DIDs are:

EMI Control Procedures DID No. DI-EMCS-80199B
EMI Test Procedures DID No. DI-EMCS-80201B
EMI Test Report DID No. DI-EMCS-80200B

The DIDs associated with platform or system procurements implementing MIL-STD-464 are:

E3 Integration and Analysis Report DID No. DI-EMCS-81540A
E3 Verification Procedures DID No. DI-EMCS-81541A
E3 Verification Report DID No. DI-EMCS-81542A

Appendix A of this handbook lists other possible data that may be ordered.
6.7 Commercial Items and Non-Developmental Items (CI/NDI)

While the use of CI/NDI provides a cost-effective alternative to what can be a costly and time
consuming design process and takes advantage of the latest technology, there needs to be an
increased awareness of the limits associated with the use of these items in the military EME.
CI/NDI should meet the basic operational requirements and function in the intended operational
EME. CI/NDI, like developmental acquisition programs, should address logistics support, T&E,
reliability, maintainability, E3, SS, and safety issues.
6.7.1 SS Concerns

Evidence of SS and approval to operate in its intended environment, including overseas theaters, is
required for CI. From a SS standpoint, there may be a potential problem with the military using
commercial equipment, particularly on commercial frequencies. A DD Form 1494 must be
submitted by the Program Office, in coordination with the organizations E3/SM office, to the
military Services frequency manager for approval. The commercial equipment procured by the
military may only be operated after approval has been granted by the MCEB. On the other hand,
the rules for the operation of leased CI operated by the military are different.
6.7.2 E3 Concerns

The use of CI/NDI presents a dilemma between the need for imposing E3 controls and the desire to
Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D




42

take advantage of existing designs, which may have unknown or undesirable EMI characteristics.
Blindly using CI/NDI carries a risk of E3 problems within the platform, system, subsystem, or
equipment. CI/NDI should meet the operational performance requirements for that equipment in
the proposed installation. As a practical matter, the limitations of CI should be recognized. For
example, CI are generally not designed to operate in the harsh military EME and in many instances
lack sufficient emission control or susceptibility (immunity) protection such that severe EMI can
result from co-located C4I systems, other onboard electronic and electrical subsystems and
equipment, or emitters on other platforms. Experience has shown that efforts to resolve these EMI
problems may be time consuming, difficult to implement in the field and expensive for the
Government, often with marginal results. Also, NDI may be designed for one environment but
selected for use in another. Each potential use of CI/NDI needs to be reviewed for the actual
intended usage, and a determination needs to be made of appropriate requirements for that
application.
6.7.2.1 Assessment of CI/NDI

Since CI/NDI is already designed, it is essential that the intended EME and required E3
performance characteristics of each candidate item be assessed. Modifications required to correct
E3 problems in an operational CI can be time consuming and very costly. E3 problems can present
a potentially hazardous situation resulting in loss of life, damage to hardware, or degradation of
mission performance capability. To mitigate the risk, an assessment should be performed to
evaluate the planned EME and the equipments EMI characteristics. This can be accomplished by
reviewing existing test data, reviewing the equipment design, or with limited EMI testing. If the
item was designed to a commercial standard, or to one from another Government agency, there may
be existing EMI test data. That data, if available, should be reviewed to determine if the item is
suitable for the particular application or intended installation. If data is non-existent, or does not
allow comparison with the applicable MIL-STD-461 requirements, limited laboratory EMI testing
should be performed to provide the data necessary to do the comparison. If, after evaluation of the
EMI data, it is determined that the equipment would not satisfactorily operate in the intended EME,
then it is the responsibility of the procuring activity to implement modifications to, or select,
equipment with adequate characteristics. CI/NDI avionics qualified to RTCA DO-160D are
considered acceptable for use on military land-based avionics systems since the tests and the limits
in DO-160 are similar to those in MIL-STD-461. There is no commercial standard equivalent to
MIL-STD-464.
6.7.2.1.1 Commercial Specifications and Standards

Not all CI/NDI will function properly in the military EME. Most commercial E3 standards are
inadequate for military platforms (that is, they do not adequately stipulate susceptibility or
immunity performance requirements, do not address the concern of common-mode EMI, and so
forth). Comparing military and commercial EMC performance requirement is a first step in
determining if:

Use of CI/NDI is practical,
More testing is required, or
Whether the equipment must be hardened.
Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D




43

6.7.2.1.2 Comparisons

Items successfully tested to commercial E3 requirements may meet a portion of the military E3
requirements in MIL-STD-461 or 464, as appropriate. Being able to compare military and
commercial specifications and standards can save an appreciable amount of effort and money when
qualifying CI/NDI for military applications. In order to make useful comparisons, the minimal E3
performance requirements essential for mission effectiveness should first be established by tailoring
MIL-STD-461 or 464 to the specific application. These E3 performance requirements should then
be compared to the E3 requirements of the specifications/standards that were used to develop the
CI/NDI that is being considered for procurement. When a commercial E3 requirement is equivalent
to, or more stringent than, a MIL-STD-461 or 464 tailored requirement, it can be assumed the
CI/NDI satisfies the military E3 performance requirement. If there is no equivalent commercial E3
requirement, testing in accordance with MIL-STD-461 or 464 should be conducted to demonstrate
whether the CI/NDI E3 performance complies with the established performance requirements.
Information to assist in comparing major National and International commercial EMC standards
with MIL-STD-461E is provided as Appendix E of this handbook and in report EPS-0178.
6.7.2.1.3 Alternatives

Several alternatives exist when E3 assessments or the testing of CI/NDI demonstrates that the
equipment or system cannot meet its E3 performance requirements. These include:

Shielding or isolation of the item,
Frequency management,
Filtering,
Blanking,
Reassessing mission profiles to determine if the CI/NDI E3 performance is acceptable, or
Abandoning the CI/NDI acquisition strategy when the E3 parameters of available CI/NDI
are far inferior to the requirement.
6.8 The Equipment Spectrum Certification Process
6.8.1 General

The purpose of the ESC process is to ensure that DoD equipment and subsystems are designed and
verified to conform to requirements of applicable International and National TOAs and other
spectrum policies. The methodology involves review of the technical and performance
characteristics of an item during the procurement to determine compliance with requirements and
provide guidance to the developer. The process:

Provides authorization to develop or procure items that utilize a defined frequency band(s)
or frequencies for the accommodation of a specific electronic function,
Ensures compliance with the policies and tables concerning the use of the spectrum, and
Ensures spectrum availability to support the item in its intended operational environment.
Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D




44

As required by DoDI 5000.2, SS must be addressed at Milestone B and C reviews. The relationship
between the acquisition process and the ESC process is depicted on Figure 4. A DD Form 1494
must be submitted in a timely and accurate manner. It is submitted up to 4 times (or stages) during
the acquisition process. CI generally enters the ESC process prior to Milestone C as a Stage 4 DD
Form 1494. Processing time depends on the quality of the data and is often delayed due to
incomplete or erroneous information. Nominal time to complete the process is 3 - 9 months. A
critical factor is the coordination period associated with HNA. Some countries may take years to
complete coordination, whereas others may be as quick as 60 to 90 days for non-controversial
systems. The process should be initiated once:

Sufficient information becomes available on the intended use and feasible frequency limits
of a proposed item to warrant consideration of a specific allocation,
An equipment is being considered for development, or
Procurement of CI or leasing of a commercial service for military use is being considered.


FIGURE 4. Relationship Between the Acquisition Process and the ESC Process
6.8.2 Overview of the Process

B A
Concept
Refinement
System Development
& Demonstration
Production &
Deployment
Operations &
Support
C

FOC

LRIP

Technology
Development
(Program Initiation)


D
o
D
I

5
0
0
0
.
2

S
p
e
c
t
r
u
m

D
e
s
i
g
n

T
a
s
k
s

Band Selection
Spectrum
Supportability
Anal ysis
Deployed Support
EMC Anal ysis

D
D

1
4
9
4

Stage I
Conceptual
Stage 2
Experimental
Stage 3
Developmental
Stage 4
Operational
Initial Capabilities
Document (ICD)
Capability Development
Document (CDD)
Capability Production
Document (CPD)
Start Host
Nation Coord
Concept
Refinement
Decision
IOT&E
E3 Rqmt
Definition
Address Host
Nation Comments
(WAY TOO LATE)
Mitigation Measures
ECP upgrades
Stage 4
Notes to Holders
Sustainment Disposal
System
Integration
System
Demonstration
Full-Rate Prod &
Deployment

DT&E
FOT&E
ASR SRR IBR SVR/FCA PCA
Full E3/EMC Testing
Define EME
Update EME as Rqd
SFR CDR TRR PRR

T
R






T
&
E

PDR
Reviews
Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D




45

An overview of the DoD ESC process is shown in Figure 5. Contractors may supply the technical
equipment characteristics data required by DD Form 1494 to the Program Office, who, in turn,
provides a completed DD Form 1494 along with any applicable releasability instructions to the
organizations E3/SM office. It is then forwarded to the sponsoring Military Departmental FMO
for review and comment. Once complete, the sponsoring Department then submits the application
to the ESGPWG for review and comment. At the same time, copies may be sent to the NTIA SPS
for U.S. National approval. Releasable DD Form 1494s are sent to the MCEB and subsequently to
the COCOMs and CCEB for coordination of HNA. All comments flow back to the sponsoring
Department who drafts the MCEB guidance for review by the ESGPWG. A J /F-12 number is
assigned upon approval of the allocation application. Once approval is obtained from the MCEB,
the J SC places pertinent data about the item and its allocation into the Spectrum Certification
System (SCS) database. The SCS is updated within one or two days of receipt of the information
from the sponsoring department. Updates of the SCS are distributed worldwide on a semi-annual
basis to DoD organizations and Military Departments. Submission of the DD Form 1494 is the key
to obtaining HNA. This form is forwarded to the COCOMs where the system will be deployed
overseas. Each Commands J oint FMO then reviews, coordinates, and obtains HNA of specified
frequencies for the system. Once approval has been obtained, the COCOM must request
assignment of a specific frequency, or frequencies, from the host nation to operate the equipment.
As indicated earlier, use of CI in DoD operations overseas must also be coordinated through these
negotiations.
6.8.3 Submission of DD Form 1494

The data required, and provided, on the DD Form 1494 includes identification of the item,
requested spectrum support (operational frequency band(s)), planned deployment information,
equipment technical characteristics, and performance data. The DD Form 1494 is submitted at
times (stages) commensurate with an acquisition items procurement cycle. These times are
defined in DoDI 5000.2 and the DD Form 1494 itself. The forms must be submitted in sufficient
time to allow for processing. With each submission, data requirements with respect to equipment
technical characteristics and performance progressively increase. With the final submission, all
data blocks requiring technical data should be completed with measured data. Calculated data
generally is not acceptable.
6.8.3.1 Selection of Frequency Band

All major DoD acquisition programs are based on identified, documented, and validated mission
needs. Definition of the mission provides a means for deriving the telecommunication needs of the
system and, therefore, serves as a meaningful basis for preliminary preparation of spectrum support
requirements. The International and National TOAs define the usable spectrum for specific radio
services in accordance with International treaties. This is a preliminary source for identifying
potential frequency band requirements based on the intended radio service, that is, communications,
navigation, radiolocation, and so forth. Next, the requirement should be assessed in conjunction
with state-of-the-art technology to determine whether certain technical factors might lead to the
selection of specific frequency bands that are ideally suited. A determination should be made as to
Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D




46

























FIGURE 5. Overview of the Equipment Spectrum Certification Process

whether some bands ideally suited from a technical standpoint might be impractical for other
reasons and should be rejected. Overcrowding might be one such reason, as might operating
restrictions imposed by DoD, Federal, and International rules and regulations that govern the
selected bands. It is also very important to consider where the system will be installed during the
testing and operational phases of its life cycle.

Before finalizing the band selection process, a review should be made of existing frequency
assignments that are authorized for equipment operating in the area(s) intended for location of the
system. In addition, a survey should be conducted of the number of items in the DoD inventory that
may be impacted by the new or modified equipment. Once completed, the survey will provide
insight on potential impacts to other equipment in the intended environment that could result in
rejection, or long, costly delay of approval of the frequency allocation application. The survey will
additionally provide insight as to whether the proposed equipment may be adversely impacted by
other items in the environment, which could lead to selection of another band option. Normally, the
frequency band selected will be one of those allocated to the radio service in question, as specified
in the NTIA TOA. Bands other than those identified in the TOA, however, may be proposed if
operational, technical, and economic justifications are provided. Upon identification of the
appropriate operational frequency band, the DD Form 1494 can be initiated.
Releasable DD Form 1494 Data
MCEB
(J SC Distributes
Releasable DD Form 1494
Data)
PROGRAM OFFICE
(E3/SM office reviews and
submits DD Form 1494)
CONTRACTOR
(Provides DD Form
1494 Information)

NTIA / SPS
(Comment)
ESGPWG
(Comments &
Guidance)
JSC
(Distributes DD Form,
Updates SCS Database, and
Makes Worldwide
Distribution)
COCOM / HOST
NATIONS
(Comment)

CCEB NATIONS
(Comment)

SPONSORING
FMO
Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D




47

6.8.3.2 Completing the Form

The J SC has developed the SCS Data Maintenance and Retrieval (SCS DMR) software application
to automate portions of the ESC process by organizing and compiling the information required by
DD Form 1494. The SCS DMR software application and user manual can be downloaded from the
Internet by completing a registration form at www.jsc.mil. The SCS DMR application provides the
following capabilities:

Aids in simplifying the entry and maintenance of ESC data in a structured database,
Provides a database retrieval capability,
Generates and prints the completed application, and
Outputs records for transfer to other users.

The DD Form 1494 is a multi-page document used to coordinate applications for equipment
frequency allocations, both nationally and internationally. The form, composed of the eight pages,
described below may be assembled in different order depending on the forum to which it is being
submitted for evaluation. The back of each page contains instructions for completing each block.

DoD General Information Page. The first page of the application contains general
information concerning the nomenclature, use, number of equipment types that make up the
system, and the frequency requirements.

Transmitter Equipment Characteristics Page. The second page documents transmitter
equipment characteristics. All technical characteristics required here, such as the tuning
range, output power, RF channeling capability, emission bandwidth, and so forth, are
evaluated in accordance with DoD requirements to determine suitability of the equipment
for operation in the intended EME.

Receiver Equipment Characteristics Page. This page consists of information related to
receiver characteristics. The required data items are evaluated against performance
requirements to determine the ability of the equipment to discern and process desired signals
in the intended operational environment. With a multi-receiver equipment, a copy of the
receiver page should be submitted for each different receiver.

Antenna Equipment Characteristics Page. It is very common for separate receiver and
transmitter antennas to be employed or for several different antennas to be associated with
the same transmitter. No attempt should be made to describe several antennas on the same
page. Use the Remarks block to describe any unusual characteristics of the antenna,
particularly as they relate to the assessment of EMC, and to clarify any other antenna
information provided.

Line Diagram Page. This is one of two blank pages that the DD Form 1494 provides to
allow for further description of the item. This page provides space for a line diagram to
provide graphical illustration of the equipment.

Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D




48

Continuation Page. The Remarks Continuation page is provided to continue any remarks
needed in reference to any of the other six pages. Continuation pages are allowed.

NTIA General Information Page. This page requires much of the same information required
by the DoD General Information page, however, it provides a format acceptable to the
IRAC SPS along with other specific required information. The DoD General Information
page is removed prior to submission of the application to the SPS. The NTIA page is used
to begin U.S. National coordination with other Government Agencies via the SPS review
process. Any Agency that is a member of the SPS can impact approval of an application
based on the information provided, or not provided. Use of the continuation and line
diagram sheets is strongly recommended to ensure that application information is clear
when submitted. Completeness is a critical factor is obtaining timely approval.

Foreign Coordination General Information Page. This page should be completed only for
equipment that will be operated outside the U.S, and Possessions. Foreign disclosure
authority is required for coordination to obtain spectrum support from countries where the
equipment may operate. Consequently, the release of technical information contained in
DD Form 1494 to these countries is necessary. Such information, however, may not be
released without first obtaining foreign disclosure approval. Action must be initiated to
obtain foreign disclosure authority in accordance with Military Department regulations and
policies for the release of appropriate data to the proposed host nations. A foreign
coordination version of DD Form 1494 is treated as a completely separate document from a
U.S. coordination version.
6.8.4 Frequency Assignments

Frequency assignments are issued by designated authorities of sovereign nations, such as
telecommunications agencies within foreign countries, and the NTIA for the U.S. and Its
Possessions. Under certain conditions, other designated authorities, such as DoD Area Frequency
Coordinators or Unified and Specified Commanders may grant frequency assignments. Equipment
that has not been previously granted some level of spectrum certification will normally not receive
a frequency assignment. Procedures for obtaining frequency assignments, once the equipment, sub-
system, or equipment has become operational, are delineated in regulations issued by the Unified
and Specified Commands and Military Services. In most cases, operational frequency assignments
are requested and received after a program has been fielded. However, if the PM has implemented
guidance received in response to the submission of a DD Form 1494 during program development
and designed the system as described in the DD Form 1494, system operators have not historically
encountered problems in obtaining operational frequency assignments. Spectrum congestion,
competing systems, and interoperability, all may contribute to the operator encountering some
operational limitations such as geographical restrictions or limitations to transmitted power, antenna
height and gain, bandwidth or total number of frequencies made available, and so forth.
Certification to operate in a particular frequency band does not guarantee that the requested
frequency(ies) will be available to satisfy the system's operational spectrum requirements over its
life cycle. Procedures for obtaining frequency assignments are delineated in the Service
regulations. (See Appendix A). A request for a frequency assignment should be submitted in a
timely manner. It can be initiated by contacting the appropriate local installation FMO.
Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D




49

6.8.5 Note-To-Holders

A Note-to-Holders is a mechanism provided by the ESC process to permit minor changes to an
existing frequency allocation in lieu of generating a new, separate allocation. The types of
modifications permitted include:

Adding the nomenclatures(s) of equipment which have essentially identical technical and
operating characteristics as a currently allocated item,
Adding comments that have been provided by the NTIA or host nations,
Documenting minor modifications, or improvements to equipment that do not essentially
alter its operating characteristics (transmission, reception, frequency response), or
Announcing the cancellation or reinstatement of a frequency allocation.

A Note-to-Holders must be submitted in a timely manner and can be initiated by contacting the
appropriate local installation FMO.
6.9 Systems Engineering Technical Reviews with Recommended E3/SS Actions
6.9.1 Initial Technical Review (ITR)

The ITR is a multi-disciplined technical review to support a programs initial Program Objective
Memorandum submission. This review is intended to ensure that a programs technical baseline is
of sufficient rigor to support a valid cost estimate with an acceptable cost risk, and enable
independent E3/SS assessments of that estimate by cost, technical, and program management
subject matter experts. Recommended E3/SS actions and focus areas are as follows:

Develop E3/SS inputs to the Mission Area ICD
Familiarize PM with E3/SS Requirements such as the E3 requirements in MIL-STD-461
and 464 and the National, International, and Host Nation SS Rules and Regulations
Submit Stage 1 (Conceptual) DD Form 1494 for any new spectrum-dependent equipment
Ensure cost estimates for all E3/SS tasks and related activities, such as system/platform
antenna design, if required
Obtain SS approval for MS A from DoD or Component CIO, CAE, or MDA, as appropriate
6.9.2 Alternative Systems Review (ASR)

The ASR is a review conducted to demonstrate the preferred system concept(s) to take forward into
the Technology Development, formerly the Component Advanced Development phase. During this
phase, program cost, schedule, and performance for the purpose of supporting MS approvals are
validated. A tailored version of the ITR checklist should be used. Recommended E3/SS actions
and focus areas are as follows:

Establish an E3/SS WIPT or participate in System Engineering (SE) IPT
Budget for E3documentation (see 6.6.3.4.1 for applicable DIDs)
Prepare and submit Stage 1 (Conceptual) DD Form 1494 request for any new spectrum-
Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D




50

dependent equipment
Obtain SS approval for MS A from DoD or Component CIO, CAE, or MDA, as appropriate
Incorporate all Lessons Learned
Refine cost estimates for all E3/SS tasks, and related activities, such as system/platform
antenna design, if required
Ensure E3/SS analyses and predictions (see 7.4) are programmed, including those to assess
the addition of new antennas or apertures on a platform or system
6.9.3 System Requirements Review (SRR)

The SRR is a system-level review conducted to ensure that system requirements have been
completely and properly identified and that there is a mutual understanding between the
Government and contractor. It captures systems requirements that go with the Concept Exploration
and Technical Development phases, and is generally conducted just prior to MS B. This review
validates program cost, schedule, and performance for the purpose of supporting MS approvals.
Recommended E3/SS actions and focus areas are as follows:

Continue the E3/SS WIPT and support the SE IPT
Prepare applicable E3documentation (see 6.6.3.4.1 for applicable DIDs), including testing
requirements
Develop E3/SS inputs to the CDD
Update budget for applicable E3documentation
Define operational EME
Establish initial E3design requirements
Develop and include E3/SS requirements in SOW, CDRLs, specification, and TEMP, as
needed
Prepare and submit Stage 2 DD Form 1494 request
Include E3/SS DT/OT test requirements in TEMP
Ensure E3/SS analyses and predictions (see 7.4) are programmed, including those to assess
the addition of new antennas or apertures on a platform or system
Refine cost estimates for all E3/SS tasks and related activities, such as system/platform
antenna design, if required
Obtain SS approval for MS B from DoD or Component CIO, CAE, or MDA, as appropriate
6.9.4 System Functional Review (SFR)

The SFR is a review of the conceptual design of the system to establish its capability to satisfy
requirements. It establishes the functional baseline as the governing technical description, which is
required before proceeding with further technical development. During this review program cost,
schedule, and performance for the purpose of supporting MS approvals are validated.
Recommended E3/SS actions and focus areas are as follows:

Continue E3/SS WIPT and support to SE IPT
Update applicable E3documentation (see 6.6.3.4.1 for applicable DIDs), including testing
requirements
Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D




51

Develop E3/SS inputs to the CPD
Update Operational EME
Ensure E3/SS requirements are addressed in the SOW, CDRLs, specifications and TEMP,
as needed
Prepare and submit Stage 3 DD Form 1494 request
Include E3/SS DT/OT test requirements in TEMP
Ensure E3/SS analyses and predictions (see 7.4) are programmed, including those to assess
the addition of new antennas or apertures on a platform or system
Refine cost estimates for all E3/SS tasks and related activities, such as system/platform
antenna design, if required
Obtain SS approval for MS B from DoD or Component CIO, CAE, or MDA, as appropriate
6.9.5 Preliminary Design Review (PDR)

The PDR is a review that confirms that the preliminary design logically follows the SFR findings
and meets the requirements. It normally includes emphasis on software specifications, and results
in approval to begin detailed design. This review establishes the allocated baseline and validates
program cost, schedule, and performance to support MS approvals. Recommended E3/SS actions
and focus areas are as follows:

Continue E3/SS WIPT and support SE IPT
Update applicable E3documentation (see 6.6.3.4.1 for applicable DIDs), including testing
requirements
Prepare applicable E3 test procedures
Ensure E3/SS requirements are addressed in the SOW, CDRLs, specifications, and TEMP,
as needed
Include E3/SS DT/OT test requirements in TEMP
Develop E3/SS inputs to the CPD
Update Operational EME
Prepare and submit Stage 3 DD Form 1494 request
Submit frequency assignment request(s) for specific test frequencies and locations
Ensure Host Nation Coordination has been initiated for use of spectrum-dependent
equipment overseas and in foreign countries
Refine cost estimates for all E3/SS tasks and related activities, such as system/platform
antenna design, if required
Obtain SS approval for MS C from DoD or Component CIO, CAE, or MDA, as appropriate
Ensure E3/SS analyses and predictions (see 7.4) are initiated, including those to assess the
addition of new antennas or apertures on a platform or system
Review Engineering Change Proposals and requests for waivers
6.9.6 Critical Design Review (CDR)

The CDR is a review conducted to evaluate the completeness of the design, its interfaces, and its
suitability to start initial manufacturing. This review establishes the product baseline and validates
Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D




52

program cost, schedule, and performance to support MS approvals. Recommended E3/SS actions
and focus areas are as follows:

Continue E3/SS WIPT and support to SE IPT
Update applicable E3documentation (see 6.6.3.4.1 for applicable DIDs), including testing
requirements
Update applicable E3 test procedures
Ensure E3/SS requirements are addressed in the SOW, CDRLs, specifications, and TEMP,
as needed
Include E3/SS DT/OT test requirements in TEMP
Develop E3/SS inputs to the CPD
Update Operational EME
Update and submit Stage 3 DD Form 1494 request
Submit frequency assignment request(s) for specific test frequencies and locations
Refine cost estimates for all E3/SS tasks and related activities, such as system/platform
antenna design, if required
Obtain SS approval for MS C from DoD or Component CIO, CAE, or MDA, as appropriate
Ensure E3/SS analyses and predictions (see 7.4) are implemented and completed, or nearly
completed, including those to assess the addition of new antennas or apertures on a platform
or system
Review Engineering Change Proposals and requests for waivers
Review status of Host Nation Coordination efforts for authorization of spectrum-dependent
equipment overseas and in foreign countries
Ensure the design has taken into account any limitations or restrictions on its use contained
in the approved MCEB DD Form 1494 guidance recommendations
6.9.7 Test Readiness Review (TRR)

The TRR is a review of the programs readiness to begin testing at any level, either by the
contractor or Government. This review determines the completeness of test procedures and their
compliance with test plans and descriptions. Recommended E3/SS actions and focus areas are as
follows:

Continue E3/SS WIPT and support to SE IPT
Update applicable E3documentation (see 6.6.3.4.1 for applicable DIDs), including testing
requirements
Ensure completeness of applicable E3/SS test procedures and compliance thereto
Ensure E3/SS requirements are addressed in the SOW, CDRLs, specifications, and TEMP,
as needed
Include E3/SS DT/OT test requirements in TEMP
Ensure that E3/SS inputs to the CPD have been submitted
Update Operational EME
Update and submit Stage 3 DD Form 1494 request
Submit frequency assignment request(s) for specific test frequencies and locations
Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D




53

Refine cost estimates for all E3/SS tasks and related activities, such as system/platform
antenna design, if required
Obtain SS approval for MS C from DoD or Component CIO, CAE, or MDA, as appropriate
Ensure E3/SS analyses and predictions (see 7.4) are implemented and completed, or nearly
completed, including those to assess the addition of new antennas or apertures on a platform
or system
Review Engineering Change Proposals and requests for waivers
Review status of Host Nation Coordination efforts for authorization of spectrum-dependent
equipment overseas and in foreign countries
Ensure the design has taken into account any limitations or restrictions on its use contained
in the approved MCEB DD Form 1494 guidance recommendations
Ensure DT&E Yellow Sheets are provided to the program office for entering and tracking in
a problem management system.
6.9.8 Readiness Reviews (RR)
6.9.8.1 Flight RR

The Flight RR is a review to ensure the proper people, planning, equipment, materials, training,
configuration, flight clearance (or defined flight clearance process, with plans to get an initial flight
clearance), ranges, instrumentation, safety controls, and risk assessments/mitigations are in place
prior to flight. Recommended E3/SS actions and focus areas are as follows:

Continue E3/SS WIPT and support to SE IPT
Update applicable E3documentation (see 6.6.3.4.1 for applicable DIDs), including testing
requirements
Ensure completeness of applicable E3/SS test procedures and compliance thereto
Ensure E3/SS requirements are addressed in the SOW, CDRLs, specifications, and TEMP,
as needed
Include E3/SS DT/OT test requirements in TEMP
Ensure that E3/SS inputs to the CPD have been submitted
Update Operational EME
Update and submit Stage 3 DD Form 1494 request
Submit frequency assignment request(s) for specific test frequencies and locations
Refine cost estimates for all E3/SS tasks and related activities, such as system/platform
antenna design, if required
Obtain SS approval for MS C from DoD or Component CIO, CAE, or MDA, as appropriate
Review Engineering Change Proposals and requests for waivers
Ensure that the E3 development (Flight Worthiness) testing and the EMI qualification
demonstration (EMC SOFT) have been successfully completed in accordance with
applicable instructions and directives
6.9.8.2 Fleet RR

The Fleet RR is a review to verify proper coordination between the developing agency and all
Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D




54

applicable Fleet E3/SS disciplines. The developing agency and the Fleet need to understand and
approve the scope of the E3/SS test effort, how it will be executed, the test results, and actions to
correct deficiencies. Recommended E3/SS actions and focus areas are as follows:

Continue E3/SS WIPT and support to SE IPT
Update applicable E3documentation (see 6.6.3.4.1 for applicable DIDs), including testing
requirements
Ensure completeness of applicable E3/SS test procedures and compliance thereto
Ensure E3/SS requirements are addressed in the SOW, CDRLs, specifications, and TEMP,
as needed
Include E3/SS DT/OT test requirements in TEMP
Ensure that E3/SS inputs to the CPD have been submitted
Update Operational EME
Update and submit Stage 3 DD Form 1494 request
Submit frequency assignment request(s) for specific test frequencies and locations
Refine cost estimates for all E3/SS tasks and related activities, such as system/platform
antenna design, if required
Obtain SS approval for MS C from DoD or Component CIO, CAE, or MDA, as appropriate
Review Engineering Change Proposals and requests for waivers
6.9.8.3 Operational Test Readiness Review (OTRR)

The OTRR is a review to determine readiness for test in the actual EME. Recommended E3/SS
actions and focus areas are as follows:

Request requisite frequency assignment(s)
Verify the E3/SS operational test plan and test scenarios
Review the E3/SS operational effectiveness and suitability thresholds in the TEMP
Validate all corrections to E3/SS deficiencies discovered during previous testing
Ensure adequate organic support is in place
6.9.8.4 Technical Evaluation

Recommended E3/SS actions and focus areas are as follows:

Request requisite frequency assignment(s)
Verify attainment of E3/SS performance specifications and objectives
Demonstrate that E3/SS risks have been minimized
Evaluate compatibility and interoperability with existing or planned equipment and systems
Provide assurance the equipment or system is ready for testing in the operational EME
6.9.8.5 Operational Evaluation

Recommended E3/SS actions and focus areas are as follows:
Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D




55

Request requisite frequency assignment(s)
Estimate the equipment or system E3/SS operational effectiveness and operational
suitability
Test in the operational EME
Identify needed E3/SS modifications
Provide information of the equipment or system E3/SS operational performance, including
tactics, doctrine, organizational, and personnel requirements
Verify the adequacy of supporting E3/SS documentation, such as manuals, handbooks,
support plans, and so forth
Correct and retest all significant E3/SS deficiencies
6.9.9 System Verification Review/Production Readiness Review (SVR/PRR)

The SVR is a review conducted to verify that the production configuration complies with the
performance specification. The PRR is a review conducted incrementally prior to any rate
production decision to validate design readiness, resolution of production engineering problems,
and accomplishment of production phase planning. These reviews validate program cost, schedule,
and performance in support of MS approvals. Recommended E3/SS actions and focus areas are as
follows:

Continue E3/SS WIPT and support to SE IPT
Update applicable E3documentation (see 6.6.3.4.1 for applicable DIDs), including testing
requirements
Ensure completeness of applicable E3/SS test procedures and compliance thereto
Ensure E3/SS requirements are addressed in the SOW, CDRLs, specifications, and TEMP,
as needed
Include E3/SS DT/OT test requirements in TEMP
Ensure that E3/SS inputs to the CPD have been submitted
Update Operational EME
Update and submit Stage 4 DD Form 1494 request
Submit frequency assignment request(s) for specific test frequencies and locations
Refine cost estimates for all E3/SS tasks and related activities, such as system/platform
antenna design, if required
Obtain SS approval for MS C from DoD or Component CIO, CAE, or MDA, as appropriate
Ensure E3/SS analyses and predictions (see 7.4) are completed, including those to assess the
addition of new antennas or apertures on a platform or system, and necessary certifications
are in work or in place
Review Engineering Change Proposals and requests for waivers
Review status of Host Nation Coordination efforts for authorization of spectrum-dependent
equipment overseas and in foreign countries
Ensure the design has taken into account any limitations or restrictions on its use contained
in the approved MCEB DD Form 1494 guidance recommendations
Validate all corrections to E3/SS deficiencies discovered during previous testing
Review and approve E3/SS test reports
Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D




56

Ensure that subsequent procurements and replacement parts meet original E3 program
requirements
6.9.10 Physical Configuration Review (PCR)

The PCR formalizes the product baseline, including specifications and the Technical Data Package,
so that future changes can only be made through full Configuration Management procedures.
Recommended E3/SS actions and focus areas are as follows:

Continue E3/SS WIPT and support to SE IPT
Update applicable E3documentation (see 6.6.3.4.1 for applicable DIDs), including testing
requirements
Update Operational EME
Update and submit Stage 4 DD Form 1494 request
Refine cost estimates for all E3/SS tasks and related activities
Ensure E3/SS analyses and predictions (see 7.4) are completed, including those to assess the
addition of new antennas or apertures on a platform or system, and necessary certifications
are in work or in place
Review Engineering Change Proposals and requests for waivers
Ensure the design has taken into account any limitations or restrictions on its use contained
in the approved MCEB DD Form 1494 guidance recommendations
Validate all corrections to E3/SS deficiencies discovered during previous testing
Review and approve E3/SS test reports
Ensure that subsequent procurements and replacement parts meet original E3 program
requirements
6.9.11 Engineering Change Proposal Review

This is a review of proposed engineering changes to the fielded system. Recommended E3/SS
actions and focus areas are as follows:

Review program E3/SS history, lessons learned, and Frequency Allocation and Host Nation
Coordination status (DD Form 1494)
Develop E3 documentation for ECPs
Update Operational EME
Update/Submit Stage 4 Frequency Allocation (DD Form 1494) request, as required, based
on proposed engineering changes
Ensure the design has taken into account any limitations or restrictions on its use contained
in the approved MCEB DD Form 1494 guidance recommendations
Validate all corrections to E3/SS deficiencies discovered during previous testing
Review ECPs and requests for waivers
Ensure that subsequent procurements and replacement parts meet original E3 program
requirements
Refine cost estimates for all E3/SS tasks and related activities
Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D




57

6.10 Summary Matrices of E3/SS Tasks and Applicable Documents

Table 1 shows the checkpoints during the acquisition life cycle where E3/SS requirements and
issues can be reviewed.

Tables 2 through 4 provide guidance and checklists to ensure that E3/SS are adequately considered
as the program progresses through the acquisition process. A checklist is presented for each
milestone decision point. If the source document does not provide the necessary information, the
issues should be raised at appropriate forums, such as IPT meetings, to obtain the required
information.

Table 5 contains a list of tasks normally required for most acquisitions and a list of applicable
documents that address each task. Additional Service-unique publications may also be consulted.
See Appendix A for a list of other such publications.

Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D




58
















DT&E








TABLE 1. E3/ESC Checkpoints
Legend:

EDM: Engineering Development Model LRIP: Low Rate Initial Production
FAAT: First Article Acceptance Test MS: Milestone
Acquisition Phases
Concept and Technology
Development
System Development and
Demonstration
Production and
Deployment
Operations and
Support
Decision Points
Documents Requiring E3/SS Input
Mission Area ICD
CDD, CPD, CRD, ISP

TEMP
E3/SS Testing Opportunities

OT&E

LRIP EDM FAAT
Prototype
Prototype EDM LRIP As required
MS C MS B MS A
Commercial Item
Minimum DD Form 1494 Submittals;
others, as specified on form itself
.
Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D


59



TABLE 2. Milestone A (Concept and Technology Development Approval) Data Requirement
Checklist

Objective: To ensure that E3 and SS are addressed in requirement documents, ACTDs/ATDs, J oint
Warfighting Experiments, Concept Refinements, and Technology Developments

Required Information:

1. DD Form 1494 submitted to Service Frequency Management Office indicating intent to comply
with applicable DoD, National, and International SM policies and regulations.

2. Requirements documents, demonstrations, and experiments that addresses the following:

a. Does the project address E3?

b. Does the project address the requirement for SS?

c. Does the project address the safety issues regarding HERO, if applicable?








Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D


60



TABLE 3. Milestone B (System Development and Demonstration Approval) Data
Requirements Checklist

Objective: To ensure that E3 and SS issues are identified and adequately addressed.

Required Information:

1. DD Form 1494 submitted to Service Frequency Management Office

2. Status of HNA efforts

3. CDD/CPD that addresses the following:

a. Description of operational EME (that is, the operational environment, theater, mission in the
Operations Plan, and so forth),

b. Compliance with applicable DoD, National, and International SM policies and regulations,

c. Intra- and inter-platform/system EMC, and

d. E3 specialty issues (HERO, HERP, HERF, EMP, lightning, ESD, and p-static, as appropriate).

4. TEMP, with a NR-KPP, a list of verification efforts that addresses effectiveness/suitability/
survivability of the platform, system, subsystem, or equipment in the intended operational EME,
and provisions for testing CI/NDI

5. E3 and SS potential risks identified and tests and analyses performed to date which identify and
define operational limitations and vulnerabilities

NOTE: All acquisition documents should contain requirements for E3 and SS tests and analyses.
















Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D


61



TABLE 4. Milestone C (Production and Deployment Approval) Data Requirements/OT&E
E3/SS Assessment Checklist
Objective: To identify to the best extent possible E3/SS limitations and vulnerabilities of the subject
system, subsystem, or equipment.

Required Information, as appropriate:

1. DD Form 1494 submitted to Service Frequency Management Office

2. Status of HNA effort

3. Description of operational EME (that is, the operational environment, theater, mission in the
Operations Plan, and so forth)

4. Latest program documentation (Mission Area ICD, CDD, CPD, CRD, ISP, performance
specification, and SOW.)

5. TEMP that contains:

a. A NR-KPP and

b. A list of tests and analyses used to determine the items effectiveness/suitability/survivability
in the operational EME

6. Copies of the following verification results, including T&E data:

a. Intra-platform/system data, including:

(1) Antenna coupling and blockage analyses and test data,
(2) Subsystem/equipment EMC analyses and test data, and
(3) CI/NDI EMC analyses and test data

b. Inter-platform/system EMC verification results and test data for spectrum-dependent (J oint
E3 Evaluation Tool (J EET) model) and non-spectrum-dependent equipment

c. Special E3 analyses and test data (HERO, HERP, HERF, EMP, lightning, ESD, and p-
static) if required by the CDD, CPD, TEMP, or contractual documents

7. E3 and SM impact assessments which identify and define operational limitations and
vulnerabilities, including lessons learned

8. DT&E test plans and results/reports

9. Initial OT&E test plans and results/reports

10. User initiated test results
Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D

62
TABLE 5. E3/SS Tasks and Applicable Documents.




E3/SS TASKS
D
o
D
D

4
6
3
0
.
5

D
o
D
I


4
6
3
0
.
8

D
o
D
D

4
6
5
0
.
1

A
c
q
u
i
s
i
t
i
o
n

G
u
i
d
e

D
o
D
D

3
2
2
2
.
3

C
J
C
S
I

3
1
7
0
.
0
1

C
J
C
S
M

3
1
7
0
.
0
1

C
J
C
S
I

6
2
1
2
.
0
1

M
I
L
-
S
T
D
-
4
6
1
M
I
L
-
S
T
D
-
4
6
4

M
I
L
-
S
T
D
-
4
6
9

M
I
L
-
H
D
B
K
-
2
3
5

M
I
L
-
H
D
B
K
-
2
3
7

N
T
I
A

M
a
n
u
a
l

Prepare E3/ESC inputs to Mission Area
ICD, CDD, CPD, CRD, ISP, and TEMP,
as applicable
x x x x x x x x
Organize E3/SS WIPT
x x x
Determine spectrum requirements
and submit requests for frequency
allocation (DD Form 1494) at appropriate
times
x x x x x x x
Define EME which may be encountered
during life cycle and update
x x x x x
Determine feasibility and evaluate
possible use of CI/NDI
x x x x x
Verify if performance of proposed item is
compatible in its intended operational
EME
x x x x x x x x x
Define acceptable performance criteria,
including the NR-KPP
x x x x x x x x x
Evaluate E3 standards, predicted EME,
and acceptable performance criteria to
determine if item will meet general
E3 and SS criteria
x x x x x x x x
Establish initial E3 requirements for
inclusion in performance specification,
SOW, CDRL
x x x x x x
Specify DT&E and OT&E requirements
to demonstrate the item will perform its
mission in the intended EME; include in
TEMP
x x x x x x x x
Review all contractor data items
x x x x
Perform special E3 tests or analyses as
specified in TEMP
x x x x x x
Define vulnerabilities and limitations due
to E3/ESC issues
x x x x x x
Request assignment of test frequencies
x x x x x
Monitor and review waiver requests and
modifications
x x x x x
Investigate and fix operational E3
problems
x x

Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D

63
7. E3/SS TEST STRATEGY
7.1 General

Information is required to make risk assessments, to validate M&S, to determine compliance with
performance specifications, and to determine whether an item is operationally effective, suitable,
and survivable for its intended use. A program must be structured to integrate all applicable
verification activities, including T&E and M&S, which will be conducted during an items life
cycle. Objectives for each phase of a program are to be designed to allow assessment of
performance appropriate to each phase and milestone. However, until an item is actually tested,
there is no assurance that it possesses the desired characteristics. The following verification efforts
usually occur during a program:

Stage 1. Subsystem/equipment qualification testing (including EMI) usually performed in
a factory, laboratory, or Open Area Test Site (OATS)

Stage 2. Subsystem/equipment installation inspection (visual) to determine if an item was
installed properly (that is, grounding, bonding, cable separation, and so forth)

Stage 3. Functional tests to determine whether subsystems and equipment meet their
performance specifications after installation

Stage 4. Intra-subsystem tests to show that equipment comprising a functional subsystem
(that is, radar, fire control, machinery control, communications, and so forth) satisfactorily
operate together. This will also show that the subsystem is free from self-generated, or
internal, EMI.

Stage 5. Inter-subsystem/equipment (or intra-platform/system) testing and analysis to
demonstrate whether the items on the platform or system are functioning so that the
platform/ system can perform its mission(s). This will also verify that all subsystems and
equipment within the platform/system effectively operate without degrading each others
performance due to E3.

Stage 6. Total platform or system test and analysis to verify that all subsystems and
equipment satisfactorily demonstrate their operational performance with all items operating
in an EME representative of a battle space scenario. These operational tests or analyses
assess intra-platform/system and inter-platform/system interactions that can occur between
radar, communications subsystems, weapons subsystems, ordnance, and so forth. Tests are
not one-on-one interactions but, rather, a full operational test of all sensors and radiators
operating in the EME whether from own platforms or systems or others in the vicinity.

Stages 1-4 are usually performed by the developing or integrating activity, whereas Stage 6 is
usually performed by the OTA. Stage 5 may be performed by either or both the integrating
activity or the OTA. Developmental and operational E3 testing and evaluations are performed
during the stages described above and should be conducted on all Defense acquisition items. In
Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D

64
addition, verification of specialized E3 requirements, such as for p-static, lightning, EMP, HERP,
HERF, and HERO may be required on a case-by-case basis, as discussed in 7.2.4 of this handbook.
It is intended that limitations of operational capabilities caused by E3 be minimized and that the
limitations and vulnerabilities remaining after deployment are documented. Plans must be
formulated as early as possible to ensure that during T&E potentially adverse E3 and SS problems
are identified. Both developmental and operational testers must be involved early to ensure that
the test program can support the acquisition strategy, the harmonization of objectives, thresholds,
and MOEs/MOPs with appropriate quantitative criteria, and effective performance in the
operational EME is demonstrated.
7.2 Developmental Test & Evaluation (DT&E)
7.2.1 General

Developmental testing will demonstrate that the engineering design and development process is
complete, that E3 risks have been minimized, and that the item will be in compliance with its
contractual E3 specifications, based on tailored military standards (such as MIL-STD-461 or 464)
or commercial standards. Developmental testing will usually be planned and conducted by the
developer in a factory, laboratory, or OATS. These tests include Production Acceptance Tests and
Evaluation and First Article E3 testing after an item has been approved for full-rate production. A
final step in a successful developmental test program is certification that the item is ready for
OT&E.
7.2.2 Subsystems and Equipment

Developmental EMI requirements for subsystems and equipment, that is, conducted and radiated,
emission and susceptibility (immunity) requirements are defined in MIL-STD-461. The standard
is discussed in detail in paragraph 6.6.3.2.2 of this handbook. Verification of these requirements is
also demonstrated by tests that are based on MIL-STD-461. The standards Appendix should be
consulted for detailed guidance on tailoring and performing the required tests. Compliance with
the equipment-level EMI requirements does not relieve the developing or integrating activity of the
responsibility for providing overall platform or system compatibility. Furthermore, if CI/NDI is
involved, sufficient testing must be done on the CI/NDI to ensure performance, operational
effectiveness, and operational suitability for the military application. Testing of CI/NDI is
discussed in paragraph 6.7.2 of this document.
7.2.3 Platforms and Systems

Developmental E3 requirements for airborne, sea, space, and ground platforms and systems,
including associated ordnance, are defined in MIL-STD-464. The standard applies to complete
platforms and systems, both new and modified. Verification of the tailored E3 requirements is
done by test, analysis, inspection, or some combination thereof, depending on the degree of
confidence in the particular method, technical appropriateness, associated costs, and availability of
assets. The standards Appendix provides rationale and guidance for implementing the
requirements and verification procedures contained therein. The standard is discussed in further
detail in paragraph 6.6.3.2.3 of this handbook. Testing or analyses for intra-and inter-platform/
system EMI, and EMV are universally applicable and are discussed below. Additional specialized
Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D

65
E3 assessments, such as p-static, EMP, lightning, HERP, HERF, and HERO may also be required
and are also discussed below.
7.2.3.1 Intra-Platform/System EMI Testing

The limits specified in MIL-STD-461 for subsystems and equipment is empirically derived to
cover most configurations and environments. The limits have a proven record of success
demonstrated by the relatively low incidence of problems at the platform/system level.
Compliance with the EMI requirements assures a high degree of confidence of achieving
platform/system compatibility; however, it does not guarantee it. Although tailoring may have
been done, it may not have accounted for all of the peculiarities of the intended installation. Non-
compliance with the EMI requirements often leads to operational problems. The greater the non-
compliance, the higher the probability that a problem will develop. Since EMI requirements are a
risk reduction initiative, adherence to them will afford a higher degree of confidence that the
platform or system and its associated subsystems and equipment will operate compatibly upon
integration. It is essential that within a platform or system, subsystems and equipment be capable
of providing full performance along with others that are operating concurrently. EMI generated by
a subsystem or equipment must not degrade the overall platform or system effectiveness. Intra-
platform/system EMI is one of the basic elements of concern and is addressed in detail in MIL-
STD-464.
7.2.3.2 Inter-Platform/System EMI Evaluations

Operational problems resulting from the adverse effects of EM energy from one platform or
system to another are well documented. These problems underscore the importance of providing
the warfighter with items that are compatible with their intended operational EME. J oint
operations further increase the potential for safety and reliability problems, particularly if the
platforms or systems are exposed to operational EMEs different from those for which they were
designed and tested. For example, Army systems, if designed to operate in a land EME, may be
adversely affected by exposure to the Navys shipboard EME as may be encountered in a J oint
operation.

In addition, the threat presented by RF emitters around the world is becoming increasingly more
serious. Increased multi-National military operations, proliferation of both friendly and hostile
weapons, and the expanded use of the spectrum, worldwide, have resulted in an operational EME
not previously encountered. It is therefore essential that the EME be defined and used to evaluate
inter-platform/system performance. Tools such as the J SCs J EET described in Appendix D are
available to support the required analyses. The EME in which military platforms and systems and
their associated subsystems and equipment must operate is created by a multitude of sources. The
contribution of each emitter may be described in terms of its individual characteristics, such as:
power level, modulation, frequency, bandwidth, antenna gain (main beam, side lobe, and
backlobe), antenna scanning, and so forth. These characteristics are important in determining the
potential impact on performance. Many threats may be seen only infrequently. For example, a
high-powered emitter may illuminate a platform or system or one of its subsystems or equipment
for only a short time due to its search pattern. And too, it may operate at a frequency where effects
are minimized. There are many different EME levels that can be encountered during an items life
cycle. MIL-STD-464 describes airborne, land-based, ship-based, air, and battle space EME levels
Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D

66
and addresses the requirement for inter-platform/system EMI in detail. In addition, MIL-HDBK-
235 contains friendly and hostile EME levels, as well as emitter characteristics.
7.2.3.3 EMV

Some inter-platform/system EMI testing may be performed under laboratory conditions where the
item under test and the simulated EME are controlled. Detection of undesired responses during
routine EMI testing might necessitate an EMV analysis to determine the impact of the laboratory
observed susceptibility on operational performance. Operational testing in the actual EME rarely
is effective in the investigation or verification of susceptibilities because there is much less control
on variable conditions, fewer functions can generally be exercised, and expenses can be high. The
results of EMV analyses and tests guide the possible need for modifications, additional analyses,
or testing. The inter-platform/system environment is evaluated to determine which frequencies are
of interest from the possible emitters to be encountered when deployed, optimum coupling
frequencies, susceptibility of the subsystem and equipment, available simulators, and authorized
test frequencies that can be radiated. The evaluations require descriptions of the EME, both
friendly and hostile, which the item may encounter during its life cycle. Based on these
considerations and other unique factors, a finite list of test emitters is derived. For each test
emitter, the item is illuminated and evaluated for susceptibilities. These tests are usually carried
out in specialized test chambers, that is, reverberation chambers, anechoic chambers, shielded or
anechoic hangars, and so forth, depending on the size of the item being tested.
7.2.4 Verification of Special E3 Requirements

Verification of these special E3 requirements are described in MIL-STD-464 and are to be applied
on a case-by-case basis, as noted in the CDD, CPD, TEMP, or contractual documents.
7.2.4.1 P-Static

The control of static charge accumulation is accomplished during the design and construction of
the aircraft and its associated subsystems/equipment. An aircraft must be verified to not pose a
hazard when exposed to p-static charging. Conductive coating resistance must be verified to fall
within the required range to prevent excessive accumulation of charge. In addition, the metallic
and composite structural members should be inspected to verify that they are adequately bonded
and that electrically conductive hardware and finishes are used.
7.2.4.2 Lightning

Verification of lightning requirements is essential to demonstrate that the platform or system is
protected from the lightning threat environment. During development, numerous tests and
analyses are normally conducted to sort out the optimum design. These evaluations may be
considered part of the verification process and must be properly documented. For example, flight
testing of aircraft may occur prior to verification of lightning protection control. Under this
circumstance, the flight test program should include restrictions to prohibit flights within a
specified distance from thunder storms, usually 25 miles. Lightning flashes sometimes occur large
distances from thunderstorm clouds and can occur up to an hour after the storm appears to have
left the area. There are many documents that describe analysis and test approaches for lightning.
Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D

67
These include MIL-STD-464, MIL-STD-1542, RTCA DO-160, Federal Aviation Administration
(FAA) Advisory Circulars AC 20-53 and 20-136, and the Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE)
Aerospace Recommended Practices 5412, 5413, 5414, 5415, 5416, 5417, and 5577.
7.2.4.3 EMP

For items with a nuclear EMP requirement, verification is necessary to demonstrate that the control
measures that have been implemented provide sufficient protection to demonstrate that the
platform or system meets the EMP requirements in MIL-STD-464. This is accomplished by
demonstrating that the transient levels at the subsystem or equipment interfaces of mission critical
subsystems or equipment do not exceed the MIL-STD-461, or other tailored hardness levels, and
that the required design margins have been met. Mission critical items are those for which proper
operation is critical or essential to the operation of the platform or system.

A combination of analysis and test is usually required to verify performance after being subjected
to EMP. Analyses or models are necessary to determine the EMP field that can be coupled into the
platform or system without causing damage. Existing coupling data on similar platforms or
systems may be used to estimate the voltages and currents generated by the EMP at each interface
of each mission critical subsystem or equipment. However, the complex geometry of a final
platform or system design may be so different from that which was modeled that the EM behavior
can be substantially altered. There are a number of ways to obtain platform or system excitation
for purposes such as quality control or hardening evaluation. EMP testing may be done using an
injection method where a pulse current is injected into the penetrating conductors at points outside
the platform or system EM shielding barrier. Residual responses are measured and the operation
of the mission critical subsystems or equipment is monitored for upset or damage. For example, in
the case of an aircraft, single point excitation such as electrical connection of a signal source to a
physical point on the external structure of the aircraft, can be done in a hangar and can reveal any
obvious problems in the airframe shielding. Alternatively, a platform or system level test can be
performed using a high-level EMP simulator in a controlled test site. DoD has a number of such
sites available for EMP testing, as described in Appendix D of this handbook.

The operational performance requirements for the platform or system must be met after exposure
to the EMP field. At the instant of the EMP event, the electrical transients may cause some
disruption of performance. However, immediately after the event, or within some specified time
frame driven by the platform or system operational performance requirements, the item must
function properly. EMP poses a threat only to electrical and electronic subsystems and equipment.
There are no structural damage mechanisms; however, EMP-induced arcing of insulators on
antenna systems can permanently damage the insulator, disabling the antenna.
7.2.4.4 EMR Hazards
7.2.4.4.1 HERP

A HERP evaluation should be performed to determine safe distances for personnel from RF
emitters. Safe distances can be determined from calculations based on RF emitter characteristics
or by measurement. Once a distance has been determined, an inspection is required of the areas
where personnel have access together with the antenna's pointing characteristics. If personnel have
access to hazardous areas, appropriate measures must be taken such as warning signs and
Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D

68
precautions in servicing publications, guidance manuals, operating manuals, and the like. The
safety tolerance levels for EMR to personnel are defined in DoDI 6055.11.

Before a measurement survey is performed, calculations should be made to determine distances for
starting measurements to avoid hazardous exposures to survey personnel and to prevent damage to
instruments. Safe distance calculations are often based on the assumption that far-field conditions
exist for the antenna. Consult your applicable Service publication in Appendix A of this handbook
for techniques to calculate safe distances and for calculating the gains of certain types of antennas.
Since hazard criteria are primarily based on average power density and field strength levels,
caution needs to be exercised with the probes used for measurements because they have peak
power limits above which burnout of probe sensing elements may occur. When multiple emitters
are present and the emitters are not phase coherent, as is usually the case, the resultant power
density is additive. This effect needs to be considered for both calculation and measurement
approaches. In addition to the main beam hazard, localized hot spots may be produced by
reflections of the transmitted energy from any metal structure. T.O. 31Z-10-4 and OP 3565
provide procedures for determining safe operating distances.
7.2.4.4.2 HERF

The existence and extent of a fuel hazard is determined by comparing the actual power density to
an established safety standard. The volatility and flash points of particular fuels will influence
whether there is a hazard under varying EME conditions. The amount of current and, thus, the
strength of a spark across a gap between two conductors depend on both the field intensity of the
energy and how well the conductors act as a receiving antenna. Verification by inspection and
analysis is usually done, with testing limited to special circumstances. T.O. 31Z-10-4 and OP
3565 provide procedures for determining safe operating distances. An important issue is that fuel
hazard criteria are based on peak power, while personnel hazard criteria are based, primarily, on
average power. Any area on a platform or system where fuel vapors may be present needs to be
evaluated. Restrictions on the use of some transmitters may be necessary to ensure safety under
certain operational conditions, such as refueling operations.
7.2.4.4.3 HERO

Adequate measures must be taken to protect ordnance from EM energy and their effectiveness
must be verified to ensure safe and effective operation. HERO testing should include exposure of
the ordnance to the test EME in all life-cycle configurations, including packaging, handling,
storage, transportation, checkout, loading, unloading, and launch from the host platform/system to
determine its susceptibility characteristics. Verification methods must show that the ordnance
device will not inadvertently operate, initiate, or be dudded. Methods used to determine HERO
susceptibility characteristics require instrumenting the device using any number of possible
techniques such as thermocouple and fiber optic temperature sensors, RF voltage or current
detectors, temperature sensitive waxes, or substitution of more sensitive elements. Such
instrumentation must not alter the overall sensitivity or response characteristics of the ordnance.
The test EME should simulate the operational EME to the maximum extent possible. This requires
appropriate representation of the EME with respect to frequency, field strength or power density,
field polarization, and illumination angle. For radar EME, representative pulse widths, pulse
repetition frequencies, and beam dwell periods should be chosen to maximize response by the
Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D

69
ordnance. In the high frequency range, transmitting antennas should be the same type used to
produce the fields in operation. Determining resonance frequencies is a fundamental aspect of
HERO testing. Whenever possible, swept frequency testing is the preferred means of determining
resonance frequencies. Reverberation chambers can be used effectively for creating a contained,
swept frequency EME. Follow-on testing at a discrete, high level EME is recommended to
determine actual susceptibility thresholds. After the susceptibility characteristics of the ordnance
are ascertained, the platform or system operational EME must be determined to ensure that
potentially hazardous EME levels are not present where ordnance may be stored, handled, or used.

Appendix A of MIL-STD-464 and MIL-HDBK-240 should be consulted for detailed rationale,
guidance, and procedures to conduct HERO evaluations, as well as the J SC Ordnance E3 Risk
Assessment Database (J OERAD). (See D.5.2)
7.3 Operational Test and Evaluation (OT&E)
7.3.1 General

Historically, failure to adequately verify platform, system, subsystem, or equipment performance
in an operational EME has resulted in costly delays, mission aborts, and reduced operational
effectiveness. Therefore, in addition to the DT&E assessments described in paragraph 7.2,
operational evaluations for E3/SS should be performed to determine if the item is operationally
effective and suitable for the intended use. The user community or Services T&E Commands
perform these evaluations. OT&E will demonstrate operational performance in the presence of
other operating items and compliance with KPPs described in the TEMP. It will also identify any
resulting limitations and vulnerabilities. These evaluations, which may include both tests and
analyses, may also be used to formulate operational procedures and tactics for the item. OT&E
should be accomplished in as realistic an operational EME as possible. It is important that
resources and assets required for verification of E3 requirements be identified early in the program
to ensure their availability when needed. The following guidance applies to operational E3 testing:

Items used for verification should be production configuration, preferably the first article.
The item should be up-to-date with respect to all approved engineering change proposals
and modifications (both hardware and software).
EMI qualification testing to either MIL-STD-461 or MIL-STD-464, as applicable, should
be performed before operational testing to provide a performance baseline and to identify
any areas that may require special attention during the operational testing.
All items should be placed in modes of operation and, where applicable, in platform unique
azimuths and elevations, that will maximize potential indications of interference or
susceptibility, consistent with overall operational performance requirements.
Any external electrical power used to operate the item should conform to the power quality
standards of the platform or system.
Any anomalies found should be evaluated to determine whether they are truly an E3 issue
or some other type of malfunction or response.
Any modifications resulting from verification efforts should be validated for effectiveness
after they have been engineered.
Margins need to be demonstrated wherever they are applicable.
Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D

70
7.3.2 Intra-Platform/System EMI Testing

As noted earlier, developmental testing of EMI requirements is a risk reduction initiative.
Adherence affords a higher degree of confidence that the platform or system and its associated
subsystems and equipment will function compatibly in the operational EME. Subsystems and
equipment should be designed and integrated to coexist and to provide the operational performance
required by the user. However, varying degrees of functionality may be necessary depending upon
the operational requirements of individual items during particular missions. Certain subsystems
and equipment may not need to be exercised at the time of operation of other subsystems or
equipment. The following issues should be addressed during operational intra-platform/system
EMI testing:

Potential EMI source vs. victim pairs should be identified and systematically evaluated by
exercising the subsystem and equipment onboard the platform or system through the
various modes and functions while monitoring the remaining items for degradation. Both
one source vs. one victim and multiple sources vs. one victim conditions should be
evaluated.

A frequency selection plan should be developed for antenna-connected transmitters and
receivers. This plan should include:

Predictable interactions between transmitters and receivers such as those at transmitter
and receiver fundamental frequencies, harmonics, intermodulation products, other
spurious responses, and cross modulation,
Evaluation of transmitters and receivers across their entire operating frequency ranges,
including emergency frequencies, and
Evaluation of EMI issues with subsystems and equipment, including ordnance.

Margins should be demonstrated for subsystems and equipment, including ordnance.

Operational evaluations of undesirable responses found in the laboratory environment.

Testing should be conducted in an area where the ambient, or background, EME does not
affect the validity of the test results. A dense environment can hamper efforts to evaluate
the performance of antenna-connected receivers with respect to emissions of other
subsystems or equipment installed in the platform or system.

Testing should include all relevant external hardware such as weapons, stores, provisioned
items (that is, those installed in the platform/system by the user) and support equipment.

Verify that any external electrical power conforms to applicable power quality standards.

All subsystems and equipment should be capable of simultaneous operation using power
supplied by the platform power. Power line distortion, harmonics, or transients should not
degrade the operation of the subsystems and equipment using that power.

Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D

71
A common issue in intra-platform/system testing is the use of instrumentation during the test. The
most common approach is to monitor subsystem and equipment performance through visual and
aural displays and outputs. To do this, it may be necessary to modify cabling and electronics;
however, these modifications may change subsystem and equipment responses and introduce
unexpected problems. Care should be exercised when using such external instrumentation. The
need to evaluate antenna-connected receivers across their operating frequency ranges is important
for proper assessment. While it might be tempting to check a few channels of a receiver and
conclude that there was no EMI, this practice should not be used. The use of modern circuitry
with microprocessor clocks and power supply choppers necessitates that all antenna-connected
outputs be monitored during intra-platform/system testing.
7.3.2.1 Additional Intra-Ship Concerns
7.3.2.1.1 Intermodulation Interference (IMI)

The large number of high frequency transmitters, their high output power, and the construction
techniques and materials used on modern ships make the presence of intermodulation interference
(IMI) a reality. On surface ships, the HF transmissions induce a current flow in the hull. The
various currents from the different transmitters mix in non-linearities within the hull to produce
signals at sums and differences of the fundamental and harmonic frequencies of the incident
signals. MIL-STD-464 requires tests and analyses to control the 19
th
order and higher IMI to
effectively manage the spectrum. Specific controls should be imposed to limit internal EM fields
on ships to ensure that the variety of equipment used onboard, particularly CI/NDI, will be able to
function with little, or no, performance degradation. Tests need to be performed with subsystems
and equipment operating under normal conditions to detect the electric fields below deck and to
verify compliance with the applicable internal EME requirements.
7.3.2.1.2 Shipboard HERO and EME Surveys

Procedures are implemented onboard Navy ships to protect ordnance from the effects of the EME
generated by high-power shipboard transmitters. These procedures include creating a ship-specific
HERO emission control instruction. A survey should be performed to identify transmitters,
antennas, and ordnance handling and loading areas throughout the ship. After the susceptibility
characteristics of the ordnance are ascertained, the ships operational worst-case EME should be
determined to ensure that potentially hazardous EME levels are not present in areas where
ordnance may be stored, handled, or used. Emissions from transmitters capable of producing
potentially hazardous EMEs should then be measured at all ordnance locations. Transmitters
should be operated to simulate the worst-case operational EME to the maximum extent possible.
Measured data is then analyzed and used to determine HERO emission control procedures. An
assessment report should be prepared and a HERO emission control bill specific to the ship under
test generated. NAVSEA OP 3565/ NAVAIR 16-1-529, Volume II, should be consulted for
detailed rationale, guidance, and procedures to conduct HERO surveys.

New and higher-powered radars have been introduced into the fleet during recent years. As a
result, reports of EMC problems with aircraft avionics and other electronic systems have increased.
Accordingly, systematic EME surveys of helicopter landing zones and flight decks of air-capable
ships (such as CG, CGN, FFG, DD, DDG), amphibious aviation (such as LHA, LHD, LPD, LPH,
and LSD), and aviation (such as CV and CVN) ships should be performed. The purpose of these
Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D

72
surveys is to record the EMEs for application in support of designing and testing avionic and
support equipment and de-conflicting emitter and ordnance operations. Data gathered during these
surveys are used to determine the EME on the flight deck and update J OERAD, MIL-STD-464
and 461, and MIL-HDBK-235. Shipboard EMEs must be continually evaluated as updates and
changes are made to ships' EM transmission capabilities.
7.3.3 Inter-Platform/System E3 Evaluations

As noted earlier, platform and system DT&E requirements are based on MIL-STD-464. In
addition, a thorough operational analysis, including M&S, may be required to verify performance
in all EME levels that may be encountered. The following guidance on issues that should be
addressed during operational inter-platform/system E3 evaluations, both testing and analyses:

Potential EMI source vs. victim pairs from friendly, hostile (if known), J oint and Combined
forces should be identified and systematically evaluated by exercising the subsystems and
equipment on each platform and system through their various modes and functions while
monitoring the remaining items for degradation. Both one source vs. one victim and
multiple sources vs. one victim conditions should be evaluated.

A frequency selection or emission control plan should be developed for antenna-connected
transmitters and receivers on platforms and systems in the intended operational EME. This
plan should include:

Predicable interactions between transmitters and receivers at fundamental frequencies
and harmonics,
Evaluation of transmitters and receivers across their entire operating frequency range,
including emergency frequencies, and
Evaluation of ordnance susceptibility and associated control measures (frequency and
power management and spatial separation).

MIL-STD-464 margins should be demonstrated for ordnance and other subsystems and
equipment.

Operational evaluation of responses identified by M&S should be performed.

Testing should be conducted in an area and at a time when the ambient, or background,
EME does not affect the validity of the test results. An environment with dense utilization
of the frequency spectrum can hamper efforts to evaluate performance.

Testing should include all relevant external hardware such as weapons, stores, provisioned
equipment (that is, items installed in the platform or system by the user), and support items.
7.3.3.1 Additional Ordnance Concerns

Inter-platform/system E3 testing involving ordnance should include preflight, captive-carry, and
free-flight configurations of the ordnance. Pre-flight testing should be conducted to ensure that the
platform/system successfully performs those pre-flight operations required during service use.
Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D

73
Operations, such as mission or target data uploading and downloading, should be performed while
exposing the ordnance to the test EME. Captive-carry testing determines survivability following
exposure to the main beam, operational EME. Since this test simulates the ordnance passing
through the radars main beam during takeoff from and landing on the host platform/system, the
ordnance should be operated as it normally would be for those flight conditions. The duration of
exposure to the EME from the main beam should be based on normal operational considerations.
Verification of ordnance survivability may, in many cases, be made utilizing the ordnance built-in
test function. However, if this is not possible, verification utilizing an appropriate test set is
suggested. Free-flight testing of ordnance may be simulated utilizing an inert, instrumented,
ordnance device suspended in a quiet, EM-free environment, such as an anechoic chamber. Use of
the anechoic chamber is recommended to determine the RF points and aspect angles associated
with specific susceptibilities determined as described in 7.2.4.4.3 of this document. The free-flight
test program consists of evaluating weapon performance during the launch, cruise, and terminal
phases of flight, while exposed to friendly and hostile EME
7.3.3.2 Additional Aircraft Concerns

An aircraft often undergoes extensive development and integration tests prior to inter-platform/
system and formal acceptance testing. The EME that may be encountered must be reviewed and
the status of the aircraft with regard to the environment must be evaluated prior to flight. EMI
testing of the subsystems/equipment can be used as a baseline of hardness. However, limited,
inter-platform/system testing involving specific emitters may be necessary. If such tests are not
performed, operational restrictions on flight paths may need to be imposed.
7.4 E3/SS Analyses and Predictions
7.4.1 General

It is essential that E3/SS analyses and predictions be employed in the planning, design,
development, installation, and operation of electronic platforms, systems, subsystems, and
equipment. These techniques are necessary to:

Demonstrate that the required level of performance has been, or will be, achieved, and,
To show efficient use of the frequency spectrum.

Analyses and predictions are used to identify, localize, and define potential E3/SS problems and
possible solutions. They should be employed as early in a program as possible, before there are
significant expenditures of time, effort, and money. E3/SS analyses are critical in identifying and
resolving potential problems during development and ensuring compatibility in the operational
phase of the program. The analyses provide essential information to guide the selection of
appropriate courses of action to correct problems. Finally, the need for performing these analyses
is closely related to the ESC process as described herein.
7.4.2 E3/SS Analyses and Predictions Throughout the Acquisition Life Cycle

E3/SS analyses should be conducted and continually refined throughout the items life cycle, as
the operational EME is updated and as technical characteristics of the end-item become available.
Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D

74
These analyses are typically performed at an increasing level of detail during each stage of the
development life cycle. For example, early in Concept and Technology Development of a
spectrum-dependent subsystem/equipment, the technical feasibility of using one or more potential
frequency bands and waveforms should be evaluated. The initial analysis should evaluate the
suitability of alternative frequency bands and waveforms. This type of study will:

Identify frequency bands already allocated for the type of service within the geographic
areas of intended use,
Determine the feasibility of using a proposed waveform in the allocated bands, and
Identify issues that may enhance or preclude the ability to obtain a frequency allocation.

The E3/SS WIPT can provide advice on the EME to be considered in the analyses, scheduling
concerns, organizations capable of performing the analyses, and required measurements. Analyses
should be conducted to determine if any of the following E3 problems are likely to be encountered:

Within or between subsystems and equipment on a platform or system, for example, intra-
platform/system or inter-subsystem/equipment problems,
Between elements of the platform or system and elements of others that are likely to be
operating in the same general area, such as, inter-platform/system problems, or
Between elements of a platform or system and the EME in which they are to be operated.

Analyses usually rely on assumed or typical characteristics for the subsystem or equipment on a
platform or system. The results from these analyses should provide the information needed to:

Determine the most suitable frequency band(s) and subsystem and equipment parameters
such as transmitter power, antenna gains, receiver sensitivity, type of modulation, rise
times, information bandwidth, and so forth,
Define E3 performance requirements, and
Identify potential E3 problem areas and the risk involved if corrective action is not taken.

The E3 control characteristics of the proposed item should be evaluated against other existing and
planned items in the EME, including natural, friendly, and hostile sources, and J oint and
Combined operating forces. This will identify the items operating in the EME that could cause
EMI to, or be degraded by, the proposed item. Estimated parameters and analytical techniques can
be used to determine the degradation criteria. Careful application of E3 analysis and prediction
techniques at the appropriate phases of an items life cycle should ensure the required level of E3
control is defined without having either the wasteful expense of over-engineering or uncertainties
of under-engineering. As the program progresses, more detailed characteristics of the item will be
available. Early E3/SS analyses should be refined, based on these characteristics and the most
recent EME definitions. As measured characteristics are determined, earlier analyses may be
refined. Available test data for interference interactions should also be fed back into the E3
analysis. The main goal, at this time, is to resolve all potential EMI interactions. The results of
this analysis will be critical for obtaining approval of the final DD Form 1494.

Additional E3/SS analyses should be performed, as required, during the Production and
Deployment and Operations and Support Phases. These may be required because of:

Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D

75
System modifications,
Reported inadequate performance,
Changing EME, or
New mission requirements.

When a modification to an item is planned, an analysis should be performed to determine whether
the modification affects the E3 characteristics of the item or others in the EME. A new EME may
have to be considered; platform or system E3 requirements should be reviewed and updated, as
required. If E3 is suspected as possibly causing performance degradation after an item has been
fielded, then an E3 analysis may help identify the cause. Corrective action can be taken, then, to
resolve the problem. If the mission requirements of the item are modified either by a new
platform, additional geographic locations, and so forth, the data describing the EME must be
updated. Then, an E3 analysis should be performed to determine the compatibility of the item in
the new EME. Guidance throughout development is available from the E3/SS WIPT, the J SC, and
the Service E3/SS points of contact noted in Appendix D.

When an item is deployed in its intended operational EME, E3 should be considered from various
operational aspects such as siting effects, frequency assignment(s), effective radiated power limits,
and antenna coverage. Operational inter-platform/system E3 control is generally achieved through
frequency management, time-sharing, and distance separation. Usually, at this time, personnel
responsible for compatible system operations should be mostly concerned with the interaction of
system elements, both with each other and with elements from other systems, and less with the
internal characteristics of the elements. E3 problems during operation generally involve signals
that are coupled among elements of either the same or different systems.
7.4.3 E3/SS Analysis Process

There are a number of different applications for which E3/SS analyses are performed. The
methods and procedures utilized are dependent upon the application and the results desired. In
general, the analysis process to be used depends on the specific application, the accuracy and
completeness of available data, and the costs to perform the analysis.
7.4.4 Cost of Analysis

Cost is an important factor that should be considered when selecting the specific techniques that
will be used for E3/SS analyses. The costs for developing the approach, method, and procedures
for E3/SS analyses, along with the manpower required to conduct the analyses, can vary
considerably. The cost depends on a number of factors, including: the type of problem being
addressed; the number of items involved; the accuracy and completeness of the data available; and,
the need to evaluate the impact of E3 on operational performance of an item or its overall mission.
7.5 DOT&E Policy Memorandum of 25 Oct 1999
7.5.1 General

E3 has the potential to adversely impact performance and effectiveness of military operations.
Todays complex military operational environment is also characterized by an increasingly
Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D

76
crowded EM spectrum, coupled with a reduction of the frequency spectrum reserved for exclusive
military use. Additionally, the mix of DoD systems along with CI/NDI increases the importance
of effectively managing E3 and spectrum usage in the battle space. It is the responsibility of
Program Offices to assure, and of OTAs to validate the readiness of systems to be fielded into this
environment. Acquisition programs have traditionally evaluated E3 in narrowly scoped
operational scenarios. Moreover, operational evaluations have been limited to:

Intra-platform/system environments rather than inter-platform/system environments,
Single Service participation in testing rather than multi-Service, or
Single mission areas rather than multiple mission areas.

The DOT&E policy memo was intended to more clearly define the role of OT&E in identifying
potentially adverse E3 and spectrum availability situations. The policy was intended to make PMs
and OTAs aware that the DOT&E plans to assess this area more systematically. This policy
encompassed all aspects of E3, but emphasized EMC/EMI and HERO. The policy memo also
focused on limitations to operational performance caused by restrictions on spectrum availability.
The memo was effective immediately and applied to all DOT&E oversight programs. It was
applicable to programs at the time of approval. Programs already underway were to incorporate
this approach during their next TEMP approval cycle.
7.5.2 Responsibilities

The following are some of the responsibilities that were delineated in the DOT&E memorandum
and will be included in a new DoDI 3222 in preparation at the time of the publication of this guide.
7.5.2.1 DOT&E Responsibilities

DOT&E will:

Review Service TEMPs, operational test plans, early assessments, and test reports on Test
and Evaluation Oversight programs to assess the adequacy of E3 testing.
Monitor and cite E3 issues and resolutions during participation on Test and Evaluation
Oversight programs acquisition IPTs.
Review Services evaluation approaches, including M&S, small-scale tests, and appropriate
chamber, field, and laboratory tests.
Review spectral characteristics data to ensure sufficient information is available for test
scenarios and to support the resolution of E3 issues.
Report the status of E3 issues for Test and Evaluation Oversight programs in the DOT&E
Annual Report, and report specific program findings as part of Beyond Low-Rate Initial
Production reports to the Secretary of Defense and the Congress.
As E3 issues related to fielded systems arise during OT&E or during large-scale training
exercises used to complement operational tests, report these issues to the appropriate
agencies for resolution.
7.5.2.2 OTA Responsibilities

OTAs are to:
Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D

77

Coordinate E3 assessments during OT&E with Services E3 points of contact and other
DoD agencies.
Conduct early assessments of DoD programs to identify and mitigate potential E3
problems, including HERO.
Include E3 and spectrum availability assessment issues as a standard presentation at
Operational Test Readiness Reviews.
7.5.2.3 PM Responsibilities

PMs are to:

Ensure that E3 T&E efforts receive adequate funding, and
Ensure that E3 is sufficiently addressed in TEMPs since it will receive scrutiny during the
TEMP approval process.
7.5.3 Process

To accomplish the objectives of the policy memo, a process and a number of actions are required
throughout the acquisition by DOT&E, the Program Offices, and OTAs. DOT&E, with the
support of the J SC, has defined in the DOT&E E3 and SM Assessment Guide E3 evaluation
criteria. Together, they evaluate testing and analyses results to define any limitations and
vulnerabilities as a result of E3 and SS problems. The guide is available on the J SC web site
www.jsc.mil. The information necessary to make these determinations is gathered throughout the
procurement process and should all be available prior to Milestone C. The information required to
perform the OT&E E3/SS assessments is shown on Table 4 of this handbook, which has been
extracted from the guide. Items 1-8 on the table are to be provided by the Program Office,
whereas items 9 and 10 are the responsibility of the OTAs. As hardware becomes available, test
data can be used to validate and supplement the analyses and models. When hardware is actually
produced, inspection, testing, and follow-on analysis of potential problems previously identified
complete the process. Additional guidance may be obtained from the DISA/J SC.
7.6 Summary E3/SS T&E Checklist

As noted earlier, the items procured must be in compliance with established E3/SS policies and
with the DT&E and OT&E requirements and KPPs discussed earlier in this handbook. The
following checklist should be used when developing and evaluating the adequacy of a planned
verification program. The list should be used with those provided earlier in the handbook.

Have developmental tests been planned to demonstrate compliance with the applicable
contractual requirements, based on tailored MIL-STD-461 or 464 requirements?
Have OT&E efforts been planned to identify and verify performance in the operational
EME, or identify limitations in performance due to E3? (Note that all items are to be
operated as in normal operations and tested in all modes, both on the platform and against
those same systems on other, or similar platforms.)
Will sufficient data be taken to identify and resolve E3 risks?
Have tests been planned to verify effectiveness of proposed spectrum control and usage?
Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D

78
Have evaluations been planned to determine EMP hardness when required?
Have tests of HERO characteristics in J oint EME been planned for ordnance?
Is sufficient data available to assess intra-and inter-system/platform EMI?
Will tests provide adequate data for EMV analyses? Are items being tested in an EME
where susceptibility has been identified during a laboratory test?
Are properly trained test personnel available to operate the test equipment?
Will CI/NDI be tested or analyzed against the applicable requirements of MIL-STD-461?
Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D

79
8. NOTES
8.1 Intended Use

This handbook provides guidance for establishing an effective E3/SS program.
8.2 Supersession

This document supersedes all previous issues of MIL-HDBK-237.
8.3 Changes From Previous Issues

Marginal notations are not used in this revision to identify changes with respect to the previous
issue due to the extent of the changes.
8.4 Subject Term (Key Word) Listing

E3
E3/SS WIPT
EMC
EME
EMI
EMP
EMV
ESC
HERF
HERO
HERP
RADHAZ
Spectrum Management
Spectrum Supportability

Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D

80















This page left intentionally blank.
Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D

81










APPENDIX A





BIBLIOGRAPHY

Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D

82
CONTENTS

Paragraph Page

A.1 General ................................................................................................................................. 83
A.2 Directives, Instructions, Regulations, and Manuals............................................................. 83
A.3 Standards.............................................................................................................................. 84
A.4 Data Item Descriptions (DIDs)............................................................................................ 88
A.5 Guidance Documents, Handbooks, Specifications, and Studies.......................................... 89
A.6 Service Documents.............................................................................................................. 90
A.7 Specific Regulations, Directives and Instructions Affecting Policy.................................... 92
A.7.1 Federal....................................................................................................................... 92
A.7.1.1 Code of Federal Regulations.............................................................................. 92
A.7.1.2 OMB Circular A-11........................................................................................... 92
A.7.1.3 NTIA Manual of Regulations & Procedures for Federal Radio Frequency
Management92
A.7.2 DoD........................................................................................................................... 92
A.7.2.1 DFAR Supplement 252.235-7003...................................................................... 92
A.7.2.2 DoDD 5000.1..................................................................................................... 92
A.7.2.3 DoDI 5000.2....................................................................................................... 93
A.7.2.4 Defense Acquisition Guidebook (replaced DoDR 5000.2-R) ........................... 93
A.7.2.5 DoDD 3222.3..................................................................................................... 93
A.7.2.6 DoDD 4630.5..................................................................................................... 93
A.7.2.7 DoDI 4630.8....................................................................................................... 93
A.7.2.8 DoDD 4650.1..................................................................................................... 94
A.7.2.9 CJ CSI 3170.01................................................................................................... 94
A.7.2.10 CJ CSM 3170.01................................................................................................ 94
A.7.2.11 CJ CSI 6212.01.................................................................................................. 94
A.7.2.12 DOT&E E3 Policy Memo................................................................................. 95


Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D

83
A.1 General

This Appendix supplements the documents listed in section 2 of this handbook. It identifies many
pertinent DoD and U.S. commercial documents relative to E3/SS. Additional documents such as
those issued by the International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC), International Special
Committee on Radio Interference (CISPR), and Industry associations are discussed in EPS-0178 or
are themselves listed in the documents included below.
A.2 Directives, Instructions, Regulations, and Manuals

DoD DIRECTIVES

DoDD 3222.3 DoD Electromagnetic Environmental Effects (E3) Program
DoDD 4630.5 Interoperability and Supportability of Information Technology (IT)
and National Security Systems (NSS)
DoDD 4650.1 Policy for the Management and Use of the Electromagnetic Spectrum
DoDD 5000.1 The Defense Acquisition System

DoD INSTRUCTIONS

DoDI 3222.3
(in preparation)
Operation of the DoD Electromagnetic Effects Program
DoDI 4630.8 Procedures for Interoperability and Supportability of Information
Technology (IT) and National Security Systems (NSS)
DoDI 5000.2 Operation of the Defense Acquisition System
DoDI 6055.11 Protection of DoD Personnel from Exposure to Radio Frequency
Radiation and Military Exempt Lasers

CJCS INSTRUCTIONS AND MANUALS

CJ CSI 3170.01 J oint Capabilities Integration and Development System
CJ CSI 3220.01 EM Spectrum Use in J oint Military Operations
CJ CSI 6212.01 Interoperability and Supportability of Information Technology and
National Security Systems
CJ CSM 3170.01 Operation of the J oint Capabilities Integration and Development
System

OTHER DoD DOCUMENTS

DFAR Supplement
252.235-7003
DoD Federal Acquisition Regulations Clause, Frequency
Authorization Act
DoDISS Department of Defense Index of Specifications and Standards
Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D

84

DoD 5010.12-L DoD Acquisition Management Systems and Data Requirements
Control List
DOT&E Memo Policy on Operational Test and Evaluation of Electromagnetic
Environmental Effects and Spectrum Management, 25 Oct 1999
NACSEM 5112 NONSTOP Evaluation Techniques
NSTISSAM
TEMPEST/1-92
Compromising Emanations Laboratory Test Requirements,
Electromagnetics
NSTISSAM
TEMPEST/1-93
Compromising Emanations Field Test Evaluations
NSTISSAM
TEMPEST/2-95
Red/Black Installation Guidelines

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

NTIA Manual Manual of Regulations and Procedures for Federal Radio Frequency
Management

FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION (FAA)

DOT/FAA/CT-89-2 Aircraft Lightning Handbook
FAA Advisory
Circular AC 20/136
Protection of Aircraft Electrical/Electronic Systems Against the
Indirect Effects of Lightning

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION (FCC)

Code of Federal
Regulations (CFR)
47 Part 15
RF Devices
CFR 47 Part 18 Industrial, Scientific and Medical Equipment

OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET (OMB)

OMB Circular A-11 Preparation and Submission of Budget Estimates
A.3 Standards

MILITARY STANDARDS

DoD-STD-1399/070 Interface Standard for Shipboard Systems, DC Magnetic Field
Environment
MIL-STD-188-125 HEMP Protection for Ground Based C4I Facilities Performing
Critical, Time Urgent Missions
MIL-STD-220 Method of Insertion Loss Measurement
Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D

85
MIL-STD-331 Fuze and Fuze Components, Environmental and Performance Tests
for
MIL-STD-449 Test Method Standard, Radio Frequency Spectrum Characteristics,
Measurement of
MIL-STD-461 Interface Standard, Requirements for the Control of Electromagnetic
Interference Characteristics of Subsystems and Equipment
MIL-STD-464 Interface Standard, Electromagnetic Environmental Effects
Requirements for Systems
MIL-STD-469 Interface Standard: Radar Engineering Design Requirements,
Electromagnetic Compatibility
MIL-STD-1310 Standard Practice Document: Shipboard Bonding, Grounding, and
Other Techniques for Electromagnetic Compatibility and Safety
MIL-STD-1377 Effectiveness of Cable, Connector, and Weapon Enclosure Shielding
and Filters in Precluding Hazards of Electromagnetic Radiation to
Ordnance, Measurement of
MIL-STD-1541 Electromagnetic Compatibility Requirements for Space Systems
MIL-STD-1542 Electromagnetic Compatibility and Grounding Requirements for
Space Systems
MIL-STD-1576 Electroexplosive Subsystem Safety Requirements and Test Methods
for Space Systems
MIL-STD-1605 Procedures for Conducting a Shipboard Electromagnetic
Interference (EMI) Survey (Surface Ships)
MIL-STD-1686 Electrostatic Discharge Control Program for Protection of Electrical
and Electronic Parts, Assemblies and Equipment (Excluding
Electrically Initiated Explosive Devices)
MIL-STD-2169 High Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse Environment

AMERICAN NATIONAL STANDARDS INSTITUTE (ANSI)

ANSI/ESD-S20.20 ESD Association Standard for the Development of an Electrostatic
Control Program for Protection of Electrical and Electronic Parts,
Assemblies and Equipment (Excluding Electrically Initiated
Explosive Devices)
ANSI/IEEE C63.011-
2000
Limits and Methods of Measurement of Radio Disturbance
Characteristics of Industrial, Scientific, and Medical (ISM) Radio
Frequency Equipment
ANSI/IEEE C63.022-
1996
Standard for Limits and Methods of Measurement of Radio
Disturbance Characteristics of IT Equipment
ANSI/IEEE C63.2-
1996
Standard for Instrumentation - Electromagnetic Noise and Field
Strength, 10 kHz to 40 GHz - Specifications
Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D

86
ANSI/IEEE C63.4-
2000
Standard for Electromagnetic Compatibility Radio - Noise
Emissions from Low Voltage Electrical and Electronic Equipment
in the Range of 9 kHz to 40 GHz - Methods of Measurement
ANSI/IEEE C63.5-
1998
Standard for Calibration of Antennas Used for Radiated Emission
Measurements in Electromagnetic Interference (EMI) Control
Calibration of Antennas (9 kHz to 40 GHz)
ANSI/IEEE C63.6-
1996
Standard Guide for the Computation of Errors in Open Area Test
Site Measurements
ANSI/IEEE C63.7-
1992
Standard Guide for Construction of Open-Area Test Sites for
Performing Radiated Emission Measurements
ANSI/IEEE C63.12-
1999
Standard for Electromagnetic Compatibility Limits - Recommended
Practice
ANSI/IEEE C63.14-
1995
Standard Dictionary for Technologies of Electromagnetic
Compatibility (EMC), Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP), and
Electrostatic Discharge (ESD)
ANSI/IEEE C63.16-
1993
Standard Guide for Electrostatic Discharge Test Methodologies and
Criteria for Electronic Equipment
ANSI/IEEE C95.1-
1991
Standard for Safety Levels with Respect to Human Exposure to
Radio Frequency Electromagnetic Fields (3 kHz - 300 GHz)
ANSI/IEEE C95.2/
ANS N2.1-1994
Warning Symbol-Radiation Symbol
ANSI/IEEE C95.3-
1972
Radiation, Electromagnetic, Potentially Hazardous, at Microwave
Frequencies, Techniques & Instrumentation for the Measurement of
ANSI/IEEE C95.4-
2002
Recommended Practice for Determining Safe Distances from Radio
Frequency Transmitting Antennas When Using Electric Blasting
Caps During Explosive Operations
ANSI/IEEE C95.6-
2002
Safety Levels With Respect to Human Exposure to Electromagnetic
Fields, 0 to 3 kHz
ANSI/NCSL-Z540-1-
2002
Calibration - Calibration Laboratories and Measuring and Test
Equipment - General Requirements

ELECTROSTATIC DISCHARGE ASSOCIATION

ESD-TR-20.20 Handbook for the Development of an Electrostatic Control
Program for Protection of Electrical and Electronic Parts,
Assemblies, and Equipment

RADIO TECHNICAL COMMITTEE FOR AERONAUTICS (RTCA)

RTCA DO-160 Environmental Conditions and Test Procedures for Airborne
Equipment

Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D

87
SOCIETY OF AUTOMOTIVE ENGINEERS (SAE)

SAE-J 551 Performance Levels and Methods of Measurement of
Electromagnetic Radiation from Vehicles and Devices
SAE-J 1113 Electromagnetic Susceptibility Measurement Procedures for Vehicle
Components (Except Aircraft)
SAE ARP 958D Electromagnetic Interference Measurement Antennas; Standard
Calibration Method
SAE ARP 1173 Test Procedures for Measuring the RF Shielding Characteristics of
EMI Gaskets
SAE-ARP 1870 Aerospace Systems Electrical Bonding and Grounding for
Electromagnetic Compatibility and Safety
SAE ARP 1972 Measurement Practices and Procedures Recommended for
Electromagnetic Compatibility Testing
SAE ARP 4242 Electromagnetic Compatibility Control Requirements Systems
SAE ARP 5412 Aircraft Lightning Environment and Related Test Waveforms
SAE ARP 5413 Certification of Aircraft Electrical/Electronic Systems for the Indirect
Effects of Lightning
SAE ARP 5414 Aircraft Lightning Zoning
SAE ARP 5415A Users Manual for Certification of Aircraft Electrical/Electronic
Systems for the Indirect Effects of Lighting
SAE ARP 5577 Aircraft Lightning Direct Effects Certification

NORTH ATLANTIC TREATY ORGANIZATION (NATO) STANDARD AGREEMENTS
(STANAGS)

ADV-PUB-20/36 Hazards of Electrostatic Discharge to Aircraft Stores
AEP-18 NATO Users Guide to EMP Testing and Simulation
AEP-20 EMP Design and Test Guidelines for Systems in Mobile Shelters
ANEP-45 Electromagnetic Compatibility (EMC) in Composite Vessels
INFO-PUB-20/36A Aircraft/Stores Electromagnetic Compatibility/ Electromagnetic
Interference and Hazards of Electromagnetic Radiation to Ordnance
STANAG 1307 Maximum NATO Naval Operational EME Produced by Radar and
Radio
STANAG 1308 RADHAZ to Ships Personnel During Helicopter (and VSTOL
Aircraft) Operations on Ships Other Than Aircraft Carriers
STANAG 1380 NATO Naval Radio and Radar Radiation Hazards Manual (AECP-2)
STANAG 1397 RADHAZ Classification of Munitions and Weapons Systems
Embodying Electro-Explosive Devices
Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D

88
STANAG 3516 EMC Test Methods for Aerospace Electrical and Electronic
Equipment
STANAG 3614 EMC of Installed Equipment in Aircraft
STANAG 3659 Bonding and In-flight Lightning
STANAG 3682 Electrostatic Safety Connection Procedures for Aviation Fuel
Handling and Liquid Fuel Loading/Unloading Operations During
Ground Transfer and Aircraft Fuelling/Defuelling
STANAG 3731 Bibliography on EMC
STANAG 3856 Protection of Aircraft, Crew and Sub-Systems in Flight against
Electrostatic Charges (AEP-29)
STANAG 3968 NATO Glossary of EM Terminology
STANAG 4234 EM Radiation, 200 kHz 40 GHz, Environment Affecting the
Design of Material for Use By NATO Forces
STANAG 4235 Electrostatic Environmental Conditions Affecting the Design of
Materiel for Use by NATO Forces
STANAG 4236 Lightning Environmental Conditions, Affecting the Design of
Materiel, for Use by the NATO Forces
STANAG 4238 Munition Design Principles, Electrical/Electromagnetic
Environments
STANAG 4239 Electrostatic Discharge, Munitions Test Procedures
STANAG 4327 Lightning, Munition Assessment and Test Procedures
STANAG 4370 Environmental Testing
STANAG 4416 Nuclear Electromagnetic Pulse Testing of Munitions Containing
Electro-Explosive Devices
STANAG 4434 NATO Standard Packaging for Materiel Susceptible to Damage by
Electrostatic Discharge (AEPP-2)
STANAG 4435 EMC Test Procedures and Requirements for Surface Ships (Metallic)
STANAG 4436 EMC Test Procedures and Requirements for Surface Ships (Non-
metallic)
STANAG 4437 EMC Test Procedures and Requirements for Submarines
STANAG 4490 Explosives, Electrostatic Discharge Sensitivity Test(s)
A.4 Data Item Descriptions (DIDs)

DI-EMCS-80157 Suspected RF Radiation Overexposure Report
DI-EMCS-80199B EMI Control Procedures (MIL-STD-461)
DI-EMCS-80200B EMI Test Report (MIL-STD-461)
DI-EMCS-80201B EMI Test Procedures (MIL-STD-461)
DI-EMCS-80217A TEMPEST Assessment Report
DI-EMCS-80218 Request for TEMPEST Test
DI-EMCS-80219 Adverse TEMPEST Impact Statement
DI-EMCS-80220 TEMPEST Inspection Report
DI-EMCS-81295A Electromagnetic Effects Verification Procedures (EMEVP)
Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D

89
DI-EMCS-81528 Electromagnetic Compatibility Program Procedures (EMCPP)
DI-EMCS-81540A E3 Integration and Analysis Report (MIL-STD-464)
DI-EMCS-81541A E3 Verification Procedures (MIL-STD-464)
DI-EMCS-81542A E3 Verification Report (MIL-STD-464)
DI-NUOR-80156 Nuclear Survivability Program Plan
DI-NUOR-80926 Nuclear Survivability Assurance Plan
DI-NUOR-80928 Nuclear Survivability Test Plan
DI-NUOR-80929 Nuclear Survivability Test Report
DI-MISC-81113 Radar Spectrum Management Test Plan (MIL-STD-469)
DI-MISC-81114 Radar Spectrum Management Control Plan (MIL-STD-469)
DI-MISC-81174 Frequency Allocation Data
A.5 Guidance Documents, Handbooks, Specifications, and Studies

MIL-HDBK-235 Electromagnetic (Radiated) Environment Considerations for Design and
Procurement of Electrical and Electronic Equipment, Subsystems and
Systems
MIL-HDBK-240 Hazards of Electromagnetic Radiation to Ordnance (HERO) Test Guide
MIL-HDBK-263 Electrostatic Discharge Control Handbook for Protection of Electrical and
Electronic Parts, Assemblies, and Equipment (Excluding Electrically
Initiated Explosive Devices)
MIL-HDBK-274 Electrical Grounding for Aircraft Safety
MIL-HDBK-293 ECCM Considerations in Radar Systems Acquisitions
MIL-HDBK-294 ECCM Considerations in Naval Communications Systems
MIL-HDBK-335 Management and Design Guidance for EM Radiation Hardness for Air
Launched Ordnance Systems
MIL-HDBK-419 Grounding, Bonding, and Shielding for Electronic Equipment and
Facilities
MIL-HDBK-423 HEMP Protection for Fixed and Transportable Ground Based Facilities
MIL-HDBK-454 Electronic Equipment, General Guidelines for
MIL-HDBK-1568 Materials and Procedures for Corrosion Prevention and Control in
Aerospace Weapons Systems
MIL-HDBK-1857 Grounding, Bonding and Shielding Design Practices
MIL-HDBK-2036 Electronic Equipment Specifications, preparation of
MIL-I-17161 Absorber, Radio Frequency Radiation (Microwave Absorbing Material),
General Specification for
EPS-0178 Results of Detailed Comparisons of Individual EMC Requirements and
Test Procedures Delineated in Major National and International
Commercial Standards with Military Standard MIL-STD-461E

Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D

90
A.6 Service Documents

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY

ADS-37A-PRF Aeronautical Design Standard, E3 Performance and Verification
Requirements (Aviation and Missile Command Report)
AR 5-12 Army Management of the Electromagnetic Spectrum
AR 11-9 The Army Radiation Safety Program
AR 40-6 Policy and Procedures for the Acquisition of Medical Materiel
AR-70-1 Systems Acquisition Policy and Procedures
AR-70-75 Survivability of Army Materiel and Equipment
AR-71-9 Material Objectives and Requirements
AR-73-1 Army Test and Evaluation Policy
DA PAM 70-3 Army Acquisition Procedures
DA PAM 73-2 T&E Master Plan, Procedures and Guidelines
DA PAM 73-3 Critical Operational Issues and Criteria (COIC) Procedures and
Guidelines
FM-11-490-30 Electromagnetic Radiation Hazards
TB 43-0133 Hazard Controls for CECOM Radio Frequency and Optical
Radiation Producing Equipment

TB 43-0129 Safety Requirements for Use of Antenna and Mast Equipment
TR-RD-TE-97-01 EM Effects Criteria and Guidelines for EMRH, EMRO, Lightning
Effects, ESD, EMP and EMI Testing of US Army Missile Systems
(Redstone Technical Test Center Report)

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

SECNAVINST 2410.1 EMC Program Within the Department of the Navy
SECNAVINST 5000.2 Implementation and Mandatory Procedures for Major and Non-
major Acquisition Programs
OPNAVINST 2400.20 Navy Management of the Radio Frequency Spectrum
OPNAVINST 2450.2 EMC Program within the Department of the Navy
OPNAVINST 3960.10 Test and Evaluation
OPNAVINST 5000.42 Research, Development, and Acquisition Procedures
OD 30393 Design Principles and Practices for Controlling Hazards of
Electromagnetic Radiation to Ordnance
Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D

91
OP-3565/NAVAIR 16-1-
529
Volume I - Technical Manual, Electromagnetic Radiation
Hazards (Hazards to Personnel, Fuel, and other Flammable
Material)
Volume II - Technical Manual, Electromagnetic Radiation
Hazards (Hazards to Ordnance)
NAVAIRINST 2450.2

Electromagnetic Environmental Effects (E3) Control Within
The Naval Air Systems Command
NAVAIRWARCEN
INST 2400.1A
Radio Frequency Management
NAVSEAINST 2450.1 Frequency Allocations and Frequency Assignments
NAVSEAINST 2450.2 Electromagnetic Compatibility (EMC)
NAVSEAINST 8020.7C Hazards of Electromagnetic Radiation to Ordnance (HERO)
Safety Program
NAVSEAINST 8020.17 Navy Explosives Hazard Classification Program
NAVSEAINST 8020.19 Electrostatic Discharge Safety Program for Ordnance
NAVSEAINST 9700.2 Integrated Topside Safety and Certification Program for
Surface Ships
NAVSEA S9040-AA-
GTP-010/SSCR
Shipboard Systems Certification Requirements for Surface Ship
Industrial Periods (Non-Nuclear)
NAVSEA S9407-AB-
HDBK-010
Handbook of Shipboard Electromagnetic Shielding Practices

DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE

AFOSH Standard 48-9 Exposure to Radio Frequency Radiation Safety Program
AFI 32-7061 The Environmental Impact Analysis Process
AFI 99-102 Operational Test & Evaluation
AFI 99-106 J oint test and Evaluation
AFMAN 33-140 Radio Frequency Spectrum Management
AFPD 63-1 Acquisition System
AFPD 99-1 Test and Evaluation Process
AFSC DH 1-4 Air Force Systems Command Design Handbook, EMC
TO 31Z-10-4 Electromagnetic Radiation Management

MARINE CORPS SYSTEMS COMMAND (MARCORSYSCOM)

MCO 2400.2 Marine Corps Management of the Radio Frequency Spectrum
MCO 2410.2 Electromagnetic Environmental Effects Control Program
MCO 5104.2 Marine Corps Radio Frequency Electromagnetic Field
Personnel Protection Program
Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D

92
A.7 Specific Regulations, Directives and Instructions Affecting Policy

Federal and DoD regulations exist, as well as DoD directives and instructions, which set the E3/SS
policies with regard to the acquisition and fielding of military C-E equipment. The following
paragraphs summarize the policies established by these documents.
A.7.1 Federal
A.7.1.1 Code of Federal Regulations

TITLE 47, CHAPTER I, PART 2, Subpart B, Section 2.103 provides regulations pertaining
to Government use of non-Government frequencies.

CHAPTER III, PART 300, indicates that Federal Agencies shall comply with the
requirements set forth in the NTIA Manual, which is incorporated by reference with
approval of the Director, Office of the Federal Register, in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a)
and 1 CFR part 51.
A.7.1.2 OMB Circular A-11

Part 2 states that the NTIA Department of Commerce must provide a certification by that the RF
required is available before estimates are submitted for the development or procurement of major
communications-electronics systems, including all systems employing space satellite techniques.
A.7.1.3 NTIA Manual of Regulations & Procedures for Federal Radio Frequency
Management

The entire NTIA manual is devoted to minimum Federal standards, regulations, and procedures for
RF management. It is available on: www.ntia.doc.gov/osmhome/redbook/redbook.html.
A.7.2 DoD
A.7.2.1 DFAR Supplement 252.235-7003

This document requires specific clauses in solicitations and contracts for developing, producing,
constructing, testing, or operating a device requiring a frequency authorization. The clauses
require contractors to obtain authorization for RF needed in support of the contract and associated
procedures.
A.7.2.2 DoDD 5000.1

This directive provides management principles and mandatory policies and procedures for
managing all acquisition programs. It requires acquisition managers to provide U.S. Forces with
systems and families of systems that are interoperable and compatible with the EM spectrum
environment.
Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D

93
A.7.2.3 DoDI 5000.2

This instruction establishes a simplified and flexible management framework for translating
mission needs and technology opportunities, based on approved mission needs and requirements,
into stable, affordable, and well-managed acquisition programs that include weapon systems and
automated information systems. It notes that interoperability is a key attributes of systems. The
instruction cites spectrum certification compliance as a statutory requirement that must be met at
Milestone B or Milestone C (if no MS B).for systems/equipment that require utilization of the EM
spectrum.
A.7.2.4 Defense Acquisition Guidebook (replaced DoDR 5000.2-R)

The guide notes the following, as related to E3 and SS:

SS and E3 must be considered throughout the acquisition process to ensure the subsequent
successful operation of spectrum-dependent systems in support of the warfighter.
Actions must be taken by PMs in each acquisition phase to achieve and demonstrate
effective and compatible operation.
Guidance is provided to PMs to ensure that E3 requirements are addressed in program
documentation that the applicable EME is defined and updated, and that E3 performance
requirements are established and met.
A.7.2.5 DoDD 3222.3

This document establishes the DoD E3 Program. It provides policies and responsibilities to ensure
mutual EMC and effective E3 control among ground, air, sea, and space-based systems,
subsystems, and equipment, including ordnance. The directive requires E3 control requirements to
be defined early during the concept and technology development process and included in the
pertinent acquisition documentation (such as the CDD, CPD, ISP, TEMP, SOW, and contract
specification) and verified throughout the acquisition process. A companion instruction is being
prepared at the time of publication of this guide that will provide responsibilities and procedures
for controlling E3.
A.7.2.6 DoDD 4630.5

This directive updates policy and responsibilities for interoperability and supportability of IT and
NSS. It defines a capability-focused, effects-based approach to advance IT and NSS
interoperability and supportability across the DoD. The directive establishes the NR-KPP to assess
net-ready attributes required for both the technical exchange of information and the end-to-end
operational effectiveness of that exchange. The NR-KPP replaces the Interoperability KPP and
incorporates net-centric concepts for achieving IT and NSS interoperability and supportability.
The directive requires that IT and NSS interoperability and supportability needs shall be
managed, evaluated, and reported over the life of the system using an ISP.
A.7.2.7 DoDI 4630.8

This instruction implements policies and requirements for ensuring interoperability and support-
Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D

94
ability of IT and NSS. Requirements are to be documented, coordinated, verified, and approved to
achieve interoperability and supportability, including ensuring SM, consideration of SS, and E3
control. NR-KPP assessments should include SS and E3 as part of the assessment.
A.7.2.8 DoDD 4650.1

This directive updates the policy and responsibilities for EM spectrum management and use by the
DoD. The directive states that a DoD component developing or acquiring spectrum-dependent
equipment or systems shall make a written determination, with the concurrence of the DoD or
Component Chief Information Officer, that there is reasonable assurance of SS. Efforts to obtain
SS for spectrum-dependent equipment or systems being developed shall be initiated as early as
possible during the Technology Development Phase. In addition, no spectrum-dependent item
being developed shall proceed into the SDD phase without such a SS determination unless specific
authorization to proceed is granted by the Milestone Decision Authority. Furthermore, no
spectrum-dependent equipment shall proceed into the Production and Deployment Phase without
such a SS determination unless specific authorization to proceed is granted by the Under Secretary
of Defense for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics or a waiver is granted by the ASD(NII).
The directive goes on to say that no spectrum-dependent off-the-shelf or other NDI shall be
purchased or procured without such a SS determination. This directive assigns responsibilities to
the DoD Components for the use of the EM spectrum in DoD, including ESC, host nation
coordination, and SS.
A.7.2.9 CJCSI 3170.01

This instruction establishes policies and procedures for the J CIDS process, and its relation to the
acquisition decisions. It provides guidance for the preparation, review, and approval of J CIDS
documents such as ICDs, including the Mission Area ICD, CDDs, and CPDs including
interoperability and supportability certifications. It requires HERO, E3, and SS be addressed in all
documents.
A.7.2.10 CJCSM 3170.01

This manual sets forth guidelines and procedures for operation of the J CIDS regarding the
development and staffing of J CIDS documents. Guidance on the conduct of J CIDS analyses, the
development of key performance parameters and the J CIDS staffing process are provided in this
manual. This manual also contains procedures and instructions regarding the staffing and
development of ICDs, including the Mission Area ICD, CDDs, and CPDs. HERO, E3, and SS are
to be addressed in all documents.
A.7.2.11 CJCSI 6212.01

CJ CSI 6212.01 establishes policies and procedures for the J -6 interoperability requirements and
supportability certification and validation of J CIDS ACAT programs and for all non-ACAT and
fielded systems. It provides guidance for the development and certification of ISPs as well as
ICDs, CDDs, and CPDs. Furthermore, the instruction indicates that the J -6 Interoperability
Certification includes conformance with J oint NSS and ITS policies, which includes the
requirement to be mutually compatible with systems in the EME and not be degraded below
Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D

95
operational performance requirements due to E3. It further requires all proposed NSS and ITS
systems that include spectrum-dependent hardware document spectrum certification of the
hardware. Commercial and non-developmental items must also comply with DoD policies on E3
and SS. The instruction also provides details for the development of NR-KPPs.
A.7.2.12 DOT&E E3 Policy Memo

This memo dated 25 October 1999 provided policy for DOT&E, OTAs, and PMs. The memo
defined the role of OT&E in identifying potentially adverse E3 and spectrum availability
situations.
Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D

96














This page left intentionally blank.
Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D

97











APPENDIX B




ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS



Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D

98
B.1 General

This appendix contains acronyms and abbreviations used throughout this handbook.
B.2 Acronyms and Abbreviations

AATF Aircraft Anechoic Test Facility
ACAT Acquisition Category
ACETEF Air Combat Environment Test and Evaluation Facility
ACTD Advanced Concept Technology Demonstration
AESOP Afloat Electromagnetic Spectrum Operations Program
AFB Air Force Base
AFC Area Frequency Coordinator
AFFMA Air Force Frequency Management Agency
AFFTC Air Force Flight Test Center
AFRL Air Force Research Laboratories
ANSI American National Standards Institute
AoA Analysis of Alternatives
APB Acquisition Program Baseline
ARAPP All Region All Platform Propagation
ARDEC Armaments Research, Development, and Engineering Center
ARL Army Research Laboratory
ASD(NII) Assistant Secretary of Defense for Networks and Information Integration
ASIL Advanced Systems Integration Laboratory
ASR Alternative System Review
ATC Aberdeen Test Center
ATD Advanced Technology Demonstration
ATEC Army Test and Evaluation Command
C4I Command, Control, Communications, Computers, and Intelligence
C4ISR C4I, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance
CAE Component Acquisition Executive
CCEB Combined Communications-Electronics Board
CDD Capability Development Document
CDR Critical Design Review
CDRL Contract Data Requirements List
C-E Communications-Electronics
CECOM Communication and Electronics Command
CE Mark Indication of Compliance With European Directives
CENELEC European Committee for Electrotechnical Standardization
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
CI Commercial Item
CIO Chief Information Officer
CISPR International Special Committee on Radio Interference
CJ CSI Chairman of J oint Chiefs of Staff Instruction
CJ CSM Chairman of J oint Chiefs of Staff Manual
CNO Chief of Naval Operations
Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D

99
COCOM Combat Command
COSAM Cosite Analysis Model
CPD Capability Production Document
CPM Communications Planning Module
CRD Capstone Requirements Document
CW Continuous Wave
DID Data Item Description
DISA Defense Information Systems Agency
DoD Department of Defense
DoDD Department of Defense Directive
DoDI Department of Defense Instruction
DoDISS Department of Defense Index of Specifications and Standards
DOT&E Director, Operational Test and Evaluation
DOTMLPF

Doctrine, Organization, Training, Materiel, Leadership and Education,
Personnel, and Facilities
DSO Defense Spectrum Office
DT&E Developmental Test and Evaluation
E3 Electromagnetic Environmental Effects
EDM Engineering Development Model
EED Electro-Explosive Device
EID Electrically Initiated Device
EM Electromagnetic
EMC Electromagnetic Compatibility
EMCAP Electromagnetic Compatibility Analysis Program
EME Electromagnetic Environment
EMEGS Electromagnetic Environment Generating System
EMENG Electromagnetic Engineering System
EMI Electromagnetic Interference
EMP Electromagnetic Pulse
EMR Electromagnetic Radiation
EMV Electromagnetic Vulnerability
EP Electronic Protection
EPG Electronic Proving Ground
EPS Engineering Practice Study
ESC Equipment Spectrum Certification
ESD Electrostatic Discharge
ESGPWG Equipment Spectrum Guidance Permanent Working Group`
EU European Union
EW Electronic Warfare
FAA Federal Aviation Administration
FAAT First Article Acceptance Test
FCC Federal Communications Commission
FMO Frequency Management Office
FOC Final Operating Capability
FoS Family of Systems
FRP Full-Rate Production
GATE Graphical Analysis Tool for EMEs
HEMP High Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse
Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D

100
HERF Hazards of Electromagnetic Radiation to Fuel
HERO Hazards of Electromagnetic Radiation to Ordnance
HERP Hazards of Electromagnetic Radiation to Personnel
HIRF High Intensity Radio Frequency
HNA Host Nation Approval
ICD Initial Capabilities Document
IEC International Electrotechnical Commission
IEEE Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers
IMI Intermodulation Interference
IOC Initial Operating Capability
IPT Integrated Product Team
IRAC Interdepartment Radio Advisory Committee
ISO International Organization for Standardization
ISP Information Support Plan
IT Information Technology
ITR Initial Technical Review
ITS Information Technology System
ITU International Telecommunications Union
J CIDS J oint Capabilities Integration and Development System
J CS J oint Chiefs of Staff
J EET J oint E3 Evaluation Tool
J FP J oint Frequency Panel
J OERAD J SC Ordnance E3 Risk Assessment Database
J ROC J oint Requirements Oversight Council
J SC J oint Spectrum Center
J TIDS J oint Tactical Information Distribution System
KPP Key Performance Parameter
LFT&E Live-Fire Test and Evaluation
LRIP Low-Rate Initial Production
M&S Modeling and Simulation
MAE Maximum Allowable Environment
MARCORSYSCOM Marine Corps Systems Command
MCEB Military Communications Electronic Board
MDA Milestone Decision Authority
MIDLANT AFC Mid-Atlantic Area Frequency Coordinator
MNS Mission Need Statement
MOE Measures of Effectiveness
MOP Measures of Performance
MS Milestone
NATO North Atlantic Treaty Organization
NAVAIR Naval Air Systems Command
NERF Naval Electromagnetic Radiation Facility
NMCSC Navy and Marine Corps Spectrum Center
NAVSEA Naval Sea Systems Command
NAWCAD Naval Air Warfare Center, Aircraft Division
NDI Non Developmental Items
NR-KPP Net-Ready Key Performance Parameter
NRL Naval Research Laboratory
Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D

101
NSS National Security Systems
NSWCDD Naval Surface Warfare Center, Dahlgren Division
NTIA National Telecommunications and Information Administration
NUWC NPT Naval Undersea Warfare Center Newport
OATS Open Area Test Site
OIPT Overarching Integrated Product Team
OMB Office of Management and Budget
ORD Operational Requirements Document
OSD Office of the Secretary of Defense
OT&E Operational Test and Evaluation
OTA Operational Test Agency
OTRR Operational Test Readiness Review
PCR Physical Configuration Review
PDR Preliminary Design Review
PM Program Manager
PRIMES Preflight Integration of Munitions and Electronic Systems
P-Static Precipitation Static
RADHAZ Radiation Hazards
RCS Radar Cross Section
RF Radio Frequency
RR Readiness Review
RTCA Radio Technical Commission for Aeronautics
RTTC Redstone Technical Test Center
SAE Society of Automotive Engineers
SCS DMR Spectrum Certification System Data Maintenance and Retrieval
SDD System Development and Demonstration
SE System Engineering
SFR System Functional Review
SM Spectrum Management
SoS System of Systems
SOW Statement of Work
SPAWAR Space and Naval Warfare Systems Command
SPS Spectrum Planning Subcommittee
SRR System Requirements Review
SS Spectrum Supportability
SSC SPAWAR Systems Center
STANAG NATO Standardization Agreement
SVAD Survivability, Vulnerability, and Assessment Directorate
SVR/PRR System Verification Review/Production Readiness Review
T&E Test and Evaluation
TACOM Tank Automotive Command
TC Technical Committee
TDS Technology Development Study
TEMP Test and Evaluation Master Plan
TOA Table of Allocations
TRR Test Readiness Review
U.S. United States
USD (AT&L) Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics
Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D

102
USMC United States Marine Corps
V/m Volts per meter
WIPT Working Level Integrated Product Team
WRC World Radio Conference
WSMR White Sands Missile Range






Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D

103




APPENDIX C


OVERVIEW

OF THE

ACQUISITION SYSTEM
Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D

104
CONTENTS


Paragraph Page

C.1 Introduction........................................................................................................................ 106
C.1.1 Overview................................................................................................................. 106
C.1.2 J oint Vision 2020.................................................................................................... 106
C.1.3 Transforming the DoD............................................................................................ 106
C.1.4 Acquisition Streamlining and Reforms................................................................... 107
C.1.4.1 Advanced Concept Technology Demonstrations (ACTDs)............................. 107
C.1.4.2 Commercial Items and Practices...................................................................... 107
C.1.4.3 Evolutionary Acquisitions................................................................................ 107
C.1.4.4 Performance-based Services Acquisition......................................................... 108
C.1.4.5 Specifications and Standards Reform.............................................................. 108
C.2 Determining J oint Warfighter Needs................................................................................. 108
C.2.1 Technological Opportunities and User Needs......................................................... 109
C.2.1.1 Advanced Technology Demonstrations (ATDs)/Advanced Concept
Technology Demonstrations (ACTDs)110
C.2.1.2 J oint Warfighting Experiments........................................................................ 110
C.2.2 Defense Acquisition Framework............................................................................. 110
C.2.2.1 Pre-Systems Acquisition.................................................................................. 110
C.2.2.1.1 Concept Refinement...................................................................................110
C.2.2.1.2 Technology Development..........................................................................110
C.2.2.2 Systems Acquisition......................................................................................... 111
C.2.2.2.1 Milestone B................................................................................................111
C.2.2.2.2 System Development and Demonstration Phase........................................111
C.2.2.2.3 Milestone C................................................................................................112
C.2.2.2.4 Production and Deployment Phase............................................................112
C.2.2.2.5 Operations and Support Phase....................................................................113
C.3 Key Activities..................................................................................................................... 113
C.3.1 Pre-Acquisition Technology Projects...................................................................... 114
C.3.2 Initial Capabilities Document (ICD)....................................................................... 114
C.3.3 Capstone Requirements Document (CRD)............................................................. 114
C.3.4 Capability Development Document (CDD)............................................................ 115
C.3.5 Capability Production Document (CPD)................................................................. 115
C.3.6 Information Support Plan (ISP)............................................................................... 115
C.3.7 Integrated Product Teams (IPTs) ............................................................................ 116
C.3.7.1 Overarching IPTs (OIPTs)............................................................................... 116
C.3.7.2 Working Level IPTs (WIPTs).......................................................................... 116
C.3.8 Test Planning........................................................................................................... 116
C.3.8.1 Test and Evaluation Master Plan (TEMP) ....................................................... 117
C.3.8.1.1 Key Performance Parameters (KPPs) ........................................................117
C.3.9 Procurement Activities............................................................................................ 117
C.3.9.1 Performance Specifications.............................................................................. 118
C.3.9.2 Statement of Work (SOW)............................................................................... 118
Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D

105
C.3.9.3 Contract Data Requirements List (CDRLs)..................................................... 118
C.3.9.4 Commercial Items and Non-Developmental Items (CI/NDI).......................... 118

FIGURE

FIGURE C-1 The New 5000 Model109



Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D

106
C.1 Introduction

This Appendix provides an overview of the DoD acquisition system. Information contained herein
is based on the policies and procedures of DoDD 5000.1, DoDI 5000.2, CJ CSI 3170.01, and
6212.01 and CJ CSM 3170.01. It is designed to be an introduction to the world of defense systems
acquisition management. It focuses on DoD-wide management policies and procedures, not on the
details of any specific defense system. It is included in this handbook so that E3/SM engineers
will have sufficient information on the acquisition process so that their requirements can be
incorporated into the PMs tasks and associated documents at appropriate points during the
acquisition life cycle. Information in this appendix is based on numerous source documents many
of which are available on internet sites such as www.dau.mil.
C.1.1 Overview

The Defense Acquisition System exists to manage DoDs investments in technologies, programs,
and product support necessary to achieve the National Security Strategy and support the U.S.
Armed Forces. The investment strategy of the DoD supports not only todays force, but also
future forces. The primary objective of defense acquisition is to acquire quality products that
satisfy user needs with measurable improvements to mission capability and operational support, in
a timely manner, and at a fair and reasonable price.
C.1.2 Joint Vision 2020

J oint Vision is the Chairman of the J oint Chiefs of Staffs conceptual blueprint for future military
operations. J oint Vision 2020, the latest version of the J oint Vision, provides a foundation for
broad support of the revolution in military affairs through the creation and exploitation of
information superiority. Central to the Chairmans vision, the concept of full-spectrum
dominance is achieved through the interdependent application of four operational concepts -
dominant maneuver, precision engagement, focused logistics, and full-dimensional protection.
Together, these four concepts provide J oint warfighters the means to fulfill their primary purpose -
victory in war - as well as the capability to dominate an opponent across the full range of military
operations. Achieving full-spectrum dominance also means building an integrated, complex set of
systems, especially a command, control, communications, computers, intelligence, surveillance,
and reconnaissance architecture. To fulfill the Chairmans vision and the Military Service Chiefs
companion vision, the research, development, and acquisition of future systems will be a challenge
for the defense acquisition system.
C.1.3 Transforming the DoD

The war on terrorism has shown that future threats to our national security may come from many
diverse areas - domestic and international terrorists, computer hackers, state-sponsored sub-
national groups, nation-states, and others. To help prepare for an uncertain and dangerous future,
the Transformation Planning Guidance for DoD provides a strategy for transforming how we
fight, how we do business, and how we work with others. The guidance stated by the Secretary
of Defense is that:
Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D

107
Transformation is necessary to ensure U.S. forces continue to operate from a
position of overwhelming military advantage in support of strategic objectives.
We cannot afford to react to threats slowly or have large forces tied down for
lengthy periods. Our strategy requires transformed forces that can take action
from a forward position and, rapidly reinforced from other areas, defeat
adversaries swiftly and decisively while conducting an active defense of U.S.
territory.

A priority for the transformation of DoD is the streamlining of the acquisition process. The latest
acquisition policies and procedures provide insight on the implementation of evolutionary
acquisitions and spiral developments to reduce cycle time and field an initial increment of
warfighting capability as fast as possible.
C.1.4 Acquisition Streamlining and Reforms

Given the changes in the threat and the fast pace of technological advances in the commercial
market, DoD fundamentally has had to change the way it acquired systems. It has to be more
efficient and effective in acquiring goods faster, better, and cheaper. The following initiatives,
though not all-inclusive, capture the essence of the major thrusts of acquisition streamlining within
the DoD:
C.1.4.1 Advanced Concept Technology Demonstrations (ACTDs)

To provide opportunities to try out mature technology directly with the warfighters, advanced
concept technology demonstrations allow operational forces to experiment with new technology in
the field to evaluate potential changes to doctrine, operational concepts, tactics, modernization
plans, and training. Following a successful advanced concept technology demonstration, the
system may enter the acquisition process at whatever point good judgment dictates.
C.1.4.2 Commercial Items and Practices

Maximizing the use of CI takes advantage of the innovation offered by the commercial
marketplace and ensures access to the latest technology and a broader vendor base. DoD is also
encouraging defense contractors to move to commercial practices that will enhance their global
competitiveness. The goal is to establish partnerships with industry to create advanced products
and systems with common technological bases and to allow production of low-volume defense-
unique items on the same lines with high-volume commercial items.
C.1.4.3 Evolutionary Acquisitions

This is the preferred strategy for the rapid acquisition of mature technology for the user. An
evolutionary approach delivers capability in militarily useful increments and recognizes, up front,
the need for future capability improvements. The objective is to balance needs and available
capability with resources and to put capability into the hands of the user quickly.
Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D

108
C.1.4.4 Performance-based Services Acquisition

As services become an increasingly significant element of what DoD buys, steps are being taken to
ensure they are acquired effectively and efficiently. Service requirements must be stated using
results required and not methods for performance of the work.
C.1.4.5 Specifications and Standards Reform

In mid-1994, Secretary of Defense Perry approved a new major policy for use of specifications and
standards for defense systems acquisition contracts. In this policy, the first choice is the use of
performance specifications. Design-specific specifications and standards were to be authorized
only as a last resort, and their use requires a waiver.
C.2 Determining Joint Warfighter Needs

This section focuses on a capabilities-based approach to identifying current and future gaps in the
ability to carry out J oint warfighting missions and functions. The current process is called the
J oint Capabilities Integration and Development System (J CIDS). In 2003, J CIDS replaced the
Requirements Generation System used for many decades. J CIDS involves an analysis of Doctrine,
Organization, Training, Materiel, Leadership, Personnel and Facilities (DOTMLPF) in an
integrated, collaborative process to define gaps in warfighting capabilities and propose solutions.
CJ CSI 3170.01 provides the policy and top-level description of J CIDS. The details for action
officers who will be performing the day-to-day work of identifying, describing, and justifying
warfighting capabilities are provided by CJ CSM 3170.01.

J CIDS produces information for decision-makers on the projected needs of the warfighter. There
are a number of key requirements documents used in the acquisition process. They promote a
consistent approach to stating the requirements. Requirements are generated in many different
ways: they are stated or derived; they are interrelated and interdependent; and, they must be
traceable throughout. As stated in CJ CSI 6212.01, requirements documents, such as the Initial
Capabilities Document (ICD), Capstone Requirements Document (CRD), Capability Development
Document (CDD), and Capability Production Document (CPD), must address National Security
Systems (NSS) and Information Technology Systems (ITS) policies in DoDD 4630.5 and DoDI
4630.8, including those for E3 and SS. These documents are discussed later in this appendix.
They are to be considered in the context of the overall Defense acquisition management
framework, as defined in DoDI 5000.2 and depicted in Figure C-1.

PMs may tailor or streamline this model to the maximum extent possible, consistent with technical
risk, to provide new systems to the warfighter as fast as possible. The process provides for
multiple entry points consistent with a programs technical maturity, validated requirements, and
funding. Entrance criteria for each phase of the life cycle guide the Milestone Decision Authority
(MDA) in determining the appropriate point for a program to enter the acquisition process. The
life cycle process consists of periods of time called phases separated by decision points called
milestones. Some phases are divided into two efforts separated by program reviews. These
milestones and other decision points provide the PM and MDA the framework with which to
review acquisition programs, monitor and administer progress, identify problems, and make
Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D

109
corrections. The MDA will approve entrance into the appropriate phase or effort of the acquisition
process by signing an Acquisition Decision Memorandum upon completion of a successful
decision review. The life cycle of a program begins with planning to satisfy a mission needs






FIGURE C-1. The New 5000 Model.

before the program officially begins. Program initiation normally occurs at Milestone B. The life
cycle process takes the program through research, development, production, deployment, support,
upgrade, and finally, demilitarization and disposal. The Initial Operational Capability (IOC) is that
point at which a selected number of operational forces have received the new system and are
capable of conducting and supporting warfighting operations. This appendix provides a brief
review of each of the phases, milestones, and other decision reviews. Each program structure must
be based on that programs unique set of requirements and available technology. The process of
adjusting the life cycle to fit a particular set of programmatic circumstances is often referred to as
tailoring. The number of phases, key activities, and decision points are tailored by the program
manager based on an objective assessment of the programs technical maturity and risks and the
urgency of the mission need.
C.2.1 Technological Opportunities and User Needs

The Defense Science and Technology Program identifies and explores technological opportunities
within DoD. The aim is to provide the user with innovative war-winning capabilities and reduce
the risk associated with promising technologies before they are introduced into the acquisition
system. Several mechanisms are available to facilitate the transition of innovative concepts and
superior technology to the acquisition process: (1) Advanced Technology Demonstrations (ATDs)/
Advanced Concept Technology Demonstrations (ACTDs), and (2) J oint Warfighting Experiments.
U UN NC CL LA AS SS SI IF FI IE E
D D
U UN NC CL LA AS SS SI IF FI IE E
D D
IOC

A
Concept &
Tech Development
System Development
& Demonstration
Production & Deployment
Pre-Systems
Acquisition
Systems Acquisition
(Demonstration, Engineering
Development, LRIP & Production)
Operations
& Support
Sustainment
Technology Opportunities
& User Needs
Concept
Exploration
Technology
Development
System
Integration
System
Demonstration
LRIP Full-Rate Prod
&Deployment
Critical
Design
Review
FRP
Decision
Review
Sustainment Disposal
FOC
Initial Capabilities
Document (ICD)
Capability
Development
Document (CDD)
Validated and
approved by
operational
validation
Process entry at Milestones A, B, or C
Entrance criteria met before entering
phases
Evolutionary Acquisition or Single
Step to Full Capability
Capability
Production
Document (CPD)
B C
Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D

110
C.2.1.1 Advanced Technology Demonstrations (ATDs)/Advanced Concept Technology
Demonstrations (ACTDs)

ATDs are used to demonstrate technical maturity and the potential for enhanced military capability
or cost effectiveness. They are subject to oversight and review at the Service or Component level.
An ATD can become the basis for a new acquisition program or for the insertion of new
technology into an existing program. ACTDs are used to demonstrate the military utility of a
proven technology and to develop the concept of operations for the system to be demonstrated.
Consequently, these demonstrations are typically funded and engineered to endure up to two years
of service in the field before entering the acquisition process. Oversight and review of ACTDs is
performed at the Office of the Secretary of Defense and the J oint Staff levels.
C.2.1.2 Joint Warfighting Experiments

J oint Warfighting Experiments, such as the warfighting experiments conduced by the military
services and the J oint Forces Command, are used to develop and assess concept-based hypotheses
to identify and recommend the best value-added solutions for changes to doctrine, organizational
structure, training and education, materiel, leadership, and people required to achieve significant
advances in future J oint operational capabilities. They are also subject to oversight and review at
the Military Department headquarters, and the Office of the Secretary of Defense and J oint Staff.
C.2.2 Defense Acquisition Framework
C.2.2.1 Pre-Systems Acquisition

Pre-systems acquisition is composed of activities in development of user needs, in science and
technology, and in technology development work specific to the refinement of materiel solution(s)
identified in the approved ICD. Two phases comprise pre-systems acquisition: Concept
Refinement and Technology Development.
C.2.2.1.1 Concept Refinement

Concept refinement begins with a Concept Decision by the MDA. During this phase a Technology
Development Strategy (TDS) is developed to help guide the efforts during the next phase,
Technology Development. Also, a study called an Analysis of Alternatives (AoA) is conducted to
refine the selected concept documented in the approved ICD. To achieve the best possible system
solution, Concept Refinement places emphasis on innovation and competition and on existing
commercial off-the-shelf and other solutions drawn from a diversified range of large and small
businesses. Concept Refinement ends when the MDA approves the preferred solution supported
by the AoA and approves the associated TDS.
C.2.2.1.2 Technology Development

Technology Development begins after a Milestone A decision by the MDA approving the TDS.
The ICD and TDS guide the work during Technology Development. A favorable Milestone A
decision normally does not mean that a new acquisition program has been initiated. For
shipbuilding, however, programs may be initiated at the beginning of Technology Development.
Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D

111
The purpose of this phase is to reduce technology risk and to determine the appropriate set of
technologies to be integrated into a full system. During Technology Development a series of
technology demonstrations may be conducted to help the user and the developer agree on an
affordable, militarily useful solution based on mature technology. The project is ready to leave
this phase when the technology for an affordable increment of a militarily useful capability has
been demonstrated in a relevant environment
C.2.2.2 Systems Acquisition
C.2.2.2.1 Milestone B

Milestone B will normally be program initiation for defense acquisition programs. For ship-
building programs, the lead ship in a class of ships is also approved at Milestone B. Each
increment of an evolutionary acquisition will have its own Milestone B. Before making a decision,
the MDA will confirm that technology is mature enough for systems-level development to begin,
the appropriate document from the J CIDS has been approved, and funds are in the budget and the
out-year program for all current and future efforts necessary to carry out the acquisition strategy.
At Milestone B, the MDA approves the acquisition strategy and the acquisition program baseline
and authorizes entry into the System Development and Demonstration (SDD) Phase.
C.2.2.2.2 System Development and Demonstration Phase

Entrance criteria for this phase are technology (including software) maturity, funding, and an
approved J CIDS document - the CDD. Programs that enter the acquisition process for the first
time at Milestone B must have an ICD and a CDD. Unless there is some overriding factor, the
maturity of the technology will determine the path to be followed by the program. A program
entering at Milestone B must have a system architecture (defined set of subsystems making up the
system) and an operational architecture (description of how this system interacts with other
systems to include passing of data). The efforts of this phase are guided by the Key Performance
Parameters (KPPs) found in the approved CDD and in the Acquisition Program Baseline (APB).
The APB establishes program goals, called thresholds and objectives, for cost, schedule, and
performance parameters that describe the program over its life cycle. This phase typically contains
two efforts: Systems Integration and Systems Demonstration. A Design Readiness Review takes
place at the end of Systems Integration.

Systems Integration. A program enters System Integration when the program manager has
a technical solution for the system, but the component subsystems have not yet been
integrated into a complete system. This effort typically includes the demonstration of
prototype articles or engineering development models, sometimes in a competitive fly-
off. A program leaves System Integration after prototypes have been demonstrated in a
relevant environment (such as a first flight or interoperable data flow across system
boundaries), the system configuration has been documented, and a successful Design
Readiness Review has been completed. The Design Readiness Review provides an
opportunity for a mid-phase assessment of design maturity as evidenced by measures such
as the number of design reviews successfully completed; the percentage of drawings
completed; planned corrective actions to hardware/software deficiencies; adequate
developmental testing; and an assessment of environment, safety, and occupational health
Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D

112
risks; and so forth. Successful completion of the Design Readiness Review ends System
Integration and continues the SDD phase into the System Demonstration effort.

Systems Demonstration. This effort is intended to demonstrate the ability of the system to
operate in a useful way consistent with the approved KPPs. The program enters System
Demonstration when the PM has demonstrated the system in prototypes. This effort ends
when the system is demonstrated (using prototypes in its intended environment); measured
satisfactorily against the KPPs; and determined to meet or exceed exit criteria and
Milestone C entrance requirements. Industrial capabilities must also be reasonably
available. Developmental test and evaluation is conducted to assess technical progress
against critical technical parameters, and operational assessments are conducted to
demonstrate readiness for production. The completion of this phase is dependent on a
MDA decision to commit the program to production at Milestone C or to end the effort.
C.2.2.2.3 Milestone C

The MDA makes the decision to commit the DoD to production at Milestone C. Milestone C
authorizes entry into Low Rate Initial Production (LRIP) or into production or procurement for
systems that do not require LRIP. Milestone C authorizes limited deployment in support of
operational testing for major automated information systems or software-intensive systems with no
production components. If Milestone C is LRIP approval, a subsequent review and decision
authorizes full rate production.
C.2.2.2.4 Production and Deployment Phase

The purpose of this phase is to achieve an operational capability that satisfies mission needs.
OT&E determines the effectiveness and suitability of the system. Entrance into this phase depends
on acceptable performance in DT&E, and operational assessment; mature software capability; no
significant manufacturing risks; manufacturing processes under control (if Milestone C is full rate
production); an approved ICD (if Milestone C is program initiation); an approved CPD; acceptable
interoperability; acceptable operational supportability; and demonstration that the system is
affordable throughout the life cycle, optimally funded, and properly phased for rapid acquisition.
For most defense acquisition programs, Production and Deployment has two major efforts: LRIP
and Full Rate Production and Deployment. It also includes a Full Rate Production Decision
Review.

LRIP. This effort is intended to result in completion of manufacturing development to
ensure adequate and efficient manufacturing capability; produce the minimum quantity
necessary to provide production or production-representative articles for Initial OT&E;
establish an initial production base for the system; and permit an orderly increase in the
production rate sufficient to lead to full rate production upon successful completion of
operational and, where applicable, live-fire testing. The MDA determines the LRIP
quantity at Milestone B. LRIP is not applicable to automated information systems or
software-intensive systems with no developmental hardware; however, a limited
deployment phase may be applicable. LRIP for ships and satellites is the production of
items at the minimum quantity and rate that is feasible and that preserves the mobilization
production base for that system. Before granting a favorable Full Rate Production Decision
Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D

113
Review, the MDA considers initial OT&E and live fire test and evaluation results (if
applicable); demonstrated interoperability; supportability; cost and manpower estimates;
and command, control, communications, computer, and intelligence supportability and
certification (if applicable). A favorable Full Rate Production Decision authorizes the
program to proceed into the Full Rate Production and Deployment portion of the
Production and Deployment Phase.

Full Rate Production and Deployment. The system is produced and delivered to the field
for operational use. During this phase, the PM must ensure that systems are produced at an
economical rate and deployed in accordance with the users requirement to meet the initial
operational capability requirement specified in the CPD. Follow-on OT&E may also be
conducted, if appropriate, to confirm operational effectiveness and suitability or verify the
correction of deficiencies. Operations and support begins as soon as the first systems are
fielded or deployed; therefore, the Production and Deployment Phase overlaps the next
phase - Operations and Support.
C.2.2.2.5 Operations and Support Phase

During this phase full operational capability is achieved, each element of logistics support (supply,
maintenance, training, technical data, support equipment) is evaluated, and operational readiness is
assessed. Logistics and readiness concerns dominate this phase. The supportability concept may
rely on a Government activity, a commercial vendor, or a combination of both to provide support
over the life of the system. System status is monitored to ensure the system continues to meet the
users needs. The operations and support phase includes sustainment and disposal.

Sustainment. Sustainment includes supply, maintenance, transportation, sustaining
engineering, configuration management, data management, manpower, personnel, training,
habitability, survivability, environment, safety (including explosives safety), occupational
health, protection of critical program information, anti-tamper provisions, and IT and NSS
supportability and interoperability. The PM works with the users to document performance
and support requirements in performance agreements specifying objective outcomes,
measures, resource commitments, and stakeholder responsibilities. System modifications
are made, as necessary, to improve performance and reduce ownership costs. Product
improvement programs or service life extension programs may be initiated as a result of
experience with the systems in the field. During deployment and throughout operational
support, the potential for modifications to the fielded system continues.

Disposal. Disposal of the system occurs at the end of its useful life. The program manager
should have planned for disposal early in the systems life cycle and ensured that system
disposal minimizes DoDs liability due to environmental safety, security, and health issues.
Environmental considerations are particularly critical during disposal as there may be
international treaty or other legal considerations requiring intensive management of the
systems demilitarization and disposal.
C.3 Key Activities

All acquisition programs, regardless of Acquisition Category (ACAT), must accomplish certain
Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D

114
key activities. These activities generate information that structures and defines the program and
facilitates planning and control by the PM and oversight by a MDA. The information generated by
key activities may be contained in stand-alone documents structured in accordance with the desires
of the MDA. Most of this information/documentation is carefully constructed by the PM using
IPTs. Key activities include, but are not limited to, development/update and approval of J CIDS
documents, formulation of program structure, contract planning and management, formulation of
an acquisition program baseline, test planning.
C.3.1 Pre-Acquisition Technology Projects

As noted above, ACTDs/ATDs, J oint Warfighting Experiments, Concept Refinements, and
Technology Developments occur prior to acquisition program initiation. Generally, they
demonstrate performance payoffs, increased logistics or interoperability capabilities, or cost
reduction potential of militarily relevant technology. They are used to demonstrate the maturity
and potential of advanced technologies for enhanced military operational capability or cost
effectiveness, the military utility of proven technology, or a concept of operations that will
optimize effectiveness. Their results are reviewed prior to making a Milestone A decision. Their
roles in the acquisition process are described in DoDI 5000.2.
C.3.2 Initial Capabilities Document (ICD)

The ICD documents the need for a materiel approach to a specific capability gap derived from an
initial analysis of materiel approaches executed by the operational user and, as required, an
independent analysis of materiel alternatives. It defines the capability gap in terms of the
functional area, the relevant range of military operations, desired effects, and time. The ICD
summarizes the results of the DOTMLPF analysis and describes why non-materiel changes alone
have been judged inadequate in fully providing the capability. It is to be prepared in accordance
with CJ CSI 3170.01, CJ CSM 3170.01, and CJ CSI 6212.01. It replaces the Mission Needs
Statement (MNS) required by the older Requirements Generation System defined in CJ CSI
3170.01B. No new MNS will be accepted for staffing. ICDs developed in accordance with CJ CSI
3170.01D and later versions thereto will be used instead. Programs that have already completed
acquisition Milestone A, or beyond, are not required to update the MNS with an ICD. No MNS
greater than 2 years old will be used to support a Milestone A (or programs proceeding directly to
Milestone B or C) acquisition decision. Effective with the issuance of CJ CSI 3170.01E, the format
of the ICD has been changed to allow for a Mission Area ICD to be written for capability
definition.
C.3.3 Capstone Requirements Document (CRD)

The CRD contained capabilities-based requirements that facilitate the development of CDDs and
CPDs by providing a common framework and operational concept to guide their development.
The CRD captured the overarching requirements for a J oint mission area that forms a family-of-
systems (FoS) (for example, space control and Theater Missile Defense) or system-of-systems
(SoS) (for example, the National Missile Defense System). With the issuance of CJ CSI 3170.01E
the CRD has been eliminated as a J CIDS document and Mission Area ICDs has been created for
capability definition.
Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D

115
C.3.4 Capability Development Document (CDD)

The CDD is the sponsors primary means of defining authoritative, measurable, and testable
capabilities needed by the warfighters to support the System Development and Demonstration
(SDD) phase of an acquisition program. The CDD will be validated and approved before
Milestone B. The CDD captures the information necessary to develop a proposed program,
normally using an evolutionary acquisition strategy. In an evolutionary acquisition program, the
capabilities delivered by a specific increment may provide only a part of the ultimate desired
capability; therefore, the first increments CDD must provide information regarding the strategy
for achieving the full capability. The CDD provides the operational performance attributes
necessary for the acquisition community to design a proposed system(s) and establish a program
baseline. It states the performance attributes, including Key Performance Parameters (KPPs) that
will guide the development and demonstration of the proposed increment. A Net-Ready KPP (NR-
KPP) is required to assess information needs, timeliness, information assurance, J oint
interoperability and supportability and other net-ready attributes. The CDD is to be updated or
appended for each Milestone B decision. The CDD is to be prepared in accordance with the latest
issues of CJ CSI 3170.01 and 6212.01 and CJ CSM 3170.01.
C.3.5 Capability Production Document (CPD)

The CPD is the sponsors primary means of providing authoritative, testable capabilities for the
Production and Deployment phase of an acquisition program. The CPD captures the information
necessary to support production, testing, and deployment of an affordable and supportable
increment within an acquisition strategy. The CPD provides the operational performance attributes
necessary for the acquisition community to produce a single increment of a specific system. It
presents performance attributes, including KPPs, to guide the Production and Deployment of the
current increment. The CPD refines the threshold and objective values for performance attributes
and KPPs that were validated in the CDD for the production increment. The refinement of
performance attributes and KPPs is the most significant difference between the CDD and the CPD.
As noted above, the NR-KPP is required to assess information needs, timeliness, information
assurance, J oint interoperability and supportability and other net-ready attributes. The CPD is to
be validated and approved before the Milestone C decision and prepared in accordance with the
latest versions of CJ CSI 3170.01 and 6212.01 and CJ CSM 3170.01.
C.3.6 Information Support Plan (ISP)

The ISP is used by program authorities to document the program's interoperability, information,
and support requirements, IT and NSS needs, objectives, interface requirements for all non-ACAT
and fielded programs. ISPs should be kept current throughout the acquisition process and formally
reviewed at each milestone, decision reviews and whenever the operational concepts, and IT and
NSS support requirements change. The ISP addresses all ACAT, non-ACAT, and fielded systems.
The ISP will contain sufficient detail, commensurate with the size of the program/effort, to permit
an evaluation of the associated interoperability and supportability requirements. ISPs contain an
Introduction (consisting of an overview and program data); an Analysis Chapter that consists of an
incremental analysis process tailored to each program; and an Issues Chapter that details the
information, interoperability and synchronization issues identified in the analysis section and the
strategies to address or mitigate these issues. ISPs shall also include a number of mandatory
Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D

116
appendices and other appendices, as necessary. The format within each chapter of an ISP may be
tailored to include only those elements that apply to the subject program. DoDI 4630.8 provides
additional information for completing each chapter and appendices in the ISP.
C.3.7 Integrated Product Teams (IPTs)

The Secretary of Defense has directed DoD to perform as many acquisition functions as possible,
including oversight and review, using IPTs. IPTs promote teamwork by empowering their
members, to the maximum extent possible, to make commitments on behalf of the organization or
functional area they represent. There are two types of IPTs: Overarching IPTs (OIPTs) and
Working Level IPTs (WIPTs).
C.3.7.1 Overarching IPTs (OIPTs)

OIPTs focus on strategic guidance, program assessments, and the resolution of issues. They
provide assistance, oversight, and review as the program proceeds through the acquisition life
cycle. The OIPT is composed of the PM, Component Staff, J oint Staff, and Office of the Secretary
of Defense (OSD) staff principals involved in oversight and review of the program. The PM
reports the status of the project to the OIPT. The OIPT shall then assess progress against stated
goals. The PM's briefing to the OIPT shall specifically address interoperability and supportability
(including spectrum supportability).
C.3.7.2 Working Level IPTs (WIPTs)

WIPTs focus on particular topics such as cost, performance, test, or specific technical issues such
as E3/SS. WIPTs are advisory bodies to the PM and meet, as required, to help develop program
objectives, review program documentation, and resolve program issues. WIPT responsibilities and
activities can include:

Assisting the PM in developing strategic and program planning,
Assisting in the establishment of the IPT plan of action and milestones,
Proposing tailored requirements and milestones,
Reviewing and providing inputs to acquisition documents,
Defining the approaches to verify requirements including analysis, modeling and
simulation (M&S), and T&E,
Establishing performance requirements,
Defining budget requirements,
Determining and assessing the feasibility of using CI/NDI, and
Assuming responsibility for obtaining approval from principals on issues, as well as on
applicable documents or portions of documents.
C.3.8 Test Planning

Test planning is central to the formulation of a coherent acquisition strategy. A variety of testing
must be planned and accomplished either to confirm program progress or to conform to statutory
dictate. It is by testing that the performance requirements identified by the user in the CPD and
promised by the PM in the acquisition program baseline are validated. Testing includes DT&E,
Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D

117
OT&E, and live fire test and evaluation (LFT&E), as appropriate. The Test and Evaluation Master
Plan (TEMP) documents the overall structure and objectives of the test and evaluation program. It
provides a framework to generate detailed test and evaluation plans for a particular test, and it
contains resource and schedule implications for the test and evaluation program.
C.3.8.1 Test and Evaluation Master Plan (TEMP)

The TEMP describes planned DT&E, OT&E, LFT&E, interoperability testing, information
assurance testing, and M&S activities. It includes measures to evaluate the performance of the
item during these test periods; an integrated test schedule; and the resource requirements to
accomplish the planned testing. It is prepared by the PM, usually by a T&E WIPT, in concert with
the user and T&E communities, and updated as the program progresses through its milestone
decisions. It relates program schedule, test management strategy and structure, and required
resources to critical operational issues, critical technical parameters, KPPs, operational
performance parameters derived from the CDD or CPD, and major decision points. The TEMP
translates the users requirements and capabilities essential to mission accomplishment, as stated in
the CDD or CPD, into testable critical operational issues, measures of effectiveness and
performance (MOEs/MOPs), and measures of suitability. As noted earlier, a NR-KPP is required
to assess information needs, timeliness, information assurance, J oint interoperability and
supportability and other net-ready attributes. The procedures and format for the TEMP are
provided in DoDI 5000.2 and the Acquisition Guidebook.
C.3.8.1.1 Key Performance Parameters (KPPs)

KPPs are those system capabilities or characteristics considered essential for a successful mission.
Failure to meet a KPP threshold could cause the system selection to be re-evaluated or the program
to be reassessed or terminated. KPPs are included in the acquisition program baseline. In
accordance with the latest version of CJ CSI 6212.01, the NR-KPP is to be used to assess
information needs, information timeliness, information assurance, joint interoperability and
supportability, and net-ready attributes required for both the technical exchange of information and
the end-to-end operational effectiveness of that exchange. The NR-KPP consists of measurable,
testable, or calculable characteristics and performance metrics required for the timely, accurate,
and complete exchange and use of information. The NR-KPP assessment determines the impacts,
risks, and vulnerabilities of fielding secure, interoperable, supportable, sustainable and usable
systems. Parameters assessed include compatibility and SS, among others.
C.3.9 Procurement Activities

Identification or, when necessary, preparation of the applicable solicitation documents is a key part
of the acquisition process. Without specific attention to clarity during the development of these
documents, it becomes very difficult to evaluate proposals and to evaluate a contractor's
performance after the contract has been awarded. The needs of the user should be clearly defined.
The success of a procurement action relies on the contractual documents being a true and accurate
statement of the user's requirements. Policies and guidelines emphasize that requirements in the
solicitation for hardware are to be stated in terms of performance or "what the product must do"
rather than "how-to" produce the product. Performance specifications SOW, and CDRLs, and
DIDs are the documents used in solicitations that become part of a contract.
Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D

118
C.3.9.1 Performance Specifications

Preparing an end item specification is a key part of the acquisition process. DoD policies
emphasize that requirements should be stated in terms of performance or "what-is-necessary"
rather than telling a contractor "how-to" perform a task. The performance specification is created
from the CDD and CPD and should contain only performance-based requirements. It is the
functional and technical description for the item being procured. It addresses what the item should
do, the accuracy with which it should be done, the environment that it should do it in, and the
required interfaces. Contracting to a performance specification allows a contractor to become
more efficient in his operations, to incorporate product enhancements, and to reduce both direct
and indirect costs associated with his effort. A performance specification should state the
requirements in terms of results along with criteria for verifying compliance, but without stating
the methods for achieving the required results. Performance specifications give a contractor the
flexibility and freedom in his design process to incorporate innovative approaches without being
constrained by the specifications or contractual issues, Government oversight, and contract
administration. (See Appendix A of this handbook for a list of applicable E3 and SS documents).
C.3.9.2 Statement of Work (SOW)

While specifications state the performance requirements for an item, the SOW establishes the work
efforts that must be accomplished to successfully execute the contract, develop, and produce the
desired product. This document is used as an input to detailed management tools used to establish
program costs and schedules.
C.3.9.3 Contract Data Requirements List (CDRLs)

The CDRL is the proper vehicle for describing and ordering non-hardware deliverables that result
from work tasked in the SOW. The SOW should direct the performance of any non-hardware-
associated work necessary to create the data used in a deliverable item, if the information is not a
by-product of tests and verifications from the requirements of the specification. CDRLs are
displayed on a DD Form 1423. The DD Form 1423 provides a format that can be used to tailor the
details of the data being ordered to the needs of the project. A DID utilizing DD Form 1664 is
used to define each item on the CDRL. DIDs establish the content required for a data product.
CDRL entries other than DIDs can be tailored on the DD Form 1423 as well as the DIDs
themselves. When applicable, data items should be tailored to buy only what is actually needed
for a project while at the same time requiring essential efforts be performed and critical data be
delivered.
C.3.9.4 Commercial Items and Non-Developmental Items (CI/NDI)

Use of CI/NDI provides a cost-effective alternative to what can be a costly and time consuming
design process and takes advantage of the latest technology. However, there needs to be an
increased awareness of the limitations associated with the use of these items. A commercial item
is any item customarily used for non-Government purposes and has:

Been sold, leased, or licensed to the general public,
Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D

119
Been offered for sale, lease, or license to the general public, or
Evolved through advances in technology or performance and is not yet available in the
commercial marketplace, but will be in time to satisfy the delivery requirements of a
Government solicitation.

NDI is any item previously developed and being used exclusively for Governmental purposes by
another DoD or Federal Agency, a State or local Government, or a foreign Government with which
the U.S. has a mutual defense cooperation agreement.

Federal and DoD acquisition policies dictate that all material requirements should be satisfied to
the maximum extent practicable through the use of CI/NDI when such products will meet the
user's needs and are cost-effective over the entire life cycle. Acquisition procedures for CI/NDI
are neither new nor significantly different from established acquisition procedures. The objective
is to obtain best value in meeting an item's requirements. Market research and analysis should be
con-ducted to determine the availability and suitability of existing CI/NDI prior to the
commencement of a development effort, and prior to the preparation of any product description.
The desired performance requirements should be defined in terms that enable and encourage
offerors of CI/NDI an opportunity to compete in any procurement to fill such requirements. CI/
NDI acquisitions require flexibility, innovation, and practical trade-offs between performance,
supportability, cost, and schedule. The acquisition process should be tailored to the unique
circumstances of an acquisition in order to provide the greatest benefit to the Government in terms
of overall cost, product quality, timeliness of delivery, and supportability.
Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D

120






This page left intentionally blank.
Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D

121







APPENDIX D

E3/SS

TEST FACILITIES AND CAPABILITIES













Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D

122
CONTENTS


Paragraph Page

D.1 Army Facilities and Capabilities........................................................................................ 125
D.1.1 Army Research Laboratory (ARL) ......................................................................... 125
D.1.1.1 Electromagnetic Coupling Facility.................................................................. 125
D.1.2 Army Test and Evaluation Command (ATEC)/Development Test Command
Test Centers.....125
D.1.2.1 Aberdeen Test Center (ATC)........................................................................... 125
D.1.2.2 Redstone Technical Test Center (RTTC)......................................................... 125
D.1.2.2.1 Electromagnetic Interference Test Facility................................................126
D.1.2.2.2 Electromagnetic Radiation Test Facility....................................................126
D.1.2.2.3 Lightning Test Facilities............................................................................126
D.1.2.2.4 Electromagnetic Pulse Facility...................................................................127
D.1.2.3 White Sands Missile Range............................................................................. 127
D.1.2.3.1 Electromagnetic Interference Facilities.....................................................127
D.1.2.3.2 Electromagnetic Radiation Facilities.........................................................127
D.1.2.3.3 Electromagnetic Pulse Facilities................................................................127
D.1.2.4 Ft. Huachuca - Electronic Proving Ground (EPG) .......................................... 128
D.1.2.4.1 Blacktail Canyon Test Facility...................................................................128
D.1.2.4.2 Electromagnetic Environmental Test Facility............................................128
D.1.2.4.3 Virtual Battlefield Environment Facility...................................................128
D.1.2.4.4 Virtual Electromagnetic C4I Analysis Tool...............................................129
D.1.2.4.5 Mutual Interference Environments............................................................129
D.1.3 U.S. Army Armaments Research, Development & Engineering Center (ARDEC)
Tank Automotive Command (TACOM).....129
D.1.3.1 HERO Research and Engineering Facility....................................................... 129
D.1.3.2 Electromagnetic Radiation, Operational Test Facility..................................... 130
D.1.3.3 EMI Test Facility............................................................................................. 130
D.1.3.4 Helicopter Electrostatic Discharge (ESD) Test Facility.................................. 130
D.1.3.5 Personnel Electrostatic Discharge Test Facility............................................... 130
D.1.3.6 EMP Test Facility............................................................................................ 130
D.1.3.7 Bruceton and Langley Test Facility................................................................. 130
D.1.4 Communication and Electronics Command (CECOM).......................................... 130
D.1.5 U.S. Army Center for Health Promotion and Preventive Medicine....................... 131
D.1.6 Army Points of Contact........................................................................................... 132
D.2 Navy Facilities and Capabilities........................................................................................ 134
D.2.1 Naval Air Systems Command (NAVAIR).............................................................. 134
D.2.1.1 Naval Air Warfare Center Aircraft Division (NAWCAD) Patuxent River,
Maryland...134
D.2.1.1.1 Air Combat Environment Test and Evaluation Facility (ACETEF)..........134
D.2.1.1.2 Aircraft Shielded Hangar...........................................................................135
D.2.1.1.3 Aircraft Anechoic Test Facility (Small Anechoic Chamber).....................135
Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D

123
D.2.1.1.4 Advanced Systems Integration Laboratory (ASIL) (Large Anechoic
Chamber)...135
D.2.1.1.5 Naval Electromagnetic Radiation Facility (NERF) and Electromagnetic
Environment Generating System (EMEGS)..136
D.2.1.1.6 Electromagnetic Transients Test and Evaluation Facility..........................136
D.2.1.1.7 EMI Laboratories.......................................................................................137
D.2.1.2 Naval Air Warfare Center Aircraft Division, Lakehurst, New J ersey............. 137
D.2.1.3 Naval Air Warfare Center Weapons Division, China Lake, California........... 137
D.2.1.4 Naval Air Warfare Center Weapons Division, Point Mugu, California.......... 138
D.2.2 Naval Sea Systems Command (NAVSEA) ............................................................ 138
D.2.2.1 Naval Surface Warfare Center, Dahlgren Division (NSWCDD) .................... 138
D.2.2.1.1 Ground Planes............................................................................................138
D.2.2.1.2 Anechoic Chamber.....................................................................................139
D.2.2.1.3 Reverberation Chamber .............................................................................139
D.2.2.1.4 Naval Ordnance Transient Electromagnetic Simulator .............................139
D.2.2.1.5 Electromagnetic Coupling Analysis...........................................................140
D.2.2.1.6 DC Magnetic Field Generation Facility.....................................................140
D.2.2.2 Naval Undersea Warfare Center Newport (NUWC Newport) ........................ 140
D.2.2.2.1. Electromagnetic Compatibility Laboratory..............................................140
D.2.2.2.2 DC Magnetic Field Susceptibility Test Facility.........................................140
D.2.2.2.3 Antenna Test Facilities...............................................................................141
D.2.2.3 Naval Surface Warfare Center, Crane.............................................................. 141
D.2.3 Space and Naval Warfare Systems Command (SPAWAR) ................................... 141
D.2.3.1 SPAWAR Systems Center Charleston (SSC Charleston)................................ 141
D.2.3.2 SPAWAR Systems Center San Diego (SSC SD) ............................................ 142
D.2.4 Naval Research Laboratory (NRL)......................................................................... 142
D.2.4.1 Compact Range Facility and Anechoic Chamber............................................ 142
D.2.5 Navy Points of Contact........................................................................................... 143
D.3 U.S. Marine Corps (USMC) Facilities and Capabilities................................................... 145
D.3.1 Marine Corps Points of Contact.............................................................................. 145
D.4 Air Force Facilities and Capabilities.................................................................................. 146
D.4.1 Air Armament Center.............................................................................................. 146
D.4.1.1 Preflight Integration of Munitions and Electronic Systems (PRIMES)........... 146
D.4.2 Air Force Research Laboratories (AFRL) .............................................................. 146
D.4.2.1 Information Directorate.................................................................................... 146
D.4.2.2 Sensors Directorate.......................................................................................... 147
D.4.3 Air Force Flight Test Center (AFFTC)................................................................... 147
D.4.3.1 Benefield Anechoic Facility............................................................................. 147
D.4.4 738 Engineering Installation Squadron................................................................... 148
D.4.5 Air Force Points of Contact.................................................................................... 149
D.5 J oint Spectrum Center (J SC).............................................................................................. 150
D.5.1 J oint E3 Evaluation Tool (J EET)............................................................................ 150
D.5.2 J SC Ordnance E3 Risk Assessment Database (J OERAD) ..................................... 150
D.5.3 All Region All Platform Propagation (ARAPP) System........................................ 151
D.5.4 Cosite Analysis Model (COSAM).......................................................................... 151
D.5.5 Graphical Analysis Tool for EMEs (GATE) .......................................................... 151
Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D

124
D.5.6 SPECTRUM XXI ................................................................................................... 152
D.5.7 J SC Points of Contact............................................................................................. 152






Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D

125
D.1 Army Facilities and Capabilities
D.1.1 Army Research Laboratory (ARL)

The following facility is used to test and evaluate a systems performance in an EME. It can also
be used to support the system analysis and evaluation process.
D.1.1.1 Electromagnetic Coupling Facility

This EM coupling facility located at the Survivability/Lethality Analysis Directorate, Aberdeen
Proving Ground, MD, supports the survivability analysis of developmental systems. System
coupling characteristics can be determined which can then be used by design engineers in
hardening systems against the effects of an EMP or other EME levels. The facility measures
coupling levels when exposed to an externally radiated, low power EME. The low level coupling
response is then scaled to determine the system response to the actual high level EME. The
facility can also use current injection techniques to simulate the high level coupling to further
analyze the system performance.
D.1.2 Army Test and Evaluation Command (ATEC)/Development Test Command Test
Centers
D.1.2.1 Aberdeen Test Center (ATC)

The ATC Electromagnetic Test Facility, located at Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD, is a large, free
standing shielded enclosure that will accommodate combat vehicles, artillery, tractor trailers,
portable shelters, electric power generation equipment, and materials handling and construction
equipment. The facility size and structural integrity allow testing of large heavy pieces of
equipment and complete systems as well as bench testing of components and systems in a noise-
free environment. The facility has a double-walled design that provides a high degree of
attenuation to magnetic, electric, and plane wave fields to assure excellent isolation from the
outside EME. It currently has the capability to conduct tests in accordance with the following E3
military and commercial standards and has been certified as an acceptable test facility that meets
European Certification Laboratory approved standard requirements.

MIL-STD-461 and 464,
SAE-J 551 and SAE-J 1113,
C.I.S.P.R. Publication 16, Specification for Radio Interference Measuring Apparatus and
Measurement Methods, and
C.I.S.P.R. Publication 22, Limits and Methods of Measurement of Radio Interference
Characteristics of Information Technology Equipment.
D.1.2.2 Redstone Technical Test Center (RTTC)

RTTC, located at Redstone Arsenal AL, is a comprehensive test facility that can be utilized for E3
testing of tactical missiles and missile platform system. The E3 Test Branch provides a full
spectrum of support to the Aviation and Missile Command Program Executive Officers and PMs,
Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D

126
as well as other DoD Agencies and contractors. Among the comprehensive E3 test capabilities
described below are the DoD unique capabilities to conduct lightning effects testing on live
missiles and munitions.
D.1.2.2.1 Electromagnetic Interference Test Facility

The EMI test facility consists of a 13-feet by 30-feet double-shielded, copper screen room, divided
into a test and a control room. The facility is capable of measuring emissions and susceptibilities
during subsystem/equipment tests as required by MIL-STD-461. To ensure that there are no
problems when assembled into a weapon system, items may be tested to determine the EM effects
between subsystems, the effects of subsystems upon external systems, and the effects of external
systems upon the subsystem.
D.1.2.2.2 Electromagnetic Radiation Test Facility

This facility provides continuous wave (CW), amplitude modulation, frequency modulation, and
pulse modulation testing with several subsets of antennas covering 2 MHz to 40 GHz. Testing is
conducted at outdoor ranges as well as in a 40-feet wide, 70-feet long and 22-feet high anechoic
chamber which incorporates a below ground fume removal duct system to allow operational
testing of ground vehicles. Test items up to 1,000 pounds, such as missiles in simulated free-
flight environments, can be positioned in azimuth (full 360 degrees of rotation) and either pitch
or roll (+90 degrees). The facility also contains a-360 degrees of rotation turntable capable of
accommodating a vehicle the size of an M-270 Launcher. RTTC also has facilities and methods
for the testing of classified hardware up to the SECRET- SPECIAL ACCESS REQUIRED level.
D.1.2.2.3 Lightning Test Facilities

Lightning testing at RTTC is divided into two categories, direct-strike and near-strike tests. Test
criteria are contained in MIL-STD-464 and RTTC Technical Report TR-RD-TE-97-01. Lightning
simulators capable of generating up to 3.6 million volts and 200,000 Amps are used for these tests.
Direct-strike test criteria are required for weapon system safety and to prevent permanent damage
to electronic components. Near-strike lightning tests are required primarily for protection of EIDs
and electronic components from detonation, burnout, destruction, and so forth, particularly during
a launch sequence or when the electronics are active. Testing is conducted on inert and live
tactical missile systems. The RTTC lightning test capabilities consist of several test facilities.

The Inert Lightning Test Facility is utilized for instrumented and go/no-go testing of
systems limited to class 1.4 explosives.

The Hazardous Lightning Test Facility is comprised of two facilities. A Small System
Lightning Test Stand is used for testing live, tactical, man-portable, and other small missile
items. A Large System Lightning Test Stand is utilized for testing large, live, tactical
missile systems and is currently limited to 100 pounds of Class 1.1, 5,000 pounds of Class
1.2, 15,000 pounds of Class 1.3, and unlimited Class 1.4 explosives. The Hazardous
Lightning Test Facility is capable of testing live, tactical missile systems and has a portable
chamber capable of conditioning vehicles to both "hot" and "cold" temperature extremes.
Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D

127
D.1.2.2.4 Electromagnetic Pulse Facility

The EMP test facility provides a sub-threat, high altitude, EMP environment to determine weapon
system safety and survivability and to analyze system EMP effects.
D.1.2.3 White Sands Missile Range

The Survivability, Vulnerability, and Assessment Directorate (SVAD) performs E3 testing at the
Electromagnetic Radiation Effects Site and Pulse Power Site at WSMR and at their test site located
on Kirtland Air Force Base (AFB) in Albuquerque, NM. The test facility provides outdoor testing
for combat systems, helicopters, and various types of combat support and combat service support
equipment. A lightning test facility and two EMP facilities and an Ultra-Wideband facility is
located near the SVAD main complex..
D.1.2.3.1 Electromagnetic Interference Facilities

These facilities are capable of performing the entire battery of MIL-STD-461 tests. Testing is
conducted in one of two special facilities designed to minimize the ambient background noise.
The first is an 18-foot long by 11-feet wide by 5-feet high anechoic chamber used for testing small
items. The second is a large, shielded test cell used to test large items and those items requiring
high capability air intake and exhaust. Two large intake fans and two large exhaust fans allow
such items as the M1 Abrams tank to be tested in a fully operational mode with engines running.
The test cell is large enough to test the Patriot on its launcher or an Abrams Tank.
D.1.2.3.2 Electromagnetic Radiation Facilities

Using any or all of five separate transmitters, outdoor test facilities provide RADHAZ, radiated
susceptibility-Operational, inter-system EMI/EMC, and ESD (personnel and helicopter) testing.
The five available transmitters cover frequencies from 100 kHz to 40 GHz, at power levels to 50
kW, depending upon the specific transmitter and test environment. These transmitters have
sufficient power to perform entire-system uniform full-threat illuminations of test systems as large
as Blackhawk helicopter. All modulations and the two polarizations can be accomplished.
Maximum field intensities are typically on the order of 200 V/m. Levels up to 700 V/m can be
achieved depending on frequency, size of the item under test, and the relative position of the item.
A new mobile facility is being completed that complements existing capabilities and will enable
peak power testing to the levels of Table 1E of MIL-STD 464A and ADS-37A from 1 to 18 GHz.
Depending on frequency, up to 30 kV/m will be available for testing. Lastly, an Ultra-Wideband
facility provides the Army with its only entire-system uniform threat-level testing. The frequency
range of this simulator is 690 to 3850 MHz.
D.1.2.3.3 Electromagnetic Pulse Facilities

SVAD has the only operational EMP facilities in the Army. EMP testing is performed at Kirtland
AFB using one of several threat level EMP simulators, either the Horizontally Polarized Dipole
Facility or the Vertically Polarized Dipole Facility. These facilities can produce both horizontally
and vertically polarized electric field strengths from 0.1 to 100 kV/m. Other facilities include a
lightning simulator, a vertically polarized bounded-wave EMP simulator, and a Direct Drive
Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D

128
Laboratory for the direct application of controlled electrical over-stress signals into electronic
components. Two additional EMP facilities are operational at WSMR. These simulators allow
full threat HEMP testing in accordance with MIL-STD-2169. Direct drive and pulse current
injection is available for testing and EMP/Lightning diagnostics. Adjacent to the two HEMP
facilities at WSMR, SVAD has a 200K-Amp direct strike lightning facility and a near strike
lightning facility, both are capable of meeting the respective requirements of MIL-STD-464.
D.1.2.4 Ft. Huachuca - Electronic Proving Ground (EPG)
D.1.2.4.1 Blacktail Canyon Test Facility

EPG has a capability to perform EMI/EMC testing in accordance with MIL-STD-464 and 461 for
DoD platforms, systems, subsystems, and equipment as well as various commercial EMI/EMC
standards tests that may be required by the customer. The facility is located at the Blacktail
Canyon area of Ft. Huachuca, AZ, a RF-isolated area with a relatively low ambient RF level,
which is ideal for open-field EMC/EMI testing efforts. Test equipment and fixtures necessary to
conduct testing include three automated receiver systems, 20 Hz to 40 GHz, which can be used to
perform radiated and conducted emission measurements. The facility instrumentation suites
provide three automated EMI data collection suites and two integrated EMI susceptibility test
systems allowing RF illumination of items under test from 10 kHz to 40 GHz at field levels greater
than 200 V/m, depending upon test frequency. In addition to the fixed facility, EPG has readily
available portable systems, offering worldwide on-site support to the customer.
D.1.2.4.2 Electromagnetic Environmental Test Facility

Located in the main post area of Ft. Huachuca, this test facility is a complex of experimental and
analytical capabilities that can be used to measure and analyze system performance in a broad
spectrum of intended EME. The facility assesses the ability of C4I systems to operate in their in-
tended EME and to assess the influence of the system on the EME. This function is accomplished
by a combination of M&S, hardware-in-the-loop testing, and field testing. It is also responsible for
developing and maintaining databases of equipment characteristics and simulated tactical
deployments to support EMC and EMV analyses and Army management of the EM spectrum.
D.1.2.4.3 Virtual Battlefield Environment Facility

This is a closed-loop facility that generates actual RF and digital message signals to provide a
realistic EME to an item under test. It emulates signals that the test item would expect to see in its
intended operational EME. These signals are computer-controlled and can represent the EME in
any part of the world. The facility can create an electronic battlefield capable of simulating up to
1024 non-communications emitters (radar and sensors) in the 0.5 - 18 GHz frequency range and 32
communications emitters in the 0.5 - 500 MHz frequency range. These can be either friendly or
enemy emitters. An enhancement is the J oint Tactical Information Distribution System (J TIDS)
network linker unit. The network linker consists of a matrix switch that receives input from up to
ten J TIDS terminals. The test facility provides the simulated EME to the J TIDS network. This
allows the J TIDS network to be tested in a virtual EME without going to the field.
Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D

129
D.1.2.4.4 Virtual Electromagnetic C4I Analysis Tool

EPG has developed a set of integrated computer programs called the Virtual Electromagnetic C4I
Analysis Tool to perform analysis and evaluation of C4I systems in their intended operational
environments. The principal thrust is to provide C-E system analysis capabilities embedded in a
user-friendly graphical user interface. It can overlay results using Defense Mapping Agency
digital terrain and digitized raster graphics maps, or commercial-off-the-shelf graphics
visualization and statistical analysis tools. The tool gives engineers and communicators a
geographic information system that supports creation of simulated tactical deployments, military
symbols, map displays for magnetic media or compact discs, line-of-sight profiles, and terrain high
points display. The measures that can be calculated include EM propagation path loss, radio
horizon, received signal level, signal-to-noise, ration, bit error rate, electric field, percentage of
time available, fade, and dilution of precision values for global positioning system predictions. A
foliage propagation model is available for analyzing attenuation of link communications, as are a
number of other propagation models.
D.1.2.4.5 Mutual Interference Environments

For technical and operational tests, EPG can provide realistic battlefield conditions simulating
"dirty" EME caused by mutual EMI of electronic equipment. This environment provides a virtual
"friendly jamming" environment for operational or technical testing of C-E within an approved
operational scenario. The effects of several thousand emitters, all sharing a common hop-set, can
be simulated with as little as 100-200 actual radios through the use of propagation path loss
models, specially designed automatic keyers, and emitter placement algorithms.
D.1.3 U.S. Army Armaments Research, Development & Engineering Center (ARDEC)
Tank Automotive Command (TACOM)

The E3 team at TACOM-ARDEC provides E3 technical support to local, DoD, and Foreign
developers of systems and equipment. Guidance is provided to ensure that developmental systems
will not be susceptible to EME levels encountered during the system life cycle. The E3 team has
several research and engineering facilities to study and evaluate instrumented or live weapon
systems against a wide range of severe man-made or natural EME. Additionally, the E3 team
provides technical and acquisition support to the Army Fuse Safety, Type Classification, and
Material Release Boards, and the Foreign Intelligence Office and J oint HERO Sub-Committee. A
description of the facilities follows.
D.1.3.1 HERO Research and Engineering Facility

The HERO facility is designed to perform RF studies on Army-developed weapon systems in
accordance with MIL-STD-464 and MIL-HDBK-240. All HERO studies are performed inside a
heated and air-conditioned shielded anechoic chamber. High power transmitters and TEM cells
cover frequencies from 100 kHz to 40 GHz at power levels to 30 kW, with maximum field
intensities on the order of 200 V/m. The facility can be used for RF susceptibility investigations,
RF shielding measurements, in-band and out-of-band RF threat simulations, as well as specialized
projects involving millimeter weapon technology.
Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D

130
D.1.3.2 Electromagnetic Radiation, Operational Test Facility

Testing at this facility is performed inside an anechoic chamber using the same RF transmitters,
antennas, and fiber optic instrumentation as in the HERO facility described above. Studies are
performed in accordance with the criteria in MIL-STD-464 and guidance in MIL-HDBK-240.
D.1.3.3 EMI Test Facility

The E3 team maintains laboratory capabilities for EM emission studies to evaluate Army
electronics and electrical systems and subsystems in accordance with MIL-STD-461. Testing is
conducted inside an RF-shielded anechoic room designed to reduce the ambient background noise
to a minimum. The room size and structural integrity allow studies from small to mid-size pieces
of equipment in a noise-free environment.
D.1.3.4 Helicopter Electrostatic Discharge (ESD) Test Facility

Helicopter ESD studies are performed in accordance with the criteria in MIL-STD-464 and 331.
Instrumented, as well as go/no-go studies are conducted on inert and live tactical ammo systems in
their shipping/storage and tactical configurations. Studies are also conducted on live weapon
systems and electronic subsystems to determine detonation, upset, burnout and destruction levels.
D.1.3.5 Personnel Electrostatic Discharge Test Facility

Personnel ESD studies are performed in accordance with the criteria in MIL-STD-464 and MIL-
STD-331. Studies are conducted on live weapon systems and electronic subsystems to determine
detonation, upset, burnout, and destruction levels. Instrumented and go/no-go studies are
conducted on inert and live tactical ammo systems in their handling configuration.
D.1.3.6 EMP Test Facility

The EMP facility uses a vertically-polarized, parallel plate chamber to simulate a HEMP
environment, which is used to determine weapon system safety and survivability and to perform
hardening evaluations. The facility is capable of producing a peak electric field of 50 kV/m, which
meets the unclassified EMP threats specified in MIL-STD-461 and MIL-STD-464.
D.1.3.7 Bruceton and Langley Test Facility

This facility performs No-Fire and All-Fire statistical values of EIDs such as detonators, primers,
and actuators. Constant current and capacitor discharge characteristics are determined that can
handle class 1.3 and 1.4 explosives. Test data is computer-generated using an approved MIL-
STD-1576 computer program.
D.1.4 Communication and Electronics Command (CECOM)

CECOM Research and Development Engineering Center, Space and Terrestrial Communication
Directorate provides E3 engineering expertise to implement Army E3 policy. Design and test
guidance are provided to CECOM developers. A limited EMI/EMC test facility is available to
Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D

131
evaluate fixes, as necessary, and to evaluate CI/NDI. SM and frequency allocation support is also
provided for all CECOM developments and procurements.
D.1.5 U.S. Army Center for Health Promotion and Preventive Medicine

The Center provides HERP support and radiation protective studies in support of health hazard
assessments, safety assessments, and safety releases. Teams are available to assess compliance
with applicable DoD and Army regulations regarding human exposure to RF radiation and to
perform ad hoc testing for susceptibility of medical devices to RF fields. The test facility can
generate and measure CW and pulse RF fields in 3 anechoic chambers and a TEM cell. Fields
from 0.5 to 100 GHz can be generated at varying power levels. Additionally, there are portable RF
probes from 3 kHz to 40 GHz, portable meters for measuring induced and contact currents below
300 MHz and magnetic flux density meters for extremely low frequency fields (60 Hz).
Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D

132
D.1.6 Army Points of Contact

Army Research Laboratory (ARL)
Survivability/Lethality Analysis Directorate
ATTN: AMSRD-ARL-SL-EA
(Mr. G. Palomino)
WSMR, NM 88002
(505) 678-8077
gpalomin@arl.army.mil

Army Spectrum Management Office
ATTN: SFIS-FAC-P
(Mr. Arthur Radice)
2461 Eisenhower Ave., Hoffman I, Suite 1200
Alexandria, VA 22332
(703) 325-8226
ARTHUR.RADICE@hqda.army.mil

Army Research, Development, and Engineering
Command
ATTN: AMSSB-SS-T
(Mr. J . Kreck)
5001 Eisenhower Ave.
Alexandria, VA 22333
(703) 617-3020
jkreck@alexandria-emh1.army.mil

Army Research, Development, and Engineering
Command (RDECOM)
For E3 for Army Aircraft Airworthiness:
ATTN: AMSRD-AMR-AE-S
(Mr. D. Lewey)
(256) 705-9756
david.lewey@rdec.redstone.army.mil
For ESC Functions:
ATTN: AMSAM-RD-MG-SD
Mr. D. Smith
(256) 876-1685
Redstone Arsenal, AL 35898

Army Armaments RDE Center (ARDEC)
Tank-Automotive Command (TACOM)
ATTN: AMSTA-AR-CCF-D
(Mr. D. Gutierrez)
Picatinny Arsenal, NJ 07806-5000
(973) 724-4667
dgutierr@pica.army.mil







Army Center for Health Promotions & Preventive
Medicine (CDR USACHPPM)
Radio Frequency/Ultrasound Program
ATTN: MCHB-TS-ORF
(Mr. J . DeFrank)
5158 Blackhawk Rd.
Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD 21010-5403
(410) 436-3353
J ohn.DeFrank@amedd.army.mil

Army Electronic Proving Ground
Test and Engineering Division
ATTN: CSTE-DTC-EP-TE-F
(Mr. R. Weeks)
Fort Huachuca, AZ 85613-7110
(520) 538-4850
weeksr@epg.army.mil

Army Test and Evaluation Command (ATEC)
Aberdeen Test Center
Electromagnetic Interference Test Facility (EMITF)
ATTN: CSTE-DTC-AT-SL-V-EMI
(Mr. M. Geiger)
400 College Rd. Building 456
Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD 21005-5059
(410) 278-2598
Michael.geiger@atc.army.mil

Army Test and Evaluation Command (ATEC)
Developmental Test Command (DTC)
Soldier, C3, IEW Division
ATTN: CSTE-DTC-TT-S
(Mr. Michael Welsh)
Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD 21005-5059
(410) 278-1340
Michael.Welsh@atc.army.mil

Army Test and Evaluation Command (ATEC)
Survivability Division
ATTN: CSTE-AEC-SVE S
(Mr. J . Reza)
1650 J eb Stuart Rd. Building 1660
Ft Bliss, TX 79916-6812
(915) 568-6539
DSN 978-6539
jose.reza@usaec.army.mil

Army Test and Evaluation Command (ATEC)
Test Support Branch
ATTN: CSTE-DTC-WS-EP-TT
(Mr. D. Searls)
Ft Huachuca, AZ 85613-7110
(520) 538-4860
Daniel.W.Searles@us.army.mil


Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D

133
Army Test and Evaluation Command (ATEC)
Redstone Technical Test Center (RTTC)
ATTN: CSTE-DTC-RT-E-EM
(Mr. J . Zimmerman, (256) 876-6386)
jzimmerman@rttc.army.mil
(Mr. J . Craven, (256) 842-2952)
(DSN)788-2952
jeffery.d.craven@us.army.mil
Redstone Arsenal, AL 35898-8052

Army Nuclear and Chemical Agency (USANCA)
ATTN: ATNA-NU
(Mr. R. Pfeffer)
7150 Heller Loop, Suite 101
Springfield, VA 22150-3198
(703) 806-7860
pfeffer@usanca-smtp.army.mil

Army Test and Evaluation Command (ATEC)
ATTN: CSTE-AEC-C3E
(Dr. Wayne Knight)
4501 Ford Ave.
Alexandria, VA 22302-1458
(703) 681-9446
KnightWayne@usaec.army.mil

Space and Missile Defense Command (SMDC)
Survivability Division
ATTN: SMDC-TC-WV
(Mr. R. Goodman)
P.O. Box 1500
Huntsville, AL 35807-3801
(256) 955-4669

US Army Center for Health Promotion and
Preventive Medicine (USACHPPM)
5158 Blackhawk Road
ATTN: MCHB-TS-ORF
(Mr. J . DeFrank)
Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD 21010-5403
(410) 436-3353
J ohn.defrank@amedd.army.mil

White Sands Missile Range,
ATTN: CSTE-DTC-WS-ST-SD
(Mr. R. Blundell)
WSMR, NM 88002-5158
(505) 679-8177
rblundell@datts.wsmr.army.mil



Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D

134
D.2 Navy Facilities and Capabilities
D.2.1 Naval Air Systems Command (NAVAIR)

The NAVAIR, E3 Engineering Division, is the single entry point for E3 work within NAVAIR.
The division ensures cradle-to-grave system EMC in NAVAIR aircraft, weaponry, and ground
support systems in support of fleet mission needs. The division provides the E3 engineering
expertise directly to NAVAIR PMs and class desks to meet technical performance objectives,
schedule, and program cost across the total life cycle of naval aviation systems. The division is
multi-sited at Patuxent River, Lakehurst, China Lake, and Point Mugu. The combination of these
sites provides specialized E3 engineering as well as unique EMI facilities throughout NAVAIR for
aircraft, aircraft launch and recovery equipment, support equipment, weapon systems, as well as
targets and decoys. The division conducts EMI and SS analyses from initial concept, design,
throughout the acquisition process, and beyond deployment, which include engineering
investigations and recommended solutions to suspected EMI problems affecting the fleet.
Engineers tailor the E3 requirements to fulfill specific mission needs, and conduct functional and
risk analyses. The division also provides requirements to major range test facility base activities
and assists in updating E3 standards, both within the U.S. military and within NATO.
D.2.1.1 Naval Air Warfare Center Aircraft Division (NAWCAD) Patuxent River, Maryland

NAWCAD Code 5.1.7 supports E3 research, development, and T&E. This support encompasses
supplying the E3 test facilities and capabilities to conduct T&E of aircraft with their weapons,
subsystems, and ground support equipment.

The Mid-Atlantic Area Frequency Coordinator (MIDLANT AFC) is a component of the
Chesapeake Test Range for EM spectrum coordination for U.S. Navy and U.S. Marine Corps
Commands in the Middle Atlantic Area. It is the frequency manager for NAWCAD and reports
operationally to Commander in Chief, Atlantic Fleet. The mission of the MIDLANT AFC is to
ensure effective and compatible authorized use of the frequency spectrum by all of the NAWCAD
activities, tenants, and their contractors. The MIDLANT AFC coordinates with Government and
non-Government activities throughout and adjacent to the Middle Atlantic area. For interference
detection and resolution, the MIDLANT AFC has facilities that provide spectrum coverage from 2
MHz to 18 GHz.
D.2.1.1.1 Air Combat Environment Test and Evaluation Facility (ACETEF)

The ACETEF is a fully integrated, ground test facility allowing full-spectrum T&E of aircraft and
aircraft systems in a secure, controlled, EME. The state-of-the-art facility uses simulation and
stimulation techniques to provide test scenarios that will reproduce actual combat conditions.
Aircraft systems are deceived through a combination of simulation by digital computers and
stimulation by computer-controlled environment generators that provide radio frequency, electro-
optical, and laser stimuli that closely duplicate real signals. The ACETEF complex has a variety
of individual labs that, when networked, can simulate virtually all aspects of aircraft operations,
and include:
Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D

135
Shielded Hangar and Anechoic Chamber,
Simulated Warfare Environment Generator,
Electronic Warfare Integrated Systems Test Laboratory,
Threat Air Defense Laboratory,
Communication, Navigation, Identification Laboratory,
Offensive Sensors Laboratory,
Manned Flight Simulator, and
Aircrew Systems Evaluation Facility.
D.2.1.1.2 Aircraft Shielded Hangar

Located with access to three runways, the shielded hangar provides a specialized environment for
testing that includes the Aircraft Anechoic Test Facility. Large enough to accommodate multiple
large aircraft, the shielded hangar has interior walls and doors covered with wire mesh and one
anechoic wall. These features allow E3 testing and EW suite integration. Inside the hangar, an
anechoic chamber provides a secure and realistic test environment for system stimulation for
tactical aircraft. The hangar also supports lightning and p-static testing on full-scale test articles.
D.2.1.1.3 Aircraft Anechoic Test Facility (Small Anechoic Chamber)

The Aircraft Anechoic Test Facility (AATF) anechoic chamber, located inside the shielded hangar,
is used for T&E of full-scale aircraft. It provides a quiet and secure test environment that
simulates free space flight and can accommodate tactical aircraft and helicopters. External signals
are suppressed 100 dB from 140 kHz to 40 GHz. It provides a test area 96 feet long, 56 feet wide,
and 30 feet high.
D.2.1.1.4 Advanced Systems Integration Laboratory (ASIL) (Large Anechoic Chamber)

The large anechoic chamber provides a secure test environment for system stimulation of multiple
tactical-sized aircraft via two 40-ton hoists, or a large aircraft the size of an E-6 or B-2. The
anechoic chamber can hold multiple tactical aircraft and helicopters as well as large aircraft in a
secure test environment utilizing the full capability of ACETEF. The ASIL main building contains
a 180 feet long x 180 feet wide x 60 feet high radar absorbing material tip-to-tip, shielded anechoic
chamber, along with several internal and external support areas. ASIL provides a quiet temporary
secure working area test environment for hoisting two 40-ton (Max.) aircraft (test objects) or
centerline floor space for an E-6 sized aircraft. Test support provisions include a 34 x 74
operations control center , an inside trailer mezzanine area, two large basement test pits, an outside
basement level trailer ramp parking area, and outside power distribution units for ground level
trailer mounted equipment. A full complement of aircraft support utilities is provided. A high
bay, 65L x 188W x 60H, aircraft preparation area is directly in front of the 187L x 65H
anechoic chamber RF main door. This area also acts as a weather buffer to the main facility and as
an alternate test area for lightning testing. The ASIL is located adjacent to the north side of the
shielded hangar, about 200 feet from the center of the AATF and within 200 feet of all ACETEF
laboratories. ASIL is tied to the AATF and to all of ACETEF and other internal/external NAVAIR
labs via fiber optic networks and other secure worldwide links.
Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D

136
D.2.1.1.5 Naval Electromagnetic Radiation Facility (NERF) and Electromagnetic
Environment Generating System (EMEGS)

The Naval Electromagnetic Radiation Facility (NERF) uses the Electromagnetic Environmental
Generating System (EMEGS) to provide worldwide operational EMEs. The environmental
generating systems consist of several radar simulator sources capable of creating MIL-STD-464
peak levels from 150 MHz to 35 GHz at discrete frequencies within specific frequency ranges.
Additionally, NERF can provide swept (stepped) frequencies from 10 kHz to 18 GHz, continuous
coverage at up to 300 V/M depending on frequency. Testing is primarily performed on a 100 x
240 steel ground plane or the shielded hangar apron, with embedded ground plane. Selected
testing may also be performed inside the shielded hangar or one of the two anechoic chambers
(AATF or ASIL). The facility emulates the worldwide Fleet operational EME for evaluating the
effects on aircraft critical functions, mission systems and vehicle systems. It can be used to
support intersystem EMC, EMV, EMR, EMW, HERO or any type of susceptibility test. The
facility supports military and commercial aircraft, unmanned air vehicles, amphibious and other
military vehicles, ground support equipment, and air-launched ordnance system testing.
D.2.1.1.6 Electromagnetic Transients Test and Evaluation Facility

This facility provides threat-level EMP, lightning, and p-static testing capabilities to determine the
survivability and vulnerability of vehicle systems to the EMP threat. A high performance, fiber
optic data acquisition and processing system designed for single-shot, fast rise-time measurements
is available to collect data during testing. The following simulators are used to conduct tests on
avionics equipment and full scale weapons systems:

P-Static Simulators. The P-Static simulators provide up to 400 kV, 1.5 mA charges to test
items via high-voltage charging probes. The simulators are hand held and can spray the
high voltage charges onto small sections of the test aircraft. A portable VHF receiver and
instrumentation are used to investigate and record a baseline to use in correcting problem
areas. The P-Static simulator is portable.

ESD Simulators. The 5 kV/25 kV simulators mimic the full threat effects of the natural
human body ESD environment. The simulator is used to inject MIL-STD-464/MIL-STD-
331 voltage waveforms into aircraft or weapon systems air launched ordnance. A pulse can
be produced every 3 minutes. A portable 300 kV ESD simulator is also available. This
simulator produces the full threat effects of the natural helicopter vertical replenishment
ESD environments. The simulator can produce up to 300 kV through a 1-ohm series
resistance into loads of up to 20 microhenrys.

Horizontal Polarized Dipole EMP Simulator. This simulator simulates a high-altitude
nuclear EMP environment. It is a free-field simulator that uses a 5 MV pulser to generate a
double exponential, horizontally polarized field in the test volume. The EMP environment
described in MIL-STD-464 and MIL-STD-2169 can be achieved. The tow way and facility
will support very large fixed wing aircraft.

Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D

137
Vertical Polarized Dipole EMP Simulator. This simulator, which is collocated with the
horizontal polarized dipole, simulates a high-altitude nuclear EMP environment. It
provides a fast rise-time EMP with a shot per minute capability. The test facility offers
high fidelity, threat level environments and has the capability of providing slower rise time
waveforms.
D.2.1.1.7 EMI Laboratories

The E3 Divisions EMI Laboratories provide MIL-STD-461 evaluation capabilities to NAVAIR as
well as other DoD agencies and private industry (via a Commercial Service Agreement). The
facility manages four EMI chambers and provides engineering analysis, avionic troubleshooting,
fleet support, EMI consultation, document reviews, site surveys, and aircraft emission control
assessments. The EMI Laboratory at Patuxent River provides the following capabilities that are
not readily available commercially.

Shielded enclosure with 600-horsepower drive stand penetration for full performance
testing of aircraft electrical generators and other high RPM applications,
MIL-STD-461E compliant reverberation chamber capable of 1,000 V/m,
Large anechoic facility for large test items (i.e. large, heavy vehicles and satellites),
Power factor correction coils for realistic aircraft impedance simulation,
Outdoor radiated susceptibility test site with airfield access,
Shielding effectiveness testing of aircraft, vehicles, cables, connectors, and enclosures,
Platform stimulation for subsystems via ACETEF,
Global Positioning System accessibility, and
Fume exhaustion, hydraulic and coolant oil interfaces, and high capacity air conditioning.
D.2.1.2 Naval Air Warfare Center Aircraft Division, Lakehurst, New Jersey

The Lakehurst EMI Laboratorys function is to provide E3 guidance, and EMI, MIL-STD-461, and
other test capabilities associated with the development and production of aircraft launch and
recovery, and fleet support equipment/systems. The EMI facility manages three EMI chambers.
The laboratory provides emission tests from 20 Hz to 10 GHz, susceptibility tests from 30 Hz to 18
GHz, and radiated susceptibility tests up to 200 V/m.
D.2.1.3 Naval Air Warfare Center Weapons Division, China Lake, California

The E3 facilities at China Lake provide secure operational E3 test sites for engineering and
development tests in support of local customer requirements, particularly for weapons, targets,
EW, decoys, and test instrumentation. The facilities also provide T&E support during failure
investigations and perform radiated and conducted emissions tests in order to obtain data to
approve aircraft modification/flight clearance request packages, prior to test on the ranges at China
Lake, Pt. Mugu, and San Nicholas Island. The laboratories are used primarily to obtain data
necessary to assist engineers during hardware development or to support a flight clearance decision
for aircraft and targets flown from these airfields. China Lake operates a three-chamber lab
located in the Michelson laboratory building and one chamber in the Integrated Battlespace Arena
Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D

138
laboratory. The E3 Branch also provides engineering support to various weapons and targets IPTs
during the acquisition cycle.

The ground plane facility is a 245-ft x 245-ft outdoor test site. The ground plane includes aircraft
tie downs, ground rods and all necessary equipment and facilities to support operation and testing
of weapon systems, targets, decoys, and aircraft. The facility is used to perform susceptibility
testing on weapon systems to support EMV preflight and HERO testing, and is usually operated
through a teaming arrangement with NSWC, Dahlgren, VA.
D.2.1.4 Naval Air Warfare Center Weapons Division, Point Mugu, California

The E3 facility at Point Mugu provides a secure operational E3 test site for engineering and
development tests in support of local customer requirements, particularly for weapons, targets,
EW, decoys and test instrumentation. The facility also provides T&E support during failure
investigations and performs radiated and conducted emissions tests in order to obtain data to
approve aircraft modification/flight clearance packages, prior to test on the ranges at China Lake,
Pt. Mugu, and San Nicholas Island. The laboratories are used primarily to obtain data necessary to
assist engineers during hardware development or to support a flight clearance decision for aircraft
and targets flown from these airfields.
D.2.2 Naval Sea Systems Command (NAVSEA)
D.2.2.1 Naval Surface Warfare Center, Dahlgren Division (NSWCDD)

NSWCDD is the surface Navy's lead laboratory for E3 RDT&E. Code J 50 provides expertise and
leadership to ensure the safety, reliability, and operational effectiveness of Navy and J oint systems
exposed to the operational EME. To accomplish this, NSWCDD conducts a multi-faceted
program using a systems engineering approach to achieve strike group, platform/system, and
subsystem/equipment EMC. NSWCDD participates in all aspects of E3, including the
development of new technologies and analytical tools, requirements definition, platform and
system acquisition support, performance verification T&E, SM, fleet guidance, EMI mitigation,
and solving fleet EMI problems. NSWCDD conducts shipboard and shore HERO surveys,
shipboard HERP and EME surveys, shipboard full-scale EMC surveys, as well as system and ship
certification T&E. NSWCDD facilities available to perform E3 evaluations are discussed below.
D.2.2.1.1 Ground Planes

NSWCDD maintains various ground planes that provide a simulated ship deck environment for
conducting high power EMV and HERO testing. Transmitters provide the full range of power and
frequency to simulate the mission EME, which also can be generated at customer locations/
facilities. Supporting instrumentation provides state-of-the-art telemetry data collection and
reduction capability. NSWCDD has two unique ground plane facilities that permit evaluation of
the effects of Naval and J oint tactical EMEs on ordnance items EIDs and aircraft/subsystems/
equipment. Aircraft, missiles, gun mounts, and fire control systems can be tested to evaluate their
performance in a friendly or hostile operational EME or they can be evaluated to determine their
operability during in-service use. These ground plane facilities provide a simulated ship, weather
and flight deck environments, for conducting high power EMV and HERO testing. Transmitters
Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D

139
provide the full range of power and frequency to simulate the mission EME. If susceptibility
occurs, points of entry, susceptibility thresholds, and solutions are identified. The facilities allow a
wide range of service conditions in which electromagnetic evaluations can be accomplished.
Mobile radar, radio transmitters, and special generators with appropriate antennas for simulating
the ship EME are positioned around the edges of the ground planes. The transmitting equipment
operates over a frequency range of 2 MHz to 35 GHz, at power levels ranging from 15 kW
continuous wave to 3 MW pulse power. Testing can also be conducted at customer facilities using
equipment in trailers with the full range of power and frequency to simulate a mission EME.

Also located at NSWCDD is the EMV laboratory, which provides telemetry collection, data
reduction, and analysis for the ground planes, anechoic chamber, and reverberation chamber. The
individual test sites are connected to the laboratory through state-of-the-art, fiber optic data links,
which allow for EMI-free data collection.
D.2.2.1.2 Anechoic Chamber

This facility, which is 60 ft x 28 ft x 27 ft, provides a controlled, reflection-free environment for
conducting high power EMV test and evaluation on a broad range of systems. The chamber is a
shielded enclosure within which missiles and other test items are immersed in a simulated
operational (hostile and friendly) EME. It provides a full-threat level test chamber capable of
evaluating electronic and weapon systems in their intended operational EME from 150 MHz
through 60 GHz.
D.2.2.1.3 Reverberation Chamber

The reverberation chamber provides specialized reverberation conditions for system susceptibility
and shielding effectiveness testing. The reverberation chamber developed by NSWCDD provides
a time-efficient, cost-effective way to evaluate the performance of large equipment using a
shielded enclosure in which very high fields can be safely generated for performing E3 testing in a
simulated "real world," near-field EME. The reverberation chamber is used to conduct shielding
effectiveness measurements of enclosures, planar materials, gaskets, cable assemblies, including
cables with associated connectors, and other shielding materials; coupling measurements; radiated
emissions measurements; HERO testing; and EMV testing of systems, subsystems, and
components. Amplifiers are available in the facility to transmit swept or discrete continuous wave
signals from 100 MHz - 18 GHz into the chamber. High power cavities and magnetrons from the
ground planes can be positioned adjacent to the building and the power routed into the chamber.
D.2.2.1.4 Naval Ordnance Transient Electromagnetic Simulator

This simulator creates an EMP environment similar to that produced on the earth's surface from a
high-altitude nuclear burst. The facility provides a threat-level HEMP to evaluate the
susceptibility of naval weapons and other systems having EMP survivability requirements, to
verify EMC of systems, and to perform EMP hardening evaluations. The facility is capable of
producing simulated HEMP and peak electric fields of 50 kV/m, which meet the unclassified EMP
threat of MIL-STD-461 and 464, and can satisfy major elements of MIL-STD-2169. The facility
can also be used to provide developmental or design support and design validation by testing peak
field strengths of up to 200 kV/m.
Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D

140
D.2.2.1.5 Electromagnetic Coupling Analysis

NSWCDD maintains a Computational Electromagnetic section with the capability for conducting
complex EM analyses of land and shipboard systems. EM toolsets are used for modeling land and
shipboard-based antennas (whips, fans, horns, apertures, phased arrays, radars, parabolic reflector
dishes, etc.) operating anywhere from 2 MHz to 300 GHz radio and optical frequency ranges.
These toolsets are also used for predicting EM coupling, EMI, and compatibility between source
and victim antenna systems and for predicting EM power density levels to support evaluation of
radiation hazards to personnel, ordnance, and fuel. The numerous numerical models use
techniques such as: Method-of-Moments; Finite Difference Time Domain, High Frequency,
Frequency Selective Surface, and Empirical. NSWCDD develops the Afloat Electromagnetic
Spectrum Operating Program (AESOP) for surface ship spectrum management. This toolset is
used in developing operational frequency assignments in achieving EMC.
D.2.2.1.6 DC Magnetic Field Generation Facility

The DC Magnetic Field test facility is designed to evaluate the effect of a DC magnetic field as
defined in MIL-STD-1399, 070 on the performance of missiles, systems and equipment. It
simulates shipboard deperming/degaussing environments. A test environment of 20 Oersteds with
a rate of change of 20 Oersteds/second can be generated.
D.2.2.2 Naval Undersea Warfare Center Newport (NUWC Newport)

NUWC Newport, RI provides E3 expertise that encompasses all phases of submarine system and
submarine platform development including concept formulation, system acquisition, operational
support, and training. The EMC Branch provides the following engineering services to the Navy,
DoD, and other customers in both the Government and private sectors.
D.2.2.2.1. Electromagnetic Compatibility Laboratory

The EMC Branch, Code 3431, operates a full spectrum EMC Laboratory capable of performing all
MIL-STD-461 testing except for RS105 and CS115. In addition to MIL-STD-461 testing, the
laboratory can perform limited MIL-STD-1399 section 300 testing including spike, power factor,
harmonic current distortion and MIL-STD-2036 leakage current testing.
D.2.2.2.2 DC Magnetic Field Susceptibility Test Facility

The Branch operates the DC Magnetic Field Susceptibility Test Facility, which is designed to
evaluate the effect of a DC magnetic field on the performance of submarine systems and
equipment. A test environment of 20 Oersteds with a rate of change of 20 Oersteds/second, as
defined in MIL-STD-1399, 070, can be generated in any orientation with a maximum of 90
Oersteds along the vertical axis
Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D

141
D.2.2.2.3 Antenna Test Facilities

The EM Systems Department, Code 34, of NUWC NPT operates antenna test facilities consisting
of following:

Tapered Anechoic Chamber, which is used for design, development, and test & evaluation
of communication, navigation, and EW/ESM antennas. It provides complete antenna and
RCS measurement capabilities
Compact Range , which is used primarily for RCS measurements, including the measuring
antenna patterns
Submarine Antenna Overwater Arch Test Facility, which is used primarily used to
characterize the performance of antennas over a seawater ground plane. Antennas under
test can be rotated and elevated relative to the seawater surface
Mile Site, which is used to measure antenna performance over a seawater ground plane
Submarine Sensor Test Platform, which is used primarily for measuring antenna
performance and RCS characteristics of submarine sensors over open ocean and varying
sea state conditions
Mobil RCS Measurement Van
D.2.2.3 Naval Surface Warfare Center, Crane

The Naval Surface Warfare Center, at Crane, Indiana, maintains 2 anechoic chambers.
D.2.3 Space and Naval Warfare Systems Command (SPAWAR)

SPAWAR has developed the following capabilities:

AESOP performs the frequency planning and interference resolution for afloat combat
systems, radars, and communication systems. AESOP runs on Microsoft Windows based
personal computers and is approved for installation on IT-21 networks. AESOP is an
integration of the former EMCAP (a radar planning program) and the CPM (a
communications planning program) software modules.

SPAWAR maintains SPAWAR Instruction 3090.1, C4ISR System Criteria for Shipboard
Topside Integration. This is a complete compilation of requirements for topside design of
C4ISR systems, including, but not limited to, EM and structural. It is an invaluable
reference for program managers and developers.
D.2.3.1 SPAWAR Systems Center Charleston (SSC Charleston)

The E3 Branch, Code 725, at SSC Charleston provides E3 services to Navy, DoD, and other
customers. Specific functions include conducting EMI investigations, recommending preventive
and corrective measures for EMI and RADHAZ, performing EMC and RADHAZ surveys and
analyses, conducting EM susceptibility testing on electronic equipment, and providing E3
certification for facility planning documents. The branch maintains laboratory test capabilities for
Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D

142
MIL-STD-461 as well as commercial test procedures. A variety of tests can be performed,
including radiated susceptibility testing, transient testing (conducted and radiated), and EMP.
D.2.3.2 SPAWAR Systems Center San Diego (SSC SD)

Code 285 at SSC SD provides products, services, and support in the following areas:

Electromagnetic modeling, simulation, and interference mitigation, and
Systems analysis.

This division maintains and manages the following capabilities:

Antenna Characterization Range,
Antenna Pattern Range,
Composite Materials Test Facility,
GHz Transverse Electromagnetic Mode Cell,
Numerical Modeling Facility.

Project areas supported include the design, development, integration, evaluation, and modification
of communications, surveillance, and other EM systems. The following are examples of tasks that
are performed in those project areas:

Antenna designs and placements,
EMP and survivability testing,
EMI and IMI testing,
E3 and EME analyses, and
Shipboard design, including topside arrangement studies, antenna radiation patterns,
complex impedance/isolation measurements and predictions, and EMP protection.
D.2.4 Naval Research Laboratory (NRL)
D.2.4.1 Compact Range Facility and Anechoic Chamber

The Naval Research Laboratory, Radar Division, operates and maintains a Compact Range Facility
and a smaller anechoic chamber. The Compact Range, which produces far field conditions in a
limited space, enables users to characterize antennas that would normally need a space thousands
of feet long to properly measure. These facilities are used to measure antenna characteristics, such
as beam width, gain, side lobe levels and polarization over a frequency range from 2 to 100 GHz.
This range can also be configured to measure the RCS of antennas or other targets from 2 to 18
GHz. The largest object that can be measured in the Compact Range Facility must fit into a
cylinder that is 8 feet in diameter and 8 feet in length. Below 6 GHz, the diameter drops to 6 feet.
The Compact Range Facility is also configured to perform near field measurements. The Near
Field test facility is capable of scanning a 12-foot by 20-foot region and can be configured for
Planar, Cylindrical or Spherical Near Field Testing.
Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D

143
D.2.5 Navy Points of Contact

Chief of Naval Operations
ATTN: CNO N71
(Mr. Dave Harris)
2000 Navy Drive Pentagon
Washington DC 20350-2000
(703) 604-8391
dave.harris@hq.navy.mil

Navy and Marine Corps Spectrum Center
ATTN: Code 113 (Mr. Q. Vu)
2461 Eisenhower Avenue,
Hoffman I, Suite 1202
Alexandria, VA 22331-0200
(703) 325-2865
vuq@navemsen.navy.mil

Naval Air Systems Command (NAVAIR)
ATTN: AIR-4.9.5, Bldg 3197, Suite 1048
(Mr. M. Squires)
22347 Cedar Point Road
Patuxent River, MD 20670-1547
(301) 342-1660
michael.squires@navy.mil

Naval Sea Systems Command (NAVSEA)
ATTN: SEA-62E
(Mr. R. Bradley)
1333 Isaac Hull Ave S.E., Stop 5011
Washington Navy Yard, DC 20376-5011
(202) 781-3537
bradleyhr@navsea.navy.mil

Space and Naval Warfare Systems Command
ATTN: SPAWAR 052
(Mr. M. Stewart)
4301 Pacific Hwy
San Diego, CA 92110-3127
(619) 524-7230
fred.stewart@navy.mil

Naval Air Warfare Center, China Lake
ATTN: Code: 476400D
(Mr. S. Tanner)
1 Administrative Circle
China Lake, CA 93555
(619) 939-4669
stephen.tanner@navy.mil


Naval Air Warfare Center Aircraft Division
ATTN: Code 5.1.7
(Mr. K. Sebacher)
48202 Standley Road, Hangar 144
Patuxent River, MD 20670-5304
(301) 342-1664
kurt.sebacher@navy.mil

Naval Air Warfare Center, Aircraft Division
ATTN: Code 4.8.12
(Mr. R. Del Conte)
Building 355
Lakehurst, NJ 08733-5060
(732) 323-2085
Richard.delconte@navy.mil

Naval Surface Warfare Center, Dahlgren
Division
EM Effects Division, Code J 50
(Ms. S. Hudson)
17320 Dahlgren Road
Dahlgren, VA 22448-5100
(540) 653-3416
virginia.hudson@navy.mil

Naval Undersea Warfare Center
ATTN: Code 3431
(Mr. Craig Derewiany)
1176 Howell St. Bldg 1319, Room 239
Newport, RI 02841-1708
(401) 832-5542
derewianycf@npt.nuwc.navy.mil

SPAWAR Systems Center Charleston
ATTN: Code J 323
(Mr. J . Epple)
P.O. Box 190022
North Charleston, SC 29419-9022
(843) 974-4228
jepple@spawar.navy.mil

SPAWAR Systems Center San Diego
ATTN: Code 285
(Mr. D. Tam)
53560 Hull St.
San Diego, CA 92152-5001
(619) 553-3782
daniel.tam@navy.mil
Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D

144
Naval Ordnance Safety and Security Activity
NOSSA)
Explosives Safety, Code N716
(Mr. C. Wakefield)
Farragut Hall, Bldg. D323
23 Strauss Ave., Indian Head, MD
20640-5035
(301) 744-6082
wakefieldcl@navsea.navy.mil

Operational Test and Evaluation Force
(Mr. Steven Whitehead)
7970 Diven St.
Norfolk, VA 23505-1498
(757) 444-5442
whitehes@cotf.navy.mil


Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D

145
D.3 U.S. Marine Corps (USMC) Facilities and Capabilities
D.3.1 Marine Corps Points of Contact

Headquarters, U.S. Marine Corps
ATTN: Code C4/CS
(MSgt M. K. Rossow)
2 Navy Annex
Washington, DC 20380-1775
(703) 693-3476 (DSN: 223)
RossowMK@hqmc.usmc.mil

Marine Corps Systems Command (MARCORSYSCOM)
2200 Lester Street
Quantico, VA 22134-6050
ATTN: Code ACENG
(Mr. P. Bharucha)
(703) 432-3806 (DSN: 378)
BharuchaPT@mcsc.usmc.mil
ATTN: ACENG/SM
(GySgt L.D. J effreys)
Radio Chief/Spectrum Manager
(703) 432-3791 (DSN: 378)
J effreysLD@mcsc.usmc.mil\

Marine Corps Operational Test and Evaluation Agency (MCOTEA)
(Dr. Robert Bell)
3035 Barnett Ave.
Quantico, VA 22134
(703) 784-3141
BellRS@nt.quantico.usmc.mil

Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D


146
D.4 Air Force Facilities and Capabilities
D.4.1 Air Armament Center
D.4.1.1 Preflight Integration of Munitions and Electronic Systems (PRIMES)

The PRIMES Test Facility performs installed systems testing of air-to-air and air-to-surface
munitions and electronics systems on full-scale aircraft and land vehicles. The tests include
system level integration performance, weapon system effectiveness via the Guided Weapons
Evaluation Facility/PRIMES Link, and electromagnetic compatibility and vulnerability
measurements.

The PRIMES facility has the following capabilities:

100-dB, RF-isolated, anechoic chamber with a hoist lift capacity of 40 tons and capable
of testing all current U.S. Air Force and Navy fighter aircraft and helicopters,
Hanger - a sheltered, non-anechoic testing environment with access to all facility
simulation and instrumentation capabilities,
Outdoor Ramp an open-air flight line area for testing of large aircraft, with access to all
facility simulation and instrumentation capabilities,
Test Stations - shielded laboratories for subsystem level testing of fighter and bomber
electronics and weapon systems,
EMI/EMC Chamber - semi-anechoic shielded enclosure for testing to MIL-STD-461 and
commercial EMI standards.

The major PRIMES modeling and simulation systems include:

Real-time six-degrees-of-freedom flight motion simulator for shooter and target motion,
Four target, closed loop radar target simulator with dynamic radar cross section, jet
engine modulation, electronic countermeasures, and clutter signatures,
6174 open loop, multiplexed threat radar emitters,
MIL-STD-1760 weapons and aircraft simulators,
Two, 10-channel, differential Global Positioning System constellations and jammers, and
Test instrumentation systems, include MIL-STD-1760, MIL-STD-1553, H009, AIM-
7/9/120 umbilical and telemetry analyses.
D.4.2 Air Force Research Laboratories (AFRL)
D.4.2.1 Information Directorate

The Newport Research Facility is used to evaluate antennas and antenna systems in a far-field
"free space" environment, to determine radiation pattern changes due to airframe effects, for the
measurement of antenna-to-antenna isolation, and to support advanced antenna measurement
technology development. This facility provides the capability to conduct accurate measurements
of antennas installed on airframes (such as F-4, F-111, A-10, F-15, F-16, F-22, F-14, C-12,
Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D


147
RAH-66, B-1 sections), complex multi-beam and phased arrays, advanced ultra low side lobe
arrays and multiple antenna systems.

The Stockbridge Research Facility is located atop a 2300-foot hill. Real property consists of a
5800-square foot laboratory and 4000-square foot storage area on 300 acres of land. The facility
uses a modified AN/FPS-35 pedestal to mount and rotate large airframes such as the B-52, KC-
135, AH-1, C-130, and B-1B. An antenna pattern measurement system is used to evaluate the
performance of large platforms. The system provides the capability for measuring antenna
patterns and antenna isolation (coupling) on large airframes mounted in an upright or upside
down configuration. Airframe modifications can be performed on-site to simulate numerous
aircraft types and configurations.

The Anechoic Research Facility provides the capability to simulate, measure, and improve the
EM performance of weapon, communication, command, control, computer, and intelligence
systems in the EME in which they operate. It also performs EM effects research investigations
of antenna/aircraft EM interactions and EM characterizations of advanced technologies. Intra-
system coupling and isolation can be measured. The measurement area consists of two EM
anechoic chambers, two reverberation chambers, RF sources, and instrumentation. The two
anechoic chambers (40ft x 32ft x 48ft and 12ft x12ft x36ft) provide a free space EME for
detailed evaluation. A reverberation chamber (32ft x17ft x12ft) provides a "quick look,"
evaluation capability for assessments of RF coupling and shielding effectiveness.
D.4.2.2 Sensors Directorate

The EMI Test Laboratory is capable of performing all of the standard test methods of MIL-STD-
461, including 200 V/m evaluations up to 18 GHz. The primary test chamber is 18 ft x 20 ft and
is semi-anechoic in accordance with MIL-STD-461. The adjacent control room is shielded and
is 12 ft x 16 ft. Available power is 115 Volt, three-phase, 400 Hz; 28 Volt DC; and 115 Volt,
single phase 60 Hz.
D.4.3 Air Force Flight Test Center (AFFTC)
D.4.3.1 Benefield Anechoic Facility

This facility supports installed systems testing for aircraft and avionics test programs requiring a
large, shielded anechoic chamber with RF absorption capability that simulates free space. The
chamber is 264 ft x 250 ft x 70 ft. The facility is used to investigate and evaluate anomalies
associated with EW systems, avionics, tactical missiles and their host platforms and is suitable
for EMC evaluations where isolation from the external EME is required. Tactical-sized, single or
multiple, or large vehicles can be operated in a controlled EME with emitters on and sensors
stimulated while RF signals are recorded and analyzed. The largest platforms tested at this
facility have been the B-52 and C-17 aircraft. It also supports testing of other types of systems
such as spacecraft, tanks, satellites, air defense systems, drones, and armored vehicles.

Test equipment generates signals with a wide variety of characteristics, simulating unfriendly,
friendly, and unknown surface-based, sea-based, and airborne systems. With the combination of
signals and control functions available, a wide variety of test conditions can be emulated. Many
Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D


148
conditions that are not available on outdoor ranges can be easily generated from the aspect of
signal density, pulse density and number of simultaneous types.
D.4.4 738 Engineering Installation Squadron

The squadron provides measurement and specialized engineering services to include
communications circuit analysis, EMC, RADHAZ measurements, interference resolution and
direction finding, shielding effectiveness measurements, and EMP hardness verification testing.
The squadron has several mobile vans with telescoping antenna masts and spectrum analysis
suites equipped to make sophisticated measurements on site. Examples of past projects are
evaluating the EME in the vicinity of large ground radar systems and ensuring that protective
systems for ground communications shelters provide the required levels of performance against
the EMP threat.


Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D


149
D.4.5 Air Force Points of Contact

Air Force Frequency Management Agency
(AFFMA)
2461 Eisenhower Ave, Hoffman I, Suite 1203
Alexandria, VA 22331-1500
ATTN: E3 Issues (703) 428-1512
ESC issues (703) 428-1509

738 Engineering Installation Squadron
(EIS)
ATTN: 738 EIS/EEE
670 Maltby Hall Dr. Suite 234
Keesler AFB, MS 39534-2633
(228) 377-1037
DSN: 597-1037

Aeronautical Systems Center (ASC)
ASC/ENAD
2530 Loop Road West
Wright-Patterson AFB, OH 45433-7101
(937) 255-8928

Air Armament Center (AAC)
PRIMES Facility
46 TW/TSP
401 Choctawhatchee Ave
Eglin AFB, FL 32542
(850) 882-9354

Air Armament Center (AAC)
46 SK/SKI
205 West D Ave, Suite 348
Eglin AFB, FL 32542-6865
(850) 882-0970

Air Force Research Laboratory (AFRL)
Human Effectiveness Division
2504 Gillingham Drive, Suite 25
Brooks AFB, TX 78235-5104
(210) 536-2937


Air Force Research Laboratory (AFRL)
Information Directorate
ATTN: AFRL/IFSE
525 Brooks Rd
Rome, NY, 13440-4505
(315) 330-4826
afrl.ifse@afrl.af.mil

Air Force Research Laboratory (AFRL)
Sensors Directorate
ATTN: AFRL/SNZW
2241 Avionics Circle
Wright-Patterson AFB, OH, 45433-7318
(937) 255-2811 x3695

Electronics Systems Center (ESC)
ESC/EN
5 Eglin St.
Hanscom AFB, MA 01731-2116
(781) 377-9573

Space and Missile Systems Center (SMC)
P.O. Box 92960
Worldway Postal Center
Los Angeles, CA 90009
(213) 363-1880

Air Force Flight Test Center (AFFTC)
Benefield Anechoic Facility (BAF)
412 TW/EWWA
30 Hoglan Ave
Edwards AFB, CA 93524
(661)-277-0840

Air Force Operational Test and Evaluation
Center (AFOTEC)
ATTN: AFOTEC/AS
Kirtland AFB
Albuquerque, NM 87117
(505) 853-1988
DSN: 240-4837
Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D


150
D.5 Joint Spectrum Center (JSC)

The J SC mission is to ensure the effective use of the EM spectrum in support of National
security and military objectives. The J SC makes its primary contribution to the warfighter in
five areas:

Spectrum planning support the warfighters spectrum requirements by assisting in
spectrum policy planning, ESC, and frequency assignment planning,
Acquisition support to optimize the performance of systems in their intended operational
EMEs while minimizing system acquisition cost and schedule,
Direct operational support to the warfighter provides SM and interference resolution
support to the warfighting COCOMs and Military Departments,
Modeling and simulation by incorporating E3 into DoD models and simulations used for
tests, training, and acquisition, and
Information systems by supplying the databases, E3 tools, and battlefield SM systems for
the warfighter.

Analyses in support of these objectives have as their goal an evaluation of the impact of E3 on
systems, personnel, ordnance, or fuel. The application of E3 analyses may be to identify
optimum spectrum use, operational constraints, or system design alternatives for systems. For
personnel, ordnance, and fuel, predictions of RADHAZ distances are often required. E3
analyses must identify not only impacts to system performance alone, but also the impact of
system performance degradation in military missions, or, mission effectiveness. These analysis
requirements define the M&S tools of the J SC. A number of these tools are described below.
D.5.1 Joint E3 Evaluation Tool (JEET)

J EET examines potential E3 interactions between equipment scheduled for developmental or
operational testing and its EME. It identifies environmental equipment capable of an EMI
interaction with the system of interest and the conditions under which EMI is likely to occur.
J EET computes frequency and distance separation criteria required to preclude EMI. It utilizes
electronic and design parameters for the system under test, coupled with an operationally-based
or generic lay down to mirror the intended or any imaginable operational deployment of the
system. J EET identifies emitters capable of producing power density/field strength levels in
support of E3 susceptibility testing and vulnerability analyses. The EME is culled from a
database containing the electronic and operational characteristics of nearly 40,000 systems.
DoD, Government, civilian, and foreign equipment are reflected in the database.
D.5.2 JSC Ordnance E3 Risk Assessment Database (JOERAD)

The primary purpose of J OERAD is to collect, develop, and provide the data needed by the
operational commanders and planners to safely and effectively manage any conflict between
ordnance and EM emitters employed in an integrated J oint operation or exercise. J OERAD
contains the ability to view, query, and maintain stored HERO susceptibility data. With this
Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D


151
information, the warfighter can make informed decisions regarding the risks associated with the
use (or non-use) of certain emitters or ordnance items. J OERAD is a tool that the warfighter can
use to make these critical decisions. With J OERAD, the warfighter has the ability to compare
the maximum allowable environment that an ordnance item can be exposed without creating a
safety or operational (reliability) problem with the EM emitters found on various platforms.
D.5.3 All Region All Platform Propagation (ARAPP) System

ARAPP computes the coupling between antennas on an aircraft or any 3-D platform, based on
the Uniform Theory of Diffraction. ARAPP computes coupling of aircraft employing low
observable coated surfaces. Although ARAPP was developed for airframe analysis, it can in
principle be applied to ships and land-mobile platforms. Computer-aided design files have been
created for many aircraft and helicopters, as well as a few ship classes.
D.5.4 Cosite Analysis Model (COSAM)

COSAM analyzes the effects of EMI on a system due to relatively high-power undesired signals
from other systems in close proximity. It analyzes the performance of communications and radar
receivers operating in a cosite environment of conventional, frequency-hopping, direct-sequence,
and radar transmitters. The interference mechanisms considered by the model include spurious
responses, desensitization, cross modulation, intermodulation, broadband transmitter noise,
spurious emissions, and noise. COSAM provides the following types of outputs:

Probability of satisfactory receiver performance,
Achieved performance measure,
Probability density function and cumulative density function of the performance measure,
Excess interference levels,
Required desired power level to achieve satisfactory receiver performance,
Bit error rate,
Articulation score,
Mean equivalent input on-tune undesired power level for one-signal interactions, such as
receiver adjacent signal and transmitter adjacent signal, and
Communications range.

COSAM can be used for the following applications:

Determining optimal antenna placement on an antenna tower, topside of a ship, or within
an antenna farm,
Determining the effects of adding new equipment to an existing site, and
Selecting optimum frequencies for assignment in a cosite environment.
D.5.5 Graphical Analysis Tool for EMEs (GATE)

GATE is a cull model that provides inter-site EMC analyses. GATE analyzes the effects of
introducing new transmitters or receivers into an existing environment. It calculates
Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D


152
interference-to-noise power ratios, desired signal-to-interference ratios, power densities, and
line-of-sight contours. GATE generates frequency-distance curves based on DoD, government,
civilian, and foreign equipment technical parameters as defined by the J SCs Frequency
Environmental database. GATE considers the effects of terrain-dependent propagation for fixed
equipment and spherical-earth propagation for mobile equipment, combined with off-axis
coupling and frequency-dependent rejection, cross polarization, and harmonic effects. GATE
also analyzes EM interactions between equipment mounted on a platform moving along a
specified track (i.e., airborne, shipboard, or land-mobile systems) and an EME of fixed ground
equipment. The data required by GATE is a subset of the J SC frequency environmental database
containing frequency assignment data. It also uses a subset of the Equipment Characteristics/
Space data taken from the J EET database
D.5.6 SPECTRUM XXI

SPECTRUM XXI is an automated SM tool that supports operational planning as well as near
real time management of the EM spectrum with emphasis on assigning compatible frequencies
and performing spectrum engineering tasks.
D.5.7 JSC Points of Contact

Joint Spectrum Center
2004 Turbot Landing
Annapolis, MD 21402-5064
- E3 Engineering Division (J 5) (410) 293-4958
(Chief: Mr. M. Williams)
(J OERAD: Mr. M. Grenis)
- SM IT Division (J 6) (410) 293-4956
(Mr. T. Diep)
- Acquisition Support Division (J 8) (410) 293-2609
web site: www.jsc.mil

Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D


153










APPENDIX E


GUIDE FOR THE USE OF

COMMERCIAL STANDARDS



Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D


154
CONTENTS


Paragraph Page

E.1 General ............................................................................................................................... 155
E.2 Applicability Considerations.............................................................................................. 155
E.3 Detailed Requirements....................................................................................................... 155
E.3.1 Rationale for Requirements..................................................................................... 155
E.3.2 Evolution of Requirements...................................................................................... 156
E.3.2.1 Military............................................................................................................. 156
E.3.2.2 Commercial ...................................................................................................... 156
E.3.3 Summary of Relevant EMC/EMI Standards........................................................... 156
E.3.3.1 Military............................................................................................................. 156
E.3.3.2 Commercial ...................................................................................................... 157
E.3.3.2.1 International Standards...............................................................................157
E.3.3.2.2 United States National Standards...............................................................158
E.3.3.3 Differences Between Commercial and Military Standards.............................. 159
E.3.4 Selection of Commercial Items for Military Use.................................................... 160
E.3.4.1 Decision Process............................................................................................... 160
E.3.4.2 Anticipation of the Environment...................................................................... 160

FIGURE

FIGURE E-1 Defining Applicable EMI Requirements.161
















Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D


155
E.1 General

On J une 29, 1994, the Secretary of Defense issued a Directive requiring the military to use
performance-based requirements in procurements and to apply commercial specifications and
standards whenever possible. This Appendix is intended to aid acquisition personnel to assess
the suitability of using equipment qualified to commercial EMI/EMC standards in specific
military applications.

This Appendix should be used in conjunction with the EPS-0178 study. The EPS study provides
the results of detailed comparisons between major National and International commercial
EMI/EMC standards and MIL-STD-461E. Differences in limits, frequency ranges, and test
procedures were identified, and their potential significance was discussed in the study. In
addition, guidance was provided in the study on judging the acceptability of a particular
commercial standard for a specific military application.
E.2 Applicability Considerations

In general, the factors that need to be considered in evaluating the applicability of commercial
equipment for military applications include the following:

System performance requirements,
Impact on mission and safety,
Operational EME,
Platform installation characteristics, and
Equipment EMI characteristics.

Given the complexity and number of factors that must be considered in the overall evaluation
process, the process may require the assistance of E3 personnel.
E.3 Detailed Requirements
E.3.1 Rationale for Requirements

The motivation behind the development of military and commercial EMC requirements is
similar. Both are concerned with controlling emissions from equipment that may couple to other
equipment with very sensitive interfaces, particularly antenna ports. Also, both are concerned
with providing adequate immunity against EM disturbances that may be present in the
environment, such as EM emissions, both intended and unintended, electrical transients, and
power line voltage distortions. The reason for the distinctions between the military and
commercial requirements occurs because of the military platform types, particularly ships,
aircraft, ground vehicles, space vehicles, and ordnance. Typically, these platforms have a heavy
concentration of equipment including high-power transmitters and very sensitive receivers.
Submarines and certain aircraft may also have special requirements because of the frequency
ranges of many of their subsystems/equipment.
Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D


156
E.3.2 Evolution of Requirements
E.3.2.1 Military

The military first established EMI emission requirements for equipment in 1945 with the
issuance of J AN-I-225. Conducted and radiated measurements were imposed over the frequency
range of 0.15 to 20 MHz. The first susceptibility requirement (expressed in terms of immunity
in most commercial standards) was introduced in 1950 with the publication of MIL-I-6181. As
electronics became more sophisticated and applications more widespread, the requirements
evolved and expanded significantly over time. A variety of documents were issued with broader
frequency ranges for emission requirements and an increased emphasis on various types of
susceptibility requirements. In 1967, many of these documents were canceled or consolidated
with the issuance of MIL-STD-461/462. MIL-STD-461E merges these two documents into one.
E.3.2.2 Commercial

The FCC has imposed requirements in the U.S. for many years on radiated characteristics from
equipment antennas. The FCC first introduced requirements on more general types of
electronics in 1979 for computing devices in the CFR 47, Docket 20780. The requirements
used today are essentially the same and are limited to conducted emissions on power interfaces
and radiated emissions. The FCC does not yet mandate immunity requirements for general
electronics. Significant changes are occurring in the commercial world because of the EMC
Directive 89/336/ EEC, which was issued by the European Union (EU) and became effective as
of J anuary 1, 1996. This directive requires equipment sold in Europe to meet both emission and
immunity requirements. U.S. manufacturers who wish to sell their products in Europe must meet
these requirements. This situation has prompted greater interest in the U.S. in establishing
voluntary immunity requirements on equipment.
E.3.3 Summary of Relevant EMC/EMI Standards

Significant differences exist between military and commercial standards, not only in the ways
that requirements are specified, but also in the test methodologies that are implemented. These
differences present major challenges in making comparisons and are treated in detail in the EPS.
A summary of the major aspects of various standards is presented below.
E.3.3.1 Military

MIL-STD-461E specifies requirements and limits based on platform types (that is, surface ships,
aircraft, and so forth), equipment location in the platform (for example internal or external to the
structure), and unique platform features, such as anti-submarine warfare capability. Although
tailoring of the requirements is encouraged for individual procurements, MIL-STD-461E is
structured to provide a reasonable set of default requirements if tailoring is not specified. It also
provides a standardized test methodology, which is consistent among the various requirements.
There are setup conditions that are common to all the tests, such as ground plane usage, electrical
cable construction and routing, and power line treatment.
Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D


157
E.3.3.2 Commercial

A variety of commercial standards are discussed in the EPS study. The most predominant are
those established by the European Community. Other standards are FCC regulations, RTCA
DO-160D, and those issued by ANSI.
E.3.3.2.1 International Standards

IEC, CISPR, and the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) have published the
most significant standards. CISPR standards primarily limit emissions, both conducted and
radiated that are capable of causing interference to radio, television, and other radio services.
The devices creating the emissions are categorized in various ways. The IEC Technical
Committee (TC) 77 is concerned with emissions below 9 kHz and has established basic
immunity measurement techniques over the entire frequency range. In addition, various IEC
technical committees concerned with specific products prepare EMC standards for these
products. Similarly, ISO technical committees prepare EMC standards. Examples are TC 20 for
aircraft and TC 22 for motor vehicles.

European Union (EU). The EU EMC efforts are extensive and complicated. The EU
EMC Directive specifies general requirements that equipment be designed and built to
achieve the following:

The EM disturbance that the equipment generates should not prevent radio and
telecommunications equipment and other apparatus from operating as intended.
The equipment has an adequate level of intrinsic immunity from EM disturbances to
enable it to operate as intended.

The European Committee for Electrotechnical Standardization (CENELEC) is largely
responsible for approving detailed standards that are acceptable for demonstrating
compliance with the EMC Directive. Most, but not all, CENELEC standards are
identical to, or contain only minor deviations from, those developed by the IEC and
CISPR. All of the European documents discussed in the EPS report are either IEC or
CISPR standards. All are not yet adopted by CENELEC. Immunity test procedures
covered in the basic IEC standards tend to be written so that there is flexibility in
applying them, depending on the particular application. Also, a range of suggested limits
is generally given. The manufacturer or some other authority must specify a particular
level for certification. Another characteristic of these documents is that each tends to
stand alone regarding test methodology. They do not have the same consistency among
test setups as those specified in the MIL-STD-461E.

CE Mark. Products sold in Europe must comply with a number of EU directives and
contain the CE mark as an indication of compliance. For electronic products, this mark
indicates compliance with both Low Voltage Directives, 73/23/EEC and 93/68/EEC,
which address electrical safety, and the EMC Directive. The following discussion
concentrates on aspects of the EMC Directive. Several paths can be followed for
Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D


158
compliance. One approach is a self-declaration where the manufacturer issues a
Declaration of Conformity that the product complies without third party participation.
This declaration should be available upon request and must list the specifications used to
demonstrate compliance. When complications exist, a technical construction file is
produced containing the details of the methods for complying with the EMC Directive. It
is submitted it to a Competent Body for approval. The self-declaration is apparently
the most common path for items that clearly fall under a particular generic or product
standard (see below). The self-declaration is more risky for the manufacturer in the event
that compliance is challenged. The CE mark indicates that a decision has been made by
someone that the equipment meets the broad intent of the wording in the EMC Directive.
It does not necessarily indicate what specific tests have been performed or what specific
limits have been met.

Generic Standards. The IEC has issued a number of generic standards, IEC 61000-6-1, 2,
3, and 4, which specify emission and immunity requirements for two classes of
equipment: residential, which includes commercial and light industrial, and
industrial. The generic standards may be used when a product standard that
addresses the particular item does not exist. The generic standards list the individual test
standards, generally IEC and CISPR documents that are applicable, and the limits that
apply.

Product Standards. These standards are prepared by product committees who determine
what requirements must be applied for a particular product or product family to meet the
intent of the EMC Directive. To determine the appropriate requirements, these
committees review the application of the product and its intended EME. The selected
requirements generally will be derived from the IEC and CISPR standards.
E.3.3.2.2 United States National Standards

In the U.S., the FCC controls non-Government use of the frequency spectrum. Emissions below
9 kHz and immunity of equipment are controlled by a variety of commercial voluntary
standards.

FCC. For certain types of non-transmitting electronics, most notably computers, the FCC
has issued requirements presently contained in CFR 47, Part 15, which are similar to
CISPR 22. The requirements are limited to conducted emissions on commercial AC
power lines and radiated emissions. There are two sets of limits, one for residential areas
and a second for industrial areas. Separate FCC requirements in CFR 47, Part 18 are
applicable to industrial, scientific, and medical equipment that intentionally uses RF
energy in its basic operation. These are similar to CISPR 11. Requirements for Part 18
are limited to radiated emission controls that are dependent on the characteristics of the
RF source.

ANSI. Test methodology for certifying equipment as meeting requirements in CFR 47,
Part 15, is provided in ANSI/IEEE C63.4, prepared by the American National Standards
Committee C63. In addition, ANSI/ IEEE C63.12 contains guidance in selecting
Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D


159
immunity for three classes of equipment: residential, industrial, and those in severe
environments. Other C63 standards cover instrumentation, site and antenna calibration,
and other related topics.

RTCA DO-160D. DO-160D is used by the commercial airline industry to qualify
equipment as part of FAA certification of aircraft. Among commercial standards, DO-
160D is the commercial standard most similar to MIL-STD-461E. The test methodology
addresses many issues that are also important in MIL-STD-461E, including ground
planes, electrical cabling, and consistency among setups. DO-160D provides a number
of different categories that equipment can be certified to, depending on the type of
equipment, its installation location, and the desires of the equipment and aircraft
manufacturers.

Other Commercial Standards. Many standards covering specialized topics are produced
under the auspices of various professional and trade organizations. Because of their
specialized nature, they are not specifically compared in the EPS study with MIL-STD-
461E. The EPS study, in some cases, provides a broad evaluation of the standards. As
an example, the EPS study notes that fourteen SAE J 1113 series standards covering
motor vehicles were screened for homogeneity to requirements and test methods
specified in MIL-STD-461E. The result was that none of these standards could be
accepted as replacements for MIL-STD-461E requirements without modification of some
performance parameter, but the test methodology for each of the fourteen is identical to
the corresponding MIL-STD-461E test method.
E.3.3.3 Differences Between Commercial and Military Standards

Major reasons for the most significant differences between commercial and military EMC
standards are as follows:

Requirements for submarines are unique because of critical dependence on the reception
of lower frequencies of EM signals.

There is a large concentration of electronic equipment, including high-power emitters and
very sensitive receivers, aboard military platforms. For this reason, military radiated
emission limits are more severe than corresponding civilian limits. The military also
places high immunity requirements on devices exposed to nearby intentional emitters.

Military platforms have the general availability of grounded conducting surfaces such as
ground planes for mounting equipment, whereas most civilian equipment is mounted on
an ungrounded tabletop. However, this difference is not pervasive; for example, floor-
mounted civilian equipment is frequently bonded to a ground plane.

Some frequency ranges are more extensive in military requirements than they are in
commercial requirements; hence, if equipment is tested to meet civilian requirements,
additional testing may be needed for military use.
Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D


160
These significant differences make it impossible to find commercial qualified equipment that is
completely equivalent to equipment meeting military requirements. This means that a detailed
analysis is required to determine the adequacy of equipment tested to civilian requirements
versus the requirements of a particular military environment.
E.3.4 Selection of Commercial Items for Military Use

In selecting CI for military purposes, the Program Office must relate the characteristics of the
anticipated EME to the characteristics of the equipment under consideration. In order to
determine if a CI is adequate for a particular military application, it is necessary to accomplish
the following:

Determine which commercial standards are applicable to the equipment,
Evaluate whether the commercial standards are adequate for the intended use, and
Determine, if necessary, which additional requirements should be imposed.
E.3.4.1 Decision Process

Ideally, the overall decision process that should be used to evaluate the adequacy of any item
for an intended military application is illustrated in Figure E-1. The process is similar for both
military and commercial equipment. The performance requirements should take into account
whether the performance of the equipment is safety or mission critical. The process must
consider both the potential impact of externally imposed EMI on equipment and the impact of
emissions from the equipment to other equipment.
E.3.4.2 Anticipation of the Environment

In order to evaluate the applicability of commercial standards for military purposes, it is
necessary to define, as indicated in Figure E-1, the EME in which the equipment will operate.
Examples of areas that may be considered to have particular environmental characteristics
include ship topside, ship below deck, submarines, aircraft carriers, aircraft external, aircraft
internal, ground combat, and so forth. In a traditional military procurement, the acquisition
personnel would assess the anticipated use of the equipment and levy appropriate requirements
from MIL-STD-461E, tailored as necessary to match the anticipated EME. The equipment
would then be designed to meet these requirements and would be tested accordingly. However,
if existing CI is to be utilized, the availability of test data must be determined, whether the data
describes the EM characteristics of that equipment, and how well those characteristics meet
anticipated needs. Thus, it is most expedient to use MIL-STD-461E as the basic reference for
establishing EMI requirements as shown in Figure E-1. The procedure then deviates, depending
on whether the equipment is a military type or CI. If the latter, a complex evaluation process
should be initiated. Guidance for such an evaluation is the subject of the EPS report.
Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D


161













































FIGURE E-1. Defining Applicable EMI Requirements.

Specify Mission
Define performance characteristics taking
into account mission and safety criticality
Determine operational EME
Are requirements in
MIL-STD 461
appropriate?

Can
MIL-STD 461 requirements be
tailored to meet operational
requirements?
Specify additional
requirements
Tailor requirements
Is item
produced for military
or commercial use?
Use EPS, as applicable to
assessrisks
Evaluate risks using EPS
recommendations, as applicable
Does item meet
requirements?
Is retest
necessary?
Retest
Is risk
acceptable?
Can equipment or
installation be
modified?
ACCEPT REJECT
Modify
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
COM
N
N
N
N
N
N
MIL
Is additional
testing required?
Perform tests
Y
N
Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D


162














This page left intentionally blank.
Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D


163
CONCLUDING MATERIAL

Custodians: Preparing Activity:

Army - CR DISA (DC5)
Navy - EC Project No. EMCS-2005-002
Air Force - 11

Review Activities:
DTRA



NOTE: The activities listed above were interested in this document as of the date of this
document. Since organizations and responsibilities can change, you should verify the currency of
the information above using the ASSIST Online database at http://assist.daps.dla.mil.
.




Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.
MIL-HDBK-237D


164














This page left intentionally blank.


























Source: https://assist.dla.mil -- Downloaded: 2014-09-15T12:43Z
Check the source to verify that this is the current version before use.