1. Ensuring the Success of 5 NASA/JPL
Projects Launched in 8 Months
2012 Project Management Challenge
Orlando, Florida
February 22-23, 2012
Rod Zieger,
Manager, JPL Project Support Office
Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology
John Hunter,
JPL Project Support Office
Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology
© 2012 California Institute of Technology. Government sponsorship acknowledged.

2. Purpose:
• This presentation will show the value of the
JPL Project Support Office (PSO) to mission
success during a period of intense mission
activity.
• The focus is on contributing to the success of 5
mission launches in 2011 and 2012, while
ensuring the success of all other JPL missions
in implementation and operations.
2

3. Integrated JPL Support to Projects
DIRECTOR,
DEPUTY DIRECTOR,
JPL
ASSOCIATE DIRECTOR,
FLIGHT PROJECTS and MISSION SUCCESS
CIO PROJECT SUPPORT
OFFICE OFFICE
CHIEF ENGINEER OFFICE of SAFETY &
OFFICE MISSION SUCCESS
BUSINESS OPERATIONS ENGINEERING & PROGRAMMATIC
DIRECTORATE SCIENCE DIRECTORATE DIRECTORATES
3

4. Project Support Office
PROJECT SUPPORT OFFICE
Topic of this presentation
COORDINATION and INTEGRATION
PROJECT PLANNING PROJECT ENGINEERING LAUNCH APPROVAL ENGINEERING, LAUNCH
OFFICE OFFICE SERVICES & IMPORT/EXPORT CONTROL
• NPR 7120.5 Support & Traceability • Flight Project Practices • Launch Approval Process
• SRB Support • Technical Infrastructure • LA HQ Interfaces
• Lifecycle Review Support • Reviews • Advanced Launch Services
• PSR/QR Administration • Risk Management • Cape Operations
• Planning Center • Contract Technical Requirements • Import/Export Control
• Project WBS • Project Gate Products
• PM Training/Certification • Technical Facilities
• Planning Templates • SFOS Operations Office
• Project Lifecycle
• PSO Website
• Formulation, Implementation and
Operations support
• ToR POC
• Formulation Agreement POC 4

5. The PSO website provides a
“one stop shop”
for project information
5

6. The 2011 – 2012 Challenge:
• 5 launches, 2 Lunar orbit insertions, 1 Vesta orbit
insertion, and 1 Temple 1 flyby, with:
– Many domestic and international partners
– 4 I&T sites
– 3 launch sites
– > 150 planned significant reviews and events
– Required attendance by high-level key staff from
NASA, JPL, international and domestic partners
Ensure that they are all successful
6

7. Busy Years: 2011 and 2012:
2011 2012
Project J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D
Temple 1 Flyby
Stardust-NEXT Feb. 14
Launched June
Aquarius 10
Launched Aug. 5
JUNO
Launched Sept. 8 LOI-A LOI-B
GRAIL Dec. 31 Jan. 1
V esta Orbit July 15 V esta Encounter
DAWN
Launched Nov. 26 Mars Landing Aug. 5
Mars Science Lab
Launch ~ March 14 7
NuSTAR

8. Organizations and Critical Events:
Mission Major Contributors I & T Site Launch Site Critical Events in
8 Months
Aquarius NASA, JPL, GSFC, Brazil Vandenberg Launch June 10,
CONAE, ASI, ESR 2011.
JUNO NASA, JPL, LMSC, LMSC KSC Launch August 5,
GSFC, ISA/INIA, SWRI, 2011.
Malin SS,
GRAIL NASA, JPL, LMSC, MIT, LMSC KSC Launch September 8,
2011.
LOI Dec 31, 2011 &
Jan 1, 2012.
MSL NASA, JPL, GSFC, ARC, JPL KSC Launch November
LANL, Malin SS, SWRI, 26, 2011.
Caltech
NuSTAR NASA, JPL, GSFC, Orbital Kwajalein Launch Mar, 2012.
Caltech, Orbital, SSL, (delayed from Dec
UCB, DTU 2011)
Stardust-Next NASA, JPL, LMSC, LMSC KSC Temple encounter,
Cornell Feb 14, 2011.
Dawn NASA, JPL, Orbital, LMSC KSC Vesta orbit insertion,
UCLA July 15, 2011.
8

9. The Requirement:
• Coordinate all key people, reviews and critical
events to:
– Enable required key people to plan attendance
– Identify and resolve conflicts
– Update plans continuously and keep everyone
informed
9

10. Example of Typical 6 months to launch:
(these are typical events for one project, next chart shows five projects)
MONTH 1 MONTH 2 MONTH 3 MONTH 4 MONTH 5 MONTH 6
Quarterly Report Monthly Report Monthly Report Quarterly Report Monthly Report Monthly Report
Center Directors Reports, Peer Reviews, etc.
Environmental Test Readiness Review
Project/ Center
Post Environmental Test Review Critical Sequence Review
Transportation Planning Review Test As you Fly Review Mission Events Readiness Review
Reviews &
Flight Parameter Review Pre Ship Review
Launch Sequence Review Certification of Flight Readiness Events
Flurry of activity Big flurry of Project/ Operations Readiness Review
Flight Readiness Review
around the end of activity Center/ Mission Readiness Review
integration and around launch
test, and preparation NASA Reviews Risk Assessment Review
Safety & Mission Success Review
to ship & Events Center Management Council
Governing Program Management council
KDP-E
Presidents Mission Success Review
Launch Ground Operations Review Review
Pre Vehicle on Stand Readiness
Mission Readiness Briefing
Range Flight Safety Review
Campaign SC - Launch Vehicle Pre Mate Review Flight Readiness Review – Launch Vehicle
Reviews & Launch Vehicle Readiness Review Launch Readiness Review - Range
Launch Site Readiness Review Launch Readiness Review – Launch Vehicle
Events LAUNCH10

11. Reviews and events for 5 launches in 2011 - 2012
April 2011 May 2011 June 2011 July 2011 Aug 2011 Sept 2011 Oct 2011 Nov 2011 Dec 2011 Jan 2012
Triangles represent reviews/events
from previous chart,
Aquarius
JUNO
GRAIL
MSL
NuSTAR
(Launch Slipped ~3 months)
11

12. Don’t forget the rest of the portfolio
EJSM
ERM
(2020)
(2017)
All the other projects have
critical events too
12

13. Everything interacts with everything else
Integrate, coordinate,
fix errors, resolve conflicts,
Everybody knows where they
have to be and when
13

14. How it’s done: The Process
Top Level Advocacy (Director’s Office)
- Institutional Buy-in
- High priority for “everybody” to keep up-to-date
Many sources
of inputs
Individual Key Project Support
Integrated
Staff Calendars Office Actions: Community
One person Calendar
- NASA HQ
responsible for: - Updated Weekly
- Centers - Discipline
- JPL Directorates - “Nag” for Updates
- Projects - Quality Control Output Formats For:
- Partners - Conflict Resolution - E-Mail (Spreadsheet &
- Management PDF)
- Facilities Approval
- Web Browsers
- Center & HQ Calendar
tools
- Smart Phones, Pads
- Wall Posters
14

15. Output Example: Waterfall Chart
Source OCE DIR Project Review/Milestone/Other LOC Sep Oct Nov Dec Conflict
NuSTAR X 7X NuSTAR Launch Sequence Orbital 5
MSL X 6X MSL ORR JP L 10-11 Attendees
SMAP X 8X SMAP P DR JP L 10-14 Attendees
4X Calendar X 4X GRAIL P LA R LM D 11
Cross 8X SMAP A pplicatio ns Wo rksho p DC 12-13
MSL X 6X MSL RA R-2 & Co FR # 3 JP L 12-13 Attendees
HQ SMD DPMC B lacko ut Date HQ 12-13
4X Calendar X 4X JUNO CM C - P o st P LA R JP L 14
DSN 6X MSL M ERR (DSN) JP L 17
5X X 7X NuSTAR Co FR # 3 JP L 17
8X Calendar X 8X Aquarius P LA R with CONA E Co rdo ba 18
Baez GSFC NPP FRR VA FB 18
4X Calendar X 4X JUNO SM D P M C - P o st P LA R HQ 20
HQ 1X See Agenda B aseline P erfo rmance Review HQ 20
HQ 6X Trace Gas Orbiter DP M C - KDP -B HQ 21
HQ SMD DPMC B lacko ut Date HQ 21
Baez GSFC NPP LRR VA FB 23 Change from last version
Baez X GSFC NPP Launch 2:48:01A M P DT VA FB 25
MSL X 6X MSL M RR S/C KSC 26
4X Calendar X 4X GRAIL P o st Launch Risk JP L 27
Elachi/Tattini/Jones Calendars
HQ 1X SMD M o nthly M eeting HQ 28
PSO See Agenda See Agenda Quarterly Repo rt JP L 31 1-3 (Before changing a GREEN
OCO-2 X 8X OCO-2 Instrument P ER JP L 1 highlighted date, email PSO at
Aquarius X 8X Aquarius P LA R (Tentative) JP L 1
Jason-3 X 8X Jason-3 CDR TB D 0 Charlayne.Fliege@jpl.nasa.gov)
4X Calendar X 4X GRAIL Co CER JP L 2
To Be Determined
MSL X EC MSL CM C - P o st M RR JP L 2
SMAP X EC SMAP CM C - P o st P DR JP L 3 Holiday
HQ SMD DPMC B lacko ut Date HQ 3
Phase or Encounter
Thomas X 6X MSL SM SR KSC 7
4X Calendar X 4X JUNO A gency P M C - P o st P LA R HQ 8
MSL X 6X MSL M RB /DP M C - P o st M RR HQ 9
Cross X 8X GRACE Follow-On CM C - P o st M CR JP L 0
Aquarius X EC Aquarius CM C- P o st P LA R - TB D JP L 0
8X Calendar X 8X Aquarius DP M C- P o st P LA R (Tentative) HQ 10
SMAP X 8X SMAP DP M C - P o st P DR HQ 16
HQ SMD DPMC B lacko ut Date HQ 16
4X Calendar X 4X GRAIL CERR JP L 17
HQ 1X See Agenda B aseline P erfo rmance Review HQ 17
MSL X 6X MSL LV FRR KSC 18
Baez X 6X MSL LM CM & DR KSC 21
4X Calendar X 4X GRAIL M ERR (DSN) JP L 22
MSL X 6X MSL LRR (LV) (L-3) KSC 22
Rules ALL None Ho liday JP L 24-25
MSL X 6X MSL Launch 10:21A M EST KSC 25 15
MSL X 6X MSL Launch Windo w KSC 25-30 1-18

16. Output Example: Sort By Project
Project Review/Milestone/Other LOC July August September October November December
Aquarius P LA R (Tentative) JP L 14
Aquarius CM C - P o st P LA R (TB D) JP L 0
Aquarius DP M C - P o st P LA R (TB D) HQ 0
DAWN Delta M issio n Readiness Review (M RR) JP L 28
DAWN A rrival P ress Co nference JP L 1
DAWN Start o f Vesta Science M issio n JP L 10
Trace Gas Orbiter CM C - P re-KDP -B JP L 1
Trace Gas Orbiter KDP -B HQ 0
GRAIL DSN M ERR JP L 4
GRAIL M RR - S/C KSC 9
GRAIL Co FR # 8 JP L 11
GRAIL S/C M ate Technical Readiness (was LSRR) KSC 15
GRAIL CM C - P o st M RR JP L 18
GRAIL B riefing to DP O/DP S (P o st M RR) Teleco n 19
GRAIL SM SR Teleco n 22
GRAIL System Certificatio n Review KSC 24
GRAIL M RB /DP M C - P o st M RR HQ 24
GRAIL P ress Co nference # 1 HQ 25
GRAIL LV FRR KSC 26
GRAIL LM CM /M DR KSC 1
GRAIL LRR (LV) (L-1) KSC 6
GRAIL 45th Space Wing KSC 6
GRAIL Launch 8:37:06 A M EDT KSC 8
GRAIL P LA R LM D 11
GRAIL P o st Launch Risk JP L 27
GRAIL Co CER JP L 2
GRAIL CERR JP L 17
GRAIL M ERR ( DSN) JP L 22
GRAIL CM C - P o st CERR JP L 30
GRAIL DP M C (P o st CERR) HQ 12
GRAIL B riefing to DP O - NA SA P SD (P o st CERR) HQ 12 16
GRAIL LOI - A TB D 31

17. Example: Fact Sheets
• Visual format that provides current, factual
information about projects
– Provide executives with current summary for
quick responses to questions
– Provide consistent summaries for Monthly and
Quarterly reporting
– Provide information in easy to understand form
for public
17

18. National Aeronautics and Space
Administration As of 12.06.2011
Jet Propulsion Laboratory
California Institute of Technology
JUNO
Mission Directorate: Science Mission Directorate (SMD)
Division: Planetary Science Division (PSD)
NASA HQ JPL
Program: New Frontiers – MSFC Program Office
Program Director: Jim Adams (PSD) Directorate: Firouz Naderi
Category 1; Risk Class B Mission jim.adams@nasa.gov Firouz.Naderi@jpl.nasa.gov
NASA Project Number: 804068
Program Scientist: Mary Mellott (HQ) Project Manager: Jan Chodas
mary.m.mellott@nasa.gov Janis.L.Chodas@jpl.nasa.gov
Science:
To improve our understanding of the origin of our solar system by understanding Program Executive: Adriana Ocampo Engineering Technical Authority: Doug
the origin and evolution of Jupiter, Juno will: adriana.c.ocampo@nasa.gov Bernard Doug.Bernard@jpl.nasa.gov
Determine the global O/H ratio (water abundance) in Jupiter’s atmosphere;
Measure latitudinal variations in Jupiter’s deep atmosphere Program Manager: Allen Bacskay (GSFC) Project Scientist: Steve Levin
(composition, temperature, cloud opacity, and dynamics); allen.bacskay@nasa.gov Steven.M.Levin@jpl.nasa.gov
Map Jupiter’s magnetic and gravitational fields;
Principal Investigator: Scott Bolton Mission Assurance: Larry Bryant
Characterize Jupiter’s polar magnetosphere and aurorae. scott.bolton@swri.org Larry.Bryant@jpl.nasa.gov
Technical Capabilities:
First solar-powered mission to the outer planets. Website: http://www.nasa.gov/juno Business Manager: Suzanne Oyama
Eight instrument payload to conduct gravity, magnetic and atmospheric Suzanne.M.Oyama@jpl.nasa.gov
investigations plus an E/PO camera. Fact Sheet:
http://www.nasa.gov/pdf/316306main_JunoF Library: https://alpha-
Polar orbiter spacecraft launches in August 2011:
actSheet_2009sm.pdf lib.jpl.nasa.gov/docushare/dsweb/View/Lib
 5 year cruise to Jupiter, JOI in July 2016 rary-93
 1 year operations, EOM via de-orbit into Jupiter in 2017  Website:
Elliptical 11 day orbit swings below radiation belts to minimize radiation http://www.jpl.nasa.gov/missions/missiond
exposure. etails.cfm?mission=Juno
PROJECT LIFECYCLE REVIEWS & MILESTONES
Phase Pre-A/ A Phase B Phase C Phase D Phase E
5.12.2005 – Step 2 05.21.2007 – Preliminary 04.20.2009 – Critical 03.22-23.2011 – Pre-Ship Review 10.04.2011 – Post Launch
Site Visit Mission System Review Design Review 06.06 - 07.2011 – Operational Readiness Assessment Review
11.28.2005 – Phase 05.12.2008 - Preliminary 03.01.2010 – System Review 08.30.2012 and 09.03.12 –
B ATP Design Review Integration Review 07.07.2011 – Mission Readiness Review Deep Space Maneuver
08.31.2008 – End of Phase B 07.15.2011 – Safety & Mission Success Review 10.9.2013 – Earth Flyby
07.20.2011 – Mission Readiness Briefing & 07.05.2016 – Jupiter Orbit
Directorate Program Management Council Insertion
08.05.2011 – Launch from KSC on Atlas V-551 12.01.2017 – End of Mission
03.29.2019 – End of Project
18

19. National Aeronautics and Space Primary Lead Organizations
Administration
Jet Propulsion Laboratory
California Institute of Technology
Southwest Research Institute:
Principal Investigator
Science Operations & Data Center
JADE & UVS Instruments
Jet Propulsion Laboratory:
Project Management
Project Scientist
Project Engineering
Mission Assurance
Payload Management
Mission System
Microwave Radiometer Instrument
Telecommunications Subsystem
Lockheed Martin:
Flight System Management
Spacecraft Development
Payload Integration
ATLO Management including Cape
Operations
Additional Providers
Goddard Space University of Malin Space Applied Physics Agencia Spatiale
Flight Center Iowa Science Lab Italiana
(GSFC) (U of Iowa) Systems (APL) (ASI)
(MSSS)
JIRAM (Selex
Galileo)
Magnetometer WAVES
JunoCam JEDI Ka-Band
Instrument
Translator (Thales
Alenia Space
Italia)
19

20. National Aeronautics and Space
Administration
Jet Propulsion Laboratory
California Institute of Technology
Juno Project Organization (Operations)
NASA Science Mission
Directorate (SMD)
Science Investigation Office New Frontiers Program Office Advisory Board
John Eterno (SwRI) PI, Chair
Principal Investigator Firouz Naderi (Dir, SSED, JPL)
Dr. Scott Bolton (SwRI)
Science Team Jim Crocker (VP, LM)
Deputy Principal Investigator Jim Burch (VP, SwRI)
Dr. Jack Connerney (GSFC) Dr. Enrico Flamini (Scientific Programs, ASI)
Education & Public Outreach Project Scientist
Alice Wessen (JPL) - Manager Dr. Steve Levin (JPL)
Subcontracts Manager Project Manager Project Systems Engineer
Geoffrey Pomeroy (JPL) Jan Chodas (JPL) Dr. Doug Bernard (JPL)
Project Resource Analyst
Genny Lopez (JPL)
Project Secretary Mission Operations Assurance Manager
Carol Ferguson (JPL) Larry Bryant (JPL)
Mission Manager
Charles Scott (JPL)
Juno Systems Engineer Deputy Mission Manager
Tracy Drain (JPL) Edward Hirst (JPL)
Mission Planner: Stuart Stephens (JPL)
DSN Interface Manager: Padma Varansi (JPL) MOS Engineer: Luis Morales (JPL)
Network Operations Engineer: Ida Baker (JPL) GDS Engineer: Marla Thornton (JPL)
MGSS Commitments: Priscilla Parrish (JPL) IOS Engineer: Amy Hale (JPL)
Msn Pln & Seq Instrument Ops
Navigation MM Resource Sch. Data Management Spacecraft Ops Juno Science Ops
Maria
John Bordi (JPL) Na Lee (JPL) Gary Smith (JPL) Kenny Starnes (LM) John Eterno (SwRI) --MWR (JPL) - Janssen
Schellpfeffer (JPL)
--Gravity Science (JPL) - Goltz
--MAG Flux Gate (GSFC) - Oliversen
--JADE (SwRI) - Reno
--UVS (SwRI) - Versteeg
--WAVES (UI) - Kurth
--JEDI (APL) - Haggerty
October 4, 2011 --JunoCam (MSSS) - Jensen
--JIRAM (SG) - Adriani
20

21. Results:
• Enabled complete coverage of 150+ critical events
• Coordinated many constantly changing plans
• Integrated project and other activities and schedules
• Identified and resolved conflicts
• Avoided surprises
• Coordinated travel
• Reduced frustration
• Kept everyone informed
21

22. What Was Learned
• Top level advocacy is required
– Institutional buy-in
– Updating calendars is last on the projects to do list
• It takes a dedicated person to “nag” for updates and resolve
conflicts
• Continuous updates and quality control are required
– Project’s and key people’s calendars change relentlessly
– Key people are unforgiving of wrong information, no matter what
the cause
• IT support is critical
– Integrated databases
– User-requested output formats and easy access
• Including ability to see charts on smart phones
22

23. Summary
• Recognized the need to coordinate many people and events
• Developed an organization and process that works
– Users ended up liking it and supporting it
– We plan to continue using it even when there are not 5 launches in 8 months!
• Utilized current information technology infrastructure to meet
many diverse needs
• Required similar dedication and attention to detail as any
flight project
Recommend that any organization with periods of intense
project activity consider a PSO-like organization
23