FIELDS Instrument Risks Status

1. FIELDS Instrument Risks Status 5 4 3 PS F9 Likelihood of Occurrence (probability) 2 P P P P P F6 F5 F1 F2 F7 S P CS CS P F11 F12 F10 F14 F16 1 1 2 3 4 5 Consequence of Occurrence (Impact) High Medium Low (Criticality) Mitigation Plans in Place for All FIELDS Risks

2. Risk Notes: July 2013 No Change from June 2013

3. Backup

4. F1-P:Risk Burn Down A 25 20 Risk Grade 15 B 10 5 C Plan Actual * Grade = Likelihood x Consequence ** Assessment is the remaining risk assessed after successful event completion

5. F2-P: Risk Burn Down 25 20 Risk Grade 15 10 5 A Plan Actual * Grade = Likelihood x Consequence ** Assessment is the remaining risk assessed after successful event completion

6. F3-CS: Risk Burn Down A 20 15 Risk retired on 12/12/12 - Replaced with risk F15 Risk Grade 10 B 5 Plan Actual C D E * Grade = Likelihood x Consequence ** Assessment is the remaining risk assessed after successful event completion

7. F5-P: Risk Burn Down 25 20 Risk Grade 15 C 10 5 AB D Plan Actual * Grade = Likelihood x Consequence ** Assessment is the remaining risk assessed after successful event completion

8. F6-P: Risk Burn Down A 25 B 20 Risk Grade 15 10 5 Plan Actual * Grade = Likelihood x Consequence ** Assessment is the remaining risk assessed after successful event completion

9. F7-P: Risk Burn Down A 25 B 20 Risk Grade 15 C 10 5 Plan Actual * Grade = Likelihood x Consequence ** Assessment is the remaining risk assessed after successful event completion

10. F8-PSM: Risk Burn Down Risk Retired A 25 20 Risk Grade 15 10 5 Plan Actual * Grade = Likelihood x Consequence ** Assessment is the remaining risk assessed after successful event completion

11. F9-FS: Risk Burn Down A 25 B 20 Risk Grade 15 10 5 Plan Actual * Grade = Likelihood x Consequence ** Assessment is the remaining risk assessed after successful event completion

12. F10-PS: Risk Burn Down A 25 B 20 Risk Grade 15 C D 10 5 Plan Actual * Grade = Likelihood x Consequence ** Assessment is the remaining risk assessed after successful event completion

13. F11-S: Risk Burn Down A 25 B 20 Risk Grade 15 C 10 5 D Plan Actual * Grade = Likelihood x Consequence ** Assessment is the remaining risk assessed after successful event completion

14. F12-P: Risk Burn Down A 25 B 20 Risk Grade 15 C 10 5 D Plan Actual * Grade = Likelihood x Consequence ** Assessment is the remaining risk assessed after successful event completion

15. F13-P: Risk Burn Down A 25 20 Risk Grade 15 10 5 Plan Actual * Grade = Likelihood x Consequence ** Assessment is the remaining risk assessed after successful event completion

16. F14-S: Phase B Contract A B 25 20 Risk Grade 15 Retired 10 5 Plan Actual * Grade = Likelihood x Consequence ** Assessment is the remaining risk assessed after successful event completion

17. F15-CS: Risk Burn Down A 25 B 20 Risk Grade 15 Retired 10 5 Plan Actual * Grade = Likelihood x Consequence ** Assessment is the remaining risk assessed after successful event completion

18. F16-P: MEP Thermal Environment A 25 B 20 Risk Grade 15 10 5 Plan Actual * Grade = Likelihood x Consequence ** Assessment is the remaining risk assessed after successful event completion

19. Risk Notes: April 2013 F5 – Survival Thermal Environment (chart 7) - new data elevates risk over concern regarding the MAG thermal model (probability increase to 3). May need more heater power then what is allocated - believe an updated thermal model is needed to proceed in lowering this risk F15 – SCM Funding (chart 17) - FIELDS had a discussion with the Backup SCM lead at GSFC; it was determined that the heritage SCM is larger and heavier than the French device. - Thus, substantial redesign work will be required to accommodate the GSFC unit. - On the plus side, though, GSFC is available to support SPP on this effort, with a baseline schedule beginning in June 2013 (if needed) - believe an updated thermal model is needed to proceed in lowering this risk

20. Risk Notes: February 2013 • F10 – Antenna Qualification (chart 12): Risk burn-down updated to reflect the current state of Antenna Qualification testing: • APL is completing materials testing on the coupons that underwent high-temp testing at Glenn Research to determine if the material properties were affected by the high temperatures. • The antenna qualification thermal testing (currently scheduled for March 2013) may be moved to September 2014. This would still permit testing to be completed prior to FIELDS I-PDR. • 2) F13 – Third Axis Electric Field (chart 15): Lowered likelihood to “1” based on the completion of determining that it’s possible to do the measurement. Added the final step of confirming the addition of this to the complement of measurements in the draft ICD in May 2013.

21. Risk Notes: January 2013 • F15 – SCM Funding Issues (chart 17): Decrease the likelihood from 4 to 3 per discussions at NASA headquarters, in international affairs, are proceeding with CNES. Detailed discussions have commenced.

22. Risk Notes: December 2012 • F3 - Foreign Funding (commitment) (chart 7): - Risk retired and replaced with a more relevant, SCM-specific risk; New risk F15 – SCM Funding Issues • F15 – SCM Funding Issues (chart 17):If foreign funding sources fail • then we may lose the French search coil sensor and would switch to the backup - created to capture the SCM-specific funding issues • - expect CNES to re-evaluate SCM funding by Jan or Feb ‘13 • - if CNES does not sign the LOA explore: • - alternate HW source (3D Plus) for LPCE; or • - funding the backup option at Goddard • 3) F16 – MEP Thermal Environment (chart 18): If the MEP high temperature AFT remains over 55 deg C; Then FIELDS heritage electronics may need to be re-designed to accommodate the higher flight temperature.- MEP panel temperature is expected to be 55 deg C so, the allowable flight temperature may be 65 deg C which may lead to some parts issues. Change approach to mitigation if it's determined that parts need to be changed. • - Determine if the MAVEN thermal design is adequate for FIELDS (end of 1/13) • - Confirm all parts meet the MEP high temp AFT (by iPDR)