Safety Package Formal Review Report#

Note

Document header

[Your Module Name] Safety Package Formal Review
status: draft
security: NO
safety: ASIL_B
tags: template
realizes: wp__fdr_reports
doc__mod_temp_module_name_safety_package_fdr
Generic Document

Attention

The above directive must be updated according to your Module.

  • Modify Your Module Name to be your Module Name

  • Modify id to be your Module Name in upper snake case preceded by doc_ and succeeded by safety_package_fdr

  • Adjust status to be valid

  • Adjust safety and tags according to your needs

Purpose

The purpose of this review checklist is to report status of the formal review for the safety package.

Conduct As described in wf__p_formal_rv, the formal document review is performed by an “external” safety manager:

  • reviewer: <committer with safety manager skills explicitly named here>

Checklist

See also the review concept for further information about reviews in general and inspection in particular.

Table 14 Safety Package Checklist#

Id

Safety package activity

Compliant to ISO 26262?

Reference

Comment

1

Is a safety package provided which matches the safety plan (i.e. all planned work products referenced)?

[YES | NO ]

std_req__iso26262__management_6481

<Rationale for result>

2

Is the argument how functional safety is achieved, provided in the safety package, plausible and sufficient?

NO

std_req__iso26262__management_6481

The argument is intentionally not provided by the project.

3

Are the referenced work products available?

[YES | NO ]

std_req__iso26262__management_6482

<Rationale for result>

4

Are the referenced work products in released state, including the process safety audit?

[YES | NO ]

std_req__iso26262__management_6482 std_req__iso26262__management_6469

<Rationale for result>

5

If safety related deviations from the process or safety concept are documented, are these argued understandably?

[YES | NO ]

std_req__iso26262__management_6481

<Rationale for result>