Safety Package Formal Review Report#
Persistency Safety Package Formal Review
|
status: valid
security: NO
safety: ASIL_B
|
||||
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 doc_concept__wp_inspections for further information about reviews in general and inspection in particular.
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 ] |
<Rationale for result> |
|
2 |
Is the argument how functional safety is achieved, provided in the safety package, plausible and sufficient? |
NO |
The argument is intentionally not provided by the project. |
|
3 |
Are the referenced work products available? |
[YES | NO ] |
<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 ] |
<Rationale for result> |