1. Cable Restraint Proposal Current design does not work. Objective: Find an alternate way of securing the LAT cables using as much of the existing design as possible and drawing upon designs with flight heritage.

2. Cable Restraint Proposal Cable Tray Risk Assessment Current design does not allow routing of the TEM to GASU cables (16 cables). Blocks access to connectors. Does not allow inspection of anything below the tray (TKR cables, TEM connectors, Calorimeter Hardware). Design does not allow to see and retrieve foreign items.

3. Cable Restraint Proposal Cable Tray Risk Assessment Cont. Inspections will be compromised. Trays have sharp edges that could damage cables. Will require disassembly of adjacent hardware during rework, which creates additional risk to flight hardware.

4. Cable Restraint Proposal. Use Pan poles due to: –Allows access to lower connections and retrieval of foreign items. –Allows visibility for inspections and rework. –Flight proven design. –Uses existing attachment points and hardware. –Requires less space. –Reduced weight.

5. Cable Restraint Proposal Calorimeter Plate is visible Connectors are visible

6. Cable Restraint Proposal. Cable intersection Pan Poles No sharp edges Connector Visible

7. Cable Restraint Proposal. Use Existing Attach Points Hardware from existing design is used. Existing attach points are used

8. Cable Restraint Proposal. Cable Trays Cable trays block view to TEM/PSU connectors and CAL attachment hardware

9. Cable Restraint Proposal. Cable Trays Clearance between electronic boxes and cable trays is less than.25” TEM cable gets pinched between Cable trays and TEM