80AFRC22N0008-SFD-Announcement.docx

National Aeronautics and Space Administration

Sustainable Flight Demonstrator

Announcement Number 80AFRC22N0008

Release Date: June 29, 2022

Proposals Due: September 1, 2022

Armstrong Flight Research Center Aeronautics Research Mission Directorate National Aeronautics and Space Administration

For Questions Regarding This Announcement Visit:

Sam.gov website

AMENDMENTS AND HISTORY PAGE

80AFRC22N0008

06/29/22 i

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ii

1. BACKGROUND

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) established the Sustainable Flight Demonstrator (SFD) Project as part of the Integrated Aviation System Program in the Aeronautics Research Mission Directorate (ARMD). The SFD Project’s overall goals support the ARMD Sustainable Flight National Partnership to accomplish the aviation community’s goal, as laid out in the U.S. Aviation Climate Action Plan, of net-zero carbon emissions by 2050. Concern over climate change has created an opportunity to target new aircraft technologies for the next generation of single-aisle airliners which account for greater than 40% of worldwide aviation emissions. A large-scale flight demonstrator X-plane will prepare these new technologies for entry into the next generation single-aisle airliner with objectives to lessen commercial aviation’s impact on climate change.

This Announcement for Partnership Proposals (AFPP) solicits proposals for the design, build, test, and flight of an advanced airframe configuration and related technologies to dramatically reduce aircraft fuel burn and carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions as part of the SFD project. As a result of this competition, NASA anticipates entering into one Agreement, with potentially more, with industry to support development of the advanced airframe and related technologies to maximize the potential and probability for commercial entry into service (EIS) in the 2030s.

The goals of the Project are to:

· Develop and flight test an advanced airframe configuration and related technologies to dramatically reduce aircraft fuel burn and carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions

· Obtain ground and flight data that will be used by the Industry/NASA teams to validate the configuration and associated technologies

· Inform industry decisions associated with next generation single-aisle seat class product [2030s Entry Into Service (EIS)] to maximize the potential to meet U.S. environmental goals articulated in the U.S. Aviation Climate Action Plan.

The SFD Project objectives are:

· Partner with Industry to design, develop, and integrate an advanced aircraft configuration Demonstrator relevant to a single-aisle transport class Vision System targeting significant improvements in fuel burn and associated CO2 emissions.

· Conduct ground and flight test of the Demonstrator to advance the technology readiness level of the advanced aircraft configuration and associated technologies, completing flight testing in a timeframe that the technologies can transition to the next generation single-aisle seat-class transport fleet with EIS in the 2030s.

· Collect design, ground, and flight data that will contribute to validating single-aisle transport class Vision System performance and Industry/NASA analytical and predictive models/tools.

2. PROJECT STRUCTURE

2.1. Approach

NASA is using a competitive process to select a proposal that best meets the objectives of the SFD project which will result in a Funded Space Act Agreement (FSAA) between NASA and the selected Industry Partner.

Under the FSAA, the Partner will lead the execution of the project with support from its industry partners and NASA. Industry will define their preferred approach for all phases of the project in order to mature the key technologies in preparation for product commercialization. The Partner will maintain ownership of the Demonstrator during and after the lifecycle of the FSAA. NASA will provide fixed payments to the Partner as pre-defined milestones are completed, as verified through a milestone review with defined entrance and success criteria. The Partner is responsible to cover all costs not covered by the NASA milestone payments.

In addition to providing fixed milestone payments to the selected Partner, other NASA furnished resources may be made available to support the partner. These resources may include access to NASA technical expertise, test facilities, and capabilities. The estimated value of requested NASA furnished resources will be assessed as part of the total NASA contribution in support of any proposed partnership.

The selected Partner will have the primary responsibility for definition of the Demonstrator requirements and project execution. A minimal number of NASA requirements are contained in this Announcement. In order to provide industry with the maximum flexibility for innovation, key NASA requirements, guidelines, and expectations for the SFD system Concept of Operations (ConOps) and project plan are included in section 2.2. Alternate approaches from these characteristics should be clearly described with associated rationales provided for each alternate approach as to their appropriateness.

2.2. Key Project Characteristics

This section outlines NASA’s requirements, guidelines, and expectations surrounding various financial and technical aspects of the SFD project.

2.2.1. Vision System

The Vision System consists of a next generation, advanced airframe commercial aircraft configuration intended to be developed and marketed for EIS in the 2030s by the Proposer. The Sustainable Flight Demonstrator is the test aircraft required to gather data (through ground and flight test) to validate aspects of the Vision System technologies and performance.

Assessments of fleetwide aviation carbon emissions indicate that the largest contribution to carbon emissions is in the single-aisle seat class market. As such, the SFD project is focused on advanced airframe technology for application in this market.

For the purposes of this AFPP, the single-aisle seat class is the commercial aircraft class (regardless of the number of aisles) with the following characteristics:

· Minimum 3200 Nautical Miles (NM) design range (Based on analysis showing most significant contributor to CO2 emissions)

· Minimum M 0.78 cruise (target Mach 0.80)

· Minimum 150 passenger two seat class arrangement

· Operate within current Group 3 airport infrastructure (jet bridges, wingspans, tail height, balanced field length, etc.)

· Capable of operations within restrictive acoustics airport environments over the Vision System lifecycle

If a Proposer’s Vision System does not meet this definition and market segment, they should provide a clear description of how their configuration would have a comparable impact on fleetwide emission reduction.

2.2.2. Airframe

NASA recommends that the SFD Demonstrator have a minimum life of 3000 flight hours and 1000 pressurization cycles, to account for the SFD flight test phase, and any future use of the aircraft.

The SFD Demonstrator should be appropriately scaled to enable validation of selected integrated system benefits and impacts of the Vision System.

2.2.3. Command and Control

NASA believes the combination of cost, system complexity, airframe scale, software development and validation, range safety, airworthiness, project risk, and schedule risk will lead to a decision for the SFD to be piloted. Alternate approaches may be considered and should describe how the proposed approach would mitigate these risks for a remotely piloted or autonomous configuration.

2.2.4. Flight Envelope

NASA anticipates the SFD will:

· Operate within a flight envelope representative of single aisle-class aircraft targeting an EIS in the 2030s.

· Demonstrate high-speed aerodynamic characteristics representative of a single aisle-class aircraft and matching the Vision System cruise Mach number.

· Demonstrate low speed aerodynamic characteristics representative of a single aisle-class aircraft.

· Demonstrate handling qualities and stability and control representative of future single aisle-class aircraft configurations to meet Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) handling qualities and stability and control requirements.

2.2.5. Flight Operations

Flight operations at NASA Armstrong Flight Research Center (AFRC) are available for Partner use and are encouraged but not required. NASA Aeronautics Research Mission Directorate (ARMD) funds the majority of the Dryden Aeronautical Test Range, chase aircraft, ground support equipment, and hangar space at AFRC, which will be made available for SFD flight operations. The assessed cost of the use of these facilities will be included, in addition to the milestone payment to the Partner, as part of the NASA resource contribution to the effort. If the Proposer determines that the project goals can be met more efficiently at an alternate flight test site, the Proposer should describe those benefits and include the associated costs in the proposal.

2.2.6. Airworthiness

Regardless of flight test location, the Partner shall obtain NASA AFRC airworthiness approval for all flights covered under this Agreement. In doing so, the SFD shall comply with NASA Procedural Requirements (NPR) 7900.3D, NASA Aircraft Operations Management. The demonstrator aircraft shall undergo an airworthiness and flight safety review process to obtain a certificate of airworthiness or airworthiness statement and an approved flight request/release. Upon FSAA award the Partner and NASA shall establish a mutually suitable airworthiness review process. The Partner shall propose the plan to establish airworthiness in accordance with AFRC airworthiness process for all flight activity to be conducted. This process shall be tailored in collaboration between the Partner’s airworthiness representatives, the NASA AFRC Chief Engineer, and the NASA SFD Airworthiness Tech Authority. To streamline the airworthiness processes, the Partner-led approach should follow internal company processes as much as possible while meeting the intent of NASA Armstrong requirements from AFOP- 7900.3-023, Airworthiness & Flight Safety Review Process. AFOP-7900.3-023 is a NASA Armstrong airworthiness process document that was developed to be compliant with NASA’s Aircraft Operations Management document, NPR7900.3D. This process assumes the adherence to industry standards such as AS9100 and design and built to aviation industry standards. Prior to the start of flight activity an audit of the partner’s flight operations will be conducted by NASA.

Terms:

Airworthiness Certificate: A government document which grants authorization to operate an aircraft in flight.

Airworthiness Statement: A memorandum authored by the AFRC Chief Engineer, and provided to an external Partner, that indicates a review of aircraft airworthiness and planned flight operations has occurred, and that NASA approves of the stated aircraft configuration and operations. The statement defines the duration of applicability, as well as any limitations to that statement. An airworthiness statement may be provided when a valid FAA standard, limited or restricted category type certificate of airworthiness exists for the aircraft.

Flight Request/Release: Official request and NASA authorization for NASA or a Partner to conduct flight operations per AFOP-7900.3-023 section 8.0.

Independent Review Board (IRB): The NASA led board responsible for conducting independent reviews (life cycle and special) of a program/project and providing objective, expert judgments to the convening authorities. Scope is limited to assessing efforts for the purpose of identifying any risks to achieving airworthiness. Actions should only be generated as necessary to ensure downstream impacts to the project are minimized to achieve airworthiness approval.

Flight Readiness Review Board (FRRB): An ad hoc team of subject matter experts (SMEs), independent of the Partner’s project team, chartered by the AFSRB Chair, that assesses airworthiness and recommends to the AFSRB whether the proposed project may proceed to flight. The FRRB members should be agreed upon by the Partner, SFD Leadership and the AFSRB chair.

Airworthiness and Flight Safety Review Board (AFSRB): The NASA led board that reviews and ensures the safety of flight projects. The board establishes airworthiness of an aircraft and issues an Airworthiness Certificate or Airworthiness Statement.

Tech Brief Board: The NASA led board that continues the safety and technical review processes after the AFSRB makes final recommendations and once the flight program moves into the flight phase. The board issues the flight release for a given flight or block of flights.

NPR 7900.3D requires that “the airworthiness process shall be continual throughout the course of a project” (2.6.4). The independent review processes should be synergistic with the lifecycle reviews that are part of the Partner’s normal development process (e.g. Preliminary Design Review (PDR), Critical Design Review (CDR), Flight Readiness Review (FRR)). The NASA SFD team and any independent review team members from the Partner or NASA shall be included in the key lifecycle reviews, design reviews and airworthiness reviews.

The AFRC Chief Engineer, in conjunction with the Partner’s Airworthiness Representative shall make recommendations for SME membership on the IRB to follow the progress of the Partner team throughout the development of the demonstration aircraft in preparation for the FRRB. Below is a suggested approach:

· The IRB is chartered by NASA and membership should be agreed upon by the Partner and NASA. There are no requirements for the number of reviewers provided by the Partner or NASA, only that the proper technical areas be covered by the IRB.

· Support and coordinate with NASA on the establishment of an independent review board (IRB) early in the life of the project that participates in all lifecycle reviews, and key technical project reviews.

· The IRB membership should consist of SMEs from NASA and Partners.

· The Partner should follow its own internal review process for establishing airworthiness.

· The Partner should include NASA airworthiness SMEs in its internal airworthiness review process.

· When the Partner is ready to proceed with airworthiness assessment IRB members will be assigned to the FRRB. Additional FRRB members may be added to the board based on the insights needed to satisfy the AFSRB.

Potential Airworthiness Approaches

The Partner shall identify the approach to airworthiness certification and address how internal Partner airworthiness processes demonstrate compliance with AFOP-7900.3-023. Some options to consider are as follows:

1. The Partner pursues a Standard Airworthiness Certificate (SAC) that may include a Supplemental Type Certificate (STC) from the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). While there is still a contractual requirement to have NASA airworthiness oversight, the extent of the modifications and any limitations or restrictions placed by the FAA will drive the depth of review by the FRRB.

· A NASA AFSRB will review the system and planned operation for the SFD flight tests via the IRB/FRRB established by the Partner and NASA.

· If the Partner is issued a SAC from the FAA, NASA will issue its own statement of airworthiness along with a flight release for the SFD flight tests per AFOP- 7900.3-023.

· If the Partner pursues a supplemental type certificate, NASA will issue an airworthiness statement along with a flight release for the SFD flight tests per AFOP-7900.3-023.

2. The Partner pursues a SAC (e.g. Restricted or Experimental) from the FAA.

· A NASA AFSRB will review the system and planned operation for the SFD flight tests via the IRB/FRRB established by the Partner and NASA.

· If the Partner pursues a SAC, NASA will review material presented to the FAA and may ask for supplemental information to issue a NASA Certificate of Airworthiness for an aircraft with Experimental or statement of airworthiness for a restricted certificate. This review along with a review of campaign specifics (e.g. concept of operations, flight test plans, and flight areas) will be used to grant a flight release for the SFD flight tests per AFOP-7900.3-023.

3. The Partner solely pursues a NASA airworthiness certificate.

· A NASA AFSRB will review the system and planned operation for the SFD flight tests via the IRB/FRRB established by the Partner and NASA.

· NASA will issue a NASA Certificate of Airworthiness along with a flight release for the SFD flight tests per AFOP-7900.3-023.

2.2.7. Financial Commitment

NASA expects the Partner to provide a large share of the total industry lifecycle cost for the SFD project. A commitment of 50% or more of the estimated industry cost is highly desired and will be considered in the evaluation. For the purposes of determining the level of commitment, NASA’s share will include both funding based on milestone payments and the value of any Government furnished resources (expertise, access to facilities, etc.) that are requested by the partner.

2.2.8. Future Demonstrator Utility

NASA recognizes that the Demonstrator may provide utility for future technology demonstration following the completion of the SFD goals. This Agreement makes no commitment to NASA participation in anything beyond the scope as defined in the FSAA.

NASA may consider an additional milestone payment related to inclusion of low-cost design features in support of future technology development only to the extent that they would avoid costly, difficult, or time-consuming impacts in the future. See section 4.3.11 for details.

2.3. Milestones

The scope of the FSAA which results from this AFPP covers the design, build, integration, and flight test of a large-scale demonstrator aircraft necessary to validate the benefits of and mitigate technical risks associated with the Proposer’s preferred Vision System.

Prospective partners shall provide proposed performance milestones that will be incorporated into the resultant FSAA(s). Proposed milestones should include a descriptive title, entrance criteria, objective success criteria, milestone amount (NASA payment), and planned achievement dates (month and year). Milestones should represent the progress of significant technical and business development events in the demonstration project. Milestones generally should provide detailed objective success criteria and be reasonable and realistic. The milestones should follow the lifecycle of the proposed effort, using industry best practices as appropriate. Milestone review entrance requirements should include data packages needed by NASA to validate the project goals and objectives. Payments will be made upon the successful completion of all of the criteria of each performance milestone negotiated with NASA and documented in the FSAA.

NASA will evaluate the Proposer’s proposed milestones and reserves the right to negotiate changes to proposed payments, milestone content, and dates. As a general guideline, there should be approximately one milestone per quarter. The Proposer is expected to maximize non-NASA funding sources to achieve its milestones under the FSAA. Accordingly, NASA’s milestone payment will not cover the total cost of achieving each milestone. Once documented in the executed FSAA, NASA’s funding contribution for each milestone will be a fixed amount and will not be increased based on the partner’s ability or inability to obtain private funding.

In addition to the milestones, a quarterly status review will be conducted to provide status on the work to date, assessment of work ahead, potential risks with associated mitigations, and technical capability maturity assessment.

Milestones should include:

· Typical project lifecycle gates and reviews

· Provide verifiable confidence of safe design and operations

· Provide detailed entrance and success criteria consistent with the milestone type including proposed data drops to NASA and disposition of milestone findings

· Establish the proposed level of Government insight including data access and availability

· Technical achievements that demonstrate the readiness of major systems, and/or performance of integrated functions pertinent to the above stated goals.

· Achieve significant risk reduction through testing

· Business progress, such as financing and marketing achievements

· Reflect Proposer’s funding schedule and sources

A set of example milestones and criteria are included in the draft FSAA Appendix A.2 of this AFPP. For all major milestones, it is required to designate at least one seat for a NASA representative on each review board as identified in Appendix A.2.

The review criteria for typical NASA Engineering Lifecycle milestones are defined in NPR 7123.1C, NASA Systems Engineering Processes and Requirements. Proposer tailoring of the criteria is permitted to align with company processes and industry best practices.

2.4. Project Schedule

NASA will commence its support activities with the Partner upon execution of the FSAA, which is targeted for early fiscal year (FY) 2023 and completion before the end of FY 2029. Proposers shall propose a schedule to support the demonstrator development and flight test per the scope of this Agreement that would support an end-product EIS by the 2030s.

2.5. Analytical Predictive Models/Tools

Given a primary goal of SFD is to obtain ground and flight data that will be used by the Industry/NASA teams to validate the configuration and associated technologies developed to dramatically reduce aircraft fuel burn and carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions, Proposer acknowledges that a primary objective of SFD is to collect design, ground, and flight data that will contribute to validating single-aisle transport class Vision System performance and Industry/NASA analytical and predictive models/tools. Many of these analytical and predictive models/tools will be made available to the industry to promote and improve the usefulness, performance, speed, safety, and efficiency of aeronautical vehicles. By submitting a proposal, Proposer acknowledges that any design, ground, and flight data provided or developed under the FSAA Article 12, which is marked Proprietary, may be used by NASA to validate/update any such analytical and predictive models/tools.

3. INFORMATION FOR PROPOSERS

3.1. General Information

Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration

Award Type: Funded Space Act Agreements (FSAAs) with milestone payments tied to milestones representing major technical achievements.

Industry Investment: NASA requires a significant industry investment (monetary and/or in-kind) from the Partner and its team members (See Section 4.3.6.1 for additional details)

Blackout: A blackout notice will be issued to NASA personnel upon publication of this AFPP, restricting all communications with potential Proposers regarding this competition.

Proposal Question Due Date: July 13, 2022, 1:00 pm PDT

Proposal Due Date: September 1, 2022, 1:00 pm PDT

Point of Contact: All questions shall be directed to the cognizant NASA official as specified below:

SFD Agreements Officer: James G. Williams, james.g.williams-1@nasa.gov, (661) 276-2501

Agreements Officer Backup: Rosalia Toberman, rosalia.toberman-1@nasa.gov, (661) 276-3931

Additional Information: The AFPP and related documents, as well as current news, responses to questions, amendments to the AFP, and other information, may be obtained and downloaded over the Internet at: sam.gov.

3.2. Eligible Proposers

Subject to Section 3.4, Compliance with U.S. Laws, Regulations and Policies, the following entities are eligible to be awarded a FSAA under this AFPP:

An entity organized under the laws of the United States or of a State, which is:

A. More than 50 percent owned by United States nationals; or

B. A subsidiary of a foreign company that has in the past evidenced a substantial commitment to the United States market through –

a. Investments in the United States in long-term research, development, and manufacturing (including the manufacture of major components and subassemblies); and

b. Significant contributions to employment in the United States.

Foreign research (including new technology development) participation: NASA’s policy is to conduct research with foreign entities on a cooperative, no-exchange-of funds basis. Although foreign individuals employed by a U.S. award recipient in support of the FSAA may receive NASA funds. NASA funding may not support research efforts by non-U.S. organizations, collaborators, or subcontracts at any level, including travel by foreign investigators. The direct purchase of supplies and/or services, which do not constitute research, from non-U.S. sources by U.S. award recipients is permitted.

Proposers and their partners involved in research and technology development shall complete and submit the eligibility certification questionnaire, which was provided as an additional file on sam.gov (see section 4.2).

3.3. Duplicative Funding

NASA will not fund Partner SFD efforts to the extent such funding duplicates payments made by the U.S. Federal, State, or Local Governments to the Partner, pursuant to another Government contract or Agreement, for the same purpose.

3.4. Compliance with U.S. Laws, Regulations and Policies

Partners must comply with all applicable U.S. laws, regulations, and policies, including but not limited to safety; security; access; export control; environmental; suspension and debarment laws and regulations; and establishing an Interconnection Security Agreement when applicable.

With respect to export control, any entity awarded an FSAA shall be required to comply with all U.S. export control laws including Export Administration Regulations (EAR) and International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR). Awardees shall be responsible for ensuring that all persons who will perform work under an awarded FSAA on export-controlled goods or services are eligible under export control laws, EAR, and ITAR.

Entities that intend to rely on Russian suppliers shall comply with the Iran, North Korea, and Syria Nonproliferation Act (P.L. 106-178, amended by P.L. 107-228, P.L. 109-112, P.L. 109-353, P.L. 110-329, P.L. 112-273, P.L. 116-94; 50 U.S.C. 1701 note) (INKSNA), or any other applicable sanctions law (including but not limited to the Chemical and Biological Weapons Control and Warfare Elimination Act of 1991, 22 U.S.C. § 5601 et seq.; Countering America's Adversaries Through Sanctions Act, P.L. 115 – 44 (Aug 2, 2017); and the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, 50 U.S.C. § 1701 et seq), during the Agreement performance. INKSNA prohibits payments to organizations or entities that are now or were in the past under the jurisdiction or control of Roscosmos (the Russian Federal Space Agency), or to any other organization, entity, or element of the Government of Russia for goods or services directly related to human spaceflight, other than for work on the International Space Station. INKSNA currently prohibits NASA from making payments in cash or in kind after December 31, 2025 for work on the ISS to the foregoing listed entities imposes reporting and assessment requirements. NASA has applied the restrictions in this Act to include NASA funding of Russian entities via U.S. entities. The Entity shall explain how its Russian supplier is not a prohibited entity under INKSNA or any other applicable sanctions law, or how the Entity will conduct its development effort without providing NASA funds or NASA technical assistance to the prohibited entity during the term of the Agreement.

Additionally, pursuant to The Department of Defense and Full-Year Appropriation Act, Public Law 112- 10, Section 1340(a); The Consolidated and Further Continuing Appropriation Act of 2012, Public Law 112-55, Section 539; and future-year appropriations (hereinafter, "the Acts"), NASA is restricted from using appropriated funds to enter into or fund any Agreement of any kind to participate, collaborate, or coordinate bilaterally with China or any Chinese-owned company, at the prime entity level and at all sub-entity levels, whether the bilateral involvement is funded or to be performed on a no-exchange-of-funds basis. Accordingly, proposals involving bilateral participation, collaboration, or coordination in any way with China or any Chinese-owned company, whether funded or to be performed on a no- exchange-of-funds basis, will be ineligible for award. By submitting a proposal, entities are certifying that they are not China or a Chinese-owned company, and that the entity will not participate, collaborate, or coordinate with China or any Chinese-owned company, at the prime entity level or at any sub-entity level, whether the bilateral involvement is funded or to be performed on a no- exchange-of-funds basis. “China or Chinese-owned Company” means the People’s Republic of China, any company owned by the People’s Republic of China, or any company incorporated under the laws of the People’s Republic of China. This restriction does not apply to the purchase from Chinese-owned entities of commercial items of supply needed to perform the Agreement.

Section 889 of the National Defense Authorization Act of 2019, “Prohibition on Certain Telecommunications and Video Surveillance Services or Equipment,” prohibits, inter alia, the Federal Government, Federal Government contractors, and grant and loan recipients from procuring or using any equipment, system, or service that uses “covered telecommunications equipment or services” (as defined in Section 889(f)(3)) as a substantial or essential component of any system, or as critical technology as part of any system. Due to the nature of the work to be executed under this Agreement, in performing the Agreement, entity agrees to not acquire or use, in any manner whatsoever or at any tier, “covered telecommunications equipment or services” defined in Section 889(f)(3)) as a substantial or essential component of any system, or as critical technology as part of any system.”

3.5. Intellectual Property

Under SFD, Partners will retain maximum intellectual property rights consistent with Federal law and regulations. Specifically:

1. NASA will not obtain rights in a Partner’s background intellectual property (data developed and inventions made at private expense that existed or were made prior to, or outside of, the SFD Agreement).

2. A Partner’s proprietary data, both existing proprietary data and data arising from work conducted under the SFD Agreement that a Partner considers proprietary, will be appropriately marked by the Partner and protected by NASA if appropriately marked.

3. If a Partner gives NASA proprietary data (engineering drawings, software, etc.) first produced by the Partner or its related entities under the SFD Agreement, the marked data will be disclosed and used under protective conditions. NASA retains the right to:

(1) maintain a copy of such Data for archival purposes; (2) use or disclose such archived data within the Government for continued validating and updating of the goals and objectives of SFD; and (3) use or disclose such archived Data by or on behalf of NASA for Government purposes in the event NASA determines that “march-in” conditions exist or if NASA terminates the SFD Agreement for the Partner’s failure to perform.

4. For any inventions made by Partners in the performance of work under a SFD Agreement, NASA is required by law – the National Aeronautics and Space Act (51 U.S.C. 20135) – to take title to such inventions. However, upon petition by a Partner, NASA will grant an advanced/identified waiver of title to such inventions to the Partner. NASA will retain only a government purpose license to use such inventions, but will refrain from NASA-use for a period specified in the Partner’s SFD Agreement upon successful completion of the Agreement’s milestones (see Appendix A, Article 13).

3.6. Title and Rights in Property

A principal goal of the SFD project is to facilitate the improvement in performance and efficiency of aeronautical vehicles, which is a stated purpose of NASA under the National Aeronautics and Space Act of 1958. In order to foster such improvements, NASA has determined that title to all property acquired by the Partner for the SFD activity will remain with the Partner(s). However, in the event of termination of the FSAA, NASA will have the right to purchase property developed or acquired by the Partner for the SFD activity pursuant to the terms of the FSAA (see Appendix A, Article 30).

3.7. Legal Liability

The FSAA(s) will contain a unilateral waiver of liability. Under the unilateral waiver, the Partner waives claims against NASA for damage to the Partner’s property or injury to its personnel, regardless of which party may be at fault.

Should a Partner provide property to NASA under the FSAA to enable NASA to support Partner’s activity, a unilateral waiver of claims by NASA against the Partner and its related entities will apply for any injury to employees of NASA or its related entities or damage or loss of property of NASA or its related entities related to the use of Partner provided property under the Agreement. No waiver applies in circumstances involving criminal or willful misconduct. To give full effect to these waivers, “flow down” provisions are included. These provisions require the parties’ legally “related entities” (contractors, subcontractors, users, customers, and their contractors and subcontractors) to agree to the same waiver.

NASA is not authorized to, and will not, indemnify a SFD Partner for any claims or damages of any kind. Thus, SFD Partners should consider obtaining appropriate insurance coverage. Such insurance coverage could include coverage for damage caused by anyone to the Partner’s property.

3.8. Award Funding

To make the biggest impact to carbon emissions with what NASA and industry have to offer, NASA anticipates one award for the Sustainable Flight Demonstrator, though multiple awards are possible. NASA anticipates up to $425 million spread over fiscal years 2023 to 2029 to be available for funding Milestone payments under the Sustainable Flight Demonstrator Agreement. The amount of funding allocated to any Partner awarded a FSAA will be solely at NASA’s discretion.

In an effort to continue the advancement of technologies, Proposers not selected for award of the Sustainable Flight Demonstrator may be considered for award of a reduced scope FSAA or Unfunded SAA for technology development tasks. Selection of potential awardees of a reduced scope FSAA or Unfunded SAA for technology development tasks will be based on the initial evaluation results. NASA reserves the right to perform due diligence to finalize overall scope of these potential awardees prior to award.

The Government’s obligation to enter into Agreements is contingent upon the availability of appropriated funds.

3.9. Ombudsman

An Ombudsman has been appointed to hear and facilitate the resolution of concerns from interested parties concerning the selection process for this AFPP. Interested parties include the Proposers, potential Proposers, and Agreement signatories. The existence of the Ombudsman is not to diminish the authority of the NASA Agreements Officer (AO), the Participant Evaluation Panel (PEP), the Selection Authority (SA), or any formal adjudication of a matter related to this AFPP. Interested parties are not to contact the Ombudsman to request copies of the AFPP, verify proposal due date, or clarify provisions of the AFPP. Such inquiries shall be directed to the NASA AO as specified in Section 3.1 of this document. Before consulting with the Ombudsman, interested parties must first address their concerns, issues, disagreements, or recommendations to the NASA AO for resolution.

If resolution cannot be made by the NASA AO, interested parties may contact the Ombudsman. At his discretion, the Ombudsman may request that an interested party submit any concerns, issues, disagreements, or recommendations in writing. Submissions or inquiries made to either the NASA AO or the Ombudsman will neither suspend the selection process, the award, or performance of the resulting Agreement. The Ombudsman may be contacted at:

Bradley C. Flick AFRC Deputy Center Director Phone: 661.276.3769 Email: bradley.c.flick@nasa.gov Armstrong Flight Research Center P.O. Box 273 M/S 4800:2011 Edwards AFB, CA 93523-0273

4. INSTRUCTIONS FOR PROPOSALS

4.1. Proposal Submittal

4.1.1. NASA will not issue paper copies of this AFPP. NASA reserves the right to select for negotiations all, some, or none of the proposals in response to this AFPP. NASA provides no funding for direct reimbursement of proposal development costs. Proposals submitted in response to this AFPP will not be returned. It is the policy of NASA to treat all proposals as sensitive competitive information and to disclose the contents only for the purposes of evaluation.

4.1.2. The electronic proposal shall contain all information required by the AFPP in order to be determined responsive. Files should have appropriate company and export control markings. NASA will accept no more than one proposal per company. A company may be a team member on other proposals.

Proposals shall be submitted to the AO and Backup AO (see section 3.1) via the NASA’s Enterprise File Sharing and Sync (EFSS) Box no later than: 1:00 pm Pacific Time, September 1, 2022, using the following instructions:

Electronic Submission of Proposals – Proposal Marking and Delivery Through NASA’s EFSS Box

The Proposer shall submit its proposal via NASA’s EFSS Box, a Federal Risk and Authorization Management Program (FedRAMP) Moderate certified platform. Electronic submissions shall not contain hidden formulas, tables, be locked, be protected, or contain links to data not included in the electronic copy. All electronic submissions should be searchable and should not contain scanned documents, except those documents that must be provided in their native format (e.g., signature pages). The Proposer shall ensure documents are free from viruses and malware, as documents determined by NASA to contain a virus or malware will not be opened or evaluated.

Prior to the submission of files, Proposers interested in submitting a response to this solicitation shall notify the AO and backup AO of their intent to submit a proposal at least 48 hours prior to the intended submission date. After receipt of the Proposer’s intent to submit, a link to the Box system will be emailed to the Proposer’s point of contact (POC).

The Proposer shall submit all proposal files via the assigned Box links. The Proposer shall follow instructions regarding proposal submission found at: https://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/procurement/other/EFSS-Box-Offeror-Proposal-Submission-Instructions.pdf

Electronic file names shall be limited to letters, numbers, and single spaces or dashes, with the exception of the period that is required before the file extension (e.g., .pdf), in order to successfully upload and download files from the EFSS Box system. The Proposer shall not use special characters “/” or “\” in file names. The Proposer shall clearly label the contents of the file and include the name of the Proposer in the file name. Example of acceptable file names are as follows:

Proposer name-solicitation number-file name.pdf

Individual files cannot exceed 150GB per file. Unless specifically authorized by the solicitation instructions, alternate proposal submissions shall not be submitted.

Immediately after all files have been uploaded and the proposal has been submitted in its entirety, the Proposer shall notify the AO and backup AO with a listing of all documents that were submitted via EFSS Box. If any problems are experienced with the EFSS Box system (e.g., login, file transfer), please contact the AO and backup AO via e-mail as soon as possible.

The Proposer is responsible for ensuring its proposal reaches the Government office designated in the solicitation by the date and time specified. The Government is not responsible for any failure attributable to the transmission or receipt of documents submitted using electronic means, including the missing of any submission requirements and established deadlines. Please note that uploading documents via EFSS Box and the transmission of the files from the Proposer to the Government may not be instantaneous. To ensure timely delivery, the Proposer is encouraged to submit its proposal at least 24 hours prior to the due date specified in the solicitation. The electronic submission of the proposal shall contain all information required by the solicitation to be determined responsive.

4.1.3. Proposals received by the Government after the published date and time for receipt shall not be accepted.

4.2. Eligibility and Compliance Certification

The Eligibility and Compliance Certification questionnaire file (Proposer Name-80AFRC22N0008-EligibilityQuestionaire.pdf) shall be completed by the Proposer and each of the Proposer's partners listed in the proposal's Teaming Approach (see section 4.3.4.6) that will be supporting partner’s research and technology development efforts. Questions regarding eligibility should be submitted prior to the proposal question due date (see section 3.1).

4.3. Proposal Content

4.3.1. Structure

All proposals shall be structured as follows:

The total page count for Section I is limited to 3 pages. Sections II through V combined shall not exceed 40 pages. Photos, drawings, graphics, plots, and tables shall be located in section VI and will not count against the 40-page limit. The Resources Worksheet and Eligibility and Compliance Certification questionnaire also do not count against the page count. A page count limit is not imposed on the appendices.

A page is defined as one side of a sheet, 8½” x 11”, with at least one-inch margins on all sides, using not smaller than 12-point type, with the exception of tables and figures, which may use 8-point type (anything larger than this will be considered two pages (i.e., foldouts)). Title pages, section and appendix cover pages, tables of contents, list of figures, list of tables, and acronym listings are excluded from the specified page counts.

4.3.2. Section I: Executive Summary

Proposals shall include an executive summary describing the prominent and distinguishing features of the Business Plan and Technical Approach for the SFD project. The executive summary should summarize how the proposal satisfies the following fundamental criteria: propose a demonstrator vehicle that will mature airframe and related technologies necessary to enable commercialization of a next generation single-aisle transport class Vision System targeting significant improvements in fuel burn and associated CO2 emissions in support of the U.S. environmental goals as stated in the U.S. Aviation Climate Action Plan. The executive summary shall stand alone and not directly reference the other sections of the proposal.

4.3.3. Section II: Vision System Impact

4.3.3.1. Vision System Architecture

Provide description of the Vision System architecture (using technologies, including propulsion, which are expected to be viable in the 2030s), with special emphasis on the airframe configuration. Include sufficient detail to allow the maturity and viability of design to be assessed. If the Vision System is likely to become a family of aircraft models, describe the family members with emphasis on the initial version to be introduced.

4.3.3.2. Impact on Fuel Efficiency and CO2 Emissions

Provide estimated Vision System CO2 emissions, fuel burn, and total energy consumption per passenger seat mile, for a single Vision System aircraft conducting up to four reference missions. These missions should include a design and economic mission described by NASA and a design and economic mission based on the Proposer’s anticipated first family product. The NASA design reference missions are listed in Appendix B. Recognizing the proposer is likely to prefer to enter the market with a vehicle model not optimized for the NASA reference missions, provide the Proposer’s mission requirements for preferred (i.e., anticipated first family product capability) design and economic missions and payload with corresponding mission/vehicle performance data. In both cases, the analysis should be for the most compatible family member to the specific design mission. If the proposer Vision System takes advantage of power generation from electric propulsion, then CO2 emissions associated with ground charging must be included in the accounting.

In addition, provide the ICAO CO2 Emissions Evaluation Metric and associated maximum take-off mass (MTOM) as described in Appendix B.

In all cases, the Vision System performance should be evaluated based on expected available propulsion efficiency for 2030s EIS.

4.3.3.3. Fleet Emissions Impact

Provide estimate of the percentage of total CO2 reduction by year through 2050, based on predicted market penetration of the Vision System (for guidance see figure 3 of U.S. Aviation Climate Action Plan). Provide predicted market penetration as a function of time along with supporting rationale for adoption by airlines/operators. Provide annual impact on CO2 over the expected life of the vision system broken out by contribution (technology, fuels, & operations). (Note impacts across the entire expected family of aircraft vision system are of interest).

4.3.3.4. Technology Assessment

Identify and provide current maturity assessment of technologies needed for the Vision System, highlighting current gaps.

4.3.3.5. Technology Development Risks

Provide Vision System technology development risk assessment, current status, and mitigation plans detailing feasibility that the technology development risks will be mitigated in time for 2030s EIS.

4.3.3.6. Aviation System Compatibility

Describe vision system compatibility with existing Group 3 airport infrastructure (jet bridges, wingspans, tail height, balanced field length, etc.) and Air Traffic Control (ATC) regulations & standards. Provide estimate of Vision System noise level relative to Stage 5 regulations. Provide assessment of any unique commercial operational benefits/challenges (e.g., use of under-utilized airports, cruise speeds/altitudes that are not consistent with current ATC operational models).

4.3.3.7. Commercialization Plan

Describe the Vision System Commercialization Plan explaining how the Proposer plans to transition the SFD flight tested technologies and lessons learned to a product. Include discussion of timeline and decision point(s), teaming/risk sharing, manufacturing and assembly plan, certification, and market assessment. Describe any feedback from potential customers on the commercial utility of the Vision System. If applicable, describe any new market segments that would be enabled. Other than SFD efforts, describe steps that need to be undertaken to address the remaining commercialization risks in order to make a decision to launch full scale production of the Vision System.

4.3.4. Section III: Demonstrator Technical Approach

4.3.4.1. Technology Development Plans

Explain how the proposed fight demonstration validates aspects of, and buys down the risk associated with, the Vision System. Utilizing the Vision System technology gaps, show down selection of high priority technologies proposed for the SFD Demonstrator. Provide description of the Proposer’s current Technology Readiness Level (TRL), technology maturation process through ground and flight tests, projected TRL levels as significant tasks are completed, and the benefits of technologies and maturation steps projected as they are envisioned to be integrated into the Vision System. Include the information /data that needs to be gathered with the Demonstrator, the sources of uncertainty being addressed in the design, development, integration, and test phases of the proposed effort and describe how the project reduces key technical and integration risks to introduction of the system in a Vision System product. Describe plans to leverage data from demonstration and analysis to validate aspects of the Vision System (traceability of demonstration(s) to Vision System).

4.3.4.2. Demonstrator Aircraft

Provide description, sizing, and renderings and preliminary drawings of the proposed Demonstrator aircraft. Include justification that the Demonstrator scale is an appropriate balance between cost and technology assessment needs. Describe Demonstrator’s ability to achieve flight conditions and configurations necessary to validate the key vision system technologies.