Attachment A SOW.pdf

Effective Date: November 02, 2020 418-XO-GXISOW-0027

Expiration Date: Five years from date of last signature Version 1.0

Responsible Organization: GEO-XO Flight Project/Code 418 i

GEO-XO Imager Phase A Study

Statement of Work (SOW) Signature page

Prepared by:

Electronically approved 11/02/2020

Phillip A. Driggers Date

GEO XO Flight Project, Sys. Eng. Mgr.

NASA GSFC, Code 599

Reviewed by:

Electronically approved 10/30/2020

Christopher A. Wheeler Date

GEO XO Flight Project, Deputy Project Manager

NASA NOAA, Code 418

Electronically approved 11/01/2020

Monica Todirita Date

GEO XO Flight Project, Manager, Instrument Systems

NASA GSFC, Code 418

Approved by:

Electronically approved 11/02/2020

Jason H. Hair Date

GEO XO Flight Project, Project Manager

NASA GSFC, Code 418

Responsible Organization: GEO-XO Flight Project/Code 418 ii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. INTRODUCTION

1.2 OVERVIEW

2. TASKS

2.1 TRADE STUDIES

2.2 IMAGER DESIGN CONCEPT DEVELOPMENT AND RELATED ANALYSES

2.3 TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT AND DEMONSTRATION

2.4 MANAGEMENT PLANNING

3. REVIEWS, REPORTING, AND DELIVERABLE PRODUCTS

3.1 STATUS MEETINGS AND REVIEWS

List of Tables

Table 1: CDRLs

Responsible Organization: GEO-XO Flight Project/Code 418

1. INTRODUCTION

The Imager will be an infra-red (IR) and visible (VIS) imaging instrument that is planned to fly on the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Geostationary and Extended

Orbits (GEO-XO) program series of geostationary satellites. The Imager will meet, as a minimum, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) requirements as defined in this Statement of Work (SOW), Imager Performance and Operation Requirements Document

(PORD), the Unique Instrument Interface Document (UIID), General Interface Requirements

Document (GIRD), and Instrument Mission Assurance Requirements (IMAR). For this procurement, in the case of any conflicting requirements, the PORD requirement takes precedence.

This statement of work (SOW) specifies the vendor requirements for performing definition-phase studies and design development as part of Imager formulation activities.

1.1 Overview

1.1.1 Top-Level Summary of Work Required

The details of the deliverables are described in later sections. At the top level, the Government requires:

a) An Imager Design that satisfies the baseline requirements defined in the PORD, UIID, GIRD, and IMAR

Enhancements to the design beyond the baseline requirements are encouraged if they can be implemented on the specified delivery timeline. The list of potential enhancements that the Government will consider and the associated details are documented in the

PORD Appendix 1. Those enhancement options are grouped by relative value to the

Government, with Priority 1 representing the greatest value to the Government and

Priority 3 the least value. The Contractor shall determine as many or as few options from those lists to be included in their design and meet the specified delivery timeline.

b) An Assessment of Imager performance against requirements specified in the PORD, including any applicable requirements in Appendix 1

c) Trade studies as specified in section 2.1

d) Technical analysis as described in section 2.2

e) Notional development schedule as described in section 2.4.2

f) Cost analysis as described in section 2.4.3

g) Technology Readiness Level (TRL) Assessment and a Technology Development Plan as described in section 2.3.1

h) Identification of Development Risks as defined in section 2.4.1

Responsible Organization: GEO-XO Flight Project/Code 418

i) As applicable, performance of any work awarded for Technology Development and/or

Risk Mitigation effort(s)

j) Identification of hardware and software heritage assumptions as defined in section 2.3.2

1.1.2 Guiding Assumptions About the Eventual Flight Program

The Flight hardware development cost and schedule estimates shall be based on the following assumptions:

a) 1 Engineering Development Unit (EDU). What this EDU consists of is the subject of a trade study documented in section 2.1.b.

b) 2 Flight Units plus parts for 3 more flight units to be procured concurrently, with contractual options to build units 3, 4, and 5. Deliveries will be as shown in the following schedule (all dates are for the Government Fiscal Year):

MILESTONE DATE (assume 1st day of quarter)

Flight Contract Award Q3 FY23

Flight Model 1 Pre-Ship Review

(PSR1)

Q1 FY30

Launch 1 Readiness Date Q1 FY32

Flight Model 2 PSR (PSR2) Q3 FY32

Launch 2 Readiness Date Q4 FY34

c) No Government Furnished Equipment (GFE) will be provided. If there is specific

Government owned equipment which the contractor is proposing to utilize, then this equipment shall be specifically identified, along with the benefit and verification of availability.

d) Instrument Class: B (as defined in NPR 8705.4)

e) Mission durations: 10 year on-orbit life after 5 year on-orbit storage and 5 year on-ground storage after instrument delivery

f) The following instrument-level reviews will be held for the first flight build: SRR, IBR, PDR, CDR, PER, PSR. Subsequent flight builds will hold a PER and PSR.

Review pre-requisites, content, and success criteria are documented in NPR 7123.1.

Responsible Organization: GEO-XO Flight Project/Code 418

2. TASKS

The Contractor shall analyze the Imager requirements, perform trade studies to justify design decisions, develop a conceptual design for the Imager, and perform all other tasks as specified below.

2.1 Trade Studies

The Contractor shall perform the following trade studies and report on the results at the Midterm

Review:

a) Data compression study: Should the projected data rate exceed the requirement in the

UIID, the Contractor shall evaluate compression options to meet the data rate requirement. Lossy compression algorithms will be considered. In the trade study, the

Contractor shall weigh the image quality (as defined in the PORD) against data rate. In addition, the Contractor shall assess impacts to the electronics and/or software, cost, schedule, and development risk. At the kickoff, the Government will provide standard scenes to be assessed in the trade study. The results of this trade study are due at the

Midterm Review.

b) EDU Trade Study: The Contractor shall conduct a trade study of possible engineering models, from a complete instrument-level EDU to component-level EDUs. The

Contractor shall clearly document the cost, schedule, and risk associated with each option and make a recommendation on the best balance of cost and schedule vs. risk as a function of the level of integration. The results of the trade shall be captured in a Model

Philosophy & Plan document. The results of this trade study are due at the Final Study

Review.

c) Enhanced Performance Options from PORD Appendix 1: The Contractor may choose to augment the baseline imager with any of the enhancements listed in the PORD Appendix

1. The enhancements are binned in order of importance to the Government, with Priority

1 being the most important and Priority 3 being the least important. If the Contractor chooses to implement any of the enhanced performance options, the Contractor shall document the associated cost, schedule, and risk weighed against predicted performance associated with each design enhancement beyond the baseline requirements. The results of this trade study are due at the Midterm Review.

d) Day-Night Band (DNB) Trade Study: The Contractor shall conduct a trade study of incorporating a DNB into the design. The Contractor shall predict performance against the following benchmarks:

1. Central wavelength in the visible spectrum

2. Resolution requirements the same as those of the 0.865µm channel

(reference PORD section 3.2.3), with an SNR requirement of 5:1

3. Illumination equivalent to a quarter-moon

Responsible Organization: GEO-XO Flight Project/Code 418

4. The same MTF requirements as those given for the 0.865µm channel

(reference PORD requirement GXIPORD182) and the same Fixed Grid definitions as those given for the 0.865µm channel (reference PORD requirement GXIPORD26)

The trade study shall indicate which, if any, channels would be descoped to incorporate the

DNB. A description of the focal plane technology shall be given along with a technology readiness assessment and any relevant heritage. Associated cost, schedule, and risks shall be defined. The results of this trade study are due at the Final Study Review.

2.2 Imager Design Concept Development and Related Analyses

2.2.1 The Contractor shall develop an Imager design concept and perform associated engineering analyses to justify design parameters, tolerances, and design/performance margins.

2.2.2 The Contractor shall provide a quantitative comparison of the imager performance against the performance requirements in section 3.2 of the PORD.

2.2.3 The Contractor shall provide a summary of compliance to the UIID, GIRD, and IMAR requirements, including initial engineering analyses showing compliance to environmental requirements.

2.2.4 The Contractor shall review all requirements listed as "TBR" and either concur or suggest new requirement values. The Contractor shall quantify potential cost, schedule, and risk impacts of any suggested requirements changes.

2.2.5 The Contractor shall define a calibration methodology for the Imager (both pre-launch and on-orbit) and provide the associated radiometric budget for each (pre-launch and on-orbit).

2.2.6 The Contractor shall describe a reliability approach (planned redundancy, parts selection, etc.) to meet the required lifetime (10 year on-orbit life after 5 year on-orbit storage and 5 year on-ground storage after instrument delivery).

2.2.7 The Contractor shall identify all single-point failures and fault critical elements. As part of this analysis the Contractor shall describe the fault tolerant/graceful degradation features of the design.

2.2.8 The Contractor shall specify the resampling algorithm to be used for Imager image data remapping to the fixed grid coordinate system (see Imager PORD, Section 1.2). The expected performance of this algorithm as it compares to the System Modulation Transfer

Function requirements defined in the PORD (GXIPORD 3.2.3.1) and the rationale for selection shall be presented. In addition, the Contractor shall estimate the processing load to implement the ground processing portion of these algorithms. A data flow diagram, Responsible Organization: GEO-XO Flight Project/Code 418 inputs and outputs, flexibility, constraints, and INR or performance impacts of the resampling method shall be described in the algorithm document.

2.2.9 The Contractor shall develop a Master Equipment List (MEL). The MEL shall document the mass, power, and TRL of each major sub-component. A template for the MEL will be provided by the Government.

2.2.10 The Contractor shall provide descriptions of any simulation and analytical tools used in the assessment of the design and/or performance, including the heritage and validation of the tools.

2.3 Technology Assessment and Demonstration

2.3.1 The Contractor shall assess the technology readiness of all components of the instrument design. The Contractor shall provide a detailed Technology Development Plan (TDP), including a schedule, explaining how all technologies will achieve TRL 6 by the instrument PDR. If the study effort includes Technology Development effort, the TDP and associated schedule shall clearly identify all of the work covered by the Technology

Development.

2.3.1.1 If the study effort includes Technology Development effort, the Contractor shall implement the Technology Development effort under contract, brief the status of this effort at the reviews described in section 3 and provide a final report detailing the work done, any associated results, and the level to which the technology has been developed.

2.3.2 The Contractor shall document the flight hardware and software heritage and document any relevant differences between the claimed heritage and the proposed design (for example, on-orbit environment, mission duration, requirements, etc.).

2.4 Management Planning

2.4.1 The Contractor shall identify and rank risks to the development of the Imager and describe associated mitigations. The likelihood and criticality of risks shall be ranked on a 5x5 matrix per GPR 7120.4D. The Contractor shall identify alternate implementation paths for all high-risk items.

2.4.1.1 If the study effort includes Risk Mitigation effort, the Contractor shall implement the

Risk Mitigation effort under contract, brief the status of this effort at the reviews described in section 3 and provide a final report detailing the work completed, associated results, and the level to which the risk has been mitigated.

2.4.2 The Contractor shall develop an implementation phase schedule. The Contractor shall assume that the parts for all 5 flight instruments will be procured at the same time. The schedule shall show the following major instrument reviews: SRR, IBR, PDR, CDR, MRRs, TRRs, PER, and PSR, achievement of TRL6, development of the instrument physical model(s) (EDU for example), long-lead (> 1 year) procurements, and primary

Responsible Organization: GEO-XO Flight Project/Code 418 and secondary critical paths. The schedule shall identify any flight hardware procurements that are started ahead of the completion of the EDU (or equivalent). The schedule is required to meet the program level milestones shown in 1.1.1.b.

2.4.2.1 The Contractor shall suggest dates for the F3 – F5 instrument contract option starts and instrument delivery milestones that will minimize the overall cost, while also minimizing the development risk to F1 and F2. The nominal launch readiness dates

(LRD) and instrument no-later-than need dates are as follows:

Mission Instrument Need Date

(NLT, Gov. FY)

LRD (Gov. FY)

F3 Q2 FY35 Q2 FY37

F4 Q1 FY38 Q1 FY40

F5 Q4 FY40 Q4 FY42

The recommended contract start and delivery dates shall be used in the cost modeling.

2.4.3 The Contractor shall provide a parametric cost estimate for the development and production of five flight model instruments and any engineering model(s) recommended in the Model Philosophy & Plan (see section 2.1.b). The costs shall be separately identified for each model, flight unit, required GSE (ground support equipment), and technology development(s). The costs shall be shown phased by Government fiscal year.

The Contractor shall state what parametric model was used in the analysis and provide any inputs to the model beyond the MEL (reference 2.2.9). The Contractor shall describe the heritage of the model.

Responsible Organization: GEO-XO Flight Project/Code 418

3. REVIEWS, REPORTING, AND DELIVERABLE PRODUCTS

The Contractor shall perform the reviews and reporting tasks and provide deliverable products as specified below. The Contracting Officer's written determination that Government requests for action (RFA's) or requests for information (RFI's) regarding the deliverable reviews and products have been closed out will constitute acceptance of the deliverable.

3.1 Status Meetings and Reviews

3.1.1 Kickoff Meeting – The Contractor shall support a kickoff meeting within 2 weeks of the

Authorization to Proceed to provide a team introduction, summary of the proposed work for the study, and a high-level introduction to the initial imager design concept. The

Contractor shall plan for a 2-hour virtual meeting. The Contractor shall deliver a soft copy of the Kickoff chart set 24 hours prior to the meeting.

3.1.2 Monthly Progress Review (MPR) – The Contractor shall present the results of the work performed since the previous MPR and discuss relevant technical and programmatic issues and findings. The topics expected to be covered are listed in the CDRLs table in section 3.1.6. The MPRs shall be planned as 4-hour virtual meetings. The Contractor shall deliver a soft copy of the MPR chart set 24 hours prior to the meeting.

3.1.3 Midterm Review (MTR) –This review will be held at the NASA Goddard Space Flight

Center, pending travel restrictions. The Contractor shall plan on a one and a half day review. The topics expected to be covered are listed in the CDRLs table in section 3.1.6.

The Contractor shall deliver a soft copy of the MTR chart set 72 hours prior to the meeting.

3.1.4 Final Study Review (FSR) - The Contractor shall plan on a one and a half day review at the Contractor’s facility. If possible, the Government will travel to attend the review in-person, pending travel restrictions. The topics expected to be covered are listed in the

CDRLs table in section 3.1.6. The Contractor shall deliver a soft copy of the FSR chart set 72 hours prior to the meeting.

3.1.5 Final Report Package (FRP) - Any CDRLs that were not delivered and approved by the

Government CO prior to the FSR or any CDRLs requiring updates shall be submitted in the Final Report Package. Also, any open action items remaining after the FSR shall be addressed in the Final Report Package. The FRP is due 2 weeks after the FSR.

Responsible Organization: GEO-XO Flight Project/Code 418

3.1.6 Contract Data Requirements List (CDRL)

The Contractor shall deliver the data products specified in the following table.

Table 1: CDRLs

SU = Status Update; UAN = Updates as Necessary

ID Deliverable/Task Kickoff MPR MTR FSR FRP SOW

Ref

1 Data Compression Trade SU X UAN UAN 2.1.a

2 EDU Trade / Model

Philosophy & Plan

SU X UAN 2.1.b

3 Enhancements Trades SU X UAN UAN 2.1.c

4 DNB Trade SU X UAN 2.1.d

5 Imager Design SU Prelim Final UAN 2.2.1

6 Predicted performance vs.

PORD

SU Prelim Final UAN 2.2.2

7 UIID, GIRD, IMAR

Compliance

SU Prelim Final UAN 2.2.3

8 Suggested values for TBRs SU, final answer by

3rd MPR

UAN UAN UAN 2.2.4

9 Calibration Methodology SU X UAN UAN 2.2.5

10 Reliability Approach SU Prelim Final UAN 2.2.6

11 Single-Point Failures &

Fault Critical Elements

SU Prelim Final UAN 2.2.7

12 Resampling Algorithm SU X UAN UAN 2.2.8

13 MEL Prelim Final UAN 2.2.9

14 Modeling and Simulation

Tool Description

SU X UAN 2.2.10

15 TRL Assessment SU X UAN UAN 2.3.1

16 Technology Development

Effort (if applicable)

SU SU SU UAN 2.3.1.1

17 Heritage Assessment SU X UAN 2.3.2

18 Risk Assessment SU Prelim Final UAN 2.4.1

19 Risk Mitigation Effort (if applicable)

SU SU SU UAN 2.4.1.1

20 Flight Implementation

Schedule

SU Prelim Final UAN 2.4.2

21 Suggested F3 – F5 dates SU, final answer by

2nd MPR

UAN UAN UAN 2.4.2.1

22 Flight Cost Estimate SU Prelim Final UAN 2.4.3

23 Kickoff Meeting Charts due 24 hours before

3.1.1

24 MPR Charts 24 hrs before

MPR

3.1.2

25 MTR Charts 72 hrs before

MTR

3.1.3

Responsible Organization: GEO-XO Flight Project/Code 418

26 FSR Charts 72 hrs before

FSR

3.1.4

27 FRP Charts 2 wks post FSR

3.1.5

Responsible Organization: GEO-XO Flight Project/Code 418

Appendix A: Acronyms

CDR Critical Design Review

CDRL Contract Data Requirement List

DNB Day-Night Band

EDU Engineering Development Unit

FRP Final Report Package

FSR Final Study Review

GEO-XO Geostationary and Extended Orbits

GFE Government Furnished Equipment

GIRD General Interface Requirements Document

GPR Goddard Procedural Requirement

GSE Ground Support Equipment

NASA National Aeronautics and Space Administration

NOAA National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

NPR NASA Procedural Requirements

IBR Integrated Baseline Review

IMAR Instrument Mission Assurance Requirements

IR Infra-Red

LRD Launch Readiness Date

MEL Master Equipment List

MPR Monthly Progress Review

MRR Manufacturing Readiness Review

MTR Mid-Term Review

PDR Preliminary Design Review

PER Pre-Environmental Review

PORD Performance and Operation Requirements Document

PSR Pre-Shipment Review

RFA Request for Action

RFI Request for Information

SOW Statement of Work

SRR System Requirements Review

TBR To Be Reviewed

TDP Technology Development Plan

TRL Technology Readiness Level

TRR Test Readiness Review

VIS Visible

UIID Unique Instrument Interface Document

Responsible Organization: GEO-XO Flight Project/Code 418

Document Change Record (DCR)

CCR GEO-XO#: X00006 Rev Title: GEO-XO - Imager Phase A Study Statement of Work (SOW) Document Baseline

Contract # N/A GOES S/C: GEO-XO Effectivity: Instrument CCB Status: Approved Doc #: 418-XO-GXISOW-0027 CCB Date: 11/02/2020 Doc Version: 1.0 Contract Mod#: N/A DOORs Version: N/A Doc Change Date: Nov. 02, 2020 DOORs ID #: N/A