CLPS_On-Ramp_80JSC019R0013_Questions_and_Answers__8-55.pdf

Commercial Lunar Payload Services On-Ramp 80JSC019R0013

Questions and Answers #8 - 55

8. Question: The solicitation states only one proposal per offeror will be accepted. Will you be accepting proposals from offerors who already have a lander on contract for a new capability, system, or configuration they would like to on-ramp? If so, will the new capability negate/take the place of the capability they bid under the original solicitation, or will contractors who are already on contract be permitted to have more than one capability on contract? Finally, for this on-ramp, is an offeror permitted to include more than one lander design in their on-ramp proposal?

Answer: Yes, only one proposal per offeror will be accepted in response to the Commercial Lunar Payload Services (CLPS) On-Ramp RFP. Offerors with an existing CLPS multiple award contract do not need to submit a proposal for new capabilities under the on-ramp. Existing contractors may submit to National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) a new capability, system, or configuration by updating their User’s Guide. Yes, existing CLPS contractors may have more than one capability on contract. Yes, offerors are permitted to include more than one lander design in an on-ramp proposal.

9. Question: Does the schedule count toward the page count limit for the technical volume?

Answer: Yes, the schedule counts toward the page count limit for the technical volume.

10. Question: What will be the make-up of the NASA review/evaluation team? Specifically, will NASA’s proposal review team be comprised of technical reviewers representing only the Science Mission Directorate, or will there also be technical reviewers representing the Space Technology Mission Directorate and/or Human Exploration and Operations Mission Directorate as well?

Answer: The Source Evaluation Board (SEB) is comprised of a diverse field of experienced individuals across NASA from four (4) different centers (Johnson Space Center, Langley Research Center, Marshall Space Flight Center, Kennedy Space Center) with expertise in lunar science, lunar landers, spaceflight operations (both piloted and science-driven robotic missions), and technology development. The makeup of the SEB spans across the directorates (STMD, SMD, and HEOMD). When approved, the SEB member names will be posted to the CLPS On- Ramp acquisition website: https://procurement.jsc.nasa.gov/clps/

11. Question: Does NASA anticipate holding an industry day (virtual or otherwise) for the on-ramp?

Answer: Yes, the CLPS On-Ramp virtual combined Industry Day and Pre-proposal conference information was published on the fbo.gov website on August 8, 2019.

12. Question: We studied the documents and I did not find any TRL requirements. Before we put too much time into this effort, could you clarify that concept stage or low TRL concepts are allowed?

Answer: Concept stage or low TRL concepts are acceptable; however, the technical acceptability standards are described in the CLPS On-Ramp RFP section IV. INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS-COMMERCIAL ITEMS (FAR 52.212-1) (OCT 2018) in part IV.9 TECHNICAL VOLUME. The offeror needs to clearly demonstrate in the proposal the capability to get to the lunar surface by December 31, 2023.

13. Question: The RFP asks Offerors to include “key milestones” in its schedule, but does not elaborate. Are there any major milestones NASA is expecting in the CLPS on-ramp schedule?

Answer: The onus is on the offeror to identify and propose the key milestones in accordance with the offeror’s technical approach to accomplish its lunar surface reference mission per the CLPS payload delivery schedule.

14. Question: In what format does NASA prefer for the schedule? Based on the RFP, we assume that a MS Project file is required, but please clarify if not.

Answer: In accordance with the Request for Proposal (RFP) section IV.6(a)(4) the proposal, to include the schedule, shall be submitted in a Microsoft Office application (compatible with Word and Excel 2010) or Adobe Portable Document Format (PDF). Microsoft Project is acceptable for the schedule submission.

15. Question: Many of the recommended frequencies for lunar missions are federally allocated bands in the United States. While the U.S. government has typically allowed the use of federal frequencies for commercial space activities that align with U.S. government needs (specifically for commercial launch), it is unclear whether this practice will be continued and extended to commercial in-space operations (such as the activities contemplated under CLPS). What is NASA's stance on spectrum use for this type of mission? Is it expected, that offerors use the common allocations for federal missions? Or is it expected that they use fully commercial spectrum?

Answer: Guidance for spectrum use for commercial in-space operations is provided by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC). Offerors are expected to coordinate frequency allocations with the FCC. Offerors are to determine and propose the spectrum, whether common or fully commercial, that is applicable to their approach and business model.

16. Question: We are looking for a clear understanding of licensing requirements; however, it’s been a grey area policy wise on what US government supervision is required. Can offerors assume that for these missions that us government authorization and supervision will occur for these activities?

Answer: No, offerors cannot assume that for the missions that US Government authorization and supervision will occur for these activities.

17. Question: We want to understand the involvement in foreign IP owners, if US is licensing owner, and we are looking at coordinating with a company outside of the US, specifically, Germany.

What things should we know in this process that maybe aren’t coming through clearly in the proposal?

Answer: Proposals submitted should demonstrate compliance with RFP Clause I.21. See answer to question 18.

18. Question: Trying to understand scenario where Intellectual Property (IP) is licensed (inclusion of foreigners), all manufacturing in United States and so is launch, but IP (Lander specifically is 100%) are European. How does IP part fit?

Answer: Per Clause I.21, “CLPS space transportation vehicles will be considered domestic end products only if the cost of their components, mined, produced or manufactured, in the United States exceed fifty (50) percent of the cost of all their components. The cost of each component includes transportation costs to the place of incorporation into the CLPS and any applicable duty (whether or not a duty-free certificate is issued).” Assembly, integration, and testing would be necessarily included in the cost of manufacturing.

Per the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR), domestic end products are either (1) unmanufactured end products mined or produced in the United States or (2) an end product manufactured in the United States if the cost of its components mined, produced or manufactured in the United States exceeds 50 percent of the costs of all its components. The manufacturing costs of domestic end products, including all labor and services associated with such manufacturing, should be included in the overall calculation when determining if the costs of components exceed 50% of all components per the clause.

The FAR defines a component as an article, material, or supply incorporated directly into an end product or construction material. As such, intellectual property and software, including the design, of components would not be included in the calculation as they are not “components.”

19. Question: Will more teams be invited to participate, in addition to original nine?

Answer: Yes, the on-ramp process is to increase the original nine CLPS multi-award contractor pool by adding new contractors to the CLPS multi-award.

20. Question: Some of the winners thus far do not have any space heritage, will that be heavily weighted in this initial uptake.

Answer: Commercial lunar payload services are considered an emerging industry without relevant past performance for transportation services to the lunar surface; therefore, past performance for this on-ramp will not be evaluated.

21. Question: If we are looking for services for this project, how can we help partner with other companies, to get where they need be with these missions?

Answer: There are different approaches to finding partnering opportunities including, but not limited to: reaching out to existing CLPS contractors, reviewing the interested parties list, and having discussions with the Johnson Space Center Industry Assistance Office.

22. Question: Can you confirm the source selection official?

Answer: When the source selection official is confirmed their name will be posted to the CLPS On-Ramp acquisition website: https://procurement.jsc.nasa.gov/clps/

23. Question: Can you confirm if we get into the IDIQ catalog and a task order comes out, do we have the ability to propose additional capabilities that were not disclosed during the on-ramping?

Answer: Yes, an on-ramped contractor may update their User’s Guide and propose on future task orders additional capabilities that were not disclosed during on-ramp.

24. Question: Once we submit a User’s Guide, can we update it periodically?

Answer: Yes, the User’s Guide should be updated as the contractor’s designs and capabilities change to facilitate maximum compatibility with future NASA payloads.

25. Question: In the RFP, it talks about submitting some documents in .pdf format and others in word documents. Is there a preference?

Answer: No, there is no preference. In accordance with the RFP section, IV6(a)(4), the electronic copy of the Offeror’s proposal shall be submitted in Microsoft Office® applications (compatible with Word and Excel 2010) or Adobe Portable Document Format (PDF) (compatible with version X).

26. Question: The way small business goal was stated, 12.6% sub-total, is potentially misleading and/or confusing. Doesn’t seem to work, can we clarify, is this real?

Answer: As stated in clause I.18 Small Business Subcontracting Goals, the Total Small Business (TSB) goal is 12.6 %. The TSB goal of 12.6 % includes the Small Business goal and its subcategories: Small Disadvantaged Business Concerns (SD B); Woman-Owned Small Business Concerns (WOSB); Historically Underutilized Business Zones (HUBZone); Veteran Owned Small Business (VOSB) concern and Service Disabled Veteran-Owned Small Business Concern (SDVOSB). However, the TSB goal will not equal to a combination of all of the subcategories rolled-up as each subcategories may contain elements of more than one subcategory. Also, as stated in IV.8 Offer Volume part (3) Small Business Subcontracting Plan, “Offerors are encouraged to propose goals that are equivalent to or greater than those that the Contracting Officer has recommended. However, Offerors shall perform their own independent assessment of the small business subcontracting opportunities and are encouraged to propose goals exceeding the recommended goals where practical.”

27. Question: Getting a little ahead, but with respect to task orders, what will be the response time?

Answer: In accordance with the RFP clause I.17 TASK ORDERING PROCEDURE (NFS 1852.216-80) (OCT 1996), ALTERNATE II (APR 2018), the Request for Task Plan for task orders will specify from the time of receipt of the Contracting Officer's request the number of calendar days from which proposals are due.

28. Question: Is there a mix of folks representing STMD, HEO, SMD, etc? Or is it generally SMD folks on SEB panel?

Answer: Please see response to question number 10.

29. Question: Discussions about landers to do pre-positioning for human presence on moon.

Today’s discussions were about science instruments and payloads, so what role does CLPS play with future pre-positioning payloads for human?

Answer: The CLPS contract is available for use by any part of the agency. However, the role that CLPS might play in future pre-positioning of payloads for landed piloted (human) missions to the lunar surface is to be determined.

30. Question: This is 8-9 year contract, our technology will evolve and so will mission needs, so how is CLPS anticipated to flex as these changes occur? How much flexibility do they have to update and change configuration of landers proposed?

Answer: As technology changes occur to include changes to the configuration of landers, each CLPS contractor will communicate this to NASA through updates of their User’s Guide.

NASA’s CLPS requirements will be communicated to the CLPS multi-award vendors via new Requests for Task Plan(s).

31. Question: The proposal asks for a reference mission, so we’ll offer a configuration of a lander for that mission. But there will be different missions on different task orders, can we change the configuration of the landers for each task order or do we need to get multiple configurations on contract?

Answer: Each on-ramped CLPS contractor will receive one contract under the CLPS multi-award. Each CLPS contractor will be issued a task order to deliver and maintain a User’s Guide, which includes the suite of capabilities available to NASA. Configuration changes can be updated in the User’s Guide and proposed with for future task orders.

32. Question: How much detail are we looking for in the schedule, are there specific milestones?

Answer: NASA is looking for the appropriate level of detail to demonstrate the contractor’s ability to achieve a successful landing no later than December 31, 2023 with the offeror’s milestones leading to a successful lunar landing.

33. Question: Does schedule count against the 33-page limit? Would NASA like MS Project file or .pdf file?

Answer: Yes, schedule counts against the technical volume page count. The technical page limit is 31 pages not 33. In accordance with the Request for Proposal (RFP), section IV.6 (a)(4) the proposal shall be submitted in a Microsoft Office application (compatible with Word and Excel 2010) or Adobe Portable Document Format (PDF). Microsoft Project is acceptable for the schedule submission.

34. Question: The RFP asks for Thermal, Power and Mass budgets. A thermal analysis report for a mission like this could alone easily fill the entire page allocation for the technical volume. Could you provide guidance on the level of detail, or any other specifics the government is looking for in the proposal for these items?

Answer: The offeror shall provide a sufficient description of mass, power, and thermal budgets, including design margin, for its reference mission within the 31-page technical volume limit.

35. Question: For Rover dimensions, 1.5 x 1.5 x 2.0 meters, wanted to confirm which was height?

Answer: The rover dimensions of 1.5 x 1.5 x 2.0 meters were approximate and briefly presented during Industry Day as representational information. NASA is not providing further detail on the notional Volatiles Investigation Polar Exploration Rover than what was provided at Industry Day. The hypothetical reference mission that must be proposed in response to the On-Ramping RFP need not include any rover capability.

36. Question: Small Business requirements, we have a current existing Small Business plan, how to confirm that it would meet requirements of RFP?

Answer: Per CLPS On-Ramp RFP a Small Business Subcontracting Plan is required in accordance with section I.8 Supplies and/or Services to be Provided item 8 and section IV.8(c)(3).

37. Question: Can you clarify the goals for the small business contract? They seemed a little high…

Answer: The small business goals were developed based on an assessment of the CLPS scope and a determination of those requirements that could be accomplished by small businesses. In accordance with IV.8 (c)(3), Offerors are encouraged to propose goals that are equivalent to or is greater than those that the Contracting Officer has recommended. However, Offerors shall perform their own independent assessments of the small business subcontracting opportunities and are encouraged to propose goals exceeding the recommended goals where practical.

38. Question: What is the status of the payloads that were assigned to Task Order 2 and were subsequently withdrawn?

Answer: The CLPS Task Order 2 payloads have been redistributed and re-assigned.

39. Question: Are the resources being reassigned/re-allocated for the task order 2 that was withdrawn?

Answer: The withdrawn CLPS Task Order 2 resources and any reassignment or reallocation is a NASA Headquarters decision.

40. Question: Will there be a future requirement for lunar night survivability? Same question except about polar landing?

Answer: The CLPS On-Ramp RFP section IV.9 TECHNICAL VOLUME part 2 Technical Proposal Instructions, states the requirement to get to the lunar surface. Future requirements for lunar night survivability and polar landing are not requirements at this time.

41. Question: Can you provide any dates for future solicitations?

Answer: No, we cannot provide the dates for future solicitations.

42. Question: Is the domestic source requirements limited to manufacturing, launch, and assembly?

For example, do they apply to technologies, design, (IP) or software? Same question, except really directed towards Software?

Answer: See answer to question 18.

43. Question: Will CLPS in the future be leveraged for delivery to lunar orbit or will it apply to lunar surface only?

Answer: The CLPS On-Ramp RFP seeks proposals that demonstrate the ability to provide an intact lunar landed mission by December 31, 2023. While lunar orbit deliveries are in scope for the CLPS Statement of Work, there is not a requirement to discuss that capability in CLPS On- Ramp proposals.

44. Question: What is evaluation criteria for lunar landing, what is considered intact? What’s high risk?

Answer: The evaluation criteria for lunar landing is defined in the CLPS On-Ramp RFP Part V.2 Technical Evaluation. An intact lunar landing is considered a safe, soft landing with an operational payload on the lunar surface. The question referring to high risk is unclear as to the subject.

45. Question: Is there a preference for capabilities that have been demonstrated?

Answer: NASA is procuring commercial services to deliver NASA payloads to the Moon. Under the CLPS model, trades related to risk, cost, and schedule are in the purview of the offeror.

46. Question: Might there be task orders for future technologies development?

Answer: As NASA defines its requirements to include those for future technology development, requests for proposals will be publically posted to fbo.gov or solicited via the appropriate existing NASA contract.

47. Question: Should we include in our proposal other potential assets like technology demonstration?

Answer: Offerors may propose content such as potential assets like technology demonstration;

however, these decisions are up to the offeror to determine what content to propose.

48. Question: Will charts be posted?

Answer: Yes, the combined Industry Day and Pre-Proposal Conference charts will be posted on fbo.gov and on the CLPS On-Ramp 2019 at https://procurement.jsc.nasa.gov/clps/

49. Question: Part of general purpose the RFP synopsis on Fed Biz Ops talked about medium sized landers, but the RFP did not reflect this request. Is NASA looking for only medium sized landers with this request or will all sized landers be considered?

Answer: No, NASA is not looking for only medium sized landers with this request. With this on-ramp as stated in RFP, section IV. INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS-COMMERCIAL ITEMS (FAR 52.212-1) (OCT 2018) part IV.9 TECHNICAL VOLUME, NASA seeks contractors who have the capability to get 10 kg (or greater) of useful payload mass to the lunar surface which may include medium sized landers.

50. Question: When it comes to an evaluation criteria, we know the five listed, if you have a medium lander, how is it evaluated?

Answer: The evaluation criteria [for mass delivery capability to the lunar surface] of this CLPS On-Ramp is 10 kg (or greater) of useful payload mass and it will be evaluated in accordance with CLPS On-Ramp RFP Part V.2 Technical Evaluation.

51. Question: The synopsis had 350 kg or greater, is there a requirement for larger than 1,000 kg?

Answer: Per the CLPS On-Ramp RFP, the requirement is 10 kg (or greater) of useful payload mass to the lunar surface.

52. Question: Part of general purpose the RFP synopsis on Fed Biz Ops talked about medium sized landers, but the RFP did not reflect this request. Is NASA looking for only medium sized landers with this request or will all sized landers be considered?

Answer: No, NASA is not only looking for medium-sized landers. For CLPS On-Ramp proposals, the offeror should define a hypothetical reference mission that demonstrates their ability to deliver payloads to the surface of the Moon. Any hypothetical payloads the vendor wishes to include are at the discretion of the vendor. For actual CLPS task orders, NASA will define which payloads are to be delivered.

53. Question: For future task orders that may come, when task orders come and payloads are proposed do we have the ability to work directly with Principal Investigators as well as NASA’s Lunar science community to optimize payload packaging and landing site selections?

Answer: As future task order requirements are announced, there may be opportunities to coordinate and work with NASA and payload PIs.

54. Question: Can you confirm that there is no pricing requirement for this RFP and the $25K minimum is the first task order?

Answer: While there is no pricing volume, there is a technical requirement in part IV.9 Technical Volume section (1)(d) and the offeror shall describe its plan for financing the development of end-to-end lunar capabilities, including launch. This could include revenue reports, pro-forma income statements, letters of credit, or the plans for obtaining such. For on-ramped vendors to meet the guaranteed IDIQ minimum of $25,000, a task order 1 for a User’s Guide will be issued immediately upon award.

55. Question: Mid-October is the anticipated award, how long after will task order 1 be issued? How long will we have to complete the User’s guide?

Answer: The CLPS On-Ramp contract award is immediately followed by issuance of task order 1 for the User’s Guide in order to satisfy the CLPS minimum of $25,000.00. The User’s Guide will be due five months from authority to proceed.