C3DO Industry Day Questions and Answers.pdf

C3DO Industry Day Questions & Answers

Pre-Decisional: All content is considered draft and subject to change prior to final AFPP release. This document has been approved for public release per STI 20250008826

The Questions and Answers below represent NASAs response to the questions submitted on September 8, 2025, during the NASA Virtual Industry Day Presentation. Although some NASA responses were provided verbally at the Virtual Industry Day, the written answers below take precedence.

Note: Some questions submitted included typos, which were corrected in this document.

1. How does NASA envision using the CLDs for development of exploration enabling technologies? NASA is very interested in supporting our Moon 2 Mars (M2M) Program and utilizing the CLDs to further exploration technologies where it makes sense, where it can be accommodated on the CLD Platforms, and where it aligns with overall Agency goals. Details will be identified as M2M needs are finalized but planned utilization capabilities include areas that could support future M2M human research and other needs.

2. Please explain the process for NASAs approval of a payment milestones, invoicing and payment, including approval evaluation periods. Article 5 of the FSAA details the process for acceptance and payment of milestones, and participants should read that Article closely to fully understand the process. In summary, the partner provides an Evidence of Completion memo to NASA once the milestone is complete. NASA has 30 days to determine whether the milestone event meets its corresponding acceptance criteria. Once accepted by NASA, the partner will be directed to submit an invoice for milestone payment utilizing the Treasury's Invoice Processing Platform (IPP) which, upon acceptance, will be paid out by the NASA Shared Services Center (NSSC). In a case where all of the milestone criteria are not met, NASA can provide written notice of a partial payment determination which would require the partner to resubmit their memo with their revision plan.

3. The draft AFPP included a requirement that the demonstration mission commander be a U.S. citizen. The slides today suggested this requirement could also be satisfied by one U.S. citizen crewmember. Please clarify. NASA's goal for the demonstration flight is to be U.S. led with a minimum of one U.S. Citizen as a crew member and highly desires as a U.S.

Citizen Commander. NASA is open to alternate perspectives and is interested in industry feedback.

4. Will the proposer’s technical superiority take into account their past performance, including various achievements on the ISS? Past performance proposal information is not required to be submitted. However, participants are encouraged to describe their technical development activities, available technologies, their technology readiness levels and how those are planned to be used in the participants’ concepts and design. These may be described in Volume II: Technical Approach under Section T2 Development Plan.

Pre-Decisional: All content is considered draft and subject to change prior to final AFPP release. This document has been approved for public release per STI 20250008826

5. Will AS9100 be levied on manufactured elements of CLD? NASA does not explicitly require AS9100 compliance in FSAAs. AS9100 is the quality management system standard that NASA has adopted into its quality policy and will likely be imposed on follow-on contracts. NASA expects industry to ensure the safety of the demonstration crew and should implement the appropriate standards for quality.

6. When will funding mechanisms such as CASIS, InSPA, and others be available for use in CLDs? NASA’s intent is to continue to sponsor promising in-space applications and other small business research on CLD’s, depending on budgets available, and in such a way as to not compete with CLD business arrangements. The timing and mechanism of NASA funding of such efforts is currently unknown.

7. With respect to the Insight Plan, how is that funded? Does the awardee fund the NASA insight work and NASA resident office, or does NASA pay for that outside of the funded SAA? NASA insight will be performed under this Funded SAA and there will be no additional funding mechanism. The intent is for NASA’s insight to be on a non-interference basis as much as possible utilizing products already being produced by industry for their own purposes helping to reduce cost and overhead. Any costs associated with providing a resident office or hoteling should be included in the Participant’s proposal. If NASA determines to perform any NASA sponsored analysis, tests or integration activities as part of Responsibility #4, NASA will be responsible for the funding of such activities. The direct cost for NASA personnel who perform and have insight access will be funded by NASA.

8. How will the credibility of the business plan be evaluated? NASA will evaluate proposals based on an Effectiveness rating for ability to meet the goals of the announcement outlined in Section 3.1, and the likelihood of successful performance. Business goals include items related to management and team experience; ability to secure financial investment;

affordability for development and operations costs; and the development of a capability that supports both government and commercial customers.

9. With NASA shifting to monthly crew rotations instead of continuous presence, what automation requirements is NASA requesting to handle uncrewed operations to avoid a capabilities gap? The Phase 2 FSAA requirement for a 30-day demonstration mission was not intended to signal that monthly crew rotations are NASA’s long-term approach. For the demonstration, the Participant has the flexibility to propose design architectures that provide capabilities ranging from minimum viable products to support the minimum demonstration goal to a full set of capabilities within the FSAA’s term of agreement. Proposals should describe future scalable or evolutionary design approaches to support these goals including periods during which the crew is absent. NASA envisions the end state of the CLD to have long duration missions to support future utilization and human research.

Pre-Decisional: All content is considered draft and subject to change prior to final AFPP release. This document has been approved for public release per STI 20250008826

10. What will be the mandatory allocations or set asides for small businesses be as a percentage of overall contracting dollars under this FSAA? Small Business goals or set-aside allocations are not required under Space Act Agreements; therefore, Participants will not be evaluated on Small Business subcontracting. It is recommended that prime Providers keep small business subcontracting in mind, as the future Certification and Services phase is intended to be FAR based, which will require small business goals. The small business goal allocation for Phase 3 is not yet determined.

11. Why levy a minimum 30-day demonstration mission? Commercial Orbital Transportation Services (COTS) and Commercial Crew Transportation Capability (CCtCap) demo missions were both originally set up as less than 14-day target mission durations.

Validating destination life support and early utilization systems should not require 30 days. NASA expects that a minimum of a 30-day CLD demonstration period is needed to complete all necessary system demonstrations, including demonstrating the minimum capability required to meet future NASA science objectives.

12. Can NASA expand on how the two individual evaluation factors (technical and business) contribute to overall evaluation for selection? How are they assessed in combination and is there any relative weighting of the two? Can NASA provide more detail for the evaluation factors? The Technical Approach and Business Approach will be evaluated separately with an effectiveness rating for each. Effectiveness will be a combination of two things: How well the proposed approach meets the goals of the announcement outlined in Section 3.1, C3DO Goals, and the likelihood of successful performance. The Selection Authority will consider the proposal evaluations and select a portfolio of approaches that best meets the C3DO goals within the available funding. NASA will consider the total anticipated funding in determining the number of awards that best meet the goals of the Announcement.

NASA may select proposals other than the most highly rated for the portfolio selection in order to achieve the C3DO goals.

13. How does this change to the CLD procurement affect the lifetime of the ISS? The CLD development plans are not tied to the ISS End of Life, nor ISS deorbit decisions. Although NASA’s objective is to decrease the gap in human spaceflight as much as possible, NASA is not considering the C3DO demonstration dates or the future Phase 3 Certification & Services schedule to determine the ISS End of Life.

14. Is feedback (due September 12) only requested from offerors, or are subcontractors and other interested parties requested to provide feedback as well? NASA welcomes feedback from all interested parties, including prime Participants and their major suppliers, the overall supplier base community and international entities.

15. The Industry Day presentation indicated phase 3 to be a FAR part 12 contract, is that approach definitive? No. The chart inadvertently showed phase 3 as a FAR Part 12

Pre-Decisional: All content is considered draft and subject to change prior to final AFPP release. This document has been approved for public release per STI 20250008826

“commercial contract”. Although the future certification and services contract for phase 3 is anticipated to be FAR based, a determination has not been made if it will be issued as a FAR Part 12 contract. The Industry Day Charts have been updated.