Attachment E - FAQ - 8.24.2026.pdf

Attachment E – FAQ (Revised) 8/24/2026 80JSC026Q0006P0002

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) for Hypobaric DCS Chamber Studies

1. DCS Symptom Determination. The DCS Study includes an EVA simulation involving repetitive tasks that may result in localized muscle or joint discomfort for subjects. Will the Government provide standardized criteria or procedures for distinguishing symptoms associated with EVA task performance from potential Type I DCS symptoms to ensure consistent subject evaluation across facilities?

Yes, if more definition beyond what is in the SOW is needed during the training session, NASA will provide these criteria to all the facilities to assess symptoms in real-time for the determination of subject removal and treatment or test termination criteria. Separately, NASA also retrospectively will make an independent assessment after the data are delivered to NASA.

2. DCS treatment coverage. For proposal pricing purposes, could the Government clarify whether oƯerors should include the potential cost of hyperbaric medical treatment and associated medical care resulting from study participation in the DCS study? If such treatment is required, should oƯerors assume those costs are the responsibility of the contractor, or will such costs be addressed separately by the Government?

This is directly addressed in the Statement of Work (SOW), please reference Attachment A- SOW, dated 7/15/2026.

3. As a foreign entity, are we required to be registered in SAM.gov before proposal submission?

No, but registration is required before award. Please reference 52.204-7 - System for Award Management.

4. “Detailed protocols for optional eƯorts will be provided by NASA after the base study (assume measures match base eƯort).” When would the protocols be made available? Is the protocol 6.5 hours prebreathe then 6 hours at 4.2 psi?

Our data shows this DCS model has a 39% DCS rate and the intent is a more benign DCS approach with a lower DCS rate that will start with very low DCS prediction and gradually increase. Coordination would also be needed for break in prebreathe (when to break mask seal during prebreathe). A rapid cabin decompression study would have a diƯerent design given that the decompression would be from habitat pressure (~9 psia) rather than suit pressure (~4.3 psia).

5. CLIN 0001 – We have completed. CLIN 0002 – “A fourth test day with minimum of two subjects”. Can you provide clarification?

CLIN 0002 is optional additional work, for an additional 2 subjects, only if needed.

6. CLIN 0003 – Break in Prebreathe with “inflight-like” treatment Preparation – This seems to be a simulation procedure to check on time-to-treatment of DCS cases. Is the entire prebreathe protocol unnecessary as this could be performed at 1 ATA?

Yes, this is a simulation that will be helpful for IRB information and approval. Yes, could be performed at 1 ATA. The 6 hr pre-breathe can be “verbal only” for those with prebreathe experience and simply cut to the simulated DCS event.

7. CLIN 0004 – Again, ‘using the protocol described above’ for an additional 50 subjects. If we were to do the protocol we already completed, with 50% DCS, I am not sure we could get it through the IRB. Is there another prebreathe protocol to be used?

The idea is to start with very safe protocol and progressively towards higher DCS rates. We do not have any other comparable prebreathe protocols (sea level to 4.3 psia with simulated EVA) with lower DCS rates. A draft DCS model could be used to ensure low DCS rates.

8. CLIN 0005 – Elevated Metabolic during EVA Testing (for another 24 subjects). Please elaborate if the focus should be on countermeasures?

Elevated Metabolic is intended to look at the stressor induced during EVA’s (after prebreathe) so this data can be used to improve models, rather than focus on countermeasures. This metabolic load is expected to increase the decompression sickness risk.

9. CLIN 0006 – Pharmaceutical-enhanced Prebreathe. “Using the protocol described above…”. Is this the 6.5 h/6.0 h 1 ATA/4.2 psi?

Likely a human DCS model would need to be developed with a lower DCS rate.

10. CLIN 0007 – Body Temperature. Does this mean environmental temperature with measurement of body temperature, or deliberate warming to specified core temperature?

Environmental temperature with body temperature measurement is important.

The combination of cutaneous perfusion regulation and evaporative heat loss in the setting of increased ambient temperature certainly add complexity to a perfusion-based nitrogen washout experiment. Possibly, a simple experimental design with subjects randomized to a warm prebreathe vs a cool prebreathe and testing for diƯerences in DCS rate could evaluate if a warm or cool lunar suit temperature setpoint can improve DCS risk. Encouraging high fluid intake during prebreathe could mitigate volume loss from sweat. The variability in evaporative heat loss with changes in chamber humidity will add experimental error.

However, any significant diƯerence (or lack thereof) in DCS rate between a warm and cool environment could inform future lunar surface operations if prebreathe temperature setpoint is important (or not).