CLDC dRFP Pre-proposal Conference 070926 (Final).pdf

National Aeronautics and Space Administration

Commercial Low Earth Orbit (LEO) Destination Contract (CLDC) Acquis it ion

Sol ic itat ion Number: Draft 80JSC026R0021

Virtual Pre-Proposal Conference

July 9, 2026

Welcome, Opening Remarks

Pre-Proposal Conference CLD Contract

Dana Weige l Low Ear th Orb i t P rogram Manager

Page | 2

Agenda

Welcome, Opening Remarks Dana Weigel, LEO Program Manager

Industry Day Overview Ashley Chaves, Contracting Officer

LEO Program & CLD Overview Dana Weigel, LEO Program Manager

Contract Technical Overview Angela Hart, SEB Chair

Unique Clauses, Proposal/Evaluation Ashley Chaves, Contracting Officer

GCA and GTA Overview Chris Zuber, Contracting Officer Representative

Small Business Tumarrow Romain, Small Business Specialist

Schedule Ashley Chaves, Contracting Officer

Page | 3#

Speakers

Angela Hart SEB Chair

Dana Weigel LEO Program

Manager

Ashley Chaves Contracting Officer

Chris Zuber Contracting Officer

Representative

Page | 4

Core Objectives in LEO

Preserve a continuous presence to conduct groundbreaking research and technology development

Expand commercial access, stimulate commercial demand and foster economic growth

Responsibly end ISS operations and transition to commercial space stations

Building a replacement for ISS is a national imperative to maintain an orbital laboratory and proving ground in LEO

Page | 5

LEO PROGRAM – Key Personnel Program Manager: Dana Weigel

Deputy Manager, ISS: Dina Contella Deputy Manager, Commercial: William (Bill) Spetch

Commercial Strategist and CLD SEB Chair: Angela Hart

COMMERCIAL CREW OFFICE

Acting Director: Dana Hutcherson

COMMERCIAL DESTINATION OFFICE

Director: Brian Derkowski

ISS VEHICLE OFFICE

CARGO TRANSPORTATION OFFICE

Director: Phil Dempsey

PROGRAM PLANNING &

CONTROL OFFICE

MISSION INTEGRATION &

OPERATIONS OFFICE

SAFETY & MISSION

ASSURANCE OFFICE

Manager: Steve McGrath

UTILIZATION OFFICE

Director: Ryan Landon

AVIONICS & SOFTWARE

OFFICE

LAUNCH VEHICLE

OFFICE

Manager: Mike Ravenscroft

EXTERNAL & PARTNER

INTEGRATION OFFICE

EVA OFFICE

Page | 6

Meeting Overview

Pre-Proposal Conference CLDC Contract

Ash ley Chaves Cont rac t ing Of f i ce r

Page | 7

Our goal is to help industry understand the CLD draft RFP and the Government’s requirements

This information is not to be interpreted as a comprehensive description of the procurement strategy or requirements in the draft RFP (dRFP)

If there are any inconsistencies between this briefing and the dRFP, the dRFP will take precedence

Page | 8

Welcome

Questions

There will be no verbal questions during this Industry Day

Questions should be submitted in writing through the QR code and will be closed 30 mins after the conference https://johnson.cnf.io/sessions/bhjn/

Official responses to written questions will be posted by the Contracting Officer to the CLDC Special Notice on Sam.gov

Page | 9 https://johnson.cnf.io/sessions/bhjn/

Points of Contact

Contracting Officer:

Ashley Chaves, jsc-cldc@mail.nasa.gov

CLDC web address:

https://www.nasa.gov/johnson/jsc-procurement/cldc/ Send questions to the Contracting Officer

Ombudsman:

NASA FAR Supplement (NFS) clause 1852.215-84, Ombudsman, is applicable.

The Ombudsman for this acquisition is Donna Shafer, JSC Associate Director , donna.m.shafer@nasa.gov

Ombudsman (NFS 1852.215-84): “…before consulting with an ombudsman, interested parties must first address their concerns, issues, disagreements, and/or recommendations to the Contracting Officer for resolution … If resolution cannot be made by the Contracting Officer, interested parties may contact the installation ombudsman whose name, address, telephone number, and email address may be found at:

https://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/procurement/regs/Procurement-Ombuds-Comp-Advocate-Listing.pdf”

Page | 10 mailto:jsc-cldc@mail.nasa.gov mailto:jsc-cldc@mail.nasa.gov mailto:jsc-cldc@mail.nasa.gov https://www.nasa.gov/johnson/jsc-procurement/cldc/ https://www.nasa.gov/johnson/jsc-procurement/cldc/ https://www.nasa.gov/johnson/jsc-procurement/cldc/ mailto:donna.m.shafer@nasa.gov https://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/procurement/regs/Procurement-Ombuds-Comp-Advocate-Listing.pdf https://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/procurement/regs/Procurement-Ombuds-Comp-Advocate-Listing.pdf https://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/procurement/regs/Procurement-Ombuds-Comp-Advocate-Listing.pdf https://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/procurement/regs/Procurement-Ombuds-Comp-Advocate-Listing.pdf https://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/procurement/regs/Procurement-Ombuds-Comp-Advocate-Listing.pdf https://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/procurement/regs/Procurement-Ombuds-Comp-Advocate-Listing.pdf https://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/procurement/regs/Procurement-Ombuds-Comp-Advocate-Listing.pdf https://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/procurement/regs/Procurement-Ombuds-Comp-Advocate-Listing.pdf https://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/procurement/regs/Procurement-Ombuds-Comp-Advocate-Listing.pdf

LEO Program and Acquisi t ion Overview

Pre-Proposal Conference CLDC Contract

D a n a We i g e l L EO P ro g ra m M a n a g e r

Page | 11

Acquisition Approach

Incorporates future LEO Human Spaceflight Missions in an end-to-end 15-year contract with strong opportunities for NASA collaboration

• Scope allows for large architecture variations and includes design, development, certification, transportation management, training, ground and flight operations

• NASA’s utilization needs are about 50% of ISS capacity and are addressed via high level capabilities that drive major architectural elements; not at the payload or experiment level

• NASA’s goal is to maintain 2 NASA crew on-orbit at all times with sorties allowed during initial assembly and launch

CLDC most complex human spaceflight contract to date

Page | 12

Contract Overview

CLD Contract (CLDC) is a FAR 15, Firm Fixed Priced Multi-Award Indefinite Delivery, Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) Contract allowing for the award of one or more contract(s)

• NASA plans to select 2 providers through CDR+ followed by a competitive task order awarded to 1 or more with detailed criteria provided with the Competitive RFTOP (Request for Task Order Proposal)

• Supports industry recommendation for final award from initial down select pool

• The contract will have a base of 8 years with four option periods to extend the ordering period up to 15 years

• Supports development, certification and services under one contracting mechanism

• Highly tailored to incorporate lessons learned and industry feedback

Page | 13

Development & Market

Page | 14

Things to consider for this procurement:

• Ensuring a solid architecture, development and certification plan with a highly feasible and resilient path to building a space station in an affordable manner

• With market still maturing, what Industry believes is achievable vs an overly optimistic market claim

• i.e. How many seats you need NASA to buy to close your business case

• Demonstration will include the initial launch, checkout and validation of early capability; not a separate activity

• Each element of the CLD will be certified prior to its launch

Contract & dRFP Features Contract maximizes flexibility for industry and includes a number of unique clauses based on lessons learned

• Allows industry to customize Standards and data deliverables (DRDs) based on industry’s commercial processes

• Establishes a legal framework for private and foreign crew due to lack of federal regulatory framework and includes a tailored liability framework

• Encourages opportunities for use of government resources and areas for collaboration to align with NASA workforce skillsets and/or reduce development risks

• Unique protections for the Government in the event Contractor under performs

• American taxpayer fair market value pricing protection

• Evaluation will include viable cost, schedule and business approach

• Emphasis on contractor financial insight and market development to address unique CLDC risks

Page | 15

Task Order Competition

CLIN 1: Initial design through CDR+ CLIN 2: CLD Dev, Demo and Certification CLIN 3: Mission Services

Plan is to award CLIN 1 to 2 providers at contract award (NASA can elect to award more than 2), minimum buy $100M

• Fixed period to reach CLIN 1 completion, at which time NASA will issue a competitive RFTOP for certification and initial services minimum buy (4 mission buy)

Draft RFTOP Competitive Evaluation Criteria (Mission Suitability)

• Contractor’s CLIN 1 progress and ability to achieve NASA Certification of an end-to-end CLDS

• Readiness date to support purchase of end-to-end mission services

• Inherent and residual risk in the Offeror’s CLDS

• Contractors may propose changes to:

• Transportation cost, additional enhancements/capabilities, and price reduction; however, NASA has the unilateral discretion to accept or reject proposed price changes

Page | 16

Transportation

Contract allows NASA to purchase transportation as part of an end-to-end service or to provide it directly

• dRFP requires a Letter of Commitment from transportation providers showing commitment to fly crew and cargo missions along with pricing

• NASA’s role for certifying crew and cargo vehicles remains unchanged regardless of transportation acquisition path

• NASA may have some pre-purchased or bartered missions remaining at the end of ISS, so CLDC flexibility allows for their use for CLD

• Government Furnished Transportation Service purchases will be determined at competitive RFTOP award and issuance of services minimum buy

Page | 17

Pricing Providers will propose dev and cert milestones and mission services pricing based on work plan templates and mission types

• Similar to other FFP-services contracts

Three Mission types will be priced

• 30 day Sortie mission

• Initial continuous crew with minimum research capability

• Full capability continuous crew

Services will be priced with and without transportation

Pricing will include 2, 3 and 4 seats for NASA; expecting bulk buy and/or quantity discounts

Page | 18

J Attachments Technical Requirements Updates

Pre-Proposal Conference CLDC Contract

Ange la Har t CLDC SEB Cha i r

Page | 19

CLIN Structure CLIN 1: Initial Development

• Performance of initial development milestones including PDR and CDR concluding in Integrated Progress Review

• Results of this performance will support selection for the Task Order Competition for CLIN 2

CLIN 2: CLDS Development, Demonstration and Certification

• Includes completion of DDT&E, concluding in Mission Demonstration(s) to close out Certification

• NOTE: The Demonstration and check-out is a step in the certification process and must meet agreed to objectives

• May be iterative based on architectures with interim Certifications for Mission Type A or B

CLIN 3: Mission Services

• Identifies three (3) Mission Service Types that may be proposed and their discrete minimum requirements.

• NASA requires first right of refusal to be the Crew Commander

CLIN 4: Pre-Priced Additional Services

• Required pre-priced services including additional utilization items such as lockers and external cargo

• Optional pre-priced services include any unique offerings by the Contractor such as special payload services

CLIN 5: Special Tasks and Studies – Avenue to request special in scope analyses or services

Page | 20

Mission Service Types

CLIN 3A – Mission Service Type A

• Minimum 2 USG Crew; may purchase extra seats

• Crew tended capability (defined in Section 1.7)

• 30 day sortie

• Minimal Utilization required (Cat 1)

CLIN 3B – Mission Service Type B

• Minimum 2 USG Crew; may purchase extra seats

• Continuous Crew capability (defined in Section 1.7)

• 6 Month increment

• Reduced Utilization required (Cat 2)

CLIN 3C – Standard Mission Service

• Minimum 2 USG Crew – Pricing provided for 2, 3 and 4 crew

• Continuous Crew capability

• 6 Month increment

• Full Certification and Utilization Requirements met and available (Cat 3)

Page | 21

Utilization Capability

J-01, SOW Section 1.5 NASA Utilization Capability Needs in

LEO

• NASA’s minimum capability requirements are grouped into three (3) categories.

• Category 1: NASA’s minimum needs for a 1-month Crew

Tended mission

• Category 2: NASA’s minimum needs for an early 6-month Continuous Crew mission

• Category 3 (Standard Mission): NASA’s minimum needs for a 6-month Standard Service mission capability (roughly equivalent to 50% of the US allocation on ISS)

NOTE: Requirements are Space/resource allocation driven -minimal required laboratory capability –– may be offered as Pre- Priced Additional Optional services

Page | 22

NASA Utilization Capabilities

Item Category 1 Category 2 Category 3

DESTINATION CAPABILITIES

Total # of Reconfigurable Locker Locations (MLE) 3 20 58

· Heritage or non-Heritage MLE 3 12 34

· Minimum # of Rack Equivalent Volume 0 1 (8 MLE each)

3 (8 MLE

each)

Deployable Pressurized Powered Payloads 4 8 12

Cargo Transfer Bag Equivalent (CTBE) Stowage 20 45 150

# of loc for Vacuum Resource Access2 0 2 2 # of loc for Vacuum Exhaust Access2 0 3 3 # of locations for gaseous O2 Access2 0 2 2 # of locations for gaseous N2 Access2 0 2 2 Potable/Conditioned Water Access Yes Yes Yes On-Orbit Conditioned Stowage (in Liters (L))3 (Total Combined) 20 60 150

· Frozen 20 50 100

· Refrigerated 0 10 50

Workbench 0 1 1 Glovebox 0 1 1

TRANSPORTATION LAUNCH CAPABILITY

Pressurized Delivery - Cargo Transfer Bag Equivalent (CTBE) 14 35 6 100

Powered Locker Locations4 1 3 4 Conditioned Stowage - Liters 3 10 30 70

· Frozen (up to) 10 10 20

· Refrigerated (up to) 5 20 40

· Incubated (up to) 0 5 10

TRANSPORTATION RETURN CAPABILITY

Pressurized Return and/or Trash Disposal - Cargo Transfer Bag Equivalent (CTBE) 5 14 35 100

Powered Locker Locations4 1 3 4 Conditioned Stowage - Liters 3 10 30 70

· Frozen (up to) 10 30 60

· Refrigerated (up to) 5 10 20

· Incubated (up to) 0 5 15

Workplans Workplans are utilized to provide NASA minimum milestone requirements while offering industry tailoring to support CLD architecture or commercial processes

J-11 Certification Work Plan

• Allows industry tailoring unique to Contractor’s architecture of Certification milestones including entrance/success criteria, pricing and schedule information

• Requires Offeror to develop unique OFI tables that align with their architecture, repeating required milestones based on their assembly sequence. Subtotals for each area and their individual milestones need to meet required min/maximums.

J-12 Mission Service Work Plan Template

• Allows industry tailoring of Mission milestones including entrance/success criteria and schedule information

• Similar OFI table process in Certification Work plans.

NOTE: J-11 and J-12 are contractually binding with implementation details negotiated per milestone in the Joint Implementation Plan (JIP)

Page | 23

J-01, Section 2.1 Quarterly Program Review (QPR) include Financial and Commercialization splinters

J-01, Section 2.3 Government Insight include specific examples of critical insight areas

J-01, Section 2.11 Safety and Mission Assurance includes Orbital Debris, Jettison and Deorbit

J-01, Section 2.20 Crew Selection and Mission Evaluation include details associated with Crew Commander proficiency requirements

J-10 Insight and Collaboration Implementation Plan allows industry to propose based on their commercial framework providing timely, streamlined access to data that meets NASAs needs

J-15 Government Furnished Transportation and Support Services - Only executed if NASA elects to provide some or all transportation.

J-17 Integrated CLDS Architecture - Contractually binds architecture from proposal

Page | 24

Additional J Attachment Highlights

Electronic Technical Documents Library (TDL)

TDL contains applicable documents not already publicly available

• ATTACHMENT J-03 CLDS REQUIREMENTS AND

STANDARDS

• ATTACHMENT J-05 APPLICABLE DOCUMENTS LIST

NOTE: NASA will continue to update the TDL until final RFP release https://sam.gov/workspace/contract/opp/ac8fb8

8f4ba74a50b12051034fb8a332/view

Document Number Revision Document Title

CLDP-STD-1102 Revision A Commercial Low-Earth Orbit Development Program Payload Interface Standard for Heritage Hardware

CLDP-STD-1106 Revision B Commercial Low-Earth Orbit Development Program (CLDP) Utilization Capabilities Standard

CLDP-PLN-1108 Revision A Commercial Low-Earth Orbit Development Program Human Systems Integration Plan

CLDP-PLN-1111 Revision B Commercial Low-Earth Orbit Development Program Crew Health and Operations Concept

CLDP-PLN-1122 Revision B Commercial Low-Earth Orbit Development Program Science Data Management Plan

CLDP-STD-1123 Revision B Medical Standards and Capabilities

CLDP-REQ-1130 Revision D Requirements and Standards for the Commercial Low-Earth Orbit Development Program

CLDP-STD-1150 Revision B Commercial Low-Earth Orbit Development Program Operations Standards

CLDP-PLN-2000 Revision A Commercial Low-Earth Orbit Destination System

Certification Plan

CLDP-PLN-2110 Revision A Commercial Low-Earth Orbit Development Program Mission Integration Plan

CLDP-PLN-3016 Revision A Commercial Low-Earth Orbit Development Program (CLDP) Insight Management Plan

CLDP-PLN-3017 Revision B Commercial Low-Earth Orbit Development Program Utilization Integration Plan (UIP)

CLDP-STD-3102 Revision B Commercial Low-Earth Orbit Development Program Hazard Analysis and Safety Process Standard

J-03 CLDS Requirements and Standards.

Page | 25 https://sam.gov/workspace/contract/opp/ac8fb88f4ba74a50b12051034fb8a332/view https://sam.gov/workspace/contract/opp/ac8fb88f4ba74a50b12051034fb8a332/view

Technical Updates Since Last RFI

NASA has updated requirements and overall strategy based on Industry feedback from previous RFIs, Ignition and to address NASA lessons learned.

Key documents updates include but are not limited to:

• CLDP-REQ-1130, CLDP Requirement and Standards

• CLDP-STD-3102, CLDP Hazard Analysis and Safety Process Standard

• CLDP-PLN-2000, CLDS Certification Plan & Milestones – First delivery to industry

• CLDP-PLN-2110, CLDP Mission Integration Plan & Milestones – First delivery to industry

• CLDP-PLN-1150, CLDP Operations Standard

Page | 26

CLDP-REQ-1130 CLDP Requirement and Standards

CLDP-REQ-1130 and related Standards convey NASA’s system-level requirements for a CLD focusing on crew safety

• Maximizes use of "meets the intent" for standards

CLDP-REQ-1130 Rev. D posted with Draft RFP including key updates:

• Added conditional EVA, External Robotics, and Berthing requirements to new Appendix P if design chooses to implement those capabilities

• Clarified Destination de-orbit must be 2 FT throughout on-orbit lifetime

• Clarified CVV return as a hazard control must be to supported landing site

• Added Destination De-orbit & Safe Haven

• Updated RPOD Requirements and Removed CVV to Destination RF

Commanding

• Clarified Heritage launch vehicle standards

Page | 27

Utilizes meet-the-intent approach to the Hazard Analysis Process encouraging providers to innovate

• Provides standard templates for hazards and controls

• Requires Co-Chaired Safety Review panels to balance shared assurance of Crew safety

Draft CLDP-STD-3102 Rev. B posted with Draft RFP includes the following key updates:

• Clarifies Qualitative Likelihood criteria

• Clarifies anomaly, critical hazard, and emergency systems definitions to be in sync with overall program glossary

– Failures that can contribute to an unsafe deorbit configuration of the Destination must also be 2-fault tolerant.

– Critical Hazard definition: A hazard with a potential for loss of Destination, mission or the ability to support a crewed mission over the planned mission duration. A hazard with potential to lead to a non-disabling or temporarily disabling personnel injury or occupational illness that requires medical intervention beyond first aid.

Page | 28

CLDP-STD-3102 CLDP Hazard Analysis and Safety Process Standard

CLDP-PLN-2000 CLDS Certification Plan

Not previously provided on sam.gov The Certification approach is dependent upon the concept of “shared accountability” with the Commercial Provider responsible for the design, development, test & evaluation (DDT&E), assembly, operations, and sustaining and retains ownership through operations and eventual retirement

NASA is responsible for certification of systems and crew. Examples of NASA responsibility include, but are not limited to:

• NASA will approve verification and variances that impact NASA applicable requirements

• NASA will concur on successful completion of life cycle Milestone Reviews

• NASA will co-chair Safety Review Boards and will approve critical and catastrophic hazard analysis

• NASA will co-chair the Misson Management Team and will have final authority for USG crew or assets safety

• NASA retains medical authority for USG crew members throughout all phases of the mission

Page | 29

CLDP-PLN-2000 - Required Certification Milestones

• Certification Baseline Review (CBR)

• Preliminary Design Review (PDR)

• Critical Design Review (CDR)

• Integrated Progress Review (IPR)

• Certification Status Review (CSR)

• Interim Design Review (IDR)*

• Manufacturing & Test Readiness Review

(MTRR)*

• Software Status Review (SSR)*

• Assembly Progress Review (APR)*

• System Integration Review (SIR)*

• Design Certification Reviews (DCR)*

• System Certification Review (SCR)

• * Milestones required to be repeated for each element/major capability

Example of CLDS Certification Review Lifecycle: Single Element CLDS

Example of CLDS Certification Review Lifecycle: Incremental Buildup

C

LI

N

C

LI

N

Page | 30

CLDP-PLN-2110 Mission Integration Plan

Not previously provided on sam.gov The Mission Integration Plan (MIP) outlines the processes, requirements and deliverables for the proper identification, tracking, handling, and communication of programmatic needs to successfully execute mission/increment requirements.

• Also defines the required recurring mission milestones during the tactical phase to ensure the NASA and

CLD Providers progress are on track for each mission.

• The Commercial Provider is responsible for the strategic and tactical development on the Mission Integration products and overall mission execution.

• CLD Provider tailoring with unique timelines, responsibilities and handoff points are expected depending on the Provider’s design and mission integration approach

CLIN 3 Task Orders are utilized to define contractual commitments including mission dates, mission objectives, ATP criteria, crew and cargo complement, initial mission success criteria, and mission milestone review payment schedules

– Mission ATP is expected at approximately launch minus 24 months

Page | 31

CLDP-PLN-2110 - Required Mission Milestones

• Authority to Proceed (ATP)

• Mission/Vehicle Baseline Review (MBR/VBR)

Mission Integration Review (MIR)

• Utilization Integration Review (UIR)

• Flight Operations Review (FOR)

• Mission Certification Review (MCR)

M is si on

C oF

R

Page | 32

CLD

MBR

L-18m

CLD

UIR

L-6m

CLD

FOR

L-4m

CLD

MCR

L-3m

CLD

ORR

L-1m

CLD

AFRR

L-1w

CTS

VBR

L-18m

Commercial LEO Destination (CLD) Increment Integration Milestones

Crew Transportation System (CTS) / Element Integration Milestones

CTS

MIR

L-12m

CLD

MIR

L-12m

Increment Execution CLDS Post Increment

Quiescent Operations CTS Post Flight

CTS

MCR

L-3m

CTS /

Element

ORR

L-1m

CTS /

Element

AFRR

L-1w

CTS /

Element

LRR

L-2d

Cr ew

L au nc h

Crew Return

CLDS

PIR

R+1m

CTS

PFR

R+1m

ATP

ATP

L-24m

L-24m

• CTS / Element Operations Readiness Review (ORR)

• CTS / Element Agency Flight Readiness Review (AFRR)

• CTS /Element Flight Readiness Review (FRR)

• CTS / Element Launch Readiness Review (LRR)

CLDP-STD-1150 CLDP Operations Standard

CLDP-STD-1150 communicates requirements and expectations for CLD operations, training, mission and ground systems

• Requirements derived from 25+ years of successful LEO operations, but allows flexibility to “meet the intent” using Industry methods

• Applies across full mission lifecycle: design, testing, planning, training, execution, and post-flight.

• Ensures operational processes and plans enable crew safety, vehicle safety and timely risk-informed decision-making across all flight phases

• Additional details associated with operations deliverables outlined in Contract DRDs.

CLDP-STD-1150 Rev B posted with Draft RFP

Page | 33

Draft RFP Section H, I , L&M

Pre-Proposal Conference CLD Contract

Ash ley Chaves Cont rac t ing Of f i ce r

Page | 34

Section H - Data Rights Clauses

Minimum Data Rights To The Government

• Unique table outlines the NASA’s Rights in Data for specific categories of data

• Government Purpose Rights for derivative works of NASA Design Data, GTA data, and Government IV&V

• Special Works rights on Imagery, Research Data, Research-Related Mission Data and Media

FAR 52.227-14 Rights in Data (Deviation)

• New “Government Purpose Rights” (GPR) regime/definition to align with Commercial practices

– Provides GPR upon termination for default, ensuring continuity of on-orbit operations

– Requires Prime to flow down data rights to subcontractors

Page | 35

Section H – Unique Clauses

American Taxpayer Protections

• Establishes a common commercial value for services ensuring any negotiated agreements or barters with sovereign nations are not valued at an amount less than the price paid by NASA

• Common Commercial Value is delivered in DRD CLDC-002, Commercialization Plan

Government Insight

• Unique Insight clarifications associated with access to subcontractor information to the extent, necessary to assess technical progress, schedule performance, risk management, Risk Based Assessments (RBA) and compliance with requirements leading to final certification

Page | 36

Section H – Legal Framework and Liability Approach

Outer Space Treaty Article 6

• Unique clause to ensure NASA is notified in compliance with this treaty

Jurisdiction and Control of Space Objects

• Unique clause to ensure registration of the CLD by the U.S., ensure activities aboard the CLD are governed by U.S. law, and ensure U.S. jurisdiction

Informed Consent And Assumption Of Risk For Non-U.S. Government Crew

• Ensures non-U.S. Government crew is notified that CLD activities involve inherently dangerous operations

• NASA is not providing oversight or certification for safety of non-U.S. Government crew, and a release of the U.S. from claims of non-U.S. Government crew

Cross-waiver of Liability

• Flow down to non-USG Astronauts required

Page | 37

Section L – Proposal Instructions - Pricing Total Evaluated Price (TEP) - Attachment L-01 Price Template

CLIN 1 = Total Price

CLIN 2 = Total Price

CLIN 3 = Calculated based on an average end-to-end Standard Mission Price for 2, 3 and 4 seats for all years, divided by 9 (total number of seats), multiplied by 2 (nominal seat buy), multiplied by 6 (missions)

CLIN 4 = Aggregated average prices for all line items for the full period of performance

CLIN 5 = Sum of Fully Burden Labor rates for Prof/Tech & Ops/Mfg x 2,000hours per year (for each year)

GFP/GFE = Total Price

GTA = Total Price

TEP = CLIN 1 + CLIN 2 + CLIN 3 + CLIN 4 + CLIN 5 + GFP/GFE + GTAs

Page | 38

Section L – Key Attachments

Attachment L-07 Corporate Contribution Worksheet

• Outlines percentage of Corporate/Investment Contribution vs Government Contribution to support the

Development and Certification effort (CLIN 1 and CLIN 2)

Attachment L-08 Business Case Analysis Template

• Collects the Contractor’s projected yearly revenue, expected cash flow, and cost information to support the evaluation of Specific Technical Understanding for Mission Suitability and Price

• Includes how many seats NASA needs to procure to close business case

Page | 39

Section M – Evaluation Criteria

Riddle & Weighting

Mission Suitability and Past Performance, when combined, are approximately equal to the Price factor

As individual factors, Mission Suitability factor is significantly more important than Past Performance factor

Mission Suitability subfactors will be numerically weighted and scored in accordance with a 1,000-point scale

Mission Suitability Factor Points

Technical Approach 550

Management Approach 400

Small Business Utilization 50

Total 1000

Page | 40

Section L & M Mission Suitability Highlights Technical & Management Evaluation Factors

• Risk to the Government as it relates to the demonstrated understanding, completeness, reasonableness, safety and feasibility

• NASA has highlighted specific areas of importance in the evaluation criteria, which may be evaluated more favorably if it is determined to be advantageous

• Credible schedules and path to Services

• Maximize NASA Insight & Collaboration

• Viable and quantifiable non-NASA financial commitments

• Robust logistics and supply chain management

Page | 41

Technical Approach Factors

• System Architecture (incorporated into contract)

• Certification & Engineering

• Mission Services & Utilization Capabilities

• Safety & Mission Assurance (S&MA) Approach

Management Approach Factors

• Program Management Approach

• Commercialization and Business Approach

• Insight Implementation

• Work Plan

Small Business Utilization

• NASA is working with the Small Business Office to allow offerors to propose Small Business goals that align with technical approach

RFI Key Areas

Page | 42

NASA is requesting Industry feedback specifically in the following areas:

Pricing approach clarity

Requirements that could be overly restrictive/prescriptive, drive cost or hinder solutions

Indemnification Under Public Law 85-804 activities that are considered unusually hazardous

Government Furnished Property, Equipment and Services that could be provided

Government approach to evaluating Past Performance or not including it

Government approach to End-to-End services and any alternate approaches utilizing Government Furnished Transportation and Support Services (GFTSS)

Draft RFP GCA and GTA Overview

Pre-Proposal Conference CLD Contract

Chr is Zuber CLDC Cont rac t ing Of f i ce r Represen ta t i ve

Page | 43

Government Collaboration Agreement (GCA)

• Encourages use of NASA skills and experience to be leveraged by the Contractor(s) to support architecture and development

• Offeror may request up to 20 FTE to support in a consultation role for technical SME advice or guidance in specific designated Collaboration roles.

• Contractor shall provide areas of collaboration in their proposal and FTE expected to support their effort

• Collaboration Agreement will be developed based on contractor’s submitted proposal but finalized during Contract execution, post-award

• Requests are not guaranteed, and the Contractor shall not assume GCA requests will be approved

Collaboration Areas NASA is Interested In

ECLSS (OGA, CO2 Removal, Toliet/Waste Collection, Fire Systems, Water & Urine Processing)

Exercise (Countermeasures/Vibration Isolation System)

Rendezvous and Docking/Undocking/Plume Effects

Docking Mechanisms, Loads and Dynamics

Spacecraft Power & Propulsion Systems

Flight Systems and round operations (VSM/Communications/Data)

Cold Stowage Systems

Materials and Processes

Flight Software

Page | 44

J-14 Government Task Agreement (GTA) GTA is a formal agreement between the Government Performing Organization/Directorate & Contractor

• GTA’s will be negotiated and finalized at contract award and included as Attachment J-14

• Any modifications or new GTAs during contract execution shall be submitted through the CO and COR

Contractor is responsible for coordinating with NASA Center Representatives to explore/request support

• Contractor shall submit GTAs to the Center POC NLT 22 days after Final RFP release for disposition

• Contractor shall determine if inclusion of a GTA within their proposal is in their best interest

• Total value of the approved GTAs will be included in the Contractor total price for evaluation

Page | 45

Office of Small Business

Pre-Proposal Conference CLD Contract

Tumar row Romain Smal l Bus iness Spec ia l i s t j sc -sma l lbus iness@mai l .nasa .gov

Page | 46 mailto:jsc-smallbusiness@mail.nasa.gov mailto:jsc-smallbusiness@mail.nasa.gov mailto:jsc-smallbusiness@mail.nasa.gov

CLDC Draft Schedule

• Draft RFP Release - Monday, July 06, 2026

• Industry Day (Virtual) – Thursday, July 9, 2025

• Industry One-on-Ones (Hybrid) – Monday – Tuesday (July 13-14, 2026)

• Final Comments from Industry – Friday, July 24, 2026

• Final RFP Release – August 2026

• Industry Proposals Due (60 days from RFP Release) – October 2026

• Contract Award – Spring 2027

Page | 47

Pre-proposal Conference Q&A Comments will close in 30 minutes.

Thank you!