CLDC Final RFP Pre-proposal Conference Charts.pdf

Commerc ia l Low Earth Orbi t ( LEO) Dest inat ion Contract (CLDC) Acquis i t ion

Sol ic i tat ion Number: 80JSC027R0004

Vir tua l Pre -Proposa l Conference

F ina l RFP

October 15, 2026

Page | 1

Meeting Logistics

Pre-Proposal Conference

CLDC

Ashley Chaves Contracting Officer

Page | 2

• Our goal is to help industry understand the CLDC Final RFP and the Government’s requirements

• This information is not to be interpreted as a description of the procurement strategy or requirements in the Final RFP

• If there are any inconsistencies between this briefing and the Final RFP, the Final RFP will take precedence SAM.gov

Page | 3

Welcome https://sam.gov/workspace/contract/opp/aee4374189ab4118b3ec0dcb00ae8408/view

Agenda

1. Welcome and Meeting Logistics Ashley Chaves, Contracting Officer

2. Welcome and Strategy Overview Dana Weigel, LEO Program Manager

3. RFP Overview and Updates Ashley Chaves, Contracting Officer

4. Technical Overview and Updates Angela Hart, SEB Chair

5. Small Business Overview Tumarrow Romain, Small Business Specialist

6. Closing Remarks & Schedule Ashley Chaves, Contracting Officer

Page | 4

Speakers

Angela Hart SEB Chair

Dana Weigel LEO Program

Manager

Ashley Chaves Contracting Officer

Tumarrow Romain Small Business Specialist

Page | 5

Questions

• There will be no verbal questions during this Pre-Proposal Conference

• Questions should be submitted in writing through the QR code and will be closed 30 mins after the conference https://johnson.cnf.io/sessions/x728/

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

Page | 6 https://johnson.cnf.io/sessions/x728/

Source Selection Authority/ SEB

Source Selection Authority (SSA)

• Joel R. Montalbano, Deputy Associate Administrator, Human Spaceflight Mission Directorate

(HSMD)

SEB Chairperson and Voting Membership

• Angela Hart, Chair, KA, LEO Program Commercial Strategy Officer

• Rodney Nabizadeh, Technical Lead, KD, Commercial Destination Office

• Christopher Zuber, Management/Business Lead, KA, LEO Program

• Jacilyn Maher, Safety Lead, KS, LEO Safety & Mission Assurance (S&MA) Office

• Ashley Chaves, Contracting Officer, BG, Office of Procurement

Page | 7 bookmark://Instruc_SSA/ bookmark://Instruc_Chair_Voting_Members/

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 | 8 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/ 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

Welcome and Strategy Over v iew

Pre-Proposa l Conference

CLD Contract

Dana Weige l

Low Earth Orbi t Program Manager

Page | 9

Welcome

Page | 10

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 and

CLDC is the next step to meeting these goals.

Page | 11

• NASA reviewed and modified the Final RFP based on the Draft RFP feedback

• Over 1000 initial comments were received

• 300 changes were Accepted or Modified to alleviate administrative burden, reduce financial risk, and foster a commercial market

• 200 suggestions were Declined to ensure crew safety/survivability, NASA protections and regulatory compliance

• 175 comments/suggestions resulted in changes to clarify understanding

• 400 comments were questions with NASA explanations provided

• Q&A responses to feedback were released incrementally

• Round 1 (8/14/2026, 171 Questions)

• Round 2 (9/14/2026, 502 Questions)

• Round 3 (10/9/2026 RFP release, 402 Questions)

Draft RFP Feedback

Page | 12

• CLDC is a tailored FAR 15, Firm Fixed Priced Multi-Award IDIQ Contract similar to xEVAS & LTVS with lesson learned updates

• Plan to award CLIN 1 (ATP to IPR ~15-18 months) to two (2) Providers at Contract Award

• Plan to award CLIN2 to one (1) Provider after CLIN 1 completion; but have contract flexibility to support a leader/follower model

• End to end service pricing required although NASA has made updates to address industry identified challenges such as:

• NASA responsible for new transportation vehicle development and certification; Contractor responsible for previously certified transportation vehicle delta certification

• New transportation development and certification may be proposed after the first four (4) missions, but the decision to certify will not be made until the CLIN 2 RFTOP

• Govt Furnished Transportation and Support Services (GFTSS) guaranteed for first 4 missions, if requested

• Allowing repricing of transportation costs at CLIN 2 RFTOP and Option periods

• NASA requiring 2 seats per increment but requesting pricing for 3 and 4 seats

• Utilization needs based on capability and sizing at approximately 50% of ISS. Final Utilization will be based on Provider offering and future NASA needs, finalized at CLIN 2 RFTOP.

Commercial LEO Destination Contract (CLDC)

Page | 13

Contract Objectives and Features Final RFP maximizes flexibility for industry and addresses NASA’s needs for insight, crew safety and NASA investment protections

• Outlines requirements and processes for the Destination and Transportation system

• Provides NASA minimum utilization requirements and capabilities to support future LEO research and exploration objectives

• Allows industry to customize standards and Data Requirements Deliverables (DRDs) based on industry’s commercial processes

• Establishes a legal framework for on-orbit crew to enable US jurisdiction for civil/criminal activities

• Includes tailored liability framework focused on NASA to Contractor relationship without dictating liability relationship between Contractor and their customers, subcontracts and related entities

• Encourages opportunities for use of government resources, workforce skillsets and areas for collaboration to support development and mission success, and to minimize schedule risks

• In addition to classic contractor technical approach, cost and schedule, we are assessing financial and market development viability to address non-NASA investments

Page | 14

• Reduction of Government Data Rights for data not associated with NASA missions

• Reduction and clarification of Insight to allow for a more Commercial Framework

• Reduction of Requirements/Applicable Documents where possible

• Restructuring and reduction of constraints in Workplan tailoring

• Reduction and clarification in Launch Vehicle NLS Category requirements and Insurance amount

• Significant Transportation updates and clarifications to address uncertainty in market, including Changes to Letters of Commitment/Intent, Guarantee GFTSS for Min Buy, and Addition of price reopener for Transportation costs at each option period

• Updates to the overall Evaluation criteria and Calculation of the Total Evaluated Price

(TEP)

• Updates to the Commercial Activity Clause and associated DRDs to address industry feedback

Significant Updates to Address Industry Feedback

Page | 15

• Updates to Communication & Public Affairs to clarify NASA coordination expectations, align with commercial goals and objectives, and incorporate Contractor event expectations for workload planning

• Updates to Use of Govt Resource Clause to allow potential use of ISS Resources via GTAs

• Updates to American Taxpayer Protections Clause – Unique clause ensures NASA is not subsidizing pricing for other customers. Clarified fair market vs most favored

• Updates to Final Payment/Mission Success Determination which includes penalties for mission success losses – Separated destination vs transportation criteria more similar to CRS/CCP

• Updates to NASA Priority and First Rights of Refusal – Removed NASA Priority Clause;

modified first rights of refusal based on seat quantities

• Added new Off Ramp Provision

Page | 16

Significant Updates Continued

Ashley Chaves Contracting Officer

RFP Overview and Updates

Page | 17

General Information

The RFP and amendments take precedence over this conference/presentation.

• Contract Type: The CLD Contract is a Multiple-award Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) with Firm Fixed Price (FFP) task orders.

• Competition: FAR 15, Contracting by Negotiation; Full and Open Competition

• Minimum Guarantee: $100M

• Maximum Not-to-Exceed (NTE) Contract Value: $34.063B

• Product Description:

• NAICS Code and Title: 336414, Guided Missile and Space Vehicle Manufacturing

• Size Standard: 1,300 employees

• DPAS Priority Rating: DO-C9

• Place of Performance: The principal place of performance will be at the CLD Provider’s facilities in the United States.

• Period of Performance: Base Period: 8 years from the date of award (April 2027 through March 2035)

• Option 1: 4 years (April 2035 – March 2039)

• Option 2: 3 years (April 2039 – March 2042)

• Final RFP Noteworthy Change: Option periods were updated from Draft RFP Page | 18

CLIN Structure

• CLIN 1: INITIAL DEVELOPMENT (IDIQ) - Initial Design through Critical Design Review and Integrated Progress

Review

• Offerors insert CLIN 1 price in B.3 INITIAL DEVELOPMENT (CLIN 1)

• Initial Task Order award for CLIN 1 outlined in Attachment L-09 CLIN 1 Model Task Order

• Final RFP Noteworthy Changes

• Last Milestone in CLIN 1, no later than 18 months after award; 15 months desired (J-11 Certification Workplan)

• Although new transportation development and certification is outlined in the proposal, NASA will not make the decision of a new transportation providers certification for CLIN 2 until RFTOP. New transportation development and certification costs will NOT be included in CLIN 1 Section B pricing.

• Attachment L-09 CLIN 1 Model Task Order added with Offeror Fill-ins (OFI) and will include Attachment J-11 Certification Work Plan.

• CLIN 2: DEVELOPMENT & CERTIFICATION – Final Development and Certification

• CLIN 2 includes the design, manufacturing, testing and evaluation, integration, operational readiness and performance of an uncrewed activation & checkout to achieve a Final System Certification of a CLDS

• Offerors insert CLIN 2 price in B.4 CLDS Development & Certification (CLIN 2)

• Final RFP Noteworthy Changes

• Added uncrewed activation & checkout milestones

• Deleted crewed Demonstration objectives from CLIN 2 and combined stand alone Crewed demonstration flight with first CLIN 3 Mission

Page | 19

CLIN Structure, continued

• CLIN 3: MISSION SERVICES –Mission service buys (includes Crewed demonstration as part of first mission)

• Offerors complete pricing tables in B.5 MISSION SERVICES (CLIN 3) for End-to-End Services based on year the mission is executed

• Section B Pricing tables are organized by Mission Types and bulk buy discounts by year

• Offerors should include asterisk (*) if NASA is providing Transportation as Government Furnished Transportation and Support Services (GFTSS).

• Attachment J-15 GFTSS identifies when NASA or the Contractor is providing Transportation Services.

• Three mission types

• Mission A – Mission supports no less than 3 crew of which at least 2 are USG Crew; Short duration/limited research capability (Cat 1)

• Mission B – Mission supports no less than 4 crew of which at least 2 are USG Crew; 6 month duration/ limited research capability (Cat 2)

• Standard Mission – Mission supports no less than 4 crew of which at least 2 are USG Crew; 6 month duration/ Full NASA required research capability (Cat 3)

• Final RFP Noteworthy change:

• Mission Service A changed minimum crew to 3

• Significant updates to GFTSS offering Page | 20

CLIN Structure, continued

• CLIN 4 - Pre-priced Additional Service– Includes additional crew seats, additional science capabilities, external cargo

• Additional Services are required to be priced which may be added to a CLIN 3 task order or separately ordered.

These include additional crew seats and additional utilization capabilities on-orbit and transportation.

• Offerors complete pricing tables in B.6 PRE-PRICED ADDITIONAL SERVICES (CLIN 4)

• Pricing based on the earliest available increment start date in which the mission is executed

• Offerors shall complete TABLE B.6.1.1 ADDITIONAL SERVICES (CY2028 – CY2035), TABLE B.6.1.2 ADDITIONAL SERVICES (CY2036 – CY2042) and TABLE B.6.1.4 ADDITIONAL TRANSPORTATION SERVICES (CY2036 – CY2042)

• TABLE B.6.2.1 OPTIONAL SERVICES (CY2028-2034) is not required but may be priced to provide unique optional services the provider wants to offer NASA

• TABLE B.6.1.4 ADDITIONAL TRANSPORTATION SERVICES (CY2036 – CY2042)

• Final RFP Noteworthy Changes: Split out trash disposal from pressurized return and better defined first right of refusal for additional cargo services based on proportional number of seats purchased

• CLIN 5 – Special Studies

• Allows NASA to purchase additional destination or transportation related services

• Includes but not limited to early crew training, special studies and analyses, risk reduction activities, materials, additional modifications/support of other technology demonstrations/utilization and/or fabrication of hardware in support of the CLDC

Page | 21

H.2 Task Ordering Procedures - Supplement Plan is to award CLIN 1 to two (2) contractors at contract award but has the ability to award additional contracts if budget allows

• Fixed period (15 – 18 months) to reach CLIN 1 completion (IPR)

• NASA intends to issue a competitive RFTOP for CLIN 2, Development & Certification and CLIN 3, Mission services prior to CLIN 1 completion to avoid gap between CLIN 1 and CLIN 2

CLIN 2 RFTOP Procedures

• Plan to award CLIN 2 and CLIN 3 to a single contractor due to budget although additional contractors may be chosen

• Key CLIN 2 Evaluation Criteria is expected to include:

• 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

• During CLIN 2 RFTOP Contractors may propose changes to:

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

• Final RFP Noteworthy Change: CLIN 4 and 5 services may be ordered at any time Page | 22

Section H Clauses

Final RFP Noteworthy Changes:

– Added new H Clauses based on Industry Feedback and NASA direction:

o H.34 Contractor Use of Excess NASA Capacity o H.36 Environmental Compliance and National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) Documentation o H.42 Insurance for Third Party Claims o H.43 Transportation Price Reopener o H.44 Programmatic Interface Requirements For Accessing Contract Data

– Deleted 2 H Clauses based on Industry Feedback o NASA Priority o NFS 1852.209-71 Limitation of Future Contracting

– Additional modifications were made to other clauses to address industry feedback

Page | 23

• H.3 Use of Government Resources

– Allows contractor to request and use of NASA resources via Government Task Agreements and Government Collaboration Agreement (up to 20 NASA personnel); contractors remain fully responsible for meeting all contract requirements.

– Use of NASA resources is governed by GTAs/GCAs, provided “as-is,” cannot substitute for contractor end-item deliverables, including spacecraft components, subsystems, or elements, nor any ground or flight hardware or software

– Updates made for clarification and to include instructions about use of ISS Resources

• H.5 On-Ramp/Off-Ramp

– Allows NASA to conduct subsequent competitions to on-ramp additional sources to the contract.

– Updated to include that contractors may be “off-ramped” if they fail to participate in task order competitions, or request removal

• H.7 Adjustment to Launch Schedule

– Establishes jointly defined launch windows with scheduled “neck-downs,” allows limited no-cost delays by either party, and requires timely notice and mutual agreement on date changes

– Updated for clarification to include a Cargo Launch Window Page | 24

• H.8 United States Commercial Provider and Domestic Source Criteria

– Requires the contractor to be a U.S. Commercial Provider and requires contractor to use U.S.-manufactured launch vehicles to launch a NASA payload

– Added L-10 Domestic Source Certification compliance

• H.12 Minimum Rights to the Government in Data First Produced Under this Contract

– Sets expected minimum data rights by category of data (e.g., special works, government purpose rights, limited/restricted)

– Changes made to address industry feedback and align with commercial data rights including removal of unlimited Rights for catch all category “all other data that does not fall under other categories”

• H.30 Commercial Activity Guidance

– Requires compliance with U.S. Law/NASA policies/brand guidelines and restricts certain activities for NASA associated missions

– Updated in the Final RFP to clarify Commercial Activity restrictions; Contractors responsible for outlining Commercial Activity processes, standards and agreements in accordance with DRD CLDC-009, Commercial Activities Management Plan (CAMP) and DRD CLDC-129, Crew Code of Conduct

Page | 25

• H.14 Government Insight

– Grants NASA access to contractor data, activities (remote/on-site), advance notifications, participation in tests/reviews

– Contractor must provide timely access, notifications, and flow-down of insight requirements to all subcontractors/suppliers

– Updated to limit scope to NASA mission related data associated unless necessary to assess hazards or impacts to USG crew and USG assets or increased risk to NASA.

– Reduced data rights from Limited Rights to the use rights as described in the clause

• H.16 Success Determination

– Ties milestone payments to objective mission success criteria (Destination/Crew/Cargo)

– Updated the Final RFP to expand detail on Crew and Cargo Mission Success Criteria, specifying Primary Objectives for each

• H.21 Communications

– Establishes NASA’s role in media releases, branding/insignia rules, crew privacy protections, timelines/coordination with NASA’s Headquarters Office of Communications (HQ OCOMM)

– Updated Contractor media coordination requirements to focus scope to NASA mission-related activities/data;

requires review and approval from HQ OCOMM

– Consolidated and simplified requirements between H-Clause and SOW 2.23 Communications and Public Affairs Page | 26

• H.13 Identification and Representation of data with Restrictive or Limiting Markings

– Requires identification and certification of limited/restricted data and flow-down to subcontractors

– FAR 52.227-15 representations (Provision K.7) will be submitted with the Model Contract and once approved by the CO, incorporated as Attachment J-04, Authorized Limited & Restricted Rights Data in the awarded contract

• H.23 Authority and Responsibilities of the Destination Commander, Chain-of-Command and Succession on-orbit; Relationship Between Ground and On-orbit Management

– Establishes the authority, responsibilities, experience requirements, and chain of command for the Destination and Crew Visiting Vehicle Commanders

– Updated to clarify that Commander spaceflight experience should include 14 days in orbit within the last 10 years.

• H.29 Applicability of Rights in Data – Special Works

– Grants NASA Special Works rights on data first produced by or on behalf of the U.S. Government including USG Crew, USG Payloads, USG Payload Facilities, and other future assets; NASA media; research data; and research-related mission data

– Updated to clarify requirements and combined Media/imagery into one category and that NASA will coordinate with the Contractor if NASA Media contains Contractor or Contractor customer content

Page | 27

• H.31 Government Technical Assessment

– NASA may delay launches or require removal of crew/cargo if technical or safety concerns arise

– Updated to clarify NASA’s authority to intervene for safety, details remedies if the contractor proceeds against NASA’s advice, and specifies burden of proof

• H.32 IDIQ Minimum Guarantee Supplement

– CLIN 2 task order awardees receive an increase to the IDIQ minimum guarantee consisting of four (4) CLIN 3 service missions (at least two must be Standard Service Missions)

– If the contractor fails to achieve Standard Service Mission capability within two years of the commitment date, NASA may reduce the minimum guarantee for each year of delay, after a two-year grace period

• H.33 American Taxpayer Protections

– Prohibits use of U.S. taxpayer funds to subsidize seats or services for foreign/private space tourists or sovereign astronauts; NASA must receive Fair Market pricing and terms offered to any non-NASA customers

– Requires Contractor to deliver a pricing structure for services offered in DRD CLDC-002 Commercialization Plan

– Updated from “Most Favored” to “Fair Market Pricing” and process for reporting and notification to NASA when pricing deviates from established pricing. NASA may require an equitable adjustment without objectively supported differences

Page | 28

• H.34 Contractor Use of Excess Capacity (NEW)

– Contractor may use excess NASA capacity (e.g., unused mission resources) for its own or non-government customers, subject to NASA approval and equitable adjustment

• H.36 Environmental Compliance and National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) Documentation (NEW)

– Contractor is solely responsible for complying with all applicable environmental laws, regulations, and permits for contract activities and facilities

– If NEPA documentation is triggered, the contractor must provide all required information and support

• H.43 Transportation Price Reopener (NEW)

– Allows the Contractor to propose updated pricing (increase or decrease) limited to transportation services prior to the exercise of an option period; price adjustments require supporting pricing data.

– If no agreement is reached, NASA will maintain current prices

• H.44 Programmatic Interface Requirements for Accessing Contract Data (NEW)

– Outlines NASA requirements for accessibility of data produced for Government viewing during the life of the contract. This Clause is optional and accessibility offerings to be evaluated as part of the proposal.

Page | 29

Section H Clauses – Legal

• H.19 Outer Space Treaty Article 6

– Requires the contractor to notify NASA of major mission plan changes, including mission termination, to support USG continuing supervision obligations under the Outer Space Treaty

– Updated to clarify examples of major mission change (e.g., changes to trajectory, plans for termination of CLD operations)

• H.22 Jurisdiction and Control of Space Objects

– Requires registration by the U.S. of all modules of the CLD where members of NASA’s Astronaut Corps or other USG personnel are required to access or anticipated to need access, and that parties engaging in activities on U.S.-registered modules agree in writing that such activities will be governed by U.S. law and the parties submit to the jurisdiction of U.S. courts.

• H.26 Insurance for Damage to Property

– Insurance required for Protected Space Operations; does not apply to activities in CLIN 1

– Updated to reduce property damage insurance to $250M for destination elements launched on NLS Category 2 launch vehicles (LV); no insurance is required for Category 3 LV

Page | 30

Section H Clauses – Legal

• H.25 Informed Consent and Assumption of Risk for Commercial Crew

– Requires notarized informed consent/releases from crew acknowledging spaceflight risks, contractor responsibility (not NASA certification), and covering assistance provided by Government crew/medical personnel.

oUSG Astronauts and other USG personnel are not required to sign

• H.39 NFS 1852.228-78 Cross-waiver of Liability for Science Or Space Exploration Activities Unrelated to the International Space Station (Sep 2025) (Deviation)

– Clarified Cross-Waiver of Liability related to commercial activities, third parties, and related entities

– Updated to expand cross waiver to GCAs, unilateral waiver on GTAs, Clarified for activities related to ISS

• H.42 Insurance for Third Party Claims (NEW)

– Clarifies that NASA is not requiring insurance for claims by Third Parties but encourages Contractor to make own assessment of risks and insurance needs

– Defines “Third Party” and provides notice that insurance for Damage to Third Parties will be required if the Government approves a Contractor request for indemnification

Page | 31

I Clauses

• Final RFP Noteworthy Changes:

– Added FAR 52.249-9 Default (Fixed Price Research and Development) (Applies to CLIN 1 and CLIN 2)

– Section I clauses were modified to address uniqueness of this contract and/or per industry feedback o I.7 FAR 52.217-9 Option to Extend the Term of the Contract (MAR 2000)

– Updated ordering periods to align with options periods o I.9 FAR 52.227-14 Rights in Data

– Changes to address NASA and industry concerns; removed Insight Data o I.12 NFS 1852.240-75 Security Classification Requirements

– Updated in Final RFP to include Attachment J-18, DD Form 254, Contract Security Classification Specification

Page | 32

National Aeronautics and Space Administration

Section L&M Proposal Instructions & Evaluation

• Due Dates, Page Limits & Formatting

• Volume I - Pricing & TEP

• Volume II – Mission Suitability

• Volume III – Past Performance

• Volume IV – Responsibilities Considerations

• Volume V – Model Contract

Page | 33

• Proposal Due Dates

• Proposal is due December 8, 2026 at 1:00pm Central Time

• NASA is requesting Past Performance two weeks early on November 24, 2026

• The System for Award Management (SAM) is a Federal Government owned and operated free web site that collects data from suppliers, validates and stores this data, and disseminates it to various government acquisition agencies.

• You are required to create an account in SAM.

• Offeror’s initial proposal should contain the best terms from a price and technical standpoint

• The Government preference is to award without discussions, however, the Government reserves the right to conduct discussions with those Offerors who have made it to competitive range

Proposal Due Date and Other Information

Page | 34

• Volume I - Pricing: 30 Total Pages for Narrative Explanation

• L-01 Price Template is not included in page count

• Volume II – Mission Suitability: 300 Pages for Technical, Management & Small Business Sections

• DRD & Attachment Exclusions to Page Count

• DRD CLDC-001 Integrated Master Schedule (Unlimited)

• DRD CLDC-002 Commercialization Plan (sections 1, 2d, 5, 6, 8-11, 200 Pages)

• Attachment L-05 Government Task Agreement Forms (Unlimited)

• Narrative Explanation/Approach for GTAs are to be included in Volume II 300-page count

• Attachment L-07 Business Case Analysis Template (Excel Template should not be modified to add tabs)

• Supplemental supporting data is limited to 100 pages

• Attachment J-11 Certification Work Plan & J-12 Mission Service Work Plan Templates (Unlimited)

• Volume III – Past Performance: 30 Pages

• Volume IV – Responsibilities: (Unlimited, not included in page count)

• Volume V – Model Contract: (Unlimited not included in page count)

Page Limits

Page | 35

• Ensure that the number of pages, page margins, font type, font size, and page size are in conformance to Section L.5 Proposal Formatting Instructions

• Pages submitted in excess of the limitations specified in this provision will not be evaluated by the Government and will be returned to the offeror

• However, any pages contained in a page limited section of your proposal which do not comply with the RFP requirements may be returned by the Government and not evaluated.

• L.3 FAR 52.215-20 Requirements For Certified Cost or Pricing Data and Data Other Than Certified Cost or Pricing Data. Jan 2026 Alternate IV

• Submission of certified cost or pricing data is not required

• CO may request additional non-certified cost or pricing data, when unusual circumstances warrant it, to support a fair and reasonable price determination.

Proposal Formatting and Other Details

Page | 36

Volume I – Pricing

• Attachment L-01 Price Template is provided to submit all pricing in Excel format by Calendar Year

• Narrative description should include pricing and estimating techniques

• Identify and disclose resources for any team members, subcontractors, or suppliers expected to receive

$100 million or more in contract value over the contract period

• Relevant assumptions that are major drivers of the price

• The CLIN Pricing Tab shall match the pricing and rates submitted in Section B for CLINs 1-5 and the GTA total

• Pricing for Service Mission A and B is optional and based on the Offerors approach, and shall start in the year service is available

• Pricing for Standard Service Missions shall start on the same date submitted in Clause H.32 IDIQ Minimum Guarantee & Conditions, Table H.32.1 Standard Service Mission Commitment

• GFTSS Pricing is only guaranteed for the first four missions. Offerors shall notate with an asterisk (*) the years that include GFTSS in their Section B Pricing, and exclude Transportation costs if they’re requesting GFTSS for those missions

Page | 37

Total Evaluated Price (TEP)

The Contracts Total Evaluated Price (TEP) is developed based on the following formula:

TEP = CLIN 1 + CLIN 2 + CLIN 3 + CLIN 4 + CLIN 5 + GTAs

• CLIN 1 – Total Price CLIN 1

CLIN 2 – Total Price CLIN 2

• CLIN 3 – The average of the annual End-to-End Standard Service Mission Prices across all contract years a Standard Service Mission is offered and multiplied by eight (8) missions

• The Offerors Transportation Pricing is calculated based on either 1) GFTSS or 2) Prime Transportation Price

(whichever is higher)

• CLIN 4 - Total sum of the average prices for each Additional Service line item for all ordering years (2028-2042)

• CLIN 5 - Total sum of ordering years (2027-2042) Fully-Burdened Composite Labor Rate (FBCLR) multiplied by 2,000 hours each

• Government Task Agreements - The total cost of all GTAs submitted

Page | 38

Supplemental Price Data

Page | 39

• Facilities Capital Cost of Money (FCCOM):

• Offerors may propose FCCOM per CAS 414 and FAR 31.205-10.

• If proposing FCCOM, provide detailed calculations and supporting information.

• If not proposing FCCOM, include FAR 52.215-17 “Waiver of Facilities Capital Cost of Money” in the

Model Contract.

• Programmatic Interface Requirements:

• Describe costs associated with Clause H.44 (Programmatic Interface Requirements for Accessing

Contract Data) in the Cost BOE breakdown tab of Attachment L-07 (Business Case Analysis Template).

• Transportation Pricing:

• End-to-end pricing must include only U.S. vehicles for transportation.

• Unbalanced Pricing

• Unbalanced pricing occurs when one or more line items are significantly over- or under-stated, even if the total evaluated price is acceptable.

• Offerors must provide documentation, data, calculations, and rationale for any apparent unbalanced pricing.

Volume II - Mission Suitability

Page | 40

Proposals shall include information as described in Mission Suitability Instructions

Technical Approach

• System Architecture

• Certification & Engineering

• Mission Services & Utilization Capabilities

• Safety & Mission Assurance (S&MA) Approach

Management Approach

• Program Management Approach

• Commercialization and Business Approach

• Insight Implementation

• Work Plan

Small Business Utilization

• Submission of Small Business Plan and Goals

• Offerors shall propose phased Small Business Goals that align with the nature of the work

Section M – 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 | 41

Proposal Evaluation Overview

Technical & Management Evaluation

• Evaluation will be based on the overall demonstrated understanding for reasonableness, feasibility, and completeness and any associated impact and ensuing risk to the Government

• NASA has detailed specific areas that may be evaluated more favorably in the evaluation criteria, if it is determined to be advantageous to the Government. (This list is not all inclusive, see RFP for all the evaluation criteria)

Technical

• Credible schedules and path to services

• Credibly supported reduced lifecycle and transportation costs supported by LOIs, clear understanding of requirements

• Low-risk operational concept that ensures safe, continuous crew operations and system reliability

Management

• Assemble and maintain an integrated workforce

• Effective Subcontractor and Teaming arrangements

• Robust logistics and supply chain management

• Viable, profitable, quantifiable non-NASA financial and commercial commitments

• Maximize NASA Insight & Collaboration, including areas outlined in Clause H.44 Programmatic Interface Requirements for Accessing Contract Data

Page | 42

Attachment L-07 Business Case Analysis Template

Page | 43

Cost Summary BOE

• Purpose is to provide a lifecycle outlook of the Development, Certification, and Operations costs of the CLDS

• CLIN 1-3 shall phase costs in the calendar year they are performed

• CLIN 3 shall assume NASA will buy Early Services if offered (Mission A or B) the first year they are available (but no more than 2 early A or B missions )

• CLIN 3 shall assume NASA will buy Standard Services Missions the first year it is available and continue at a rate of 2 missions per year, with 2 NASA crew on each Mission.

ProForma Cash Flow

• Outlines NASA and Commercial Revenue, Investments and their sources by calendar year

• Including sales for utilization, and seats on crew vehicles and the destination

• Narrative explanations and supporting documents can be included as part of the 100 pages for supplemental supporting data

Cost BOE Breakdown

• Proves detailed BOE explanations by CLD Element, CLD Operations, Transportation and Other

• Element costs are split by Non-Recurring; Recurring Engineering

• Explanations and supporting documents can be included as part of the 100 pages for supplemental supporting data

Corporate Contribution

• Purpose is to identify and determine prior and future corporate financial investments vs the Government

Volume III – Past Performance The Offeror shall fill out and submit Attachment L-02 Past Performance Matrix

This Matrix identifies the specific SOW areas that the Offeror shall focus their past performance on.

• Offerors shall provide a narrative summary of up to three (3) relevant contracts and/or agreements that are active or were completed in the last five (5) years

• Offerors shall provide up to two (2) more additional narrative summaries, for up to five (5) qualifying major team members, subcontractors, and suppliers.

• Qualifying major team members, subcontractors and suppliers are defined as having over $100M of work related to this contract during the 8-year base period.

• Additionally, Offerors shall provide performance data with explanatory remarks on relevant contracts and/or agreements in the last 3 years.

• This data includes Environmental Compliance, Safety & Health Data, OSHA citations, Injuries, etc.

2.1

Program

Management

2.3

Government

Insight

2.4

Schedule

Management

2.5

Risk

Management

2.10

Systems

Engineering and

Integration

2.11

Safety &

Mission

Assurance

2.13

Certification

2.14

Mission

Integration

2.15 Utilization

2.16

Mission

Operations

2.17

Transportation

3.1

Initial

Development

3.2

CLDS

Development &

Certification

3.3

Mission

Services

Page | 44

Volume IV – Responsibility Considerations

• The Contracting Officer makes the determination of responsibility per FAR 9.104.

• Responsible means that the contractor has adequate organizational and financial controls, satisfactory business ethics, financial resources, the ability to successfully perform the work, is eligible, etc.

• This determination is performed by the CO and is separate from the selection decision.

• If an offeror is not responsible, then they are not eligible for award.

• The Contracting Officer will also check the FAPIIS database (includes records of the Contractor’s previous contracts).

NASA has included the following Responsibility Considerations:

• DRD CLDC-003, Organizational Conflicts of Interest (OCI) Plan

• Attachment L-04, Contractor Responsibility Matrix

• Submission of Attachment L-10, Domestic Source Certification

• Financial Capability Disclosure Information

• Optional Proposal Supplements

• Request for Indemnification under Public Law 85-804

• Request for NASA to consider an exception to 51 U.S.C. 50131 Commercial Space Transportation Services

Page | 45

Volume V - Model Contract

• The Model Contract consists of Sections A-K and SF-33 of the RFP.

• The Offerors will submit a signed Model Contract with their proposal.

• The Model Contract must be signed by a person authorized to commit the offeror.

• All pages must be returned, not just the pages with the fill-ins.

Page | 46

Angela Hart

Technical Overview and Updates

SEB Chair LEO Program Commercial Strategy Officer

Page | 47

Requirements and Standards Approach

• CLDC requirements include Destination, Cargo and Crew vehicle requirements (equivalent to multiple program requirement sets)

• Requirements and Standards have been heavily tailored for a commercial development to enable contractor innovation and efficiency while maintaining safety oversight

• Focus on safety/certification requirements and interfaces for existing hardware to avoid incurring redesign costs for already certified visiting vehicles

• Utilization needs addressed via contract SOW as services

Final RFP Noteworthy changes:

• Clarifications in many areas to address Industry ability to propose alternate standards to “Meet the Intent” and adjudication process

• Significant updates to Applicable documents to clarify when verifications are required and when meets-the-intent may apply and reduced overall Applicable documents list by over 50% (from ~375 to ~175)

• Final CLDP-REQ-1130 Rev. D includes EVA, External Robotics, and Berthing requirements re-designated as reference, clarifications on Destination deorbit requirements and failure tolerance, and addition of cybersecurity

Page | 48

Certification Approach

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 safety including, but not limited to:

• Approval of verification and variances that impact NASA applicable requirements

• Co-chair of Safety Review Boards and joint approval of critical and catastrophic hazard analysis

• Approval authority in anomaly resolution when USG Crew and/or assets are present or impacted.

• Approval of USG Crew ground training plans, USG on-orbit crew time, and concurrence on integrated increment and manifest plans for NASA associated missions

This approach allows the Contractor to propose a jointly approved certification plan that aligns with their commercial processes and CLDP-PLN-2000 Certification Plan and DRD CLDC-102 Verification, Validation, and Certification Plan

• Milestone details are documented in J-11 Certification Work plan

Final RFP Noteworthy Changes:

• Updated CLDP-PLN-2000 Rev. A including changes to milestone entrance/exit criteria and other updates based on industry comment; aligns with J-11 Certification Workplan

Page | 49

Mission Integration Approach The Mission Integration Approach allows Contractor to propose a jointly approved mission integration plan based on commercial processes that aligns with CLDP-PLN-2110 Mission Integration Plan and the following Mission Integration DRDs:

– DRD CLDC-201 Mission Integration and Operations Management Plan (MIOMP)

– DRD CLDC-202 Mission Resource Allocation Document (MRAD)

– DRD CLDC-203 Tactical Increment Execution Report (TIER)

– DRD CLDC-205 Post Increment Report

– DRD CLDC-206 Visiting Vehicle Post Flight Report and the SOW

• Details associated with Mission Integration milestones are documented in J-12 Mission Integration Work Plan

– NOTE: CLDP-PLN-2110 was not updated prior to Final RFP release; J-12 takes precedence

Final RFP Noteworthy Changes:

• 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 | 50

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

C re w L au n ch

C rew

R etu rn

CLDS

PIR

R+1m

CTS

PFR

R+1m

ATP

ATP

L-24m

L-24m

Workplan Updates

Workplans are utilized to provide NASA minimum milestone requirements while offering industry tailoring to support CLD architecture or commercial processes for the certification and mission execution phases

• Allows 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-11 and J-12 tables are contractually binding with implementation details negotiated per milestone in the Joint Implementation Plan (JIP) post contact award

Final RFP Noteworthy Changes:

• J-11 Certification Work Plan

• Updates to milestones and structure to ensure clarity, simplify and provide better flexibility for implementation

• Removal of Stand Alone Demonstration Mission (Combined with first Crewed Mission)

• Updates to J-11 Certification Work Plan to align with CLDP-PLN-2000 Rev A changes

• J-12 Mission Service Work Plan Template

• Updates to milestones and structure to ensure clarity, simplify and provide better flexibility for implementation

• NOTE: CLDP-PLN-2110 Mission Integration Plan was not revised prior to Final RFP release. Updates were made to J-12 Mission Integration Milestones for clarification and will take precedence if there are discrepancies.

Page | 51

Operations and Training Approach The Operations and Training Approach allows Contractor to propose a jointly approved Operations and Training plan based on commercial processes that aligns that aligns with CLDP-STD-1150 Operations Standards and the following DRDs:

– DRD CLDC-111 Medical Operations Plan

– DRD CLDC-113 Health Stabilization Program (HSP) Plan

– DRD CLDC-127 Mission Systems Plan

– DRD CLDC-128 Operations and Training Plan

– DRD-CLDC-130 Crew Selection and Evaluation Plan

– DRD CLDC-131 Pre-Launch and Post-Landing Operations and the SOW.

• The approach is based on 25+ years of successful LEO operations, but allows flexibility to “meet the intent” using Industry methods

NASA maintains responsibility and authority over USG crew, crew safety and associated activities including but not limited to:

• Co-chair the Misson Management Team and will have final authority for safety of USG crew and assets

• Medical authority for USG crew members throughout all phases of the mission

• Clarification and updates on the use of NASA crew time for maintenance, assembly and checkout tasks

• Responsible for inputs to providers integrated operations, utilization activities, and training

Final RFP Noteworthy Changes:

• Clarified first right of refusal for Commander during Mission Service order process

• No changes to CLDP-STD-1150 but numerous updates to SOW and DRDs based on industry feedback Page | 52

Utilization Approach

The Utilization Approach allows Contractor to propose a jointly approved Utilization Integration Plan based on commercial processes that aligns with CLDP-PLN-3017 CLDP Utilization Integration Plan, CLDP-PLN-1122 CLDP Science Data Management Plan, the Statement of Work and the following DRDs:

• DRD-CLDC-124 Utilization Integration Plan

• DRD CLDC-126 Science Data Management Plan

Final RFP Noteworthy Changes:

• Separated out trash and return from SOW Section 1.5 NASA Utilization Capability Needs in LEO, Table 1.5-1

• Updates for clarity and changes to address concerns with NASA Priority and First Right of Refusal modified to base minimum requirements on transportation capability by number of seats purchased.

Page | 53

TABLE 3.4.1-1 NASA First Right of Refusal Allocated

Cargo Per Mission

Number of Seats Purchased

% of Available Cargo

2 50%

3 65%

4 75%

Safety & Mission Assurance (S&MA) Approach

S&MA approach focuses on the development and execution of Safety plans and processes with Contractor-proposed implementation methods jointly approved by NASA that align with NASA defined plans and DRDs, including but not limited to:

• CLDP-STD-3102 CLDP Hazard Analysis and Safety Process Standard ensuring a hazard analysis and system safety process in place for identifying, controlling, and verifying critical and catastrophic hazards with NASA joint approval at co-chaired safety reviews

• NASA-STD-8739.8B Software Assurance and Software Safety Standard ensures Contractor Software Safety and Assurance Plans aligns with specified sections including third-party IV&V or optional Government IV&V support

• Contractor Quality Assurance Plans cover Contractor and supplier activities to ensure compliance with requirements

• Nonconformance (NC) process and NASA insight plan allows early visibility into items that may affect safety of USG crew and/or assets

Final RFP Noteworthy Changes:

• Expanded Nonconformance (NC) section to include Contractor support for NASA-led investigations, including risk assessments and corrective action recommendations.

• Addition to S&MA Plan to ensure all items are certified for their intended application(s) and environment(s) Page | 54

Government Insight Approach

• Contractor proposes a jointly approved insight approach based on commercial processes that aligns with CLDP-PLN-3016, H-Clause, SOW and DRD CLDC-104 Insight and Collaboration Implementation Plan.

– Based on many lessons learned, Insight requirements must be flowed to subcontractors and suppliers

• Final RFP Noteworthy Changes

– Updated to clarify NASA insight (monitoring) and oversight (approvals) to preserve commercial autonomy while maintaining necessary program insight.

– Clarified key areas to Insight Data access in support of: development progress, schedule/critical path performance, effective risk management, manufacturing progress, verification planning and execution, testing, Risk Based Assessments (RBA), Product Assurance Actions (PAA) planning, training and execution.

– Insight structured as risk-based monitoring, not approval authority; updates reinforce that insight does not replace Contractor responsibility or constitute NASA approval or acceptance.

– Clarified issues identified through insight will be elevated through LEO Program boards for timely issue elevation and provide oversight resolution if necessary, while Contractor retains full responsibility and compliance with requirements leading to final certification and on-orbit operations.

– Added NASA Rights to Insight Data that includes the right to request, store and access, reproduce and use Insight Data

Page | 55

Statement of Work (Attachment J-01)

• The Statement of Work outlines the technical scope and requirements

– Requirements levied are specifically outlined within the Statement of Work or are through call outs to Requirements documents, H Clauses and/or Data Requirements Deliverables (DRDs).

• Final RFP Noteworthy Changes:

– Additions based on NASA Internal Review included:

o Updates to Quarterly reporting requirements to provide NASA greater insight into performance o Clarification of Activation & Checkout will be completed in the first CLIN 3 Mission Service Order

– Significant Changes based on Industry Feedback included:

o Added new Transportation section to clarify all transportation requirements, including GFTSS o Utilization minimums updated to provide a range to address transportation capability uncertainty o Clarifications to First Rights of Refusal (Commander and Cargo Requirements) o Reduced Crew Tended Missions to a…