CSDA_Source Selection Statement_Final.pdf

SOURCE SELECTION STATEMENT FOR

COMMERCIAL SMALLSAT DATA ACQUISITION (CSDA) PROGRAM

SOLICITATION No. 80HQTR23R0007

On September 6, 2023, I along with other senior officials from The National Aeronautics and

Space Administration (NASA) met with the Source Evaluation Board (SEB) appointed to evaluate proposals for the Commercial Smallsat Data Acquisition (CSDA) Program procurement. A full briefing of the results of the evaluation conducted by the SEB was presented. This memorandum documents my decision at the conclusion of that meeting.

PROCUREMENT DESCRIPTION AND HISTORY

The Commercial Smallsat Data Acquisition (CSDA) Program procurement will result in a multiple-award, Indefinite delivery Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) Contract with a five (5) year effective ordering period, and the ability to issue Firm Fixed Price (FFP) task orders. This contract is in support of the NASA Science Mission Directorate (SMD), Earth Sciences Division

(ESD). The minimum amount of supplies or services that shall be ordered during the effective ordering period is $500 per contract. The maximum amount of supplies or services that may be ordered during this effective ordering period is $476M, cumulatively across all awarded contracts.

The purpose of this contract is to acquire earth observation data and related services from commercial sources to support NASA’s Earth science research and application activities.

Emphasis will be placed on data acquired by commercial constellations, affording the means of complementing NASA's Earth observations data with higher resolutions, increased temporal frequency or other novel capabilities. This contract will provide a cost-effective means to augment and/or complement the suite of earth observations acquired by NASA and other US government agencies and those acquired by international partners and agencies. NASA will require End User License Agreements (EULAs) under each task order issued, to enable broad levels of dissemination and shareability of the commercial data with the US government agencies and partners.

The CSDA contract includes an On-Ramp feature, which allows the original solicitation to be periodically re-opened to give new vendors the opportunity to submit a proposal to NASA for evaluation and potential award. On-Ramps also give vendors already awarded a CSDA contract the opportunity to propose new data products developed (or data products based on new instruments) that were not available during initial proposal submission.

The CSDA requirement was issued as a full and open competition procurement under North

American Industry Classification System (NAICS) Code 541990 for All Other Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services.

NASA issued the Request for Proposal (RFP) on March 21, 2023. A total of three RFP amendments were issued on April 12, 2023, April 21, 2023, and July 18, 2023, respectively. The first two amendments mainly addressed administrative matters, and the purpose of Amendment

No. 3 was to issue a Final Proposal Revision (FPR) request, with proposals due on July 27, 2023.

While the RFP stated that the government intended to evaluate offers and award a contract(s) without discussions, following the initial evaluation presentation on June 9, 2023, I concurred with the Contracting Officer’s determination that a competitive range and discussions were necessary. One Offeror’s proposal was determined to be “Unacceptable” after initial evaluation and was not part of the competitive range. Discussions were conducted in accordance with

Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 15.306. After discussions concluded, eight Offerors submitted timely and responsive Final Proposal Revisions (FPR). One offer was untimely, and another offer was unresponsive, therefore these Offerors were removed from the competitive range.

The following eight (8) companies remained in the competitive range for consideration under this procurement:

Airbus DS Geo, Inc.

Capella Space Corp.

GHGSat Inc.

Global Weather and Climate Solutions, DBA PlanetiQ

ICEYE US

Maxar Intelligence, Inc.

Spire Global Subsidiary Inc.

Umbra Lab, Inc.

The SEB documented its findings in a presentation that was presented to me on September 6, 2023, which is discussed below.

EVALUATION AND SOURCE SELECTION PROCEDURES

The evaluation factors specified in the CSDA RFP included Technical Acceptability Standards

(TAS) and Price List Reasonableness. The RFP identified three potential ratings for each of the four TAS’s identified below: Acceptable, Potentially Acceptable, or Unacceptable. The RFP stated that proposals must be rated “Acceptable” in all four (4) TAS to be eligible for contract award, either upon initial proposal evaluations or after discussions and final evaluation.

The RFP Technical Volume included the following four (4) TAS to be evaluated for each Offer to determine acceptability:

1) The Offeror’s narrative, including all of the proposal information required by provision III.11.2.1, is complete and adequately describes how it meets the minimum constellation of 1 satellite (s) - Sections 1.0.a-1.0.c of the CSDA IDIQ SOW.

2) The Offeror’s narrative, including all of the proposal information required by provision III.11.2.2, is complete and adequately demonstrates that data from the satellite(s) covers a period of at least nine (9) continuous months, after June 1, 2016 – -

Sections 1.0.d-1.0.f of the CSDA IDIQ SOW.

3) The Offeror’s narrative, including all of the proposal information required by provision III.11.2.3, is complete and adequately demonstrates the ability to provide a comprehensive catalog of its commercial Earth Observation data products in accordance with Section 2.0 of the CSDA IDIQ SOW. At a minimum, the data catalog must include data sets, associated metadata, and ancillary information.

4) The Offeror’s response, including all of the proposal information required by provision

III.11.2.4, is complete and adequately demonstrates that it has the ability to make the required data available for access in accordance with the Government-defined EULAs via providing data system capabilities for search, discover, and access data via (i) user interface and (ii) application programming interface.

To determine acceptability, each of the four TAS were evaluated for adequacy, reasonableness, credibility and risk related to the offeror’s ability to successfully address the technical acceptability standards. A proposal was rated “Potentially Acceptable” in a TAS area when after the initial evaluation, the evaluation team estimated that additional information could be provided by an Offeror during discussions (if utilized) that may result in a proposal rating of acceptable.

The Offerors proposed Contract Price List was evaluated in accordance with FAR 15.305(a)(1) to determine the fairness and reasonableness of the proposed prices in comparison with the

Offeror’s commercial pricing. Adequate price competition is expected to occur at the task order level in the Sustained Phase.

Additionally, Offerors were required to demonstrate responsibility to be considered for award, in accordance with the standards and procedures set forth in FAR Subpart 9.1 and NASA FAR

Subpart 1809.1. Offerors were also required to submit an Information Technology Security

Management Plan (ITSMP) as well as a “Delivery of Metadata for Archive”, which will be issued as the first Task Order under this contract for all vendors.

EVALUATION RESULTS

TECHNICAL ACCEPTABILITY STANDARDS EVALUATION

Each of the following offerors’ FPRs satisfactorily addressed each of the TAS 1-4 requirements at the level of detail required by the solicitation instructions, resulting in an Acceptable rating for each TAS from the SEB:

Airbus DS Geo, Inc.

Capella Space Corp.

GHGSat Inc.

Global Weather and Climate Solutions, DBA PlanetiQ

Maxar Intelligence, Inc.

Spire Global Subsidiary, Inc.

UMBRA Lab, Inc.

ICEYE US, satisfactorily addressed the requirements for TAS 1-3 at the level of detail required by the solicitation instructions, resulting in an Acceptable rating for TAS 1-3 from the SEB. TAS

4 was rated Unacceptable and as such, in accordance with the evaluation criteria, this Offeror is not eligible for contract award.

PRICE EVALUATION

The SEB’s evaluation of the Price List proposed by each of the Offerors listed below determined the prices proposed to be fair and reasonable in comparison with the Offeror’s commercial pricing, in accordance with the evaluation criteria specified in the RFP. The Price Lists proposed by these vendors, will be incorporated into the resultant contract as Attachment D.

PlanetiQ

Maxar Intelligence, Inc.

The SEB evaluation of the Price List proposed by each of the Offerors listed below was able to determine the majority of the prices proposed as fair and reasonable, in comparison with the

Offeror’s commercial pricing, in accordance with the evaluation criteria specified in the RFP.

The SEB could not validate the prices for some of the products proposed (varies by vendor) as insufficient data other than certified cost or pricing data was submitted. NASA intends to incorporate the proposed price lists into the resulting contracts as Attachment D, with the exclusion of these products/prices identified for which additional supporting documentation is needed.

Airbus DS Geo, Inc.

Capella Space Corp.

GHGSat, Inc.

Spire Global Subsidiary, Inc.

RESPONSIBILITY DETERMINATION

The 7 eligible offerors evaluated after FPR were determined to be responsible based on the

Contracting Officer’s evaluation of responsibility and FAR Subpart 9.1. All 7 offerors provided acceptable ITSMPs and the Metadata for Archive Delivery, as required by the RFP.

DECISION

In making my determination, I reviewed the evaluation criteria and procedures that are summarized in this document and detailed in the RFP. During the presentation, I solicited input from the evaluation team and key management personnel that were in attendance and have responsibilities related to the procurement. I carefully reviewed the presentation and findings of the evaluation team in comparison to the evaluation criteria in the RFP and concur with their findings.

I determined that the evaluation results presented by the SEB, as documented in its presentation, were detailed and consistent with the evaluation criteria in the CSDA RFP. I discussed with the

SEB its rationale for the evaluation of the offerors for each of the four TAS ratings. I determined that the ratings were reasonable and valid for the purpose of making a selection decision.

Furthermore, I concur with the Contracting Officer’s decision to exclude certain data products from the resultant contract(s) price lists, for which price fairness and reasonableness could not be determined, and potentially incorporate them at a later time if sufficient and reasonable pricing support is provided by the vendors identified.

I determined that based on the evaluation findings, the following seven Offerors provided proposals for this effort that successfully met the RFP requirements. Therefore, based on the above, I select the following seven Offerors for contract award under the Commercial Smallsat

Data Acquisition (CSDA) Program procurement.

Offerors

Airbus DS Geo, Inc.

Capella Space Corp.

GHGSat Inc.

Global Weather and Climate Solutions, DBA PlanetiQ

Maxar Intelligence, Inc.

Spire Global Subsidiary Inc.

Kevin J. Murphy

Chief Science Data Officer, Science Mission Directorate

Source Selection Authority