Pathfinder_RFI-questions_and_answers.pdf

Pathfinder Questions and Answers 10/13/2017

1. Section 4.5 of the RFI Instructions states that our response to the RFI should be emailed, but there is no email address identified. To whom should we address the email that contains our RFI response? Send responses to: NASA-Pathfinder-Relay@lists.nasa.gov, attention of Justin Wilson (See Section 4.1 of the RFI)

2. Will NASA provide direction on page limits or font size limits for the RFI response? Or is the only limit to keep the email submittal less than 15 Mbytes? If so, can a responder use multiple emails to send a complete RFI response that exceeds 15 Mbytes as long as each email is individually less than 15 Mbytes each? There is no page limit on the responses. Multiple submissions will be accepted, however, responses should address items in the RFI. Keep marketing material to a minimum.

3. Section 1.2 states that NASA is soliciting information from “any and all U.S. commercial entities.” Thank you for defining a commercial entity on page 3 and 4 of the RFI instructions per the 2010 National Space Policy. However, most commercial telecommunications companies that operate in GEO are international commercial companies, often with headquarters overseas along with American affiliates in the United States. Examples of these commercial GEO communications companies are Intelsat, SES, Inmarsat, Eutelsat, and Telesat. Does NASA consider these major commercial telecommunications companies to be U.S. commercial companies for the purposes of this RFI response? What is the definition of a “U.S. company” for the purposes of this RFI response?

All sources are welcome to reply to the RFI. However, future partnerships are envisioned with U.S. commercial companies. In general terms, a U.S. company is a legal entity established under and subject to state law, as well as U. S. statutes and regulations. For the purposes of this RFI, companies with a U.S. operation or affiliation may also be considered.

4. In Section 1.3, NASA states,” Partnership activities may range from technology assessments, flight validations of new technologies, up to simply providing commercial services.” Is NASA willing to partner with a U.S. commercial entity to build and launch a pathfinder next generation data relay capability that can demonstrate the effectiveness of leveraging commercial space as well as provide “leave behind capability” for the Next Generation Architecture? Or is a pathfinder with leave-behind capability beyond the scope of NASA’s intention? “Leave behind capability” is within the scope of NASA’s intention. Any capability for NASA needs to align with the NASA Next Generation Architecture as described in the RFI. Proposals should discuss the business model and the viable and addressable non-Govt commercial market.

5. Please describe the pathway to an acquisition strategy that will deliberately and purposefully leverage commercial space capabilities to replace the current government owned and operated TDRSS systems. The RFI is seeking input to determine a path to leverage the commercial space market capability when it meets anticipated mission needs to augment government owned and operated (often contractor operated) capability. NASA will continue to provide services to NASA missions not met by commercial market provided services including using TDRSS through the 2030s as the TDRSS fleet is gradually retired.

6. How much money is in the NASA budget for this commercial partnership initiative leading up to a 2025 start of operations? A budget has not yet been determined for the commercial partnership initiative.

7. In Section 1.3, NASA states, “As needed for potential future activities, NASA will also negotiate the Partner’s access to NASA’s spaceflight resources; satellite payload or bus systems, ground stations, technical expertise, facility, flight or test analysis or data, aspects of risk mitigation, or other resources. Use of additional Government resources such as facility, services, and Government developed technologies may require the negotiation of a separate agreement with NASA.” Questions:

a. What do you mean by NASA’s “spaceflight resources?” Do you mean launch services?

Spaceflight resources include such aspects as satellite payload or bus systems, ground stations, technical expertise, facility, flight or test analysis or data, and aspects of risk mitigation. Spaceflight resources for purposes of the RFI do not include launch services, however, NASA would discuss sharing the cost of launch services.

Shared spacecraft resources could also include space, power, thermal control, TT&C, etc. on the shared bus and might also include capacity such as channel bandwidth within an aggregated Government data stream over cross link or to receive commercial data on the ground (Section 2.3), consistent with allowable spectrum allocations.

b. For use of “additional Government resources such as facility, services, and Government developed technologies” NASA indicates that may “require the negotiation of a separate agreement with NASA.” What kind of separate agreement? Why does this agreement need to be separate from the basic partnership agreement? The agreement mechanism will be negotiated between NASA and the potential Partner. Agreement types could include contracts, Space Act Agreements, cooperative agreements or other agreements.

There may be circumstances that require specific or separate agreement(s) with NASA (HQ) or particular NASA Centers.

8. In Section 2.2, NASA states that “NASA expects to own and operate the following ground stations for the future architecture: Relay Gateway Ground Stations; Optical Ground Stations.” Given that statement, will NASA allow a commercial service provider to downlink NASA science data through commercial transponders to the commercial service provider’s existing ground antenna so that it can be cost-effectively transmitted directly to NASA mission users through terrestrial fiber?

NASA uses commercial transponders today to move NASA science data among commercial networks (ground station to ground station) when most cost effective to the Government. It is expected that missions that use commercial service transponders (within existing frequency allocations and designations for commercial services and when most cost effective) will downlink their data to the commercial service provider’s ground stations and transmit that data to the NASA user.

9. Regarding Section 3.5.5, will NASA allow a Commercial Service Provider (CSP) to use the spectrum allocated for NASA inter-satellite links to also be used for commercial satellite links needs on a non-interference basis?

Consistent with the RFI purpose, NASA welcomes concepts that may include services to multiple types of users including NASA systems, other federal agency systems, commercial systems, and international entities. International and U.S. spectrum regulations define the conditions for space-to-space (inter-satellite) spectrum access including the available frequency bands and the associated constraints some of which are based on the Federal/Non-Federal status of the user.

The Responder should not only describe the vision for shared services but also demonstrate an understanding of the international and U.S. regulations including frequency bands, technical constraints, associated status conditions (Federal/Non-Federal), and potential changes that would be required. Any NASA collaboration will ensure the continued interference-free operations of NASA’s core missions as well as those of other Federal agencies, but, noting that NASA already shares services and spectrum with multiple entities, concepts for shared services may be possible.