NextSTEP-2_BAA_Appendix_6_LR_TCPS_-_Amendment_2.pdf

NextSTEP-2 Appendix F: LR TCPS NNH16ZCQ001K-TCPS

National Aeronautics and Space Administration

NASA Headquarters

Advanced Exploration Systems Division

300 E ST SW

Washington, D.C. 20546-0001

Next Space Technologies for Exploration Partnerships -2

(NextSTEP-2)

Broad Agency Announcement NNH16ZCQ001K-TCPS

Appendix F: Logistics Reduction (LR) in Space by Trash

Compaction and Processing System (TCPS)

Originally Issued: July 3, 2018

Amendment 1 Release: July 31, 2018

Amendment 2 Release: August 16, 2018

NOIs Due: July 30, 2018, 5:00 PM Eastern Time

Proposals Due: August 22, 2018, 5:00 PM Eastern Time

Change Log

Version Description of Changes Date

Original Release ----- July 3, 2018

Amendment 1 References in section 7.3 updated to include web addresses July 31, 2018

Amendment 2 Corrected “Letter of support” and PRR requirement (pp. 11, 23) August 16, 2018

Table of Contents

Change Log

Table of Contents Acronyms

1.0 Introduction & Background

1.1 Logistics Reduction Purpose

1.2 Trash Compaction & Processing System Description

1.2.1 General TCPS Performance

1.2.2 Trash Compaction Processing

1.2.3 Residual Product

1.2.4 Effluent Management

1.3 Objectives and Acquisition Strategy

1.3.1 Phase A

Critical and High Risk Technology Validation Objective

Partnering Phase A Deliverables

Access to Government Facilities

1.3.2 Phase B

Phase B Deliverables

2.0 Funding Opportunity Description of Solicitation Topic

2.1 Description of Solicitation Topic

2.1.1 Basic TCPS CLIN

Trash Processing Residual Product

Effluent Handling

2.1.2 Resource Recovery CLIN

Effluent Recovery Recovery Performance Study

2.1.3 Capabilities Relevant to Both CLINs

Safety Compatibility with ISS EXPRESS Rack

Crew Operation Time System Reliability, Maintainability, and Lifetime

2.2 Phase B Description

2.3 General Information for Respondents

3.0 Eligibility Information

3.1 Eligibility of Applicants

3.2 Corporate Resources

4.0 Proposal Submission Information

4.1 Instructions for Proposals

4.1.1 Proposal Format and Contents

Title Page Executive Summary Proof of Eligibility System Concept

Technical Approach

Business Addendum Respondent Capabilities Intellectual Property

Price Proposal Attachments

4.2 Additional Proposal Guidance

4.2.1 Contract Structure

4.3 Phase A Deliverables

4.3.1 Concept Review and Preliminary Requirements Review

Basic TCPS CLIN CR/PRR Resource Recovery CLIN delta CR

4.3.2 Preliminary Design Review (PDR)

Basic TCPS CLIN PDR Resource Recovery CLIN delta PDR

4.3.3 Operational Bench-Top/Lab-Level Demonstration

4.3.4 Residual Product Production

4.3.5 Technology Readiness Level (TRL) Assessment

4.3.6 Routine Deliverables

4.3.7 Safety and Health Plans

4.4 Basic TCPS CLIN ISS Flight Requirements

4.5 GFP/GFE/NASA Subject Matter Expertise

4.6 Access to Research Results/Data Management Plan

5.0 Proposal Review Information

5.1 Factor 2: Scientific/Technical Merit Criteria and Weighting

5.1.1 Basic TCPS Evaluation Criteria

Criteria I: Trash Compaction and Product Solution Criteria II: Effluent Management Criteria III: Operational Considerations

Criteria IV: Concept Demonstration

5.1.2 Resource Recovery Evaluation Criteria

Criteria I: Technical Solutions for Resource Recovery Criteria II: System Integration and Operation

Criteria III: Extensibility Criteria IV: Concept Demonstration

6.0 Award Information

6.1 Funding Availability

6.2 Period of Performance

6.3 Award Date

6.4 Funding Allocation

7.0 Attachments

7.1 Attachment 1: Waste Model for Space Mission Trash

7.2 Attachment 2: ISS EXPRESS Rack

7.3 Attachment 3: Publications Relating to the Development of the HMC

8.0 References

Acronyms

AES Advanced Exploration Systems

BAA Broad Agency Announcement

CAD computer aided design

CDR Critical Design Review

CLIN Contract Line Item Number

ConOps Concept of Operations

CR Concept Review

CTB(s) cargo transfer bag(s) dCR delta Concept Review dPDR delta Preliminary Design Review

ECLS Environmental Control and Life Support

EXPRESS EXpedite the PRocessing of Experiments to Space Station

FAR Federal Acquisition Regulation

FFRDC Federally Funded Research and Development Centers

Gen Generation

GFE Government Furnished Equipment

GFP Government Furnished Property

HMC Heat Melt Compactor

IAC Initial Assessment of Criticality

IRAD Independent Research and Development

ISS International Space Station

JPL Jet Propulsion Laboratory

JSC Johnson Space Center

LEO Low Earth Orbit

LR Logistics Reduction

NASA National Aeronautics and Space Administration

NextSTEP Next Space Technologies for Exploration Partnerships -2

NOI Notice of Intent

NPR NASA Procedural Requirements

P&ID piping and instrumentation diagram

PDR Preliminary Design Review

PoP Period of Performance

PRR Preliminary Requirements Review

SBIR Small Business Innovative Research

SMAC Spacecraft Maximum Allowable Concentrations

SME Subject Matter Experts

SOW statement-of-work

SysML Systems Modeling Language

TCPS Trash Compaction and Processing System

TD Technology Demonstration

TIM Technical Interchange Meeting

TRL Technology Readiness Level

US United States

VES Vacuum Exhaust System

1.0 Introduction & Background

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) supports public-private partnerships for achieving its strategic goals and objectives for expanding the frontiers of knowledge, capability, and opportunities in space. The next step for human spaceflight beyond

Low Earth Orbit (LEO) is into cislunar space and eventually to planetary bodies. An important part of NASA’s strategy is to stimulate the commercial space industry while leveraging those commercial capabilities through public-private partnerships and potentially through future contracts to deliver mission capabilities at lower costs. NASA’s ultimate goal is to develop capabilities that will enable missions that are not reliant on resupply from Earth, thus making them more sustainable and affordable. NASA is employing a capability-driven approach to its human spaceflight strategy. This approach is based on developing a suite of evolving capabilities that provide specific functions to solve exploration challenges. These investments in initial capabilities can continuously be leveraged and reused, enabling more complex operations over time and exploration of more distant solar system destinations.

Through the continual presence of humans on the International Space Station (ISS) for almost two decades, several strides have been made in understanding the reliability of human support technologies and the development of human health countermeasures to combat long-duration microgravity effects. As NASA pushes human exploration to longer missions travelling further from Earth, the human demands on logistics necessitate efficient use, re-use, and repurposing of supplies for human daily living, and minimizing crew time for routine tasks. Dealing with the generation of waste/trash from daily living activities as crew size and mission endurance increase is an important capability that needs to be addressed.

To meet this requirement and to engage Private Industry, NASA issues this appendix for a

Habitat Systems Logistics Reduction (LR) Trash Compaction and Processing System (TCPS).

This solicitation provides details about the specific capabilities needed to support the goals of the

Next Space Technologies for Exploration Partnership (NextSTEP).1 The LR TCPS supports some of the guiding principles outlined in Section 1.1 of the NextSTEP-2 Omnibus Broad

Agency Announcement (BAA).2 LR TCPS specifically supports: Fiscal Realism, Technology

Pull and Push, Gradual Build Up of Capability, Economic Opportunity, Architecture Openness and Resilience, and Continuity of Human Spaceflight.

1.1 Logistics Reduction Purpose

NASA’s Advanced Exploration Systems (AES) Habitat Systems - Logistics Reduction (LR) project was established with the objective to identify and develop technologies that reduce mass, volume, and the crew time dedicated to logistics management. Trash processing is one such technology that has been identified to potentially fulfill the objectives of LR.

The current approach to trash management entails manually compacting, temporarily storing it, and then disposing of the trash either by return to Earth or incineration during reentry in a disposable supply vehicle. Long distances from Earth and lengthy durations with limited or no resupply will characterize future human missions. Returning trash to Earth will be impractical, jettisoning during the mission can result in loss of valuable recoverable resources and disposing of it locally may pose a planetary protection risk, if left untreated.

https://www.nasa.gov/nextstep https://www.nasa.gov/content/nextstep-2-omnibus-baa

NASA needs a system that can handle astronaut trash in situ rather than disposing of it overboard. However, storing trash inside a spacecraft creates physical and biological hazards for the crew, consumes critical habitat volume, and sequesters potentially valuable resources. To achieve meaningful logistics reduction, NASA ultimately needs a Trash Compaction and

Processing System (TCPS) that compacts trash to reduce storage volume, renders it biologically and physically safe and stable, recovers trapped resources, and forms residual material into a storable, potentially useful product.

1.2 Trash Compaction & Processing System Description

NASA has explored TCPS technology previously through the development of the Heat Melt

Compactor (HMC). A list of heat melt compaction publications is given in Section 7.3. This work has led NASA to derive a set of primary functions that are characteristic of a TCPS designed for long-endurance transit and planetary missions. Long-endurance refers to mission duration without resupply as opposed to long-duration mission, which may include a resupply.

The TCPS concepts proposed for this solicitation are not required to be modeled after the NASA

HMC. However, the proposed TCPS concept must satisfy the functions described in this section.

The Systems Modeling Language3 (SysML) use case diagram in Figure 1 shows these TCPS functions and the associations between the TCPS Physical System, the astronaut, the trash, the product, and the spacecraft support systems. The functions required of a TCPS are to:

Reduce trash volume into a form suitable for safe and efficient long duration storage, Safen the trash to reduce the risk of biological activity, i.e. controlling hazards with sufficient certainty to be considered safe for human operations, Stabilize the trash physically, geometrically, and biologically (biologically inert), i.e.

making the product unlikely to change from its final form, and

Manage the effluents that can be expected to come off the trash during processing.

1.2.1 General TCPS Performance

NASA has determined that a TCPS should support a four-person crew on extended space missions, and should be capable of continually processing trash daily with minimal servicing and/or maintenance for at least 60 months. Long duration space flight will also include substantial periods of dormancy, thus the TCPS must be able to be used before and after dormancy without extensive refurbishment. Section 7.1, Attachment 1 “Waste Model for Space

Mission Trash,” gives a representative trash model that the proposed technology must be able to process. Although servicing and maintenance are not desired, this may be necessary, so any serviceability and maintainability should be designed into the system. Ideally, the trash should be processed in its original form without preprocessing (e.g. shredding) or extensive sorting in order to limit crew interaction time.

Figure 1: Trash processing SysML use case diagram for long-endurance space missions;

“include” dependencies are required functions and “extend” dependencies are desired functions.

1.2.2 Trash Compaction Processing

The primary purpose for a trash compaction system is to reduce trash volume. This could be achieved with a variety of different technologies, such as mechanical, pneumatic, hydraulic or other means. Candidate TCPS systems could use heat and temperature hold times to boil off water, melt plastics, and to stabilize, safen and/or sterilize the trash. Further, processing under vacuum could assist with compaction and reduce the temperatures required to boil-off water.

Previous development efforts have encountered challenges including leakage around moving piston seals and door seals, water squeezing out into the gas effluent ports, caramelization of organics on chamber surfaces, plugging of effluent gas exits, long cooling times, and difficult extraction of the tile after processing.

1.2.3 Residual Product

The TCPS is expected to produce a dry, safe, minimal volume product or “tile” that can either be efficiently stored (i.e., highest packing density with minimal astronaut effort) in containers such as cargo transfer bags (CTBs), or be used to cover internal habitat walls for augmented radiation protection. NASA’s work with the HMC has achieved compaction ratios four to seven times more than the density obtained by hand compaction (~100g/liter). The HMC also melts the plastic in the trash at a temperature above 130 °C, which upon cooling, tends to encapsulate the trash and prevent volume spring-back. The temperature of plastic melting is also sufficient to drive off the water that is bound in the trash. It has been determined that if sufficient water is driven off to reduce water activity to below 0.6, then the processed trash does not support microbial regrowth unless rewetted. Increased processing time and/or elevated temperatures can also sterilize the trash. Challenges in this area have included trapped water, loose packing and crumbling at lower tile densities, possible off-gassing from tiles, and biological activity if not processed at high enough temperatures with sufficient hold time.

1.2.4 Effluent Management

The TCPS must be able to manage and/or process any effluents that may come off of the trash during processing. Expected effluents include aqueous solutions with contaminants, water vapor laden with organic and inorganic gases, and entrained particulates. Effluents may require processing to render them compatible with spacecraft air and water life support systems, and/or vacuum exhaust systems that vent to space.

There are several challenges in managing effluents. When heating trash, released hydrocarbons may result in a mixture that is combustible. In microgravity, the interaction of fluid with the geometry of its storage container is often counter-intuitive resulting in undesirable fluid migration. Additionally, solids may precipitate from expulsed water and collect on any part of the system over many trash-processing cycles that could clog small flow paths or eventually breakaway and be entrained with flowing gases to downstream spacecraft support systems.

A key decision in effluent management is to determine if effluents should be vented overboard or recovered. Whether or not to recover effluents for reuse is a tradeoff between the complexities of the system needed to recover them versus the value of the effluents to the mission. A TCPS that is able to recover resources from the effluent is likely to be higher mass, consume more power and volume, and be more complex than a system that cannot. Extra TCPS mass, power, or volume could drive up the cost of a spacecraft and/or launch vehicle. Additional complexity could negatively impact the reliability and require more crew time for maintenance and require provisioning of additional spare parts.

Alternatively, the effluents may contain valuable resources whose value is governed by mission distance and duration. The duration drives the total amount of effluent that could be recovered as well as the infrastructure (tanks, valves, heaters, etc.) required to store or dispose of the effluent if not recovered. The distance drives the cost to carry or resupply the resources if they are not recovered. The additional mass of the extra resources and infrastructure needed to store and/or manage them can drive the need for extra propellant, loss of habitable volume or the cost of extra resupply ships, for example.4

While mission distance and duration can be derived from existing reference missions, specific information on propellant and structural mass partials or resupply concept of operations is not.

Therefore, it is difficult to quantify the value of the effluents, which makes a definitive trade for recovery elusive. However, it is worthwhile to understand the implementation cost to achieve various levels of recovery performance so that future trade studies can be completed when specific missions are better defined.

1.3 Objectives and Acquisition Strategy

NASA’s ultimate objective for achieving a flight verified TCPS will be accomplished in two phases. Phase A will develop and validate one or more concepts for TCPS technology, including validation of critical and high risk technical solutions through ground based prototype demonstration. This appendix is currently only requesting proposals for Phase A.

Phase B will include an ISS flight demonstration of a complete trash compactor system. Details for Phase B will be released as a follow-on BAA or other acquisition vehicle. It is expected that a

TCPS with a successful flight demonstration satisfying the required performance and endurance test objectives will be strongly considered for future long-endurance human space missions.

1.3.1 Phase A

The development of a complete TCPS will require the integration of various capabilities. NASA recognizes that all respondents may not have the expertise to address the full breadth of capabilities for a complete TCPS for long-endurance missions. Therefore, Phase A will be awarded as separate contract line item numbers (CLINs); one Basic TCPS CLIN and one or more optional CLINs for Resource Recovery. Each optional Resource Recovery CLIN will be independently scoped, priced, evaluated and awarded separately, but concurrent with the Basic

TCPS CLIN. Detailed evaluation criteria and weighting factors are described in Section 5.0. The

CLINs are as follows:

The Basic TCPS CLIN is mandatory for all respondents to propose a basic TCPS that accepts and processes trash, produces a compacted product, and handles effluents to the extent necessary to ensure their compatibility with and delivery to spacecraft systems. In this case the vehicle will be the ISS and handling effluents may include delivering them to the space vacuum exhaust system (VES).

The Resource Recovery CLIN is optional for respondents who wish to propose capabilities that build upon the Basic TCPS CLIN to recover resources from the effluent stream. Efforts must also include a performance metric study on mass, volume, power, and cooling versus effluent constituent and percent of constituent recovered to facilitate future mission trade studies. Respondents may propose and could be awarded more than one Resource Recovery CLIN option.

Critical and High Risk Technology Validation Objective Each respondent should clearly identify their approach and cost for satisfying each proposed

CLIN. This includes not only the capability itself but also the method of validation for each

CLIN. By the end of Phase A, respondents must validate that all critical TCPS technologies, regardless of CLIN, have reached a Technology Readiness Level (TRL) level 4 to assure an end-to-end system is viable for development during Phase B.

Validation can be accomplished using systems engineering best practices, however, for critical and high-risk areas and subsystems, validation shall be by ground-based prototype demonstration(s). High-risk areas include unproven technologies, critical components, or complex integrated systems. Respondents will need to identify high-risk areas and can leverage

NASA’s extensive development work with the HMC for guidance. For example, trash compacting, safening, sterilizing, and stabilizing methods explored with the HMC are generally understood. Other areas are less understood, such as effluent management. Publicly available references with details of NASA’s HMC development work are given in Section 7.3.

Partnering Partnering between respondents with complementary expertise with different CLIN objectives is acceptable and encouraged. Multiple Resource Recovery CLIN options are also acceptable.

Organizations with Resource Recovery CLIN technology may participate on multiple teams to enhance their award opportunities.

Phase A Deliverables Details for Phase A deliverables are given in Section 4.3 with minimum deliverables summarized below:

Concept Review (CR) – due 4 months after contract start.

o Preliminary Concept of Operations (pre-ConOps).

o Prototype sizing and functionality overview.

o Preliminary Requirements Review (PRR).

Preliminary Design Review (PDR) - due 1 month before contract end.

o Technology Readiness Level (TRL) of major subsystems at the end of Phase A.

o Assessments of subsystem and integrated system capabilities with defined maturation paths.

o Developmental test data and representative products.

o Information and analysis supporting the PDR exit/success criteria.

o Initial report on effluents and/or residual product from processing government provided trash.

o Resource Recovery CLIN only: performance metric study of resource recovery.

Full report of development and test data - due at end of contract.

o Results and conclusions validating the proposed TCPS concept.

o Proof-of-concept demonstration(s) of critical and/or high-risk technologies through a bench-scale prototype.

o Closed actions from PDR.

o Residual effluents and/or product from processing government provided trash, delivered to NASA.

Access to Government Facilities Respondents may request up to 6 weeks of use of the Government Furnished Equipment (GFE), including services of the NASA HMC Generation (Gen) 2 bench scale facility, to perform specific system, or subsystem tests, or operational evaluations during Phase A. Section 4.5 provides a description of the NASA HMC facility and services expected to be available. If GFE is requested, it is incumbent upon the respondent to secure an initial notice of intent from the government and include those costs as part of their proposal. Where appropriate, there will be a provision permitting the use of the GFE in any resulting contract. Data rights when using government facilities for testing will be negotiated in final contract negotiation.

Requested GFP/GFE: Include a SOW or description of tasks, government facilities and equipment, or other Government in-kind contributions; and a related cost estimate for those resources, any associated letters of support from facility owner, and associated points of contact.

The details and scheduling of the government facilities and equipment will be finalized as part of contract negotiations during award.

1.3.2 Phase B

Phase B will include a flight unit, a ground unit, and an ISS flight demonstration of the flight unit. The primary test objectives of Phase B will be to verify microgravity performance, operational acceptability, and endurance lifetime. Phase B requirements are expected to be derived from the concepts examined under Phase A. The Phase B details will be released as a follow-on BAA or other acquisition vehicle.

Phase B Deliverables Minimum anticipated Phase B deliverables are as follows:

PDR for Phase B due 6 months after contract start.

Critical Design Review (CDR) package due 12 months after contract start.

Ground unit TCPS with same design specifications as the flight unit.

Ground unit endurance test with minimum refurbishment afterward.

Flight unit TCPS to fly on board the ISS as a Technology Demonstration (TD) with operations support and TD verification resulting in TRL 7.

2.0 Funding Opportunity Description of Solicitation Topic

2.1 Description of Solicitation Topic

NASA is seeking proposals to provide a conceptual design (Phase A) which will lead to a future in-space TCPS demonstration on the ISS (Phase B) with functional requirements depicted in

Figure 1 and with the capabilities described in Table 1. The CLIN to which the capabilities are applicable are indicated in the CLIN column of Table 1. The capabilities are divided into

Minimum Capabilities, which all Phase A proposals must address, and Objective Capabilities, which are highly desired. Given that the ultimate goal is an integrated system to support long-endurance human spaceflight, the incorporation of as many Objective Capabilities as possible will increase the overall merit of the Phase A proposal. However, proposed functionality will be balanced against other weighted interest, such as cost, complexity, risk, etc. A credible technology and design maturation path (e.g. using modularity or upgradability) can be proposed to add functionality in the future. Technical evaluation criteria and weighting details can be found in Section 5.1.

2.1.1 Basic TCPS CLIN

While NASA is always interested in new technologies, for the purpose of consideration on this solicitation, the proposals for a Basic TCPS must address a solution producing a stabilized safe compacted trash product.

Trash Processing As mentioned in Section 1.2.1, the TCPS must process trash daily for a four-person crew for 60 months. This was derived from an estimate of 1 year pre-mission ground testing, a two-year operational space mission, and a two-year dormancy. The TCPS must be able to process the normal components in common trash described in the trash model in Section 7.1. Ideally, the trash should be processed in its original form without preprocessing (e.g. shredding) or extensive sorting. However, respondents must describe any anticipated preprocessing or sorting as part of the proposal. Consumables that support trash processing (such as containment bags that are not part of the trash model) can be considered if the benefits can be shown to outweigh the incremental additional mass. Crew interaction with the trash compaction system, including trash insertion, trash processing operations, and product removal and storage should ideally be less than 5 minutes per day during an exploration mission.

Respondents should describe the proposed methods and performance parameters of trash processing (e.g. operating temperatures and temperature hold time to boil off water, melt plastics, and to safen or sterilize the trash) and means of compaction to produce the desired trash volume reduction and final product density. Proposed solutions should address the challenges described in Section 1.2.2 such as leaking around moving piston seals and door seals, squeezed-out water into the gas effluent ports, organic caramelization on chamber surfaces, plugging of effluent gas exits, long cooling times, and difficult extraction of the tile after processing.

Representative trash for development testing is the responsibility of the respondent. NASA will provide actual model trash for processing as part of validating the TCPS concept. This trash shall be processed using the proposed concept approach, and the residual product and effluents delivered to NASA.

Table 1. TCPS Capabilities

CLIN Capability

Name

Minimum Capabilities

(For Phase A) Objective Capabilities

Basic

TCPS

Trash

Processing Capable of accepting and processing 2.2kg/day of non-hazardous trash per list in Section 7.1, with minimal consumables.

Capable of processing 5 cycles with limited maintenance and cleaning.

Process 4.4kg/day trash per list in Section 7.1. This process rate is sized for a four person crew.

Does not require unique consumables (e.g. carrier gas/air loss or processing bags).

Capable of 15 processing cycles without maintenance or cleaning.

Does not require consumables.

Basic

TCPS

Residual

Product Volume reduction to 400 grams/liter or higher.

Product is physically and geometrically stable with a form factor suitable for long-endurance storage and radiation shielding augmentation.

Safe – no biological, chemical, or physical uncontrolled risks to human health.

Volume reduction to 600 grams/liter or higher.

Product is storable for 5 years or more onboard the spacecraft.

Does not require consumables (e.g. storage bags or covers).

No tools required for removal of product.

Water activity of product, aw< 0.6.5

Basic

TCPS

Effluent

Handling Demonstrate safe storage or venting of any effluent water, gases, and particulates present, while preventing accumulation or deterioration of ISS vacuum exhaust system.

N/A

Resource

Recovery

Effluent

Recovery Recover water and/or gases and render them compatible with interfacing systems or the cabin environment.

Derive performance criteria and metrics to support trade studies.

Recover > 90% of the water from the trash.

Demonstrate less than 50% of the SMAC values if venting to a crew cabin with a US laboratory volume.

Both System Safety The TCPS shall comply with standard facility safety requirements and have safety features to address standard ISS payload safety hazards.

N/A

Both Compatible with ISS

EXPRESS

Rack

The system shall be adaptable to an ISS Standard EXPRESS

Rack payload.

The System and supporting avionics, power, and cooling shall be compatible with that of a standard double + single locker EXPRESS Rack payload, using only air cooling.

Both Crew

Operation

Time

Crew time interaction with the system limited to 15 minutes/day to process 2.2kg/day of trash.

Crew time interaction with the system limited to 5 minutes/day to process

4.4kg/day of trash.

Both System reliability, maintainability, and lifetime

Capable of processing 400kg trash at 2.2kg/day over 6 months with no repair servicing and minimal maintenance.

Capable of processing 8000kg trash at 4.4kg/day over 60 months with no repair servicing and minimal maintenance. (Long-endurance testing can be conducted with the ground unit in phase B).

Residual Product The TCPS is expected to produce a dry, safe, minimal volume product or “tile” that can either be efficiently stored (i.e., highest packing density with minimal astronaut effort) in containers such as cargo transfer bags (CTBs), or be used to cover internal habitat walls for augmented radiation protection. Proposals should describe the characteristics of the residual product including form factor and dimensions, physical stability defined as no crumbling, no disintegration, no loose material, no unacceptable off-gassing or unacceptable reactivity, and no biological activity, geometrical stability defined as the product retaining its final desired shape, and suitability for constructing a non-load bearing structure for radiation shielding by itself or inside some type of container or bag.

Compaction mechanical pressure and temperature are directly related to tile physical characteristic such as product density, geometric stability, and water activity of the residual product. Results from NASA’s HMC have shown that compaction to a density of 400 grams per liter produces a tile with minimally acceptable physical characteristics, whereas compaction to

600 grams per liter and above produces a tile with robust physical characteristics. Additionally, it has been determined that if sufficient water is driven off to reduce water activity below 0.6, then the processed trash does not support microbial growth unless rewetted. Water activity, aw, is the vapor pressure of water above the surface relative to the vapor pressure of pure water at a given temperature. An aw < 0.6 appears to be the limit at which biological growth stops (Stevenson

2015). Challenges in this area that were alluded to in Section 1.2.3 include: trapped water, loose packing and crumbling at lower tile densities, possible off-gassing from tiles, and biological activity if not processed at higher temperatures with sufficient hold time.

Effluent Handling All Phase A Basic TCPS CLIN proposals must address handling and/or processing expected effluents to ensure compatibility with dependent spacecraft systems. For example, water vapor and gases may need to be captured and then released in a controlled fashion in order to meet spacecraft vacuum exhaust mass flow and dew point requirements (e.g. ISS Vacuum Exhaust

System (VES)6). Proposals must describe solutions for managing fluids in microgravity with the goal for avoiding complex active phase separation equipment. Proposed solutions must also address flammability limits due to combustible effluents; deflagration, detonation, and explosion due to ignition sources and autoignition; explosion related to system design’ and strategies for dealing with precipitants and particulates.

2.1.2 Resource Recovery CLIN

Effluent Recovery To maximize the extensibility of the TCPS concept to long-endurance transit and/or planetary missions it is prudent to consider recovering resources from the effluent stream. NASA seeks the development and maturation of technologies that can recover constituents from the effluent or render the effluent stream compatible with vehicle waste recycling systems. For example, delivering non-potable water to an Environmental Control and Life Support (ECLS) water processor or demonstrate less than 50% of the Spacecraft Maximum Allowable Concentrations

(SMAC) values if venting gasses to a crew cabin with a United States (US) laboratory volume.

Proposed solutions may consider a modular approach to allow reconfiguration of the system to adapt to the demands of a particular mission scenario.

Recovery Performance Study Per Section 1.2.4, a definitive trade for effluent recovery versus vent-to-vacuum remains elusive until more detailed missions are defined. However, respondents will be required to complete a performance metric design study to identify the drivers in implementing effluent recovery technologies to facilitate future trade studies as mission definition matures. Respondents will derive performance metric sizing parameters, such as mass, power, and volume, versus percent recovery of the targeted constituent within the range of recovery performance applicable to the proposed technology. Of particular interest is the identification of inflection points where increasing the desired level of recovery may drive a switch to a different technology, thus step changes in the performance metric relationships.

2.1.3 Capabilities Relevant to Both CLINs

Safety Respondents shall consider the ISS payload safety requirements during Phase A for both the basic TCPS, its product and any Resource Recovery CLIN technologies. This includes, but is not limited to:

pressure requirements;

mechanical;

processed effluent;

product chemical reactivity, off-gassing, and biological inertness; and human factors in operating the system such as touch temperature.

It is understood that respondents may not have complete access or knowledge of NASA safety, interface, and operational requirements for flight payloads. Thus, upon selection, awardees will be provided a NASA interface consultant with expertise in advising payloads in how to meet the

NASA unique requirements with the intent to provide understanding and resolve questions due to a steep learning curve of NASA processes.

Compatibility with ISS EXPRESS Rack The system shall be adaptable as an ISS EXPRESS Rack payload with a target packaging volume for a double locker plus one single locker (Section 7.2). As a reference, HMC Gen 2 including all hardware and electronics was designed for this volume packaging.

Crew Operation Time Crew time interaction with the TCPS, including trash insertion, trash processing operations, and product removal and storage shall be less than 15 minutes per day per 2.2kg/day trash processed with a goal of less than 5 minutes per day per 4.4kg/day trash processed. These values do not include installation, servicing, or maintenance. However, servicing is not desirable and maintenance should be minimal over the lifetime of operation.

System Reliability, Maintainability, and Lifetime The proposed system concept should be capable of processing trash daily with minimal servicing and/or maintenance. Servicing and maintenance, though not desired, should be addressed and be designed into the system. If servicing and/or maintenance is deemed necessary - for example, in order to achieve the required lifetime - then mean-time between servicing/maintenance should be estimated. One primary test objective during Phase B will be endurance and operational lifetime testing. Endurance testing can be accomplished through testing of the ground unit.

2.2 Phase B Description

Phase B will include delivery of an ISS flight unit and a ground test unit. The flight unit will be used for ISS trash processing experiments and will be integrated with ISS spacecraft support systems such as the ISS Vacuum Exhaust System (VES). The ground unit with the same design specifications as the flight unit will be delivered to NASA for performance and endurance testing, and for ground operations in support of the ISS on-orbit investigations.

It is anticipated that there will be three test objectives for Phase B: performance testing, operational acceptability, and endurance lifetime. Performance testing and operational acceptability will be verified with the flight unit on ISS in microgravity and also with the ground unit. Endurance lifetime testing will be primarily verified with the ground unit. Though Phase B requirements are not defined at this time, it can be expected that for the flight demonstration a minimum capability will require processing of at least 30 kg of trash into product over an estimated six months, and that at least 15 kg of processed product will be returned to Earth for further tests; and that there be an objective capability of returning and recovering any collected water back to Earth for tests.

It is expected that for the ISS flight demonstration, the TCPS will not be allowed to interface with ISS life support systems, hence effluents will need to be managed accordingly. For example, effluent streams would either be stored and returned to earth or destroyed while in a disposable re-entry vehicle or vented to the VES.

2.3 General Information for Respondents

Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration

Announcement Title: NextSTEP-4.2 BAA, Appendix F: Logistics Reduction - Trash

Compaction and Processing System

Responsible Office: Advanced Exploration Systems Division

Human Exploration and Operations Mission Directorate

Washington, DC 20546

Point of Contact: Jason Crusan

Director, Advanced Exploration Systems

Human Exploration and Operations Mission Directorate

E-mail: HQ-NextSTEP-BAA@mail.nasa.gov

Industry Forum: A NextSTEP-2 Partnership Industry forum will be held both at Ames

Research Center and virtually for this Appendix and respondents will have a chance to mailto:HQ-nextstep-baa@mail.nasa.gov ask questions about this particular solicitation. The tentative date for the forum is July

24, 2018, 8:00am Pacific Time. The meeting agenda and related information will be posted to the NextSTEP website1. Please contact HQ-NextSTEP-BAA@mail.nasa.gov to arrange badging with “NextSTEP-2, Appendix F: LR TCPS Industry Forum” in the subject field of e-mails. The cutoff date for requesting attendance is July 18, 2018.

Notice of Intent: Due July 30, 2018, 5:00pm Eastern Time. To assist in the planning of the proposal evaluation process, NASA strongly encourages the submission of a Notice of

Intent (NOI) to propose by all prospective respondents. The NOI should contain the following information: name, address, telephone number, e-mail address, and institutional affiliation of the respondent, and the solicitation topic in which you intend to propose (NextSTEP-2, Appendix F: LR TCPS). NOIs shall be submitted electronically to the Point of Contact e-mail address above. Please note that NOIs are strongly encouraged, but are not required. Not submitting an NOI will not impact the selection process.

Inquiries: Due August 1, 5:00pm Eastern Time. There will be an opportunity to submit written questions for each appendix released. The questions shall not contain proprietary information nor require proprietary information in the response. NASA will not provide evaluations, opinions, or recommendations regarding any suggested approaches or concepts. All questions shall be directed to the NextSTEP e-mail box HQ-NextSTEP-

BAA@mail.nasa.gov no later than the date specified above. Inquiries shall identify the

BAA number and this Appendix in the subject field of e-mails.

Proposals Due: Proposals must be submitted electronically in accordance with instructions no later than August 22, 2018, 5:00pm Eastern Time to the NextSTEP e-mail box HQ-

NextSTEP-BAA@mail.nasa.gov. The e-mail submission shall include the BAA number and “Appendix F – LR TCPS Proposal” in the subject field of the e-mail.

https://www.nasa.gov/nextstep mailto:HQ-NextSTEP-BAA@mail.nasa.gov mailto:HQ-NextSTEP-BAA@mail.nasa.gov mailto:HQ-NextSTEP-BAA@mail.nasa.gov

3.0 Eligibility Information

3.1 Eligibility of Applicants

This solicitation topic is open to non-Government U.S. institutions (companies, universities, nonprofit organizations) and foreign institutions. NASA civil servants, Jet Propulsion Laboratory

(JPL) employees, national laboratories, and Federally Funded Research and Development

Centers (FFRDCs) shall not be proposed as a Prime Contractor on any effort associated with this announcement but may participate as a team member. Proposals from foreign organizations must comply with Section 3.2, Guidelines for International Participation, of the Omnibus BAA. Other eligibility information is also included in the omnibus portion of this BAA.

3.2 Corporate Resources

Respondents are required to show a minimum of 20% corporate contribution as defined in

Section 3.2.5 of the Omnibus BAA (10% for a Small Business as defined by the SBIR small business eligibility, as posted here: http://sbir.nasa.gov/content/nasa-sbirsttr-program-definitions). Up to 50% of the corporate contribution can come from work performed within the last five years that is directly relevant to the proposed effort. A minimum of 50% of the corporate contribution must be invested coincident with Phase A. No more than 50% of the required minimum corporate contribution may be from foreign partners. Respondents shall describe how they intend to meet this eligibility requirement in Section II of the proposal. An appendix to the proposal shall provide documentation in an attachment showing proof of corporate contribution.

Corporate contribution may be in the form of direct labor, travel, consumables, or other in-kind contributions. Also, other reasonable forms of corporate contribution may include travel directly related to achieving proposed objectives during Phase A, investments in special facilities or equipment, tooling or other prior private investment, and internally funded technology maturation such as Independent Research and Development (IRAD) are deemed acceptable for this effort. For this BAA, state and local government contributions may be included with private corporate resources.

The value of participation by federally funded government funded participants and/or the use of federal government facilities shall be added to the price to the government, which will be the price used to determine whether the 20% required corporate contribution has been met.

Criteria and procedures for the allowability and allocability of cash and non-cash contributions shall be governed by FAR7 Parts 30 and 31, and NFS8 Parts 1830 and 1831. NASA reserves the right to hold due diligence discussions to make reasonable determinations regarding corporate contributions.

mailto:https://www.nasa.gov/content/nextstep-2-omnibus-baa http://sbir.nasa.gov/content/nasa-sbirsttr-program-definitions http://sbir.nasa.gov/content/nasa-sbirsttr-program-definitions https://www.acquisition.gov/?q=browsefar https://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/procurement/regs/nfstoc.htm

4.0 Proposal Submission Information

4.1 Instructions for Proposals

See NextSTEP Omnibus BAA2 for general instructions. Where instructions are different, the specific instructions in this section are in addition to or supersede the general instructions in the

Omnibus BAA and apply to this appendix only.

4.1.1 Proposal Format and Contents

The proposal format and content requirements as outlined in this section below are specific to this appendix. The required sections of the proposal must be submitted as one searchable, unlocked PDF file with edit permission enabled. Respondents must comply with the format and page limit requirements described in the Omnibus BAA, as well as any additional requirements specified in this appendix.

There is no limit for file size limit for proposals (This is an exception to Section 2.3.1(c) of the

NASA Guidebook for Respondents9). Only attachments that are specifically requested either in this solicitation or in appendices to this solicitation should be submitted.

Proposal Section Page Limitations

Title Page 1

Executive Summary (Section I) 3

Proof of Eligibility (Section II) 3

System Concept, Technical Approach, Business Addendum (Sections III-V) 30

Basic TCPS CLIN System Concept and Technical Approach

Optional Resource Recovery CLIN(s) System Concept and Technical Approach

Business Addendum

Respondent Capabilities (Section VI) 5

Data Rights (Section VII) 1

Price Proposal (Section VIII) No limit

Attachments No limit

A page is defined as one side of a sheet, 8 1/2" x 11" with at least one-inch margins on all sides, using not smaller than 12-point font, with the exception of tables and figures, which may use 8-point font. Pages in excess of the page limits for each section will not be evaluated.

Proposals received by the Government after the published date and time for receipt will not be accepted.

Title Page Include any Notice of Restriction on Use and Disclosure of Proposal Information.

An optional graphic image may be included.

The Respondent’s name of the proposal or proposed project.

Date of the proposal.

The title, solicitation number and Appendix being responded to of this Announcement.

Organization name and address.

Respondent Point of Contact name, title, e-mail address, and phone number.

https://www.nasa.gov/content/nextstep-2-omnibus-baa http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/procurement/nraguidebook/

Executive Summary Describe the combined proposal’s prominent and distinguishing features, including for both the Basic TCPS and any proposed Resource Recovery options.

Provide an overview of the total proposed effort that is suitable for release through a publicly accessible archive should the proposal be selected.

The Executive summary will not be evaluated.

Proof of Eligibility Provide information showing that the respondent and all team members are eligible participants as stipulated in Omnibus BAA, Section 3 Eligibility Information2 and

Section 3.0 of this Appendix.

Describe compliance with participation requirements as needed.

Explain how the required corporate contribution resources will be satisfied.

System Concept For each proposed CLIN:

Describe the overall system concept and its functions (concept of deployment and operation), how it addresses the objectives and requirements in this BAA, and its maturity (TRL, if appropriate).

Describe how the proposed system is on the path to a long duration fight unit TCPS.

Technical Approach For each proposed CLIN, respondents shall describe the approach and schedule for achieving the objectives of Phase A. Successful implementation of the approach must result in the milestones and deliverables given in Section 4.3. The approach should include both qualitative assessment and quantitative analysis. At a minimum, describe the following with sufficient detail in order for

NASA to evaluate the merits of the proposal.

Describe the concept, the capabilities it will address, and how the concept and capabilities will be validated.

Describe key technologies and maturation paths including technology demonstration and verification.

Describe methodologies for any experimental prototype systems, tests, and supporting analysis.

Describe critical technologies and how they will be validated or verified.

Describe programmatic high risk areas and how they will be mitigated.

Describe the system design approach and systems engineering tools and practices that will be used. Describe how Model Based Systems Engineering and SysML will be implemented (SysML diagrams are deliverables).

Provide a schedule and work plan for major milestones, deliverables, and decision gates;

and describe the work and work products needed to achieve each.

Describe how NASA will be kept informed and how information and data will be communicated.

Identify key personnel and partners, and their roles and responsibilities.

Business Addendum Describe how this activity advances the intent of the public-private partnership concept and meets NASA’s strategy to stimulate the commercial space industry while leveraging those same commercial capabilities through this partnership and future contracts to deliver mission capabilities, by:

Providing a business overview.

Defining customer/partnership model.

Listing business case(s) that are leveraged by the hardware development.

Explaining business risks.

Respondent Capabilities Include any previous experience designing and developing space-qualified systems applicable to the objectives of this BAA. Describe the applicability of the respondent capabilities to each proposed CLIN.

Intellectual Property Describe the approach for data rights and inventions and how they meet the objectives outlined under the Omnibus BAA in Section 2.7, Intellectual Property Developed under an Award.

Omnibus BAA Appendix D, Attachment B10 provides as a reference the standard FAR patent and data rights clauses used by NASA in contract awards. Respondents are advised to carefully review these clauses and provide any exceptions, with justification thereto, at the time of proposal submittal.

Price Proposal Each CLIN shall be priced separately. The price proposal shall include the overall firm fixed price for the capability/technology development proposed in the CLIN. The respondent shall provide total direct labor hours by skill mix, travel, and subcontracts in accordance with the sample format set forth in Omnibus BAA, Attachment A: Price Proposal Sample Format.