DRFP_Q&A.pdf

U-Class Draft Request for Proposal (DRFP) Comments

1) Question: Attachment 02, Milestone Deliverable Descriptions and Requirements. May an Offeror propose changes to the Milestone Payment schedule? The payment schedule’s cash flow is mismatched with what is required to pay the Launch Vehicle Provider with a Small Business taking on all of the risk.

Response: Yes, an offeror can propose changes for government consideration to the Milestone Payment schedule as long as they are in line with the offeror’s standard commercial practices. In addition, NASA has revised the Milestone Payment schedule as follows:

Milestone #1 -15% Milestone #2 -25% Milestone #3 -20% Milestone #4 -20% Milestone #5 -10% Milestone #6 -10%

2) Question: Please provide clarification to “Integration Complete”. Does this mean integration of CubeSat to dispenser or dispenser/CubeSat to launch vehicle?

Response: Integration complete is defined as the integration of the CubeSat in the dispenser onto the launch vehicle.

3) Question: Attachment 02, Milestone Deliverable Descriptions and Requirements. Termination for the convenience of the USG should comply with the FAR clauses for allowable costs to be billed to the USG. We do not conduct current business with this high of risk.

Response: NASA has revised the Milestone Deliverable Descriptions and Requirements, Termination for the convenience as follows:

Milestone #2 -50% Milestone #3 -40% Milestone #4 -20%

4) Question: Attachment 02, Milestone Deliverable Descriptions and Requirements. What does “Orbital parameters at release” entail?

Response: The Attachment 02 has been changed to, “Orbital parameters at release or other data indicating UCPs were delivered to the intended orbit.”

5) Question: Attachment 02, Milestone Deliverable Descriptions and Requirements. Quantify what “any exceedances of the ICD requirements” means?

Response: If during launch, any of the contractor launch vehicle ICD requirements for environments exceed the value provided, this is considered an exceedance. Meaning that if the value seen during launch is greater than what was expected for the ICD, this may cause the CubeSat not to function properly once on orbit.

6) Question: Attachment 01, Statement of Work. Description “the LV contract shall…” Meetings would have to be negotiated up front. We have a standard set of meetings included in our services price. Suggest that baseline meetings requested as part of the SOW.

Response: Meetings should be proposed by the contractor in line with what is provided for a typical commercial launch service. However, at a minimum the government requires a PDR, CDR, and Readiness Review. Any additional meetings beyond these three should be detailed in the offeror’s proposal.

7) Question: Attachment 01, Statement of Work, Assumption #13. Some U-Class Payloads may be powered up by battery and have RF systems on at launch and remain powered through ascent.

Launching powered on is unusual. We don't generally allow for this in a rideshare environment. Can you provide more information on this topic?

Response: There may be payloads that want to collect data during ascent phase of flight. To do this the spacecraft may need to be powered on. If the offeror is unable to provide powered launching, an exception should be taken in their proposal.

8) Question: Attachment 01, Statement of Work, Assumptions #14 and 16. Clarify who is responsible for the ODAR reports.

Response: NASA CSLI will perform the ODAR for the CubeSats on the mission with inputs from the contractor. NASA will then provide this ODAR to the contractor to be used by the overall mission.

9) Question: Attachment 01, Statement of Work, Data Requirements. These are not standard measurements for CubeSat launches. Please update accordingly.

Response: SOW section Data Requirements updated to delete these specific requirements. See SOW for full update.

10) Question: Attachment 01, Statement of Work, Data Requirement (vi) Is the Government planning to use any umbilical or other electrical connection to the launch vehicle? What if we can’t launch powered on.

Response: SOW section Data Requirements updated to delete these specific requirements. See SOW for full update.

11) Question: RFP Section 2. Object to Inspection/Audit clause. USG has the right to inspect/test as we provide it services. Additionally, it will have access to and the right to examine any directly pertinent books, records, etc. up until 3 years after the end of the contract.

Response: RFP has been updated, FAR Clause 52.246-4 Inspection of Services - Fixed Price (Aug 1996), incorporated by reference is deleted.

12) Question: RFP section 3.1. Provide definition of excusable delay.

Response: Per FAR 52.212-4 Contract Terms and Conditions -- Commercial Items (Jan 2017), Excusable delays. The Contractor shall be liable for default unless nonperformance is caused by an occurrence beyond the reasonable control of the Contractor and without its fault or negligence such as, acts of God or the public enemy, acts of the Government in either its sovereign or contractual capacity, fires, floods, epidemics, quarantine restrictions, strikes, unusually severe weather, and delays of common carriers. The Contractor shall notify the Contracting Officer in writing as soon as it is reasonably possible after the commencement of any excusable delay, setting forth the full particulars in connection therewith, shall remedy such occurrence with all reasonable dispatch, and shall promptly give written notice to the Contracting Officer of the cessation of such occurrence.

This is a standard FAR clause that would require a deviation to alter. At this time the Government does not intend to pursue a deviation.

13) Question: Who is responsible for obtaining all licenses and the third party liability insurance typically required of the Launch Service Provider?

Response: The contractor is responsible for ensuring it is a US LV, and that all licenses and third party liability insurance is in place. It is not expected that the offeror will obtain the licenses or insurance that is typically handled by the launch service provider.

14) Question: Attachment 02, Milestone Deliverable Descriptions and Requirements. Recommend removing requirement stating "Received telemetry data or other available data shows the Interface Control Document (ICD) environments and parameters were not exceeded, –OR – If there is a violation of the ICD requirements that there is no launch vehicle/service caused degradation of the payload’s ability to perform its intended function". Requirement to provide launch vehicle environments is not appropriate for a U-Class Payload.

Response: NASA agrees. Updated Attachment 02.

15) Question: Attachment 02, Milestone Deliverable Descriptions and Requirements. The clause stating that "The final payments (Milestone 5 and/or 6) shall not be made in the event of a failed mission determination. In the event of a failed mission, the final payments shall be forfeited by the Contractor and is not recoupable." implies that 40% of the payment would not be made for a launch failure that is not the direct responsibility of the UCP integrator (in the case a Rideshare broker/aggregator). This is untenable for a Small Business concern, given that almost all of their scope and expenses would have been expended at that point in the mission. Utilize payment milestones recommended above and/or change the definition of a 'Failed Mission' to not include a launch vehicle failure or other cause outside of the control of the UCP integrator.

Response: NASA takes no exception on the description of requirement. Milestone payments have been changed as noted in response to question 1. In addition, the definition of Failed Mission has been change. Please see attachment 02.

16) Question: Are we able to offer multiple launches to meet the 72U (~105kg) launch load yearly need. It was not clear if the goal was a single launch per year or multiple launches to meet the needs.

Response: There is not a yearly 72U requirement. There is a total potential requirement of 72U broken out in up to 24U maximum per year. The government’s requirement is for the first launch to be 12U minimum with two options each for an additional launch of a maximum of 24U per year. The subsequent launches may be broken down into smaller units (6U minimum) so long as the yearly option of 24U is achieved.

17) Question: Are there target altitudes - I do understand the required NASA Orbital Debris Policy (NPR 8715.6A) clause, but that does not dictate min or max altitude.

Response: Abiding by Orbital Debris Policy, a launch 500km/ –50km or +100km would be acceptable.