BAA-NOAA-GEO-2019_FINAL.pdf

Geostationary Orbit Concept Exploration Broad Agency Announcement

BAA-NOAA-GEO-2019

October 3, 2019

Office of Systems Architecture and Advanced Planning (OSAAP) National Environmental Satellite, Data, and Information Service (NESDIS)

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Department of Commerce (DOC)

BAA-NOAA-GEO-2019 Page 2

Table of Contents

1. OVERVIEW

GENERAL INFORMATION

NAICS Code Agency Name Development Opportunity Title Announcement Type and Date White Paper Due Date Eligible Offerors Research and Development Areas of Interest Award Information

2. PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

2.1 SYSTEM OVERVIEW

2.2 REFERENCE CONSTELLATION

3. RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT AREA OF INTEREST

3.A. INSTRUMENT CONCEPTS

3.A.1 Technical Requirements 3.A.1.1 Instrument Concepts at the Target (Baseline) 3.A.1.2 Instrument Concepts within the Recommended Performance Ranges 3.A.1.3 Instrument Ground Data Processing 3.A.1.4 Instrument Concepts Study Content 3.A.2 Study Requirements 3.A.2.1 Study Coordination Requirements 3.A.2.2 Study Communication Requirements 3.A.2.3 Study Period of Performance 3.A.2.4 Government Furnished Equipment (GFE)/Government Furnished Services (GFS) 3.A.2.5 Deliverables

3.B. MISSION CONCEPTS

3.B.1 Technical Requirements 3.B.1.1 Mission Concept Alternatives: Study Content 3.B.1.2 Task Requirements 3.B.2.1 Study Coordination Requirements 3.B.2.2 Study Communication Requirements 3.B.2.3 Study Period of Performance 3.B.2.4 Government Furnished Equipment (GFE)/Government Furnished Services (GFS) 3.B.2.5 Deliverables

4. WHITE PAPER GUIDELINES

4.1 SUBMISSION PREPARATION

4.1.1 Quad Chart Guidelines

4.1.2 White Paper Guidelines

4.2 EVALUATION INFORMATION

5. FULL PROPOSAL INSTRUCTIONS (STAGE 2)

BAA-NOAA-GEO-2019 Page 3

6. AGENCY CONTACTS

APPENDIX 1 – Weather Observation Performance Ranges

APPENDIX 2 – Definition of Technology Readiness Levels

BAA-NOAA-GEO-2019 Page 4

1. OVERVIEW

This is a Broad Agency Announcement (BAA) posted in accordance with Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Subpart 35.016. The United States Department of Commerce (DOC), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), National Environmental and Satellite, Data, and Information Service (NESDIS), Office of Systems Architecture and Advanced Planning (OSAAP) is requesting submission of white papers to conduct studies of instrument concepts and integrated mission concepts in support of needs for regional real-time weather data and space weather data collection as part of a Geostationary, Highly Elliptical, and Lagrange Orbit Concept Exploration.

This announcement shall be posted for a total of thirty-five (35) calendar days, and all submissions are due by 3:00 PM Eastern Standard Time (EST), 7 November, 2019. All pre-submission inquiries shall be submitted in writing to both the Contract Specialist and the Contracting Officer by 3:00 PM Eastern Daylight Time (EDT), 23 October, 2019. The program offices and technical points of contact may not be contacted directly and will refer all inquiries to the Contracting Officer. Additional submission instructions are provided at Section 4.

GENERAL INFORMATION

NAICS Code

The NAICS code for this BAA will be 541715 – Research and Development in the Physical, Engineering, and Life Sciences (except Nanotechnology and Biotechnology).

Agency Name

United States Department of Commerce (DOC), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), National Environmental and Satellite, Data, and Information Service (NESDIS), Office of Systems Architecture and Advanced Planning (OSAAP)

Development Opportunity Title

Geostationary Orbit Concept Exploration

Announcement Type and Date

Broad Agency Announcement (BAA-NOAA-GEO-2019); posted 3 October, 2019

White Paper Due Date

7 November, 2019 3:00 PM EST

BAA-NOAA-GEO-2019 Page 5

Eligible Offerors

This BAA is open to ALL responsible sources. Offerors may include single entities or teams from private sector organizations, Government laboratories, and academic institutions.

To be eligible for award, a prospective recipient must meet certain minimum standards pertaining to financial resources, ability to comply with the performance schedule, prior record of performance, integrity, organization, experience, operational controls, technical controls, technical skills, facilities, and equipment.

Federally Funded Research and Development Centers (FFRDCs) and Government entities (Government/National laboratories, military educational institutions, etc.) are subject to applicable direct competition limitations and cannot submit a response to this BAA in any capacity unless they address the following conditions:

FFRDCs

1. Must clearly demonstrate that the proposed work is not otherwise available from the private sector.

2. Must provide a letter on letterhead from their sponsoring organization citing the specific authority establishing their eligibility to propose to government solicitations and compete with industry.

3. Must demonstrate compliance with the associated FFRDC sponsor agreement and terms and conditions. This information is required for any FFRDCs proposing to be primes or subcontractors.

Government Entities

1. Government entities must clearly demonstrate that the work is not otherwise available from the private sector and provide written documentation citing the specific statutory authority (as well as, where relevant, contractual authority) establishing their ability to propose to government solicitations. Specific supporting regulatory guidance, together with evidence of agency approval will be required to establish eligibility. NOAA will consider eligibility submissions on a case-by-case basis; however, the burden to prove eligibility for all team members rests solely with the Offeror.

Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs), Minority Institutions (MI), Small Business concerns, Small Disadvantaged Business concerns, Women-Owned Small Business concerns, Veteran-Owned Small Business concerns, Service-Disabled Veteran-Owned Small Business concerns, 8(a) Business concerns, and HUB Zone Small Business concerns are encouraged to submit white papers and to join other entities as team members in submitting white papers.

BAA-NOAA-GEO-2019 Page 6

Small business subcontracting plans will be required from any large business proposals selected for negotiation or further solicitation/award in accordance with the applicable Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR), Commerce Acquisition Regulation (CAR), Commerce Acquisition Manual (CAM) and NOAA provisions/clauses/regulations.

Research and Development Areas of Interest

Development and technical objectives are described in Section 3. Efforts proposed by Offerors may cover Instrument Concepts, Mission Concepts, or both (see Section 4).

Award Information

The total expected amount of funding for studies is $9.99M. NESDIS envisions multiple (8-12) awards for studies under this BAA, with each one having a duration of up to 7 months, with a technical report as the final deliverable. The government may award zero, one, or multiple study contracts under this BAA, dependent on the applicability of the white papers to the technical need, and congressional appropriations. Subject to the availability of funding, Offerors whose white papers receive a favorable evaluation may be invited via e-mail to submit a full proposal.

This BAA should not be construed as a commitment or authorization to incur costs in anticipation of a grant, cooperative agreement, other transaction, or contract. Contracts, grants, cooperative agreements, or other transactions may be awarded, as appropriate. At this time it is anticipated that each study award will result in a firm fixed price contract.

The Government is not responsible for any costs incurred in the preparation of a submission in response to this BAA.

BAA-NOAA-GEO-2019 Page 7

2. PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

NOAA is exploring options for the next generation of weather satellite systems in Geostationary, Highly Elliptical, and Lagrange orbits. Industry and interested parties are invited to submit white papers for studies of instrument concepts and integrated mission concepts in support of needs for regional real-time weather data and space weather data collection. The studies will identify potential technologies, instruments, systems, and Concepts of Operation (CONOPS) that together could be used to support continuation of capabilities now supported by the Geostationary Operational Environmental Satellite (GOES) series of satellites, Deep Space Climate Observatory (DSCOVR), and other solar observation satellites, as well as potential new capabilities.

NOAA’s current program of record includes the recently launched and operational GOES-16 and GOES-17 satellites in the East (75.2°W) and West (137.2°W) locations. These satellites, capable of tracking severe weather events and monitoring wildfire and volcanic ash, form the backbone of NESDIS’s real-time weather monitoring capabilities. The combination of the GOES satellites and the DSCOVR satellite also provide detection of approaching space weather events. The replenishment GOES-T and GOES-U satellites are planned for launch in December 2021 and the first quarter of 2024 respectively. GOES-T and -U, along with the Space Weather Follow-On (SWFO) satellite launching in 2024, will carry on these capabilities through the rest of the decade, but NOAA must replenish these them by approximately 2030. Toward that end, NOAA is exploring cutting edge technologies and mission concepts that can be matured and developed to maintain and advance our mission capability in the 2030s and beyond.

2.1 SYSTEM OVERVIEW

NESDIS will use the results of these studies to determine the most viable and beneficial instrument and mission concepts that will make up the future NOAA/NESDIS satellite constellation and form the basis for future acquisitions. The results may be used to:

1. Support future satellite acquisitions of geostationary satellites and/or instruments and/or hosting services supporting real-time weather imagery, lightning mapping, and possibly other measurements of the western hemisphere.

2. Support future satellite acquisitions of Earth-Sun Lagrange point satellites supporting in-situ space weather measurements and solar observations from both on and/or off the Earth-Sun axis.

3. Support future satellite acquisitions and missions occupying highly inclined, high altitude orbits (e.g., Tundra or Molniya).

4. Support future demonstration missions including as part of a potential fly-before-buy acquisition strategy.

5. Support a future acquisition of weather data addressing any of the observation needs in Appendix 1.

BAA-NOAA-GEO-2019 Page 8

2.2 REFERENCE CONSTELLATION

For the purposes of this announcement, NOAA has defined a reference constellation. This constellation, with mandatory and optional elements, is the planning basis within this announcement for Section 3.A. It also serves as the baseline case for Section 3.B and against which variations to the reference constellation can be assessed. This reference constellation is only for planning purposes within this announcement. NOAA has not made a determination to pursue this constellation and will use the results, in part, of studies conducted under this announcement to potentially alter the future GEO constellation.

The reference constellation consists of:

1. A comprehensive environmental remote sensing satellite flown in geostationary orbit.

This satellite will nominally occupy the current GOES East and West positions. It will be flown frequently enough, including on-orbit sparing, to assure greater than 93% long-term availability. This satellite will host all or some of the following instruments that jointly produce data in accord with the observational specifications in Appendix 1:

a. A terrestrial weather imager

b. A suite of solar observing instruments, including:

i. Ultraviolet Imager

ii. X-ray Irradiance Monitor

iii. Coronagraph Imager

c. Instruments to measure magnetic fields and particle radiation flux

d. Optionally, a day/night imaging capability

e. Optionally, a lightning mapper

f. Optionally, an IR sounder that may be a standalone instrument or may be integrated into the weather imager

g. Optionally, a MW imager or sounder

h. Note: Instruments mentioned here can differ in the future based on the technology advancements or changes in packaging of instruments

i. Note: The complement of instruments above may or may not be manifested on the same platform

2. A satellite flown in the Earth-Sun L1 Lagrange point with instruments to measure in-situ space weather conditions, including magnetic fields and solar wind, again in accordance with Appendix 1.

a. Optionally, a Coronagraph Imager

3. Optionally, a satellite flown in a highly inclined orbit, with the baseline choice being the

24 hour polar Tundra orbit. The Tundra satellite will carry the same instrument load as the GEO satellite (#1 above) with the following exceptions:

a. The imager will be capable of auroral imaging, or the satellite will carry an additional imager specifically for auroral imaging (see Appendix 1).

BAA-NOAA-GEO-2019 Page 9

b. If the Tundra satellite is flown, then each GEO and Tundra satellites will carry two of three solar imaging instruments mixed to ensure a full complement on orbit.

c. The lightning mapper may not be carried.

As discussed in Section 3.B, there are several variations on this study constellation aside from the options indicated above.

Note: The likely use of sounder data will be through direct use of radiances in inversion systems and through assimilation into Numerical Weather Prediction (NWP) models and other applications of hyperspectral radiometry that potentially effect instrument systems performance including; assimilation of wind/momentum information, and monitoring of atmospheric instability, atmospheric motion, air quality, trace gases, cloud properties, dust, volcanic ash plumes, surface emissivity, etc.

BAA-NOAA-GEO-2019 Page 10

3. RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT AREA OF INTEREST

3.A. INSTRUMENT CONCEPTS

Offerors are invited to submit a concept in response to either Section 3.A.1.1 (e.g., a concept at the baseline performance level), Section 3.A.1.2 (e.g., a concept within the performance range, but with reduced cost or improved performance) or both (e.g., a concept that meets baseline performance with options to reduce cost/improve performance while staying within the performance range). Note that a single concept may be the capabilities of a single instrument that meets a subset of the Appendix 1 requirements (e.g., an imager) or multiple independent sensors that cover the entirety of Appendix 1’s requirements (e.g., separate imagers and lightning mappers). The explanation of the concept should clearly indicate which requirements are (and are not) addressed.

3.A.1 Technical Requirements

3.A.1.1 Instrument Concepts at the Target (Baseline)

This section of this task is to explore concepts for space-based remote sensing instruments including quantifying the cost and performance trades around a Target (“Baseline”) performance level (defined in Appendix 1 “Sensors Requirements”), for instruments flown in the reference constellation defined above. In responding to this task, the Offeror should define instrument concepts for potential operational use beginning no later than 2030 providing observation data at the “Baseline” performance level defined in Appendix 1 and flown in the reference constellation. The Offeror should explicitly identify the observation parameter(s) (from Appendix 1) being met by the instrument concept. To that end, the Offeror may submit a white paper exploring instrument concepts for multiple observations or individual instruments that provide multiple observations either simultaneously or in time-shared operation (i.e., using one instrument that can do two (or more) observations but not at the same time).

3.A.1.2 Instrument Concepts within the Recommended Performance Ranges

This section of this task is to explore concepts for space-based remote sensing instruments including how instrument cost, development schedule, and risk would vary as performance parameters vary between the Appendix 1 defined Lower Bound (“Threshold”) and Maximum (“Objective”) levels. In responding to this task, the Offeror should define instrument concepts for potential operational use beginning no later than 2030 providing observation data at performance levels within the “Threshold” and “Objective” levels as defined in Appendix 1 and flown in the reference constellation. The goal of exploring instruments in the defined performance ranges is to identify where relaxation of performance requirements from the ”Baseline” can result in large cost and accommodation savings, and/or where performance improvements above the ”Baseline” can be realized with low cost or accommodation impact.

BAA-NOAA-GEO-2019 Page 11

The Offeror should identify major breakpoints in size, weight, power and/or cost as performance is varied across the designated ranges. It is of particular interest where individual performance level variations induce especially large or small cost, schedule, or risk variations, not necessarily the impact of moving all performance levels to “Objective” or down to “Threshold”.

3.A.1.3 Instrument Ground Data Processing

NOAA is expecting that future observing system vendors will not be required provide full data products (EDR/Level 2+) in support of the performance levels listed in Appendix 1. Instead, the measurements are to provide Sensors Data Records (SDRs/Level 1b) products at those performance levels. In NOAA, both product generation and data assimilation systems (including National Weather Service Numerical Weather Prediction (NWS NWP)) use SDRs. NESDIS expects that the development of usable SDRs by vendors requires close communication with, and inputs from, NESDIS during vendor hardware development and testing in order to optimize the SDR to meet the NESDIS data requirements. NESDIS also acknowledges that having this close communication poses a risk to the execution efficiency we are seeking in this BAA. We are asking for recommendations from industry on ways for NOAA to accomplish this in an efficient, low-risk manner.

3.A.1.4 Instrument Concepts Study Content

As part of the study and documented in the final report, the Offeror shall develop a Technical Data Package that defines the instrument specifications including estimates of size, weight, power, data rates and performance. It should recommend a non-proprietary standard spacecraft interface, as well as list any special accommodation requirements that may need to be considered for flight.

The Offeror shall identify the Technical Readiness Level (TRL) of the instrument(s) and/or subcomponents using the guidance in Appendix 2. The Offeror shall include a description of the technical work required to continue maturation of the instrument, the proposed development timeline, its ability to meet the operational use timeline of 2030, and an overall schedule for when the instrument could be available for first operational launch.

Offerors subject to applicable direct competition limitations (e.g., FFRDC’s, Government Entities) should include a technology transfer plan as part of the study final report.

The Offeror shall identify the current technical and programmatic risks (including potential cost drivers) associated with the instrument concept(s) including, but not limited to, manufacturability, operability, calibration constraints, etc.

BAA-NOAA-GEO-2019 Page 12

The Offeror shall identify the total cost to mature, develop, and produce the instrument including subsequent instruments, should more than one be desired. Additionally, a cost profile, year-by-year in constant year dollars, is required.

The Offeror shall answer the following questions with respect to their instrument concept proposals of choice:

• What are the technical challenges in operating the instrument both in a geostationary orbit as well as in a highly inclined, high altitude orbit (e.g., Tundra, Molniya)?

• What are the technical challenges to designing the instrument to be hostable on an array of commercial satcom geostationary satellites?

3.A.2 Study Requirements

This section describes the anticipated requirements for the studies, if awarded. It is included to aid the Offerors in developing their estimates for the study, as required in Section 4.

3.A.2.1 Study Coordination Requirements

Kick-Off Meeting: A kick-off meeting will be held (Face to face, WebEx/telecom, or a combination). Its objective is to ensure the study plans, schedule, and deliverables are understood, and to answer any questions that may arise as part of the process.

Mid-Study Status Meeting: The mid-study status meeting is intended to provide current project status, discuss the approach towards completing the study, and agree on any adjustments to the work to be completed during the remainder of the study.

Instrument Study Final Review: At the conclusion of the instrument concept study(s), the contractor will schedule a final instrument concept review. This final review will go over the work done to date including a description of the instrument and its critical technologies, review of the tech maturation plans, cost and schedule data, and any hardware or software demonstrations the contractor would like to perform.

3.A.2.2 Study Communication Requirements

The Offeror shall maintain proactive, open, and responsive communication with the Government. Regular communication shall include support of Programmatic and Technical Interchanges taking the form of email, recurring teleconferences, etc., as required. The Offeror shall support in-person reviews at the customer location or Offeror’s facilities, as required.

Teleconferences shall take place once every month to discuss status and interchange information.

BAA-NOAA-GEO-2019 Page 13

3.A.2.3 Study Period of Performance

The period of performance will be specified by the Offeror, but not to exceed seven (7) months from Authorization to Proceed (ATP). This period of performance includes up to six (6) months to perform the study and produce the deliverables, plus one month for follow up questions and/or clarifications.

3.A.2.4 Government Furnished Equipment (GFE)/Government Furnished Services (GFS)

The Government does not expect to provide GFE or GFS for these study tasks.

3.A.2.5 Deliverables

The Offeror shall provide the following reports and CDRLS.

3.A.2.5.1 Reports

The study report should describe the system concept of the instrument(s) and/or CONOP(s).

The system concept design should be in sufficient detail to support the proposed performance against the requirements and contain all information requested in Section 3.A.1.4. If the Offeror chooses to submit white papers for multiple instruments, or multiple observations within one instrument, a single report is all that is required as long as sufficient details as requested above are provided.

A final briefing of the study and deliverables shall be provided approximately one month before the completion of the period of performance.

3.A.2.5.2 Contract Data Requirements List (CDRL) CDRL # Name 0001A Instrument Concept Report

3.B. MISSION CONCEPTS

3.B.1 Technical Requirements

A primary architecture objective is to maintain a continuous, high availability presence in geostationary orbits with a variety of instruments, ranging from smaller Space Weather instruments all the way to an ABI-class Earth Imager.

The reference constellation accomplishes that by placing all instruments on U.S. Government owned satellites. The two approaches considered in the reference constellation are:

1. Continuation of several relatively large, U.S. government owned geostationary satellites containing all of the instruments of interest as defined in section 2.2.

BAA-NOAA-GEO-2019 Page 14

2. Alternatively, development of a satellite bus capable of operating in either geostationary or highly inclined Tundra orbit. This satellite would always contain an imager and in-situ space weather instruments, and a subset of solar observation instruments. It would have capacity for additional, alternative instruments chosen close to launch time. The goal in this approach would be to allow the satellite’s destination orbit to be chosen close to launch time and so be chosen in response to evolving constellation health as the production line flies out.

Industry is invited to propose alternatives to the reference constellation in order to identify potential cost savings, performance enhancements, beneficial business arrangements, etc. The architecture trade questions below are intended to identify potential paths to alternative solutions but the respondent is not limited to only responses to these questions. Any and all alternative ideas that benefit the Government are encouraged.

3.B.1.1 Mission Concept Alternatives: Study Content

The Offeror is invited to address the below architecture trade questions as part of their mission concept. Additionally, the Offeror is not limited to just these questions and may provide feedback or postulate questions NOAA may not have thought of in this BAA.

• Could some or all of the observation requirements detailed in Appendix 1 be met by instruments flown as hosted payloads or through other acquisition arrangements? Any allocation of instruments to hosted platforms would be predicated on the ability to make that a long-term choice. Can Offerors commit to long-term and high availability service provision of some or all of the observations in hosted payload arrangements?

Offerors can refer to Attachments 1, 2, & 3 as draft interface requirements that can be used to understand the hosting requirements that may be placed on a commercial provider to host instruments such as these. They may not be the exact instruments developed in the future but can used for this initial assessment.

• Would changing the size and/or changing the accommodation requirements for either of the three draft instrument interface requirements make a material difference in the willingness to make long-term hosting service offerings? If so, can industry define and provide details on what areas would need to be relaxed in order to make hosting an attractive option?

• What is industry’s interest in providing a long-term hosting service where they would guarantee an on-orbit level of service from designated instruments at approximate designated locations for approximately 20 years?

• What is industry’s interest in providing a long-term hosting service specific to Solar and In-Situ Space Weather observations as detailed in Appendix 1 under tables 3-9 at approximate designated locations for approximately 20 years?

• Is there interest in providing Space Weather Solar Observation data as a service?

• What is industry’s plan for future hosting capabilities including any planned offerings and/or description of growth in accommodations for data rates, size, and/or power?

BAA-NOAA-GEO-2019 Page 15

Attachments 1, 2, & 3 to this BAA contain potential interface requirements for interested Offerors as contextual information for answering the above questions.

• Attachment 1 – 417-R-GIRD-FOR-STUDY Imager version 3.pdf

• Attachment 2 – 417-R-GIRD-FOR-STUDY Lightning Instrument v3.pdf

• Attachment 3 – 417-R-GIRD-FOR-STUDY Solar Instrument v3.pdf

3.B.1.2 Task Requirements

The Offeror shall provide a technical description and analysis of alternative constellation architectures to the reference constellation (case #1, U.S. Government owned comprehensive geostationary satellites). These alternatives could include flexible/agile satellite acquisitions and adaptive launch strategies, long-term payload hosting arrangements, data as a service, or other arrangements.

The Offeror shall provide a business/cost report that includes the total and annual cost to the government of the proposed alternatives over an approximate 20 year lifespan. This cost report should also include a business analysis that shows the viability of the business case for any non-traditional architecture solution.

The Offeror shall provide a development report that details any development necessary to achieve the provision of government observation needs. This development report should include technical maturation plans, risk assessments, schedule and cost estimates, and details of any non-traditional business or contract mechanisms proposed.

3.B.2.1 Study Coordination Requirements

Kick-Off Meeting: A kick-off meeting will be held (Face to face, WebEx/telecom, or a combination). Its objective is to ensure the study plans, schedule, and deliverables are understood, and to answer any questions that may arise as part of the process.

Mid-Study Status Meeting: The mid-study status meeting is intended to provide current project status, discuss the approach towards completing the study, and agree on any adjustments to the work to be completed during the remainder of the study.

3.B.2.2 Study Communication Requirements

The Offeror shall maintain proactive, open, and responsive communication with the Government. Regular communication shall include support of Programmatic and Technical Interchanges taking the form of email, recurring teleconferences, etc.; as required. The Offeror shall support in-person reviews at the customer location or Offeror’s facilities, as required.

BAA-NOAA-GEO-2019 Page 16

Teleconferences shall take place at least once every month to discuss status and interchange information.

3.B.2.3 Study Period of Performance

The period of performance will be specified by the Offeror, but not to exceed seven (7) months from Authorization to Proceed (ATP). This period of performance includes up to six (6) months to perform the study and produce the deliverables, plus one month for follow up questions and/or clarifications.

3.B.2.4 Government Furnished Equipment (GFE)/Government Furnished Services (GFS)

The Government does not anticipate providing GFE or GFS for this task

3.B.2.5 Deliverables

The Offeror shall provide the following reports and CDRLS.

3.B.2.5.1 Reports

The report should be a description of the mission concept. The mission concept design should be in sufficient detail to support the proposed performance against the requirements.

A final briefing of the study and deliverables shall be provided approximately one month before the completion of the period of performance.

3.B.2.5.2 Contract Data Requirements List (CDRL) CDRL # Name 0001B GEO Architecture Concept Report

BAA-NOAA-GEO-2019 Page 17

4. WHITE PAPER GUIDELINES

The application process will be divided into two steps:

1. White Paper (Stage 1)

2. Request for Proposal (Stage 2), for selected white papers.

White Papers (WPs) are due 7 November, 2019. Subject to the availability of funding, Offerors whose White Paper receive a favorable evaluation may be invited via e-mail to submit a Full Proposal. The instructions for the Full Proposal package will be provided in the invitation email.

Offerors are encouraged to submit White Paper(s) in each of the Instrument Concepts or Mission Concepts categories, or both. If Offerors want to submit white papers for multiple distinct instruments or mission concepts, they shall submit a separate White Paper for each concept. Each White Paper will be evaluated independently.

To that end, the Offeror may submit a white paper exploring instrument concepts for multiple observations or individual instruments that provide multiple observations either simultaneously or in time-shared operation (i.e., using one instrument that can do two (or more) observations but not at the same time).

4.1 SUBMISSION PREPARATION

Interested Offerors shall submit a White Paper, proposing a distinct Instrument Concept or Mission Concept that meets the mission criteria described in section 3. The initial submission is limited to a cover page, one-page Quad Chart, and White Paper not to exceed 10 pages. This results in a submission packet not to exceed 12 pages. If submissions exceed these limitations, only those pages previously defined will be reviewed.

For each distinct White Paper submittal, combine all files and forms into a single searchable PDF file before submitting.

The document must be submitted in accordance with the preparation guidance below. The document should describe the effort in sufficient detail to allow evaluation of the concept's technical merit and its potential contribution to the NOAA mission.

White paper submissions must remain valid for six months from the submission deadline.

Offerors will be notified via e-mail if their submission is or is not being considered for Stage 2.

Electronic Submission, due 3:00PM EST, 7 November 2019. Late submissions will not be considered. All submissions shall be submitted electronically to both:

BAA-NOAA-GEO-2019 Page 18

• Contract Specialist, Gabriela Bravo, via email: Gabriela.Bravo@noaa.gov

• Contracting Officer, David Marks, via email: David.Marks@noaa.gov

The government reserves the right to re-consider un-selected white papers evaluated during the first round of submissions for award up until 30 June, 2020, without the opening of additional rounds of white paper submissions.

The government reserves the right to open additional rounds of white paper submissions.

Additional requests, if applicable, will be posted on FBO.gov as an amendment to this posting no later than 30 June, 2021.

IMPORTANT: The subject line of the email should consist of the announcement number, area of interest number, and purpose of the email (e.g., BAA-NOAA-GEO-2019, Instrument/Mission Concept <name>, White Paper Submission). White Papers do not require any special forms, but must be submitted in the following format:

Single PDF file for each White Paper submission as an email attachment; may attach multiple White Paper submissions in one email

Page Size: 8 ½ x 11” with 1” Margins

Spacing – single

Font – Times New Roman size 12 font or equivalent; charts, tables, and graphics may use a Times New Roman size 10 font

The file should not exceed 10 Megabytes of storage space. Movie and sound file attachments, URL Links, or other additional files, will not be accepted.

Classification: All Quad Chart and White Paper submissions must be UNCLASSIFIED.

4.1.1 Quad Chart Guidelines

A quad chart must contain the following information and be positioned in a landscape view.

Any quad chart submitted that exceeds the one-page limit will not be read or evaluated. The following components are required:

Heading: Title, BAA #, Development Area of Interest, Technical/Administrative point of contact (Name, Email, Phone), Company’s Name & Address.

Please note that the Title of the Project should be different than that of the Area of Interest.

mailto:Gabriela.Bravo@noaa.gov mailto:David.Marks@noaa.gov

BAA-NOAA-GEO-2019 Page 19

Upper Left:

• Objective: should be 2-3 sentences describing the objective and methodology.

• Description of effort: a few bullet points noting the primary scientific challenges addressed

Lower left: Benefits of proposed technology, challenges, maturity of technology research area

Upper right: Picture or graphic illustrating the research or the concept

Lower Right: Milestones, period of performance, total ROM cost estimate for the study.

4.1.2 White Paper Guidelines

The white paper shall describe the Offeror’s concept’s ability to address the need and requirements detailed in the appropriate part of Section 3. Merely restating the minimum study objectives is not sufficient. The core components of the white paper include a detailed explanation of the concepts being proposed including definitions of how the Offeror plans to meet the requirements for that given concept including but not limited to:

1. What concept they are proposing to study

2. What they plan to accomplish in the study timeframe

3. What they plan to deliver at the end of the study

4. How their concept contributes to the requirements laid out in Section 3 regarding

NESDIS’s sounding observation mission

With regard to instrument concept, the Offeror must supply sufficient data to justify the proposed Technology Readiness Level (TRL) maturity of the candidate instrument.

The price portion of the white paper shall contain a high-level estimate on the work intended to be completed during the study. A detailed price proposal will be required if an Offeror moves to Stage 2 of the selection process and is issued a Request for Proposal (RFP).

Any applicable past performance references should also be provided as part of the white paper submission if they are relevant to the proposed work plan. This information will be excluded from the page limit.

White papers that are outside the scope of the BAA may be returned to the Offeror.

BAA-NOAA-GEO-2019 Page 20

4.2 EVALUATION INFORMATION

Submissions will be evaluated in accordance with the following evaluation factors:

A. Technical Merit

a. The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s concepts as defined in their White Paper for their ability to meet the requirements as defined in the appropriate part of Section 3. If the Offeror submits multiple White Papers, the Government will evaluate each study submission as independent studies and one submission will not affect the evaluation of the other submission.

B. Price Factor

a. Price will be evaluated for Price Reasonableness.

b. Cost or Pricing Data for the study may be required for evaluation purposes.

C. Past Performance

a. Offerors need to have an acceptable level of past performance for similar type of studies to be considered.

The Technical Merit factor is more important than the Past Performance factor. Price is the least important evaluation factor.

The Government anticipates awarding multiple contracts in each study area, but reserves the right to award no contracts or a combination of contracts or contract options for study work based upon availability of funds.

BAA-NOAA-GEO-2019 Page 21

5. FULL PROPOSAL INSTRUCTIONS (STAGE 2)

Note that full proposals will not be accepted under the BAA unless requested. If an Offeror’s concept is selected for funding based on the evaluation of their White Paper, an Invitation for Full Proposal will be e-mailed to the Offeror. Stage 2 is subject to FAR 52.232-18 -- Availability of Funds.

6. AGENCY CONTACTS

Contract Specialist: Gabriela Bravo, gabriela.bravo@noaa.gov

Selecting Official, Contracting Officer: David Marks, david.marks@noaa.gov mailto:gabriela.bravo@noaa.gov mailto:david.marks@noaa.gov

BAA-NOAA-GEO-2019 Page 22

APPENDIX 1 – Weather Observation Performance Ranges

General Note for all Sensor Requirements Tables

These sensors requirements compiled in the tables below have been built based on previous community effort led by the SPRWG (NOAA Space Platform Requirements Working Group) to generate community-wide requirements for space platforms and sensors. This work was done in the framework of the NSOSA (NOAA Satellite Observing Systems Architecture). Sometimes, changes from the NSOSA values were deemed necessary based on debates and discussions among Sensors performance Assessment Team (SAT) members as well as other sensors experts and constitute the best compromise between different driving factors: (1) Update to requirements based on users’ needs and expectations, (2) the need to extend the trade space for the industry, to allow NOAA to decide on the best cost/performance balance, (3) updated knowledge of industry's capability in terms of sensors design and technology maturation.

BAA-NOAA-GEO-2019 Page 23

Table 1: Regional Real-Time Weather Imaging

Attribute Lower Bound ("Threshold")

Target ("Baseline")

Maximum ("Objective")

Current Program of Record

(GOES-R)

Imagery of N/S America, W.

Atlantic, E. Pacific to at least 65N and westward just past the dateline with latency <10 min, and update faster than 30 minutes.

Ground-projected instantaneous field of view (IGFOV) nadir view (Horizontal Resolution)

Visible 2 km 0.5 km 0.25 km 0.5 km IR 4 km 1-2 km 1 km 2.0 km Near IR 3 km 1 km 0.3 km 1.0 km

Sampling frequency (update rate for full disk images) 30 minutes 5 min 2.5 minutes 5 min Latency (image time to delivery) 10 minutes 1 min 1 min 1 min Mesoscale (movable 1000kmx1000km)

Number of Regions

(moveable)

(moveable)

(moveable) 2 (moveable) Update rate 7 minutes 30 s 15 s 30 s Latency (image time to delivery) 7 minutes 30 s 15 s 30 s Wavelengths covered

Lower edge of coverage 0.63 microns 0.47 microns 0.4 microns 0.47 microns Upper edge of coverage 11 microns 13.6 microns 13.7 microns 13.7 microns

Day-night bands (DNB) 0 [None] 1 band at 0.64 microns 1 band at 640 nm 0 [None] Number of specific bands 4 16+ 32 16

Radiometric accuracy 0.2K 0.1K 0.05K 0.1 K Navigation accuracy 3.0 km at nadir 1.0 km at nadir 0.5 km at nadir 1.0 km at nadir

Mission Level Spec/Trade Period of Service (Per Mission Block of 4) 2032-2047 2030-2049 2030-2049 Observation Availability 0.9 0.93 0.95

BAA-NOAA-GEO-2019 Page 24

Table 2: Global Real-Time Weather Imagery

Lower Bound ("Threshold")

Target ("Baseline")

Maximum ("Objective")

Current Program of

Record (GOES- R)

Weather imagery outside the region of objective A1 with update rate shorter than 1 hour and latency less than 1 hour. Minimum extent is GEO ring, provided by international partners.

None, rely on international partners

Poleward extent with high quality 60 N/S

All of Alaska and Canada to 75 N

60 S to 90 N, all longitudes

60 N/S

Ground-projected instantaneous field of view (IGFOV) nadir view (horizontal resolution)

Visible 4 km 0.5 km 0.25 km 0.5 km IR 8 km 2.0 km 1 km 2.0 km Near IR 8 km 1 km 0.3 km 1.0 km

Update rate 60 min 10 min 5 min 15 min Latency (image time to delivery) 60 min 10 min 5 min

10 min

Wavelengths covered Lower edge of coverage 0.63 microns 0.470 microns 0.4 microns 0.470 microns Upper edge of coverage 11 microns 13.35 microns 13.7 microns 13.7 microns

Day-night band 0 [None] 1 band at 640 nm

1 band at 640 nm, 1 band at 100-190 nm for auroral imaging 0 [none]

Number of bands (specific bands), or products supported 4 16 32

Radiometric accuracy 0.2 K 0.1 K 0.05 K 0.2 K

Navigation accuracy 3.0 km at nadir 1.0 km at nadir 0.5 km at nadir 1.0 km at nadir

Mission Level Spec/Trade Period of Service (Per Mission Block of 4) 2032-2047 2030-2049 2030-2049

Observation Availability 0.75 0.9 0.93

BAA-NOAA-GEO-2019 Page 25

Table 3: Regional Real Time Vertical IR Soundings

Objective Attribute Lower Bound ("Threshold")

Target ("Baseline")

Maximum ("Objective")

Current Program of

Record (GOES- R)

Full Disk Real Time Vertical IR Radiances and Soundings Update Rate 90 min 30 min 15 min None Regional (CONUS) Real Time Vertical IR Radiances and Soundings Update Rate 45 min 30 min 15 min None Meso Scale Real Time Vertical IR Radiances and Soundings Update Rate 30 min 5 min 2 min Temperature and water vapor

Horizontal resolution (Nadir) 10 km 3 km 2 km None

Vertical resolution 3 km 2 km 1 km None

Latency to update rate (from last measurement of updated coverage area) 15 min 10min 3 min None

Accuracy

Temperature

Accuracy 2 K 0.75 K 0.5 K None

Water vapor

(relative humidity) 20% 10% 5% None

Mission Level Spec/Trade

Period of Service (Per Mission Block of

4) 2032-2047 2030-2049 2030-2049

Observation Availability 0.75 0.9 0.93

BAA-NOAA-GEO-2019 Page 26

Table 4: Real Time Vertical MW Soundings and Radiances

Objective Attribute Lower Bound ("Threshold")

Target ("Baseline")

Maximum ("Objective")

Current Program of Record

Real Time Vertical MW Radiances and Soundings with non-concurrent Full disk, Regional (CONUS) and Meso capability

CONUS Update Rate None 30 min 15 min None

Temperature and Water Vapor

Horizontal resolution (Nadir) None 25 km 5 km None

Vertical resolution None 3 km 2 km None

Accuracy None

Temperature None 1.5 K 1 K None

Water Vapor (relative humidity) None 10% 5% None

BAA-NOAA-GEO-2019 Page 27

Table 5: Lightning

Lower Bound ("Threshold")

Target ("Baseline")

Maximum ("Objective")

Current Program of Record (GOES-R)

Detect and locate total lightning (in cloud and cloud to ground) None Latency 1 min 30 s 20 seconds 20 s Horizontal Resolution (nadir view) 20 km 8 km 2 km 8 km Accuracy (Minimum instantaneous probability of correct detection of flashes over 24 hours) 50% 70% 80% 70% Sampling frequency 1 sec 2 msec 1 msec 2 msec

Geographic coverage CONUS

Same as POR 2025 (2 GLM full disks) Same as EXP plus Alaska 2 GLM full disks

Mission Level Spec/Trade Period of Service (Per Mission Block of 4) 2032-2047 2030-2049 2030-2049 Observation Availability 0.9 0.93 0.95

Table 6: Coronograph Imagery: Sun-Earth Line

Lower Bound ("Threshold")

Target ("Baseline")

Maximum ("Objective")

Current Program Of Record 2025

(SWFO)

Field of View Lower limit 2.5 Rs 2 Rs 1.1 Rs 3 Rs Upper limit 17 Rs 32 Rs 32 Rs 22 Rs Spatial resolution 30 arc sec 30 arcsec

25 arcsec (varying) 56 arcsec

BAA-NOAA-GEO-2019 Page 28

Sampling frequency 30 min 15 min 5 min 20 min Data latency 30 min 15 min 5 min 15 min

Table 7: Solar EUV Imaging

Lower Bound ("Threshold")

Target ("Baseline")

Maximum ("Objective")

Current Program of Record (GOES-R)

Field of view 1.3 Rs 1.5 Rs 1.5 Rs 1.5 Rs Spectral range starting at 30.4 nm Lower limit 17 nm 9.4 nm 1.0 nm 9.4 nm Spatial resolution 10 arcsec 5 arcsec

1.5-5 arcsec varying 5 arcsec

Sampling frequency 60 s 10 s 2 seconds 10 s Data latency 10 min 1 min 10 s 1 min

Table 8: Photospheric Magnetogram Imagery: Sun-Earth Line

Lower Bound ("Threshold")

Target ("Baseline")

Maximum ("Objective")

Current Program of Record

PMI of full solar disk

None

None Spatial resolution 3.5 arcsec 2 arcsec 1 arcsec None Sensitivity 10 Gauss 10 Gauss 10 Gauss None Sampling frequency 1 hour 10 min 1 min None Data latency 6 hours 15 min 1 min None

BAA-NOAA-GEO-2019 Page 29

Table 9: Solar X-Ray Irradiance

Lower Bound ("Threshold")

Target ("Baseline")

Maximum ("Objective")

Number of Bands 1 2 2 2 Sensitivity 1e-07 W/m**2 1e-09 W/m**2 1e-10 W/m**2 1e-09 W/m**2 Sampling frequency 5 secs 3 sec 1 sec 3 sec Data latency 10 sec 10 secs 3 secs 10 sec

Table 10: Solar EUV Irradiance

Lower Bound ("Threshold")

Target ("Baseline")

Maximum ("Objective")

Wavelength Range

Lower limit Use baseline 5 nm 5 nm 5 nm Upper limit Use baseline 127 nm 170 nm 127 nm

Coarsest Resolution across the wavelength range Use baseline 5 nm 1 nm 5 nm Sampling frequency Use baseline 30 seconds 10 s 30 sec Data latency Use baseline 10 seconds 5 s 30 sec

Table 11: Geomagnetic Field at GEO

Lower Bound ("Threshold")

Target ("Baseline")

Maximum ("Objective")

Current Program of Record

(GOES-R)

Range (nT/axis) Use Baseline +/- 512 Use Baseline +/- 512 Uncertainty (nT/axis) Use Baseline 1 Use Baseline 1.0 Sampling frequency Use Baseline 10 Hz Use Baseline 10 Hz Data latency Use Baseline 10 s Use Baseline 5 d

BAA-NOAA-GEO-2019 Page 30

Table 12: Geospace Energetic Particles

Lower Bound ("Threshold")

Target ("Baseline")

Maximum ("Objective")

Current Program

(GOES-R)

Orbital coverage Use baseline GEO, LEO Add in high inclination GEO

Energy range-electons Lower limit Use baseline 30 eV Use baseline 30 eV Upper limit Use baseline 6 MeV Use baseline 4 MeV Energy range- Protons Lower limit Use baseline 30 eV Use baseline 30 eV Upper limit Use baseline 750 MeV Use baseline 500 MeV

Energy range- Heavy ions Lower limit Use baseline 10 MeV/n Use baseline 10 MeV/n Upper limit Use baseline 200 MeV/n Use baseline 200 MeV/n Uncertainty Use baseline 25% Use baseline 25% Sampling frequency Use baseline 30 s Use baseline 30s Data latency Use baseline 30 s Use baseline 30s

Table 13: Auroral Imaging

Lower Bound ("Threshold")

Target ("Baseline")

Maximum ("Objective")

Current Program

Field of view >65 latitude Northern

Hemisphere None Bandpasses:

Lower Limit 110 nm 100 nm None Upper Limit 180 nm 190 nm None Lower limit 400 nm 400 nm 400 nm None Upper limit 650 nm 650 nm 650 nm None

Spatial resolution 60 km 50 km 10 km None Refresh rate 45 min 20 min 1 min None Data latency 60 min 10 min 1 min None

BAA-NOAA-GEO-2019 Page 31

APPENDIX 2 – Definition of Technology Readiness Levels

TRL 1 Basic principles observed and reported: Transition from scientific research to applied research.

Essential characteristics and behaviors of systems and architectures. Descriptive tools are mathematical formulations or algorithms.

TRL 2 Technology concept and/or application formulated: Applied research. Theory and scientific principles are focused on specific application area to define the concept. Characteristics of the application are described. Analytical tools are developed for simulation or analysis of the application.

TRL 3 Analytical and experimental critical function and/or characteristic proof-of- concept: Proof of concept validation. Active Research and Development (R&D) is initiated with analytical and laboratory studies. Demonstration of technical feasibility using breadboard or brass board implementations that are exercised with representative data.

TRL 4 Component/subsystem validation in laboratory environment: Standalone prototyping implementation and test. Integration of technology elements. Experiments with full-scale problems or data sets.

TRL 5 System/subsystem/component validation in relevant environment: Thorough testing of prototyping in representative environment. Basic technology elements integrated with reasonably realistic supporting elements. Prototyping implementations conform to target environment and interfaces.

TRL 6 System/subsystem model or prototyping demonstration in a relevant end-to-end environment (ground or space): Prototyping implementations on full-scale realistic problems. Partially integrated with existing systems. Limited documentation available. Engineering feasibility fully demonstrated in actual system application.

TRL 7 System prototyping demonstration in an operational environment (ground or space): System prototyping demonstration in operational environment. System is at or near scale of the operational system, with most functions available for demonstration and test. Well integrated with collateral and ancillary systems. Limited documentation available.

TRL 8 Actual system completed and "mission qualified" through test and demonstration in an operational environment (ground or space): End of system development. Fully integrated with operational hardware and software systems. Most user documentation, training documentation, and maintenance documentation completed.