_Redacted Signed Mars Ascent Propulsion System (MAPS) JOFOC.pdf

NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION (NASA)

GEORGE C. MARSHALL SPACE FLIGHT CENTER

JUSTIFICATION FOR OTHER THAN FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION (JOFOC)

For Mars Ascent Propulsion System (MAPS)

1. Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 6.302-2(b)(1) – Identification of the agency and the contracting activity, and specific identification of the document as a “Justification for other than full and open competition.”

This document is a justification for other than full and open competition prepared by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Marshall Space Flight Center

(MSFC).

The procuring agency is NASA, and the contracting activity is MSFC.

2. FAR 6.303-2(b)(2) – The nature and/or description of the action being approved:

This justification provides the rationale for contracting by other than full and open competition to award a sole-source contract for the Mars Ascent Propulsion System (MAPS) with Northrup Grumman Innovation Systems (NGIS). This contract will include the design, development, test, and evaluation of the first and second solid rocket motor stages with their respective Thrust Vector Control (TVC) systems. This contract will also include the procurement of 10 each first and second stage solid rocket motors with their respective TVC systems to be delivered for the Mars Ascent Vehicle (MAV).

3. FAR 6.303-2(b)(3) – A description of the supplies or services required, to meet the Agency’s needs (including the estimated value):

MSFC provides propulsion support and products for space flight missions. NASA has tasked MSFC with producing the MAV, which includes solid rocket propulsion. The Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) is developing a payload for MAV as a part of the potential Mars Sample Return (MSR) program. The MAV will be a two-stage vehicle requiring a stage 1 and stage 2 solid rocket motor of different designs. Both motors will require a TVC system. Mars environments will be a significant factor.

This new procurement includes responsibility for design, development, manufacture, testing and qualification of two different solid rocket motors with multiple deliveries of each. For each stage solid rocket motor there will be 3 demonstration tests, 3 qualification tests, 1 flight test, 1 flight, 1 spare and 1 inert engineering unit (10 each). Logistic support such as ground support equipment and shipping will be included. The period of performance begins October 2020 and runs through October 2025 for a total of 5 years. Key delivery dates are May 2023 for the engineering units, November 2023 for the flight test units, and January 2024 for the flight and spare units. These dates support scheduled assembly, integration, and test operations for the

MAV system to meet the required MAV delivery of January 2026. Delivery of the MAV system supports a launch date of July 2026 for the Mars sample return lander which will have the MAV aboard.

Total Estimated Value:

4. FAR 6.303-2(b)(4) – An identification of the statutory authority permitting other than full and open competition:

The statutory authority permitting other than full and open competition is 10 U.S.C.

2304(c)(1), as implemented by FAR 6.302-1, “Only One Responsible Source and No Other Supplies or Services Will Satisfy Agency Requirements.”

5. FAR 6.303-2(b)(5) – A demonstration that the proposed contractor’s unique qualifications or the nature of the acquisition requires use of the authority cited:

The rationale supporting the use of 10 U.S.C. 2304(c)(1) is the use of a proprietary solid rocket propellant and unique capability for a specialized solid rocket nozzle joint design.

Development of any alternative will not meet the MAV schedule due to the prolonged research and development period required for another company to produce a similar capability. Based on the RFI responses, development of a new propellant and super sonic spit line nozzle for MAV is prohibitive based on the motor need dates. Only NGIS met the project timelines. The second best estimated schedule from the capability statements received was estimated at TRL 6. Based on NASA’s engineering experience with propellant qualification timelines, it would take five to six years to complete development and deliver hardware for MAV (which would be two to three years too late to meet MAV need dates).

This timeline is prohibitive and does not meet the timeline for the MAV motor system which requires hardware to be delivered in late 2023. These delays and expenditures would have serious financial impacts to the overall potential MSR Campaign due to schedule slip beyond the current 2026 launch window.

As part of the potential MSR, the MAV is considered a high-risk subsystem. Success must be assured in every aspect of the effort. Two of MAV’s highest risk items are the propellant and the nozzle/TVC system.

The vacuum of space transport, temperature extremes, Entry Descent and Landing (EDL) loads and operation temperatures are a challenge for most propellants. (The EDL phase of this mission pertains to the time when the MAV, as a payload, is entering and descending to the Mars surface. This phase of the mission generates an estimated 15 g’s on MAV which creates the risk for propellant unbond. The loads experienced during EDL encompass the loads for all other mission phases.) In 2018, MSFC performed an internal study that evaluated six NGIS and two of another vendor’s candidate propellants for the MAV system.

The study concluded that two of the NGIS propellants were the best candidates for MAV due to their flight heritage binder Carboxyl-Terminated Polybutadiene (CTPB) and cold mechanical properties down to -54C (TP-H-3062 propellant). Two NGIS propellants were considered to have potential for the MAV mission, TP-H-3062 and TP-H-3135. Both are

CTPB based propellants however, TP-H-3062 had better low temperature mechanical properties. Other propellants were not considered acceptable candidates for the MAV system primarily due to their lack of flight heritage or the propellant would require development of 2 years or more. NGIS is the only solid propulsion supplier who participated in and has data from the Long Duration Exposure Facility (LDEF) and the effects of exposing several solid propellants to the harsh space environment for long periods of time (~5.7 years). (The LDEF was a platform launch by the Space Shuttle in 1984 to provide data on the effect of long-term exposure to the harsh space environment. This platform was in the low-Earth orbit environment for over 5.5 years and provided data on the long-term effects of space exposure on materials, components and systems.) Moreover, NGIS has extensive data and experience with solid rocket materials and designs intended for long-term space environments such as NGIS’ breaking motor on the Magellan Spacecraft, which was successfully fired after being in space for more than fifteen months. Central to this is a specific propellant formulation called TP-H-3062, a proprietary formulation belonging to NGIS. This propellant has endured space travel, high vacuum, low temperatures, and has flight heritage at Mars being used on three Mars landing missions.

NGIS also has test data specific to MAV and the use of TP-H-3062 propellant. Testing was completed that studied the relationship of propellant web fractions at multiple temperatures.

Testing occurred at temperatures as low as -78.9 C (-110 F) for both end burning and center perforated configurations.

Development of a new propellant for this application is not feasible. A candidate propellant at Technical Readiness Level (TRL) 6 (best alternative available based on RFI and market research) would require a minimum of 2 years for qualification and still not have the flight heritage deemed necessary for this critical high-risk mission.

A potential launch scenario for MAV would be to eject vertically from the lander in a horizontal position with the first stage motor ignited within a short interval at a predetermined time following the vertical ejection. In order to navigate the MAV safely away from the lander, this could require sudden, high nozzle vector rates on a motor that has been stored at -40C for up to a year. Ignition will occur at -20C creating an enhanced environment for the condensation of combustion products to make a typical TVC nozzle joint ineffective.

The current nozzle concept accounts for cold temperatures and is novel in design employing a Super Sonic Split Line (SSSL). NGIS has an advanced state of the art flight-proven design (TRL 8) SSSL. NGIS’s experience for this nozzle technology includes the following.

Flight-proven tactical pulse motor nozzles for Multi-Mission Propulsion Technology

(MMPT)

Test nozzles for Mk 103 dual pulse rocket motors LM Multi-Object Kill Vehicle (MOKV) Produced but untested nozzle for the Sierra Nevada Dream Chaser hybrid propulsion system (designed for multiple use in flight after months on-orbit) Only domestic contractor to develop and successfully fly a SSSL nozzle design

Development of a SSSL nozzle concept to TRL 8 by another contractor would not support mission schedule limits. The fastest that any of the other respondent companies could get to developing and maturing a SSSL nozzle to TRL 6 (per RFI responses) was five to six years (and would require a minimum of two years for qualification based on engineering experience), which was outside the required performance schedule.

6. FAR 6.303-2(b)(6) – A description of the efforts made to ensure that offers are solicited from as many potential sources as practicable, including whether a notice was or will be publicized as required by Subpart 5.2 and, if not, which exception under 5.202 applies:

In accordance with FAR Part 10 a Sources Sought Synopsis was published on FedBizOpps on September 16, 2019. A total of 5 companies responded to the synopsis by the due date of September 26, 2019. Responses were reviewed and evaluated. The evaluation criteria was based on the requirements in the RFI. Also considered were criteria such as efficient use of government expenditures, company size, durations in business, and applicable experience.

NGIS has experience that is directly applicable to MAV. They are a direct manufacturer of solid rocket motors, which alleviates the need for an integrator and reduces contract cost. NGIS has shown extensive understanding and capability to meet all aspects of the MAPS contract.

They also possess a proprietary propellant formulation with sufficient relevant mission heritage. NGIS was the only source found that is the capable of providing a TVC system of appropriate TRL to meet program needs.

A notice to the Government Point of Entry (GPE) website (beta.sam.gov) was published on April 7, 2020, in accordance with FAR Subpart 5.2. This posting informed potential sources of NASA’s intent to award this sole-source contract to NGIS. The results of this synopsis are summarized in Section 10 below.

7. FAR 6.303-2(b)(7) – A determination by the contracting officer that the anticipated cost to the Government will be fair and reasonable:

The Contracting Officer’s signature on this document indicates that the Contracting Officer has determined that the anticipated cost to the Government will be fair and reasonable. The Contractor shall be required to submit a proposal to be evaluated and negotiated by the Government. Prior to execution of the contractual instrument, a proposal analysis will be performed. The proposal analysis will ensure that the final agreed-to price for the contract action is fair and reasonable.

The Contracting Officer will assess the Contractor’s proposal utilizing cost and price analysis techniques in accordance with the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 15.404-1 to determine a fair and reasonable price. Assistance from the MSFC Pricing Team, the Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA), the Defense Contract Audit Agency (DCAA), and other independent auditors will be utilized as appropriate to analyze, evaluate, and negotiate based on detailed cost or pricing data. The Contractor will be required to certify proposed cost and pricing data at the conclusion of negotiations.

8. FAR 6.303-2(b)(8) – Description of the market research conducted, and the results, or a statement of the reasons a market research was not conducted:

In accordance with FAR Part 10 a Sources Sought Synopsis was published on FedBizOpps on September 16, 2019. A total of 5 companies responded to the synopsis by the due date of September 26, 2019. Responses were reviewed and evaluated. The comparison criteria was based on the requirements in the RFI. Also considered was criteria such as an efficient use of Government expenditures, company size, duration in business, and applicable experience.

Four evaluators were asked to assess each respondent on each of the following metrics based on their submittal.

Years in Business and Past Customers Relevant Experience If they were a direct manufacturer of solid motors or an integrator?

Engineering depth and ability to support development and qualification Ability to meet 3-sigma Isp variation <= 0.4% (Knowing/estimating accurately the flight motors’ Isp is critical in knowing where the MAV payload will be in orbit for pickup by the Earth Return Orbiter (ERO). Therefore, a very stringent Isp variation (<=0.4%) has been levied as our current ground rule (requirement).)

Ability to deliver a stage 1 and stage 2 SRM that meet requirements in Part III and IV of RFI Comparison of recommended propellant mission heritage to MAV mission Ability to provide TVC system that meets requirements in Part V of RFI Comment on SSSL trapped ball nozzle design, risks and development points Ability to provide low variability and high reliability solid rocket motors suitable for

MAV

Estimated time for delivery of first unit Confidence in estimated development time to first unit and how well it meets Part II of RFI Comment on implemented quality standards and ability to meet them Understanding and capability to provide and implement planetary protection protocols

The respondent companies’ capability statements described some level of proficiency with solid rocket motors. Other than NGIS, none had a TRL 8 propellant capable of use for MAV, none had SSSL nozzle concepts at TRL 8, and none provided schedules to attain these that met mission timelines. Based on NASA’s engineering experience, the closest that any of the other respondent companies could get to meeting the required performance schedule would be approximately two to three years late. The RFI responses and market research showed that it will take two years for another company to mature a solid propellant to TRL 8 (However, the best alternative to NGIS had TRL 6 per the RFI responses, and TRL 8

). Other potential SSSL systems available were in development or testing and not flight proven. Maturing to a flight proven SSSL would take two to three years based on NASA’s engineering experience. One Contractor specified NGIS as their supplier in their capability statement.

NGIS has experience that is directly applicable to MAV. They are a direct manufacturer of solid rocket motors, which alleviates the need for an integrator reducing contract cost. NGIS has shown extensive understanding and capability to meet all aspects of the MAPS contract.

NGIS has numerous examples of space uses of their flight-proven STAR motors with several being nearly identical in size to the anticipated MAV motors (STAR 15G, STAR 17, STAR 15, STAR 13, STAR 20, and STAR 24). Of the Mars missions that have utilized solid propulsion, NGIS is the only contractor who has provided those motors. NGIS is the only solid propulsion contractor with data on solid propellant samples from long-term exposure to the space environment, and NGIS’ breaking motor on the Magellan Spacecraft successfully fired after being in space for more than fifteen months. NGIS has a proprietary propellant for the MAV mission that has been used on three other Mars Missions (Mars Exploration Rover:

Spirit, Mars Exploration Rover: Opportunity and Mars Pathfinder). NGIS is also the only domestic Contractor who has flight experience with SSSL nozzle concepts. NGIS has been identified as the only respondent capable of providing and meeting MAV objectives within the schedule constraints.

9. FAR 6.303-2(b)(9) – Any other facts supporting the use of other than full and open competition:

None

10. FAR 6.303-2(b)(10) – A listing of the sources, if any, that expressed an interest in writing in the acquisition:

A notice of NASA’s intent to award this sole-source action was synopsized on the GPE website (beta.sam.gov) per FAR Subpart 5.2 (See Section 6 above). The synopsis was posted on April 7, 2020 and closed on April 22, 2020. One response was received. Response did not object to the decision to procure this requirement as a sole source acquisition.

11. FAR 6.303-2(b)(11) – A statement of actions, if any, the agency may take to remove or overcome any barriers to competition before any subsequent acquisition for the supplies or services required:

The Agency will continue to examine the market in the future for alternative solutions or new sources before executing any subsequent acquisitions for the same requirements.