Industry Day Questions and Responses.pdf

Questions Resulting from SMBA Phase

PROCUREMENT

Will the SMBA Phase A study still be awarded in October 2023 (as planned) if there is a continuing resolution? What if there is a government shutdown?

The study would be awarded in October 2023 (as planned) if there is a continuing resolution. If there is a government shutdown, then the study would need to wait for the government to reopen before proceeding.

Are there any constraints on how Phase A study vendors spend the $5m cap for the study?

No, as long as the work is within scope of the contract and all contract requirements are met, vendors are free to allocate money as they believe is best.

Must vendors submitting proposals for the Phase A studies bring their designs to a PDR state of development to be considered?

No, that is not one of the requirements of this study.

Does the Government desire any partnerships between vendors?

The RFP provisions and clauses may address partnering preferences, such as with small businesses.

However, partnering is a business decision for vendors to make.

May vendors propose additional work to occur beyond the 12 month study?

The study is capped at 12 months. Vendors may make note of additional work that could be pursued if time and money permit within the 12-month period and $5m budget cap.

Who holds the intellectual property rights?

The Government intends to utilize clause 52.227-14 Right in Data – General for most intellectual property. However, please review the solicitation for the complete set of clauses related to intellectual property.

Will the Government have multiple contractors in Phase B and beyond?

This has not yet been decided.

Will the Government be buying calibration as a service?

This has not yet been decided.

STATEMENT OF WORK

How much should vendors attempt to shorten the schedule shown in the Phase A SOW?

The Government is interested understanding how many years, if any, earlier the Flight Model 1 Pre-Ship Review (PSR1) can reasonably be held. Feasibility is important to the Government. The Government is also interested in understanding what the cost and technical risks (as compared to the date for PSR1 listed in Phase A SOW item 1.1.2.b) associated with this more aggressive schedule are. The Government wants to balance an earlier schedule with technical risk.

What are the Government’s intended priorities for the first set of instruments (F1, F2, F3, F4) compared to the priorities for the optional second set of instruments (F5, F6, F7, F8, F9)? For instance, does the Government plan to prioritize cost on the first set of instruments and new technology on the second set of instruments?

The delivery schedule and phasing of the instruments shown in items 1.1.2.b and 2.4.2.1 is notional. The Government would like vendors to suggest the best schedule and phasing for a set of nine instruments.

Vendors can consider delivering the instruments in a different number of groups, updating the design between deliveries, reducing schedule and/or cost for the first set, and delivering the second set of instruments at a later date amongst any other alternative that a vendor may believe is feasible within scope. The trade study shown in item 2.1.a elaborates on this. The Government’s intention is to understand the best schedule and technology phasing approach.

PERFORMANCE SPECIFICATION DOCUMENT

Are the aspirational requirements in the Performance Specification Document (PSD) optional? Will they continue to be optional during Phases B-F?

The aspirational requirements in the PSD are currently optional. It is the government team’s intention to understand the feasibility of the aspirational requirements during the Phase A studies. The government team will adjust the final requirements set for Phases B-F after better understanding the trade space during Phase A. Some aspirational requirements may become final requirements, some baseline requirements may become final requirements, and some other thresholds may be identified for final requirements.

Is there a volume specified for SMBA? What about other interfaces?

The PSD does not specify a volume. The government team will work to understand SMBA’s volumetric needs during the Phase A study. The Government’s reference mission allocates a 1m x 1m x 1m volume to the instrument, but this is not a requirement. Other interfaces are specified in Section 5. The Government plans to procure the spacecraft after SMBA so that the spacecraft can respond to SMBA and other instrument needs.

Are the priorities listed in PSD table 4.0-1 negotiable?

The priorities listed in PSD table 4.0-1 are not requirements, they are simply the order of importance that the Government places on each capability. Therefore, the priority list is not negotiable. However, the government team intends to work with the Phase A study vendors to understand if/how to incorporate each priority into their designs.

Is SMBA expected to detect Radio Frequency Interference beyond 5G?

Yes, while 5G Radio Frequency Interference is the immediate concern, the Government would like SMBA to evolve with the Radio Frequency Interference environment over its lifetime.

INSTRUMENT MISSION ASSURANCE REQUIREMENTS

Will all instruments including other LEOS instruments use the same IMAR?

The IMAR released with the RFI is a Goddard Space Flight Center template for Class C. The IMAR will be tailored for each implementation.

MISCELLANEOUS

Will the Government provide vendors with more information on the LEOS Program’s programmatic and technical plans?

Yes, further information is planned to be provided in early 2023.

How will vendors work with the science community?

The government science team will help vendors coordinate communication with the broader science community.