**OMB Approval Number 2700-0087**

**Broad Agency Announcement NNJ08ZBT002**

**BROAD AGENCY ANNOUNCEMENT**

**Exploration Systems Mission Directorate**

**Lunar Surface Systems Concepts Study**

**PROPOSALS DUE**

**July 9, 2008**

**Issue Date: June 6, 2008**

**NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION**

######## Table of Contents

  ------------- ---------------------------------- -----------------------
  **Section**   **Introduction**                   2

  **I**         **General Information**            3

  **II**        **Eligibility Information**        3

  **III**       **Background**                     4

  **IV**        **Description of Study Areas**     4

  **V**         **Proposals**                      10

  **VI**        **Submission of Late Proposals**   11

  **VII**       **Evaluation Information**         11

  **VIII**      **Evaluation Panel**               12

  **IX**        **Award Information**              12
  ------------- ---------------------------------- -----------------------

**INTRODUCTION**

This publication constitutes a Broad Agency Announcement (BAA) as
contemplated by Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Part 35 and NASA
Federal Acquisition Regulation (NFS) Part 1835. A formal Request for
Proposal (RFP), solicitation, and/or additional information regarding
this announcement will not be issued. Request for same will be
disregarded.

NASA will not issue paper copies of this announcement. NASA reserves the
right to select for award all, some, or none of the proposals in
response to this announcement. NASA provides no funding for direct
reimbursement of proposal development costs. Technical and cost
proposals (or any other material) submitted in response to this BAA will
not be returned. It is the policy of NASA to treat all proposals as
sensitive competitive information and to disclose their contents only
for the purposes of evaluation.

Potential offerors may submit questions regarding this BAA in writing
via e-mail to Herb Baker, Contracting Officer, at
<herb.baker-1@nasa.gov>, not later than June 23, 2008.

This BAA is soliciting proposals for six study areas as follows:

Topic 1: Alternative Packaging Options

Topic 2: Minimum Functionality Habitation Element

Topic 3: Innovative Avionics Architectures & Sparing Strategies

Topic 4: Long-term Lunar Energy Storage Systems Concepts

Topic 5: Alternative Software Architecture Development Approaches

Topic 6: Lunar Regolith Moving Methods & Techniques

Offerors may propose solutions for up to a maximum of three study areas.
For the purpose of this limitation on the number of proposals submitted
by a single offeror, the term "offeror" is defined as a corporate entity
or university system. That is, for organizations with multiple business
systems, divisions, campuses, or sites, the proposal limit applies to
the entire organization, not to individual business systems, divisions,
campuses, or sites.

**I. [GENERAL INFORMATION]{.underline}**

1.  **Agency Name: NASA**

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
2.  **Research Opportunity Title:** Exploration Systems Mission
    Directorate (ESMD) Lunar Surface Systems Concepts Study

3.  **Program Name:** NASA Constellation Lunar Surface Systems Project
    Office

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
4.  **Response Date:** July 9, 2008 by 4:30pm CDT

5.  **Point of Contact:** All questions shall be directed to the
    cognizant NASA Contracting Officer as specified below. All questions
    shall be submitted in writing. Questions and responses will be
    posted on the JSC Procurement website and the Lunar Surface Systems
    Public Data Windchill site. Inquiries by telephone or in person will
    not be accepted.

> [Contracting Point of Contact]{.underline}
>
> NASA Lyndon B. Johnson Space Center
>
> Herb Baker, Mail Code BT
>
> 2101 NASA Parkway
>
> Houston, TX 77058
>
> Email: <herb.baker-1@nasa.gov>

7.  **Instrument Type(s):** It is anticipated that multiple
    firm-fixed-price contracts will result from this solicitation.

> **8. Additional Information:** The BAA and Attachments may be obtained
> over the internet at
> [http://procurement.jsc.nasa.gov/lsspo/](https://mail01.ndc.nasa.gov/exchweb/bin/redir.asp?URL=http://procurement.jsc.nasa.gov/lsspo/).
> Technical and design data can be obtained through the password request
> process found at
> [www.exploration.nasa.gov](http://www.exploration.nasa.gov/) under the
> Lunar Surface Systems Concept Studies Discussions link.

**II. [ELIGIBILITY INFORMATION]{.underline}**

1.  **[Eligible Applicants]{.underline}**

> All categories of non-NASA U.S. institutions are eligible to submit
> proposals in response to this BAA. NASA Centers (JPL is considered a
> NASA Center for the purposes of this BAA) cannot submit proposals to
> this BAA nor may they be used as team members.

2.  **[Guidelines for Foreign Participation]{.underline}**

> Performance of studies under this BAA will require access to data that
> is subject to export control regulations. Any entity proposing for a
> contract under this BAA must demonstrate their compliance/process for
> export control following the U.S. Government export control policy in
> order to be considered for award.

**III. [BACKGROUND]{.underline}**

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) is currently
studying lunar outpost architecture concepts, including habitation,
mobility and communication systems, to support U.S. lunar exploration
and science objectives.  NASA is in the process of defining functional
capabilities and concepts for architectural elements to provide core
capabilities.

 

Over the past 6-9 months, NASA's Exploration Systems Mission Directorate
(ESMD), whose primary mission is to develop new space transportation and
human exploration capabilities, has engaged with industry for input on
the lunar architecture.  The forum for this collaboration has primarily
been through the U.S. Chamber of Commerce (USCC) Space Enterprise
Council.

 

NASA would like to build on the expertise gained over 50 years of
spaceflight, by soliciting the best ideas and concepts from
universities, aerospace and non-aerospace companies in this important
space exploration effort.  By addressing the full USCC membership, NASA
is attempting to reach entities not traditionally engaged with the space
industry, but who have applicable expertise and innovative ideas that
can be incorporated into NASA\'s lunar surface systems planning.

This Broad Agency Announcement (BAA) for concept studies, and
opportunities to follow, is intended to stimulate innovative ideas and
provide a mechanism for these ideas to inform NASA\'s lunar architecture
planning.

**IV. [DESCRIPTION OF STUDY AREAS]{.underline}**

####### Topic 1: Alternative Packaging Options

##### [Objective]{.underline}

*The primary objective of this study is to produce alternative packing
options that eliminate or minimize waste generation from packing
materials and allow optimal utilization of available stowage volume.
Potential alternatives can include concepts that do not require packing
material at all or that employ packing materials that have secondary
uses. A third, but less desirable, approach would be packing materials
whose volume is reduced following use but which still become waste.*

*All options must satisfy applicable requirements for initial packing
function, must strive to minimize the mass of the packing materials, and
must comply with other spaceflight requirements such as flammability and
offgassing. An additional goal is that the mass of packing material not
exceed the mass of the item, or items, being packed.*

##### [Background]{.underline}

Historically, packing materials have been employed to protect stowable
hardware items during ascent from the ambient vibroacoustic environment.
Examples of items that are packed in this way include spare spacecraft
hardware components, tools, scientific instruments, food and
photographic equipment. These packing materials occupy a significant
fraction of the available stowage volume. Additionally, these packing
materials account for a very substantial proportion of the waste stream
that evolves during a mission as the stowed items are utilized and the
packing material no longer serves a purpose. The end result is
consumption of stowage volume by material that ends up as waste.

####### [Technical Requirements]{.underline}

Topic-specific requirements to be addressed in the oral and written
Contract Deliverables, specified in paragraph 8 of Section IX, include:

1.  defining the proposed alternative options

2.  addressing compliance with functional and compatibility requirements

3.  defining the unit mass of proposed materials, and

4.  defining secondary uses of materials, as applicable.

####### Topic 2: Minimum Functionality Habitation Element

##### [Objective]{.underline}

*The primary objective of this study is to produce a conceptual design
for a minimum functionality habitation element based on a minimum set of
functions that are required to perform the reference mission. The
minimum functionality habitation element includes basic required safety
features but does not protect for contingency situations. This element
would never realistically fly, but the minimum set of functions
identified would provide the backbone for crew accommodations on the
surface, as well as provided growth options for the Lunar Surface
Systems. All functions identified as necessary for minimum functionality
should include rationale that supports their inclusion or omission from
the design. The LSS Project Office is seeking input on the minimum
functional design, and any safety and reliability upgrade approaches
that would lead to a flyable design.*

##### [Background]{.underline}

NASA anticipates that early deployment of habitation assets will be
required to enable human lunar exploration of extended durations. The
nature of the pressurized element architecture will evolve as scientific
objectives are prioritized and international/commercial partnerships are
better defined. Reliable and robust habitation represents a key
capability for expanding human presence in the solar system, and NASA
expects to begin its work on habitat design in a manner similar to that
used by the Altair project.

####### [Technical Requirements]{.underline}

Topic-specific requirements to be addressed in the oral and written
Contract Deliverables, specified in paragraph 8 of Section IX, include:

1.  identifying and defining the proposed minimum required functions

2.  providing rationale for the proposed minimum required functions

3.  providing a conceptual design (topology, layout, sections, 3D) that
    accommodates the minimum required functions

4.  providing mass, power and volume estimates of the concept

5.  providing potential growth options utilizing the concept

####### Topic 3: Innovative Avionics Architectures & Sparing Strategies

## Objective

*The objective of this study is to investigate innovative avionics
architectures and sparing strategies that maximize commonality of
avionics components and enable/facilitate in-situ repair strategies
while minimizing mass of spares. Critical to deployment of a sustainable
avionics architecture are reductions in mass including indirect
reductions via reductions in power, packaging, and maintenance spares.*

# 

# [Background]{.underline}

NASA is studying campaign options for long duration lunar outpost
missions including surface elements for habitation, mobility,
communications, and in-situ resource utilization. As part of these
efforts, several reference avionics architectures have been developed
for each of the surface elements to varied levels of maturity and not
necessarily fully integrated with other systems. The current concepts
have been derived from operations concepts of deployment, use, and
maintenance and utilize a product line approach to obtain component
commonality and interoperability as intrinsic aspects of the
architecture. As part of the development process, consideration has been
given to the potential to maintain heritage with current systems in
terms of software, communications, and interoperability. As part of this
study, NASA is seeking innovative concepts in avionics architecture and
sparing strategies that demonstrate optimal mass/sparing ratio,
efficient redeployment of delivered resources, and flexibility of
components to adapt to needs of an evolving architecture.

# 

# [Technical Requirements]{.underline}

Topic-specific requirements to be addressed in the oral and written
Contract Deliverables, specified in paragraph 8 of Section IX, include
describing specific evaluation(s) to address the following areas:

##### What figures of merit are used to evaluate various trade options?

##### At what levels are commonality enabled (hardware, communications, software)?

##### How can the sparing mass be reduced while meeting mission safety requirements?

1.  Where could technology development promote increased commonality and
    facilitate reconfiguration and repair?

2.  How does the architecture enable an evolvable and maintainable
    infrastructure?

####### Topic 4: Long-term Lunar Energy Storage Systems Concepts

## Objective

*The primary objective of this study is to identify novel energy storage
concepts that enable longer crewed missions on the lunar surface. The
ideal energy storage system would be robust to the lunar environment and
the system requirements, have low mass and volume, and require little or
no maintenance or support. The ideal system would also be efficient in
discharge and recharge and be integrated with the outpost simply and
with little impact.*

System Requirements:

-   2 - 5 kW net discharge electric power

-   100 - 2000 kWhr net energy storage per module

-   TRL 6 by 2015 - 2018 timeframe

-   5 - 10 year calendar life

-   10,000 - 15,000 hour operational life

-   100 - 2000 charge/discharge cycles

-   able to withstand high dust, radiation, and widely varying thermal
    environment

## Background

Staying on the moon for extended periods of time can require significant
energy storage. For solar power based systems, energy storage is needed
for nighttime power as well as mobile power and daytime power
augmentation. The lunar nighttime duration is about 350 hours or
greater, which is significantly higher than Earth and Martian orbit and
surface nighttime durations. Some reduction in the lunar nighttime
duration is possible by landing on elevated sites near the poles, but
despite this, the nighttime durations are such that even low power
levels require significant energy storage.

The high cost of delivering mass to the lunar surface makes mass and
volume the primary drivers for choice of the energy storage
approach. Secondary, but still important, design drivers include
life-cycle cost, high reliability and long life, little or no
maintenance needs, and high discharge and recharge efficiency. All of
these can have significant effects on the overall lunar outpost design
and approach.

 

Batteries have been used for other space missions including short-term
lunar missions but their application for future lunar surface systems
carries a substantial mass penalty. Other concepts have not been fully
developed and demonstrated in a relevant environment. Fuel cells have
been used for manned spaceflight missions but have not been used
regeneratively, where the fluid products are converted back to
reactants, in a relevant environment. Other energy storage concepts, as
well as new approaches to battery and fuel cell technology, exist and
may be potential solutions for the lunar surface application.

## Technical Requirements

Topic-specific requirements to be addressed in the oral and written
Contract Deliverables, specified in paragraph 8 of Section IX, include:

1.  the conceptual design(s) and their figures-of-merit, including
    estimated mass, volume and recharge efficiency.

2.  qualitative summaries on potential issues affecting cycle and
    calendar life, reliability, maintainability, and cost.

3.  the sensitivity of the energy storage system design and its
    requirements on the figures-of-merit.

4.  the potential impacts on other subsystems including thermal,
    communications, and logistics needs.

5.  any concepts for dual use, such as capturing and using waste heat,
    or other hybrid approaches.

####### Topic 5: Alternative Software Architecture Development Approaches

[Objective]{.underline}

*The primary objective of this study is to identify alternative
approaches for lunar surface systems software architecture and
development that may result in robust software performance and
reliability at a lower cost than traditional development methodologies.*

[Background]{.underline}

NASA is seeking innovative approaches to software development and
architecture for lunar surface systems in order to create a requirement
trade space and alternative concepts of operations that are impacted by
software. Lunar surface systems comprise lunar habitats, pressurized and
unpressurized rovers, communication and navigation elements, electrical
power control, and in-situ resource utilization. Studies should include
both aerospace approaches (such as state-of-the art approaches to
spacecraft health monitoring and autonomous operations) and multiple
alternative software analogues for their insight into the requirements
and cost trade space.

Examples of alternative software analogues include but are not limited
to software system architecture and development methods for submarines,
underwater habitats, biohazard facilities, and autonomous and
human-occupied vehicles. Analogues should be compatible with human
safety in non-benign environments, but not necessarily within the
traditional aerospace framework of human rating. Innovative
architectures and software development approaches that are highly
cost-effective yet meet human safety should be investigated.

[Technical Requirements]{.underline}

Topic-specific requirements to be addressed in the oral and written
Contract Deliverables, specified in paragraph 8 of Section IX, include
the following for each architecture/development approach investigated:

1.  the conceptual design(s) and their figures-of-merit, including
    estimated software cost, reuse and rationale. The rationale for
    software cost should be based on either actual data or projected
    costs derived through a well-defined cost estimation method.

2.  qualitative summaries on potential issues affecting reliability and
    life-cycle cost, and maintainability.

3.  the sensitivity of the software system design and its requirements
    on the figures-of-merit. 

4.  any concepts for Off the-Shelf (OTS, including COTS, GOTS, ROTS)
    reuse with their rationale.

####### Topic 6: Lunar Regolith Moving Methods & Techniques

## Objective

*The primary objective of this study is to provide viable and innovative
methods and techniques for moving lunar regolith as needed to deploy and
operate a lunar outpost. These methods and techniques should be focused
on providing novel approaches while leveraging off terrestrial
technologies that are promising for lunar environments. It is highly
desirable to have an investigation of life cycle cost reduction while
benchmarking off existing NASA concepts and prototypes.*

## Background

A Lunar Outpost implies some degree of infrastructure, surface systems
and site preparation in order to facilitate spacecraft landings, element
deployment and efficient operation of the lunar Outpost. It may include
a variety of assets, including habitats, power and science facilities,
surface rovers, logistics and re-supply, communications and navigation,
and *in situ* resource utilization equipment.

There are benefits to the "Altair" lander, surface systems, In-Situ
Resource Utilization (ISRU), scientific activities and Mars forward
development, provided by Lunar regolith moving methods and techniques.
For the "Altair" lander, regolith site preparation can: provide an
enhanced landing capability, reduce landing risk, reduce turnaround
issues and mitigate potential damage to the lander, and provide a
landing facility with associated staged support equipment, as well as a
level surface for controlled launching conditions. Surface systems will
benefit since: site preparation will protect emplaced assets from
subsequent blast damage during landings, provide a better surface
condition for Outpost elements deployment, transportation and
positioning, reduce life cycle cost and operations risk of operating an
outpost, clear areas for enhanced EVA and vehicular mobility and provide
dust mitigation zones. ISRU oxygen production equipment will require the
acquisition, beneficiation and delivery of regolith feedstock to the
input hopper, in order to extract oxygen from the regolith on a
continuous basis to support Outpost logistics and reduce re-supply
activities. Science activities will benefit from a trenching capability
for Lunar stratigraphy studies, surface and sub-surface sample
collection capability and geotechnical methods for deploying
instruments. In order to land on Mars with humans, studies have shown
that 50-60 metric ton landers will be required with associated landing
problems due to plume impingement with a resulting reduction in regolith
strength and cratering that could cause a lander failure and loss of
mission. By learning how to move and manipulate regolith on the moon,
NASA will be able to address the substantial issues that will be faced
for sustainable, cost effective operations on the moon and eventually
Mars.

Lunar regolith moving methods and techniques consist of solutions that
take advantage of a systems engineering approach to the lunar outpost
where every element has a direct correlation to the stakeholder's needs
with dual use and multiple functionality being the key to mass, cost and
operational efficiency. For example a lunar "space truck" or large
mobility platform will be required for off loading payloads from
landers, transporting astronauts during EVA, providing a chassis for a
pressurized roving compartment and being the host for a variety of
supporting implements for construction, operations and science research
activities. Since this mobility platform is available it could become
the transportation node for a regolith movement and excavation system,
with a small mass penalty to the transportation architecture while
providing a significantly enhanced modular functionality for regolith
movement with resulting benefits to the life cycle cost of the outpost.
Other solutions may explore the use of several smaller dedicated
mobility platforms dedicated to a task such as regolith collection and
beneficiation for ISRU oxygen production, in order to provide
redundancy, avoid schedule conflicts and extend machine lifetimes.

## Technical Requirements

Topic-specific requirements to be addressed in the oral and written
Contract Deliverables, specified in paragraph 8 of Section IX, include:

1.  A comprehensive study and operational assessment, with benchmarking,
    assessing areas such as:

    a.  Earth soil moving techniques, devices, implements and lessons
        learned with applicability to moving lunar regolith specifically
        in relation to regolith flow and interaction with excavation
        devices, beneficiation devices, wheel traction, input hopper
        design and regolith transport systems in performing tasks such
        as:

        i.  Landing / Launch Pads, Blast Protection Berms, Electrical
            Cable Trenches / Stratigraphy Trenches, Utility Roads /
            Clearing Obstacles, Foundations / Leveling, Trenches for
            Habitat & Element Burial, Regolith Shielding on Roof over
            Element Trenches

2.  A trade study of concepts for collecting loose surface regolith
    including:

    a.  Regolith found at depths less than 2 -3 cm on the moon

    b.  Compacted regolith found at depths greater than 20 -30 cm on the
        moon

3.  Identification of viable lunar regolith moving and surface
    stabilization methods and techniques as well as regolith size
    sorting and mineral beneficiation methods that can be integrated
    into proposed systems

4.  A life cycle cost study of regolith moving systems and Earth based
    lessons learned from a variety of industries to identify the key
    drivers and applicable components of life cycle cost with associated
    wear mitigation and cost reduction techniques and suggestions.

**V. [PROPOSALS]{.underline}**

> **a. [Submission Instructions]{.underline}**
>
> All proposals in response to this BAA must be submitted electronically
> via e-mail to Herb Baker, at <herb.baker-1@nasa.gov>, in MS Word and
> MS Excel formats. The separate parts of the proposal should be
> delivered as separate files. The Price proposal may be submitted as
> either a Word file or Excel file.
>
> Page limitations are outlined below. A page is defined as one (1)
> sheet 8 ½ x 11 inches using a minimum of 12-point Times New Roman font
> size for text and 8-point for graphics. Title pages, tables of
> contents, and tables of figures are excluded from the page count
> limits specified. Proposal documents should have margins of at least
> one inch on all sides.
>
> The Government intends to evaluate proposals and issue contract awards
> without discussions with offerors. Therefore, the offeror\'s initial
> proposal should contain the offeror\'s best terms from a price and
> technical standpoint. The Government reserves the right to conduct
> discussions if the Contracting Officer later determines them to be
> necessary.
>
> Offerors may propose solutions for up to a maximum of three study
> areas. For the purpose of this limitation on the number of proposals
> submitted by a single offeror, the term "offeror" is defined as a
> corporate entity or university system. That is, for organizations with
> multiple business systems, divisions, campuses, or sites, the proposal
> limit applies to the entire organization, not to individual business
> systems, divisions, campuses, or sites.
>
> **b. Proposals must include the following material, in this order:**
>
> **[Part 1:]{.underline}** **a. Technical Approach (Maximum 10 pages)**
> The offeror shall describe its approach to completing the Technical
> Requirements specified for the particular topic the offeror is
> proposing against.
>
> **b. Statement of Work (SOW) (No page limit)** The offeror shall
> detail the scope and objectives of the effort and the technical
> approach in a SOW. It is anticipated that the proposed SOW will be
> incorporated into the resultant contract.
>
> **[Part 2:]{.underline}** **Key Personnel** **(Maximum 6 Pages)** The
> offeror shall describe the proposed roles, education, experience, and
> other qualifications of a maximum of three (3) key personnel.
>
> **[Part 3:]{.underline} Price Proposal (No page limit)** The price
> proposal shall include the overall firm-fixed-price. Offers shall not
> exceed \$250,000. Those proposals in excess of \$100,000 shall include
> the additional detailed breakout of the following costs:
>
> \(a\) Labor: Including Labor Categories, Hours, and Rates
>
> \(b\) Other Direct Costs: Including Travel (number of trips, number of
> days per trip, departure and arrival destinations, number of people,
> etc.); Subcontracts and; Materials (itemized cost breakout), as
> applicable.
>
> \(c\) Indirect Rates: Including Overhead and G&A
>
> \(d\) Profit

**VI. [SUBMISSION OF LATE PROPOSALS]{.underline}**

> Except as provided under NFS 1815.208, proposals received by the
> Government after the specified date and time for receipt will not be
> evaluated.

**VII. [EVALUATION INFORMATION]{.underline}**

> **Evaluation Factors and Relative Importance.** The following factors
> shall be used to evaluate proposals, in descending order of
> importance.

##### **Factor 1 - Technical Merit**

> The Government will evaluate the offeror's unique and innovative
> concepts and the overall proposed technical approach to performing the
> required effort for each study area. The completeness and suitability
> of the proposed SOW for incorporation into a contract will be
> evaluated.

##### **Factor 2 -- Price**

> Evaluation of price will include the following: the overall
> firm-fixed-price to the Government; reasonableness of the proposed
> price and associated work content and; the extent to which the offeror
> complied with the specified dollar limits in the BAA.

##### **Factor 3 -- Key Personnel** 

> The Government will evaluate the proposed roles, education,
> experience, and other qualifications of the proposed key personnel
> relative to the requirements of this BAA.

**VIII. [EVALUATION PANEL]{.underline}**

> Evaluation of the proposals received in response to this Broad Agency
> Announcement will be accomplished by Government Personnel only. All
> Government personnel participating in the evaluation will be required
> to comply with applicable procurement regulations and NASA policy to
> protect proprietary and source-selection information.

**IX. [AWARD INFORMATION]{.underline}**

> **1. CCR.** Successful offerors not already registered in the Central
> Contractor Registry (CCR) will be required to register in CCR prior to
> award of any contract. Information on CCR registration is available at
> [http://www.ccr.gov](http://www.ccr.gov/).
>
> **2. Certifications.** Consistent with FAR Subpart 4.12
> *Representations and Certifications*, offerors must update their
> representations and certifications submitted to Online Representations
> and Certifications Application (ORCA), as necessary. This is required
> in conjunction with registration in the Central Contractor
> Registration (CCR) database (<http://www.ccr.gov/>). Submission of a
> separate package of representations and certifications for this
> procurement action will not be required.
>
> **3. Multiple Awards.** NASA anticipates multiple awards, which
> represent the best value to the Government in accordance with the
> evaluation criteria. The overall number of awards will be dependent
> upon the quality and innovativeness of proposed studies, funding
> availability, and evaluation results. Similarly, for any single study
> topic, NASA may make multiple awards or none at all.
>
> **4. Period of Performance.** The maximum period of performance for
> any resultant contract shall not exceed six months. Offerors, at their
> discretion, may propose a period of performance of less than six
> months for any of the study areas. The due dates for the interim
> report and presentation and final report will be adjusted based on the
> proposed period of performance.
>
> **5. Award Date.** Selection and award is anticipated for August 2008.
>
> **6. Funding Allocation.** The Government's overall budget for issuing
> awards under this BAA is anticipated at \$2,000,000.00. Individual
> award amounts are limited to not more than \$250,000.00,
> firm-fixed-price.
>
> **7. Data Rights.** The objective of the contract is to obtain data
> for NASA\'s use in determining an approach for the Lunar Surface
> Systems requirements. Therefore, all data produced and delivered under
> the contract will be \"unlimited rights\" data under FAR 52.227-14.
> The offeror should identify in its proposal any requested exceptions
> for specific types of data.

8.  **Contract Deliverables.**

-   Interim Study Report (due at mid-point of contract period of
    performance): 1 Hard Copy and 1 CD-ROM

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   Interim Oral Presentation (within 1 (one) week of Interim Study
    Report submission): not to exceed a half day

-   Final Study Report (due date may vary by study area -- should
    generally be 90-150 days after contract effective date): 1 Hard Copy
    and 1 CD-ROM

-   Collaborative Technical Exchange with Awardees and broader community
    (within a month of Final Study Report) 3 days in duration