National Aeronautics and

Space Administration March 5, 1999

AO-99-OES-01

ANNOUNCEMENT

OF

OPPORTUNITY

Lightweight Synthetic Aperture Radar (LightSAR)

Proposals Due May 10, 1999
LightSAR Announcement of Opportunity

ii
LightSAR Announcement of Opportunity

iii

OMB Approv

LIGHTWEIGHT SYNTHETIC APERTURE RADAR (LightSAR)

NASA Announcement of Opportunity

Soliciting Proposals

for

Period Ending

May 10, 1999

AO-99-OES-01

Issued March 5, 1999

Office of Earth Science

National Aeronautics and Space Administration

Washington, DC 20546
LightSAR Announcement of Opportunity

iv
LightSAR Announcement of Opportunity

v

Table of Contents

Page

1.0 DESCRIPTION OF THE OPPORTUNITY...................................................... 1

1.1 Introduction................................................................................................. 1

1.2 Process....................................................................................................... 2

1.2.1 Preproposal Conference............................................................. 2

1.2.2 Notice of Intent............................................................................... 3

1.3 Proposal Opportunity Period and Schedule ........................................ 3

2.0 PROGRAM OBJECTIVES ................................................................................ 4

2.1 Science Objectives ................................................................................... 4

2.1.1 Natural Hazards ............................................................................ 4

2.1.1.1 Crustal Deformation...................................................... 5

2.1.1.2 Volcanic Hazards ........................................................... 5

2.1.1.3 Other Hazards................................................................. 6

2.1.2 Ice Sheet Mass Balance and Sea Level................................... 6

2.1.2.1 Glacier and Ice Sheet Velocities ................................. 7

2.1.2.2 Ice Surface Topography................................................ 7

2.1.2.3 Ice Sheet and Glacier Boundaries.............................. 7

2.1.3 The Carbon Cycle ......................................................................... 8

2.1.3.1 Forest Regrowth and Biomass................................... 9

2.1.4 The Hydrologic Cycle.................................................................... 9

2.1.4.1 Soil Moisture ................................................................... 9

2.1.4.2 Snow Properties...........................................................11

2.1.5 The Role of the Ocean in Climate Change............................11

2.1.5.1 Air-Sea Interaction and Ocean Climate Dynamics 12

2.2 Commercial/Applied Science Objectives...........................................13

2.3 Technology Objective .............................................................................13

2.4 Cost and Contribution Objectives........................................................13

2.5 Summary ..................................................................................................13

3.0 GUIDELINES, REQUIREMENTS, AND CONSTRAINTS..........................15

3.1 Constraints...............................................................................................15

3.1.1 Available Funding........................................................................15

3.1.2 Technical Maturity........................................................................16

3.1.3 Launch Services..........................................................................16

3.1.4 NASA Science Investigators......................................................17

3.2 Requirements..........................................................................................17

3.2.1 Minimum Science Mission........................................................17

3.2.2 Data Archive .................................................................................18
LightSAR Announcement of Opportunity

vi

Table of Contents (Continued)

Page

3.3 Guidelines................................................................................................18

3.3.1 Teaming Arrangements.............................................................18

3.3.2 Role of JPL...................................................................................19

3.3.3 International Participation..........................................................19

3.3.4 Outreach and Opportunity..........................................................20

3.3.5 Additional Instruments...............................................................20

3.3.6 Mission Milestone Reviews ......................................................20

4.0 PROPOSAL SUBMISSION GUIDELINES ..................................................21

4.1 General Overview....................................................................................21

4.1.1 Proposal Instructions.................................................................21

4.1.2 Proposal Format .........................................................................22

4.2 Proposal Content....................................................................................24

4.2.1 Science .........................................................................................24

4.2.2 Technical ......................................................................................27

4.2.3 Opportunity ...................................................................................30

4.2.4 Cost ...............................................................................................30

4.2.5 Management................................................................................34

4.3 International Participation......................................................................39

4.4 Submittal of Proposals ..........................................................................39

4.4.1 Certification ..................................................................................39

4.4.2 Quantity .........................................................................................40

4.4.3 Submittal Address ......................................................................40

4.4.4 Submittal Deadline.....................................................................40

4.4.5 Notification....................................................................................40

4.4.6 Proposals Involving International Participation.....................40

5.0 PROPOSAL EVALUATION, SELECTION AND IMPLEMENTATION .......41

5.1 Evaluation Criteria...................................................................................41

5.1.1 Science Evaluation Criteria.......................................................41

5.1.2 Technical Evaluation Criteria....................................................42

5.1.3 Opportunity Evaluation Criteria.................................................42

5.1.4 Cost Evaluation Criteria.............................................................43

5.1.5 Management Evaluation Criteria..............................................43

5.2 Evaluation and Selection Process.......................................................44

5.3 Contract Administration and Funding .................................................45

6.0 CONCLUSION.................................................................................................46
LightSAR Announcement of Opportunity

vii

APPENDICES

Appendix A General Instructions and Provisions

Appendix B Launch Services Information

Appendix C [Not Used]

Appendix D [Not Used]

Appendix E Regulations Governing Procurement of Foreign Goods or Services

Appendix F Elements to be Included in Arrangements Between U.S. Proposal Team

Leaders and Cooperating Foreign Parties

Appendix G Contents of the Program Library

Appendix H AO Acronyms

Appendix I Glossary of Terms

Appendix J Certification Regarding Debarment, Suspension, and Other

Responsibility Matters Primary Covered Transactions

Appendix K Certification Regarding Lobbying

Appendix L [Not Used]

Appendix M Charts and Templates

Appendix N Mission Assurance Guidelines and Requirements

Appendix O Safety Requirements
LightSAR Announcement of Opportunity

viii

[Not Used]
LightSAR Announcement of Opportunity

1

1.0 DESCRIPTION OF THE OPPORTUNITY

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) announces the

opportunity to conduct scientific investigations as part of the LightSAR Program. The

LightSAR Program is intended to accomplish unique Earth Science basic and applied

research from low-earth orbit using innovative, streamlined management and

implementation approaches.

1.1 Introduction

The LightSAR Program will carry out Earth Science investigations by means of

spaceborne observations with low total cost. Specific measurements that offer high

scientific payoff for this program were identified by the LightSAR Science Working

Group (LSWG) appointed by NASA in 1997. The findings and recommendations of

this multidisciplinary group are summarized in Section 2. Proposals to the LightSAR

Program will require a careful trade-off between science and cost, to produce a

mission with the highest possible science value (defined as integrated science and

cost) to NASA.

To meet the desired LightSAR Program launch date and cost goals, there are

constraints limiting mission definition and development times. NASA envisions a

LightSAR mission with the goal of launching an Earth-viewing satellite by the end of

calendar year 2002, or earlier.

The NASA Headquarters Office of Earth Science (OES) will select the LightSAR

mission. NASA will direct the award of a subcontract by the NASA-Jet Propulsion

Laboratory (JPL) to implement the selected mission. JPL will manage the project for

NASA and coordinate data requirements for NASA science investigators. Therefore,

the successful Proposer and the JPL LightSAR Project Office are expected to work

together as a single, seamless, integrated team committed to a successful mission.

The goals of the LightSAR program are scientific, commercial, and technological.

Proposals will be required to include basic research and/or applied research (e.g.,

commercial applications development) and suitable technology demonstrations. In

addition to this AO, separate NASA Research Announcements (NRAs) and

solicitations may be issued (and funded separately) to solicit proposals for applied

and basic science investigations using LightSAR images and data.

Proposers may envision potential future commercial opportunities that might arise as

a result of performing the applied research envisioned in this AO. In that event, cost

sharing of the effort or contribution of other resources by the Proposer may be

appropriate. If resource sharing is proposed, suitable data rights provisions may be

offered.

Proposers are notified that if commercial opportunities (which are beyond the

research scope of this AO) are to be pursued, the Proposer should investigate license
LightSAR Announcement of Opportunity

2

requirements (See 15 U.S.C. 5601 et seq.). The conditions attached to a remote

sensing license may affect the Proposer’s considerations concerning potential

commercialization and, thus, the extent to which resource sharing may be proposed.

Since resource sharing will be part of the evaluation criteria, the Proposer should

indicate the relationship of resource sharing to commercialization potential (if

considered in the decision to resource share). If any license is required due to

Proposer’s unique requirements, such a license must be in place prior to contract

award. For additional information, the Proposer should contact the Remote Sensing

Licensing Coordinator, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration at 301-713-

2074, Ext. 107.

In concert with the LightSAR program development, NASA has initiated the Earth

Observations Commercial Applications Program - Synthetic Aperture Radar

(EOCAP-SAR) to promote new markets for SAR products and services, as part of the

NASA program to help U.S. industry maintain its competitive position in the

international remote sensing marketplace. The Commercial Remote Sensing

Program (CRSP) office at the John C. Stennis Space Center (SSC) manages EOCAPSAR for the NASA OES.

1.2 Process

NASA will initially review all proposals and eliminate from further consideration any

proposal deemed not responsive to the proposal instructions of this AO. The

proposals that pass the initial review will be further evaluated for strengths and

weaknesses, under the criteria set forth in Section 5.1. The proposal that represents

the best value to the Government will be selected for contract negotiation. If no

proposal meets these criteria, no selection will be made.

NASA makes no commitment to take procurement action as a result of this AO if the

proposal arrangements are too restrictive and are not in the best interest of the U.S.

Government. As such, the Proposers are expected to assume the cost of preparing a

proposal in response to this AO at their own risk.

Prospective Proposers should attend the LightSAR AO Preproposal Conference and

submit a Notice of Intent, as described below.

1.2.1 Preproposal Conference

A Preproposal Conference will be held on March 18, 1999, at the Crystal City Sheraton

Hotel, Arlington, Virginia, from 9:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m. By March 12, anyone planning to

attend should furnish his/her name to the LightSAR AO Coordinator at the address in

Section 4.4.3, together with the text of any specific question that should be answered

at the Conference. Questions received after March 12 will be addressed only if time

permits. A transcript of the proceedings will be sent to each attendee approximately

two (2) weeks after the Conference.
LightSAR Announcement of Opportunity

3

1.2.2 Notice of Intent

Prospective Proposers are strongly encouraged to advise the LightSAR AO

Coordinator of their intention to submit a proposal, so that necessary preparations

can be made. The written Notice of Intent (NOI) should be received by April 5, 1999,

should reference the LightSAR AO, and should include a list of team members, their

organizations, addresses, and telephone numbers. If the proposal team has a nonU.S. member, a copy of the NOI should be sent to the NASA External Relations office

at the address in Section 4.4.6.

NASA will not release information provided in an NOI, nor acknowledge or confirm

receipt of an NOI.

1.3 Proposal Opportunity Period and Schedule

Proposers have 66 days from the official AO release date to prepare and submit their

proposals, according to the following nominal schedule:

Official AO release date...............................................................March 5, 1999

Attendees List/ Questions for Preproposal Conference.....March 12, 1999

Preproposal Conference...........................................................March 18, 1999

Notice of Intent due..........................................................................April 5, 1999

Proposal due...................................................................................May 10, 1999

Announcement of selection................................................................ July 1999

Anticipated Subcontract Award......................................................August 1999
LightSAR Announcement of Opportunity

4

2.0 PROGRAM OBJECTIVES

The Earth Science Enterprise (ESE) uses NASA’s space-based observing technology

and scientific expertise for the study of planet Earth, an integrated system of land,

ocean, atmosphere, ice, and biological processes. From the vantage point of space

we are beginning to understand how the processes work and how they interact.

NASA recognizes that while different instruments can supply valuable information in a

broad range of Earth science disciplines, it is impossible to satisfy all science

disciplines with the resources of a single affordable spaceborne platform. Following

the highly successful flights of the Shuttle Imaging Radar-C/X-Band Synthetic Aperture

Radar (SIR-C/X-SAR) in 1994, NASA requested the Space Studies Board of the

National Research Council (NRC) to evaluate the utility of a third SIR-C/X-SAR

mission and to provide guidance in developing a strategy for a space-based, scienceoriented interferometric small SAR.

“Because of their all-weather, day-night capability, active microwave

systems may represent the only reliable approach to collecting data on a

given region at a particular time. In addition, ...the signals returned by

radar systems are sensitive to the physical structure and moisture

content of the surface being sensed, and may offer avenues to obtaining

results that are important for research and application but are not

otherwise obtainable.” (NRC Report.)

Therefore, in 1997 NASA commissioned the LSWG to identify key science

measurements that can best be addressed through advanced active microwave

remote sensing. The working group identified and recommended those key

measurements that would provide the best scientific payoff relative to the goals of

OES. The entire report is available as a reference document at the LightSAR Web

site, http://southport.jpl.nasa.gov/lightsar/.

The LightSAR program objectives summarized below are grouped into three broad

categories: scientific, commercial, and technological.

2.1 Science Objectives

The science objectives for the LightSAR mission are grouped into a broad range of

scientific disciplines. These groups represent specific areas where there is an

immediate and obvious, unique need for investigations using active microwave

remote sensing. These scientific topics listed below are in approximate priority order

in the context of this AO.

2.1.1 Natural Hazards

Over the past two decades, space geodetic techniques, in particular the Global

Positioning System (GPS), have proven to be powerful tools for studying movements
LightSAR Announcement of Opportunity

5

and deformations of the surface of the Earth and have led to major advances in

understanding. But these measurements lack spatial continuity and require field

equipment at each study site. Recent technological advances in spaceborne radar

interferometry permit observation of millimeter-level surface deformation at 25 m

resolution with worldwide accessibility. Derivation of the first differential

interferometric maps of the co-seismic displacement of the June 28, 1992, Landers

earthquake was arguably the most exciting recent result in earthquake geodesy.

Nevertheless, at the present time, civilian spaceborne differential interferometry

remains primarily a demonstration tool, because no mission dedicated to that

purpose exists. The high-priority science goals of LightSAR are: (1) to refine our

understanding of the earthquake cycle by determining millimeter-level interseismic

and co-seismic vector deformation fields along faults and plate boundaries; (2) to

monitor volcanoes for new activity and potential eruptions by determining millimeterlevel deformation fields; and (3) to support additional natural hazards research using

SAR as a rapid and weather-independent monitoring tool.

2.1.1.1 Crustal Deformation

The most challenging science goal for LightSAR is mapping slow Earth deformations.

This includes the interseismic accumulation of strain leading up to earthquakes, as

well as transient post-seismic strain relaxation following earthquakes. The main

issue is that such signals are subtle, with millimeter-sized displacements and long

wavelengths vulnerable to systematic measurement errors. The accumulation of

strain in the Earth's crust is the first order indicator of future seismic hazard. The

mission should allow for repeated measurement of surface change in seismically

active areas along all continental margins, and it should provide worldwide

accessibility to allow targeting of new and previously unidentified areas for study.

Desired temporal coverage should support an interval of 8 days for any particular

area, or 24 days for all areas. We also require a surface displacement resolution of

2-5 mm statistical height error to track and model wide-area deformation during and

between major earthquakes. Specific high-priority zones should be imaged every

orbit if possible, while other areas can be imaged no fewer than four times per year.

In order to construct vector deformation fields, imaging must be accomplished from

multiple directions.

2.1.1.2 Volcanic Hazards

The major observations in volcanology to be obtained by LightSAR are: (1) the spatial

and temporal extent of deformation preceding and accompanying eruptions, which

are key observables constraining models of magma migration; and (2) the spatial

extent of new material produced during an eruption, derived from image decorrelation,

which is an important diagnostic of the eruption process. As in earthquake studies,

the mission should allow the measurement of surface change in volcanically active

areas on a desired interval of 8 days for any particular area, or 24 days for all areas,

with a surface displacement resolution of 1-3 cm statistical height error in order to

track and model ground deformation prior to, during, and after volcanic eruptions or
LightSAR Announcement of Opportunity

6

intrusive events. Surface change caused either by the emplacement of new lava flows

or by the collapse of volcanic craters should also be studied.

2.1.1.3 Other Hazards

There are a number of other natural hazards that could be studied. Since floods build

with time, frequent revisitation and weather-independent images will be used to plan

for flood mitigation. Post-flood images may be used for quantitative damage

assessment, and may be useful for rapid assessment during the immediate postflood period when the area may still be cloud covered from continuing storms. For the

same reason, SAR images may also be useful for rapid damage assessment after

major hurricanes, when cloud cover and damaged infrastructure (telephones, roads,

bridges) make conventional surveys difficult. Correlation measurements of landslideprone areas will be used to detect early signs of incipient ground failure and to help

assess the size and destructive potential of such events. Documenting the evolution

of the correlation signatures will provide insight for physical modeling of the disasters

and for formulation of mitigation strategies. LightSAR will also measure surface

change caused by human activity, such as subsidence due to fluid withdrawal from

aquifers or hydrocarbon reservoirs.

2.1.2 Ice Sheet Mass Balance and Sea Level

Sustained development of coastal areas worldwide has made the global economy

extremely vulnerable to changes in sea level. Ice sheets and glaciers contain a frozen

reservoir totaling nearly 80% of the world's fresh water and are the primary source of

future sea level rise. While the general retreat of mountain glaciers globally is

believed to be responsible for approximately one quarter to one third of the current 2

mm/year increase in sea level, the majority of the remainder remains unidentified.

However, it is likely the result of yet-undiscovered imbalances in the large polar ice

sheets. Accordingly, the role of ice sheets and glaciers in the global water cycle,

especially their impact on future sea level, is a critical objective of ESE.

There are three specific measurements that LightSAR should be able to make that

will contribute significantly to this goal. The first two, glacier and ice sheet velocities

and topography, are direct products of the interferometric capability of LightSAR. The

third, monitoring of critical margins of ice sheets and glaciers, utilizes singlepolarization amplitude SAR data. With the exception of the now-concluded European

Remote-sensing Satellite (ERS)-1/2 tandem mission, there are no current or planned

SAR interferometric missions to provide the first two types of measurements, and

except for the recent Radarsat Antarctic Mapping Mission (AMM), lasting only 18 days,

there is no SAR satellite designed to view the vast majority of Antarctica, where over

90% of the Earth's ice reservoir exists.
LightSAR Announcement of Opportunity

7

2.1.2.1 Glacier and Ice Sheet Velocities

Ice velocity is the fundamental parameter representing the dynamics of ice. It can be

compared with "balance" velocities (determined from areal integration of the snow

accumulation) to assess the state of equilibrium of any ice mass or portion of an ice

mass. Even in the absence of accumulation data, the magnitude and direction of ice

flow is a critical input to dynamic models of ice flow and, when compared with surface

topography, can identify regions that are far from being in equilibrium.

The mission should allow investigations of these phenomena by interferometric

measurements from different viewing directions to provide the full velocity vector over

the greatest portion of the ice sheets possible. The desired repeat interval for ice

objectives is 8 days, or less.

L-band interferometry has been successfully demonstrated on glaciers with SIR-C,

but not over the drier snow on ice sheets. In terms of the expected sensitivity to ice

displacement, an 8-day repeat cycle at L-band compares with a 2-day repeat cycle at

C-band. Thus, displacements will be twice what have already been measured with

the highly productive 1-day ERS-1/2 tandem data set. Based on the experience with

tandem data, longer repeat periods will limit the ice areas over which displacements

can be measured due to phase unwrapping difficulties. The accuracy of the LightSAR

interferometric motion products will be better than 1 m/year and complementary to

GPS measurements, which will help determine the final velocity fields.

2.1.2.2 Ice Surface Topography

The second interferometric product of ice sheets and glaciers is surface topography.

Surface topography determines the magnitude and direction of the gravitational force

driving the ice flow. Thus, the detailed shape of an ice sheet determines the

boundaries of individual drainage basins contained within the ice sheet. In addition,

the undulated character of the ice sheet surface provides proxy evidence of whether

the ice flow is sliding over a well-lubricated bed or is frozen to the subglacial bed.

Finally, the complete elevation field can be an invaluable aid to the interpolation of

laser altimetry data (e.g., EOS GLAS), which inherently measure elevations only along

very narrow corridors across the ice sheet.

With repeat-pass interferometry, surface topography and ice velocity are both

contained in any single interferogram. However, because the displacement due to

surface topography is fixed in time, while motion displacements accrue, sequential

interferograms can separate these two essential data sets by a technique known as

double differencing.

2.1.2.3 Ice Sheet and Glacier Boundaries

This is the most direct approach to detecting change but the most challenging in

terms of deducing the cause of that change, given the delayed response character of
LightSAR Announcement of Opportunity

8

slow-moving ice. Nevertheless, SAR offers the advantage of viewing through clouds,

which are frequently persistent at the edges of ice sheets and in mountainous terrain.

By regularly imaging (once every 3-5 years) the Greenland and Antarctic Ice Sheets,

LightSAR can contribute to building an unprecedented series of snapshots

documenting the short-term evolution of these ice sheets. This objective is

particularly germane given the recent and unexpected disintegration of large portions

of ice shelves in the Antarctic Peninsula. Planimetric accuracies required for the

intercomparison are about 100 m.

2.1.3 The Carbon Cycle

The global carbon cycle, especially as it relates to CO2 and its important role as a

greenhouse gas, is fundamental to the study of Earth’s climate. SAR has contributed

to this by enhancing our abilities to: (1) quantify the current rates of exchange of

carbon dioxide between the atmosphere and the oceanic and terrestrial

sources/sinks of carbon, (2) understand how changes in climate and the

concentration of carbon dioxide will influence patterns of vegetation distribution and

regrowth after disturbance, and (3) estimate how changes in climate will influence

processes controlling patterns of carbon storage in terrestrial ecosystems,

particularly in organic soils in high northern latitudes. While much previous work has

focused on remote-sensing systems operating in the visible and near-infrared

regions of the electromagnetic spectrum (e.g., MODIS, Landsat), research has also

demonstrated that imaging radar systems provide useful information as well.

Notwithstanding the burning of fossil fuels, worldwide deforestation and afforestation

practices are believed to have the highest impact on the net flux of greenhouse gases.

Growing forests remove atmospheric CO2 and sequester carbon in new or growing

trees. The sequestration rate of carbon (biomass production) in tropical forests, for

instance, could be as much as 10 to 20 tons/hectare per year. Natural disturbances

to forests (such as fires, insects, and diseases) that result in large-scale mortality

release large amounts of carbon to the atmosphere. Anthropogenic activities (such

as deforestation and afforestation) also strongly influence the atmospheric carbon

budget.

Since carbon is stored in the form of biomass in forests and this biomass is

interdependent with factors such as nutrient fluxes, water availability, forest age, and

temperature, monitoring the changes in biomass provides a critical piece of

information to help us understand the global carbon cycle. Monitoring the other

factors just mentioned is also important, to the extent that they influence the biomass

variations. Balancing the carbon budget is still an unresolved issue. The

biogeochemical cycles that determine the atmospheric concentrations of greenhouse

gases are not yet completely understood. As we seek to provide a definitive answer to

the global change question, our knowledge of land-atmosphere exchange at both the

regional and global levels suffers from a lack of long-term observations of biomass.

Among remote-sensing instruments, radar has been shown to have the unique

abilities to respond to biomass over a usable range and give reliable temporal
LightSAR Announcement of Opportunity

9

information, since it sees through cloud cover. For an L-band radar, biomass values

of up to 150-200 tons /hectare have been successfully retrieved.

2.1.3.1 Forest Regrowth and Biomass

Land cover change is one of the fundamental factors perturbing the global carbon

cycle. In an IPCC assessment, conversion of forests to managed systems (pastures

and croplands) in the tropics was estimated to release 1.6 (±) GtC/y to the

atmosphere. Conversely, the regrowth of the mid-latitude forests harvested a halfcentury ago may be absorbing 0.5 to 1.0 GtC/y. In addition to identifying primary land

conversion, successful efforts are underway using SAR to estimate regrowth in

secondary forests, a key factor in carbon balances.

The SIR-C mission has demonstrated that a polarimetric L-band radar would enable

monitoring patterns of forest regrowth following disturbance in many different forest

ecosystems. The development of LightSAR, therefore, would enable ESE scientists

to develop operational approaches for addressing topics (1) and (2) in Section 2.1.3,

above. To clearly separate areas of disturbance from undisturbed areas and to

produce the requisite accuracies in areal extent, a resolution of approximately 25

meters is desired.

2.1.4 The Hydrologic Cycle

The redistribution of solar energy over the globe is central to climate studies. Water

plays a fundamental role in this redistribution through the energy associated with

evapotranspiration, the transport of atmospheric water vapor, and precipitation.

Residence time for atmospheric water is on the order of a week, and for soil moisture

it ranges from a couple of days to months, which emphasizes the active nature of the

hydrologic cycle.

Perhaps the most important role that the land surface plays in global circulation is the

partitioning of incoming radiation into sensible and latent heat fluxes. The major

factor involved in determining the relative proportions of the two heat fluxes is the

availability of water, generally in the form of soil moisture. The role of soil moisture is

equally important at smaller scales. Recent studies with mesoscale atmospheric

models have similarly demonstrated a sensitivity to spatial gradients in soil moisture.

2.1.4.1 Soil Moisture

Soil moisture is an environmental descriptor that integrates much of the land surface

hydrology and is the interface for interaction between the solid Earth surface and life.

As central as this seems to the human existence and biogeochemical cycles, it is a

descriptor that has not had widespread application as a variable in land process

models. There are two primary reasons for this. First, while it can be measured at

one point in time, it is a difficult variable to measure on a consistent and spatially

comprehensive basis. Secondly, it exhibits very large spatial and temporal variability;
LightSAR Announcement of Opportunity

10

thus, point measurements have very little meaning. The practical result of this is that

soil moisture has not been used as a variable in any of our current hydrologic,

climatic, agricultural, or biogeochemical models.

Over the past decade or so, much research into the use of remote sensing to

measure soil moisture has taken place. It is generally accepted that the only way to

measure soil moisture to a depth exceeding a few centimeters is with a microwave

instrument operating at L-band or lower frequencies. Passive microwave

measurements from low-flying aircraft have proven measurement accuracies on the

order of 3% volumetric soil moisture at spatial scales of a few tens of meters.

Unfortunately, similar instruments operating in space require large antennas,

presenting a significant technological challenge. Even if this technological challenge

could be overcome, the resolution of these instruments would be limited to tens of

kilometers. Given the large spatial variability of soil moisture and land cover over

spatial scales much smaller than tens of kilometers, it is unclear how the resulting

measurement would relate to the soil moisture at any given point inside such a large

pixel.

Active microwave instruments provide an alternative way of measuring soil moisture.

To estimate soil moisture from active microwave measurements, one has to separate

the effects of surface roughness and soil moisture, making this generally a more

challenging problem than the passive microwave case. However, several algorithms

have been developed, ranging from empirical models to ones based on complex

electromagnetic scattering theories. All of these algorithms seem to give similar

results, with proven accuracies (when compared with in-situ measurements) on the

order of 4% volumetric soil moisture at spatial scales of a few tens of meters.

Furthermore, at least one of these algorithms has been applied to SIR-C data over the

Washita site in Oklahoma, and the accuracy was verified using ground-truth data.

NASA/OES-sponsored research using the ERS SAR has demonstrated that

spaceborne SAR systems can be used to monitor relative changes in soil moisture in

fire-disturbed boreal forests. In these biomes, soil moisture is a key parameter in the

estimation of rates of soil respiration. It has been estimated that climate warming will

result in significant increases in soil respiration and release of carbon to the

atmosphere in these biomes. Thus, the ability to monitor variations in soil moisture is

essential for estimating future fluxes of carbon. Polarimetric capabilities are required

in order to separate the effects of changes in soil moisture from changes in biomass

and surface roughness. This will significantly improve models of soil respiration in

the boreal region.

The redistribution of water is governed partly by atmospheric circulation. In recent

years, models have been developed to trace circulation through space and time.

Topographic roughness is a key parameter for such models, but one for which

mapping data are mostly lacking. The ability to map large areas based on the radar

backscatter coefficient was demonstrated by SIR-C for L-band. The application of this
LightSAR Announcement of Opportunity

11

technology to help refine circulation models will enable better understanding of water

vapor transport, as well as general atmospheric motions.

2.1.4.2 Snow Properties: Snow Cover and Snow-Water Equivalence

Traditionally, satellite data have been used extensively to map snow-covered

area—i.e., to determine whether a pixel is snow-covered or snow-free. In clear

weather, optical sensors map the presence of snow best. A C-band dual-polarized

SAR can map snow presence about 80% as well as the Landsat Thematic Mapper in

all weather conditions, with the advantage that SAR can detect whether the snow is

wet or dry. Snow cover data are incorporated into operational snowmelt forecasting

schemes, but the size of a snow-covered area may not be a reliable indicator of the

amount of water stored in the snowpack.

The most fundamental snow property in terms of water supply forecasting is the

snow-water equivalence, which is the total amount of water the snow would yield at a

point if it melted. Traditionally, this variable has been measured at several hundred

snow courses throughout the mountainous regions of the western U.S. However,

these snow courses do not adequately sample the terrain's variability—they are all on

flat ground—and simple interpolation between snow courses does not produce

useful results. Hence, the traditional snow course data provide only an index to the

amount of water in a basin. They do not provide data that are accurate enough to

calculate a water balance for the basin.

There is a need to estimate the spatial distribution of snow-water equivalence and its

basin-wide integral. Experiments with SIR-C/X-SAR data show that direct

measurement of snow-water equivalence is now within our technological capability.

With accurate estimates of snow-covered areas, detection of melting snow, and the

measurement of the spatial distribution of snow-water equivalence, we will be able to

better forecast melt on short and season-long time scales. Such forecasts will

improve the management of reservoirs in areas of snowmelt runoff and thus improve

the allocation of water for agriculture and other uses.

2.1.5 The Role of the Ocean in Climate Change

Synthetic aperture radar images of the oceans contain large amounts of information

on both coastal and deep-ocean physical processes. This information is varied and

impacts a rather wide variety of scientific oceanic disciplines. However, in the context

of a LightSAR mission, probably the most significant contribution is the role of the

oceans in climate change. The importance of this role has been established by

numerous publications and has led to major observational and theoretical programs.

These research activities will continue well past the lifetime of LightSAR and thus will

be significantly enhanced by the data provided by LightSAR.
LightSAR Announcement of Opportunity

12

The world’s oceans play an exceedingly important role in establishing global weather

and its long-term average, climate. The oceans have the only significant heat capacity

on the surface of the Earth, because (a) water has the largest specific heat of any

known substance (save one), and (b) the seas cover 71% of the surface of the planet.

The land heats up and cools down on diurnal time scales, and the atmosphere is far

too tenuous to store heat in any concentration. Thus, if significant amounts of solar

energy are to be stored or released on time scales exceeding a few days, the oceans

must be looked to for the mechanisms of retention and release; they are well-known

to provide those mechanisms.

2.1.5.1 Air-Sea Interaction and Ocean Climate Dynamics

Synthetic aperture radar images have recently been shown to display signatures that

discriminate important air-sea interaction processes due to sensitivity to small-scale

surface roughness. Although the roughness modulations are often small (on the

order of a few percent), they nevertheless are quite apparent in the imagery and often

mirror significant and extensive dynamics. For example, it is the interaction between

the planetary boundary layer of the atmosphere and the upper ocean that establishes

the interchange of heat, momentum, and moisture in both the lower and upper

atmospheric regions. It is those fluxes that must be determined if we are to

understand the processes that control the mean temperature of the Earth, its humidity

and cloudiness, and the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. Changes in

long-term heat storage and release are major factors in the establishment of climate

variability. While problems such as increases in carbon dioxide concentrations in the

atmosphere are clearly important, it must be remembered that water vapor is a more

radiatively active gas than carbon dioxide and is much more variable in time and

space.

Much, if not most, of the air-sea interchange occurs episodically during storms and

high wind events. During these events, the surface of the sea is hidden from remote

sensors such as visible and infrared scanners because of cloud cover. Furthermore,

ship- and buoy-based measurements are inhibited or even compromised during

such heavy weather episodes. Thus, it is not presently possible to make accurate

observations during those times when the physics is most active. It is at these times

that spaceborne SAR provides views of the sea surface that are difficult to obtain by

any other means.

The most important LightSAR characteristics for oceanography are: (1) a wide

swath—250 to 500 km—because the spatial scales of the important processes are

well in excess of the so-called oceanic Rossby radius of deformation (typically 50 km

at mid-latitudes); (2) dual polarization (HH and VV), because of the possibility of

delineating atmospheric fluxes via differences in signatures of the two polarizations;

and (3) repeated observations of the non-stationary processes at work, with a repeat

time on the order of a week. Both open-ocean and coastal observations are desired,

the latter because many important mechanisms go on near the edges of the
LightSAR Announcement of Opportunity

13

continental shelves. Many features visible in SAR images of coastal regions also

benefit fishing, boating, shipping, and offshore oil interests.

The climate-oriented observational program would likely concentrate on a few areas

of the ocean known to be important: the Gulf Stream, the Greenland/Labrador Seas,

the Norwegian Sea, and the Pacific equatorial current systems (this is an example of

a tropical region). Observations would be focused on places and times when other

relevant ocean research programs were taking place, thus leveraging the resources

and providing “sea truth” to the SAR. The details of the observational strategy to be

used by LightSAR will depend on these in-situ programs.

2.2 Applied Science /Commercial Objectives

The questions posed and answers found in the grand scientific inquiry not only

support scientific exploration and discoveries, but also may yield knowledge of

substantial near term practical value to society.

Most NASA Earth Science missions yield a variety of practical applications of the

resulting data. The applied research to be pursued in the scientific topics listed in

Section 2.1, above, is likely to lead to potential commercial applications which may

support cost sharing. For proposals in which this is the case, the applied research

and the applications expected to be derived from performance of the proposed

mission will be described.

2.3 Technology Objective

NASA has invested in new technology in support of LightSAR development through

the Advanced Radar Technology Program and the LightSAR Payload Technology

Alliance. These efforts have enabled NASA to take advantage of the best SAR

technologies available in government and industry. Every effort should be made to

incorporate technology advances that have potential to reduce cost and enhance

performance, consistent with the restrictions imposed by cost, risk, and schedule.

For more information on the LightSAR Payload Technology Alliance visit the LightSAR

Web site, http://southport.jpl.nasa.gov/lightsar/.

2.4 Cost and Contribution

NASA has a goal of accomplishing its LightSAR objectives within the cost constraints

presented in Section 3.1. The successful Proposer to this AO will design, build,

launch, and operate the LightSAR system; process and distribute the acquired image

data and related products; and conduct unique scientific investigations. Proposals

offering cost sharing or the contribution of resources are encouraged.
LightSAR Announcement of Opportunity

14

2.5 Summary

While the objective of this AO is to enable/conduct unique scientific investigations for

NASA’s Earth Science Program as part of the LightSAR Program, the program also

has goals to:

1. Enable U.S. industry to open new markets and create long-term businesses

that will become sustained providers and consumers of valuable science and

commercial SAR data; and

2. Demonstrate advanced technologies that reduce the cost and enhance the

performance of future LightSAR missions.

More information is available at the following Web sites:

NASA Earth Science Enterprise - http://www.earth.nasa.gov

NASA LightSAR Project - http://southport.jpl.nasa.gov/lightsar/
LightSAR Announcement of Opportunity

15

3.0 GUIDELINES, REQUIREMENTS, AND CONSTRAINTS

The following sections describe the constraints, guidelines and requirements of the

LightSAR Program. Specific directions and requirements for proposal preparation are

included in Section 4.

3.1 Constraints

3.1.1 Available Funding

NASA desires the LightSAR mission to be implemented using the low cost, rapid

development approaches pioneered in recent Earth and Space Science missions. To

this end, NASA will limit the NASA funding, or NASA Mission Cost (NMC), of the

mission selected under this AO while seeking the greatest possible scientific return

for the government investment in this program.

Total cost to be addressed in the proposal includes mission management;

spacecraft and instrument definition and development; mission systems integration

and test; launch services; on-orbit operations; in-situ measurements necessary to

enable optimum science return, which may include non-satellite or ground

measurements; applied research investigations; processed data support for NASA

Science Investigations; public and educational outreach support; algorithm

development and data processing; calibration /validation; and data product archiving

and distribution. All civil service or civil service support contractor resources must be

proposed on a full cost basis. Funding currently budgeted for LightSAR development

and operations, including JPL subcontract administration expenses (currently 10.9%

of contract value), is presented below. Funding for NASA Science Investigators

(selected outside of this AO), JPL project management, and JPL coordination of data

requirements for NASA Science Investigators is provided separately (as needed) and

is not included in the budget profile shown below.

NASA funding (as currently budgeted) in real year $M for the mission is:

FY1999 FY2000 FY2001 FY2002 Total

 $5 $20 $31 $26 $82

FY2003 FY2004 FY2005 FY2006 FY2007 FY2008 Total

 $6.3 $8.4 $8.4 $8.4 $8.4 $2.1 $42.0

The nominal launch date assumed in the above funding profile is September 2002.

NASA is prepared to consider adjusting the above funding (profile and/or total) if

suitable justification is provided.

LightSAR Proposers are strongly encouraged to include resource sharing in their

proposals. This will be considered in the evaluation process. Opportunities for

commercialization and private investment may reduce the cost to NASA in
LightSAR Announcement of Opportunity

16

accomplishing mission science objectives. Proposals may include enhancements to

the NASA minimum science mission. In return for cost sharing, NASA will consider

innovative data management approaches that afford protection of commercial

opportunities while maximizing non-proprietary scientific return.

Proposers may include international partners on their teams, as described in Section

3.3.

NASA does not intend to maintain a separate funding reserve for the LightSAR

program. All proposed costs for enhancements to the science mission that exceed

the LightSAR NMC will be borne by the successful Proposer. The combined NMC and

proposing team cost share funding must contain reserves proportional to the project

scope and degree of development risk.

3.1.2 Technical Maturity

The nominal launch date assumed in the above funding profile (Section 3.1.1) is

September 2002. Alternate schedules may also be proposed, including an

accelerated schedule to meet commercial needs. To meet these schedules, it is

recognized that proposed new technology developments may be few, perhaps limited

to necessary developments in the radar instrument and in ground data processing.

Use of new technologies must be consistent with present technical maturity level and

proposed launch schedule. The technology developments required for successful

performance of the LightSAR mission must be identified in the proposal, along with

an assessment of the present technology maturity, the risks involved and alternative

approaches.

3.1.3 Launch Services

The proposal is expected to identify how a launch vehicle and all necessary launch

services will be acquired. NASA seeks to take advantage of all reasonable sources of

domestic commercial expendable launch vehicle (ELV) services, while assuring that

NASA-funded payloads are not exposed to excessive risk. Accordingly, the

demonstrated reliability of the proposed launch vehicle (foreign or domestic), the

programmatic and technical risk associated with the proposed launch service, and

the resultant probability of mission success will be evaluated. At least one successful

prior launch of the proposed vehicle configuration (occurring before the scheduled

LightSAR launch) is considered a minimum demonstration of launch vehicle

reliability.

NASA funds may not be used to purchase a launch service using a non-U.S.-

manufactured launch vehicle.

It is permissible to propose a NASA-provided launch. If a NASA-provided launch is

proposed, it must be on a full cost basis and must be arranged through direct contact
LightSAR Announcement of Opportunity

17

by the Proposer. For proposal purposes, refer to Appendix B for costs/capabilities of

launch services available for a NASA-provided launch.

3.1.4 NASA Science Investigators

NASA Science Investigators are defined as persons conducting basic and applied

research in Earth Sciences under NASA OES sponsorship. The expected scope of

LightSAR-related scientific research is identified in Section 2. NASA Science

Investigators are selected through NRAs, AOs, unsolicited proposals, and similar

means. NASA will take full advantage of the applications research activities that are

currently sponsored by the EOCAP SAR program and will issue future NRAs (funded

separately) for soliciting proposals for applications and scientific data analysis from

this mission.

3.2 Requirements

3.2.1 Minimum Science Mission

The LSWG recommends that the highest priority science objectives, balancing

scientific need and relevance against cost and complexity, are those that can be

accomplished by repeat pass interferometry with an L-band (approximately 24 cm

wavelength) SAR. Although an 8-10 day exact repeat time is desired, the maximum

allowable time between repeat orbits is 30 days. The mission design life is to be five

(5) years. These objectives include seismic and volcanic deformation mapping,

vector ice sheet and glacier velocity mapping, topographic mapping and surface

characterization, and hazard monitoring and assessment. All these primary

objectives are integral to the OES Solid Earth and Natural Hazard strategic plan, are

unique, and have broad multidisciplinary community support. The LSWG also finds

that for the LightSAR mission to provide data to scientists studying the Earth’s carbon

and hydrologic cycles, a polarimetric capability would be required. Specific objectives

to be met here include monitoring forest regrowth, estimating soil moisture, and

estimating snow density. This constitutes the basic Minimum Science Mission and

represents the minimum mission which must be accomplished in the event of a

descope (e.g., to recover from problems without exceeding NMC).

For interferometric SAR observations it is necessary to optimize the wavelength of

operation against temporal decorrelation, instrument sensitivity, and radar brightness

for many surface terrains. It is also necessary to optimize observational strategies for

atmospheric effects, such as propogation delays related to water vapor and the

ionosphere. With years of ERS and Japanese Earth Resources Satellite (JERS) SAR

data acquired, volumes of multi-frequency, multi-polarization SIR-C/X-SAR data

analyzed, and the prospect of new advances from the multi-mode Radarsat

observations, it has become clear that the longer wavelengths such as L-band are

best suited to our identified repeat pass interferometry science measurements,

where the radar return is relatively insensitive to local changes on the surface.

Reduction of SIR-C/X-SAR data show that this wavelength is also a good choice in
LightSAR Announcement of Opportunity

18

polarimetric consideration. L-band multi-temporal and multi-polarization

measurements best provide capabilities to monitor changes in (1) biomass due to

forest regeneration, (2) soil moisture levels, and (3) snow density. Thus, the

fundamental functional requirements for LightSAR specify L-band as the primary

choice of frequency to meet the LightSAR science objectives.

Finally, a wide swath mode (250-500 km) would be required for oceanographic

applications- they would also benefit from dual polarization capabilities (HH and VV).

SAR data provide unique information about Earth’s surface and biodiversity, including

critical data on natural hazards and data for use in resource assessments. SAR

interferometric capabilities, which allow measurement of large-scale surface change

at fine resolution, are required for monitoring surface topographic change and glacier

ice velocity and, in many instances, for generating critical topographic data sets. Many

recent literature citations have documented the contributions of interferometric radar

to studies of earthquake mechanisms and propagation, volcanological hazard

assessment, and refined measurements of the global ice-sheet mass balance.

Analysis of data from the SIR-C/X-SAR indicates that multiparameter (wavelength and

polarization) SAR data can provide accurate land cover classification and forest

growth estimates; biomass estimation; mapping of wetlands; measurements of

snow density, soil moisture, and surface roughness; characterization of oil slicks; and

monitoring of sea ice thickness. While optimal frequencies and polarizations for

these measurements depend on the specific application and, in some cases,

environmental conditions, the more limited multiparameter data set provided by

LightSAR will nonetheless contribute to research in this area.

Proposals may include enhancements to the L-band SAR described herein.

3.2.2 Data Archive

All acquired NASA science data are to be maintained in an easily accessible data

storage arrangement for a period of five (5) years following the end of the LightSAR

mission. The proposal should address how soon after being acquired the data will

be accessible in the archive, and the processing level of the archived data. It will be

required to inform NASA of any contemplated actions that would result in the loss of

science data in the archive in sufficient time for NASA to make alternate

arrangements.

3.3 Guidelines

3.3.1 Teaming Arrangements

LightSAR proposals may contain innovative partnerships. Teaming arrangements

with nonprofit institutions, NASA Centers (including JPL), Federally Funded Research

and Development Centers (FFRDCs), or other national and international agencies
LightSAR Announcement of Opportunity

19

and organizations are encouraged. The Team Leader is defined as the entity that

submits the proposal and signs the contract. If NASA institutional services are

proposed, they must be on a full cost basis and must be arranged through direct

contact by the Proposer.

This solicitation encourages U.S. commercial sector participation in every aspect and

area of the proposed LightSAR mission. Best available commercial processes,

business practices, and technologies are encouraged to optimize the effectiveness of

the project and return best value science to U.S. taxpayers.

3.3.2 Role of JPL

The NASA Headquarters Office of Earth Science (OES) will select the LightSAR

mission. NASA will direct the award of a subcontract by the NASA-Jet Propulsion

Laboratory (JPL) to implement the selected mission. JPL will manage the project for

NASA and coordinate data requirements for NASA science investigators. Therefore,

the successful Proposer and the JPL LightSAR Project Office are expected to work

together as a single, seamless, integrated team committed to a successful mission.

The overall JPL role may be revisited, depending on the cost share and capability of

the selected proposal.

3.3.3 International Participation

Participation by international partners in the LightSAR mission may include, on a noexchange-of-NASA-funds basis, the contribution of all or a portion of the spacecraft,

additional instrument(s), launch services, and/or communications, consistent with

program goals. Any proposed international participation must include the provision

of all requested cost, schedule, and management data in the proposal and

subsequent reviews.

NASA-provided dollars may not be used to fund non-U.S. team members or to

purchase a launch service from a non-U.S. source. However, the direct purchase of

goods and/or services from non-U.S. sources by U.S. team members is permitted.

LightSAR Proposers are advised that international purchases must meet NASA and

Federal regulations and that these regulations may place an additional burden on the

successful Proposer that should be explicitly included in discussions of the

Proposer's cost, schedule, and risk management. Information regarding regulations

governing the procurement of foreign goods or services is provided in Appendix E.

The system design shall be such that non-U.S. ground stations are not essential to

obtain data and/or command/control the LightSAR satellite. If use of non-U.S. ground

stations is proposed, such use must be consistent with any restrictions, or

anticipated restrictions, that may be placed on the proposing team’s remote sensing

space system operating license.
LightSAR Announcement of Opportunity

20

Participation by non-U.S. partners as team members must be endorsed in writing by

these organizations and, where foreign government funding is provided, by the foreign

government involved. All proposals with non-U.S. participants shall include a binding

contractual agreement between the Team Leader and each non-U.S. organization, as

described in Section 4.3. NASA recognizes that these contractual agreements may

dictate that a separate agreement also be reached between a foreign government

and NASA. If necessary, NASA is willing to assist in finalizing such a government-togovernment agreement after selection.

3.3.4 Outreach and Opportunity

Programs that enhance the level of public understanding and awareness of Earth

Science, by mass media, and/ or educational activities with primary and secondary

educational institutions, are strongly encouraged.

Team members shall agree to use their best efforts to assist NASA in achieving its

goal for the participation of small disadvantaged businesses, women-owned small

businesses, Historically Black Colleges and Universities, and other minority

educational institutions in NASA procurements. Investment in these organizations

reflects NASA’s commitment to increase the participation of minority concerns in the

aerospace community, and is to be viewed as an investment in our future.

3.3.5 Additional Instruments

Instruments in addition to the instrument necessary to perform the minimum science

mission may be flown, on a non-interference basis, on the LightSAR spacecraft.

Proposals to add additional instruments which cannot be accommodated within the

NASA cost limit are acceptable only if the funding for instrument development,

integration, operation, and all data processing is provided from another source.

3.3.6 Mission Milestone Reviews

In order to assess progress and to provide NASA with necessary technical and

programmatic insight, the proposed implementation approach should include a

schedule of reviews (see Appendix N) for the entire LightSAR life cycle (Appendix I).

The overall review plan should include a set of mission milestone reviews. Innovative

implementation still requires management accountability. The Team Leader and the

LightSAR Project Office must be accountable to NASA for the success of the mission

and must be prepared to recommend mission termination when, in their judgment,

mission success is not likely within the committed cost and schedule reserves.
LightSAR Announcement of Opportunity

21

4.0 PROPOSAL SUBMISSION GUIDELINES

4.1 General Overview

The following guidelines apply to the preparation of proposals in response to this AO.

The material presented is a guide for the Proposer and is not intended to be all

encompassing. The Proposer shall provide information relative to those items

applicable or as otherwise required by the AO. The required proposal format,

contents and instructions are summarized below. Failure to follow all proposal

format, content and other instructions may result in reduced ratings during the

evaluation process and could lead to rejection of the proposal.

4.1.1 Proposal Instructions

All documents must be typewritten in English, use the International System of units

(SI), and be clearly legible. All cost estimates, including non-U.S. contributions, must

be in U.S. dollars. Submission of proposal material by facsimile (fax), videotape, or

Internet reference is not acceptable. All paper proposals and copies must be

submitted on plain white paper only (e.g., no cardboard stock or plastic covers, no

colored paper, etc.). Photographs and color figures are permitted if printed on

recyclable white paper only. The original signed copy should be bound in a manner

that makes it easy to disassemble for reproduction. Every side upon which printing

appears will be counted against the page limits. In complying with page limits, no

page should contain more than 50 lines of text and the type size should not be

smaller than 12 points. Top, bottom and side margins of at least one inch should be

used. Single or double column format is acceptable.

In addition to the bound paper volumes, the proposal shall also be provided on

diskettes. These diskettes will be used primarily to assist evaluators with searches

for information within the proposal. The actual evaluation will be performed utilizing

all portions of the proposal submitted on paper. Only the text portion plus table and

figure titles need to be provided on the diskettes; tables, figures and any other

material of an essentially graphic nature need not be included. INFORMATION NOT

INCLUDED IN THE PAPER VOLUME OF THE PROPOSAL SHALL NOT BE INCLUDED

ON THE PROPOSAL DISKETTES. If the diskettes are found to include information

which differs from the paper volume or are found to be defective (e.g., non-readable)

the diskettes will be returned to the Proposer and the Proposer shall promptly provide

replacement diskettes. Replacement diskettes will not be considered a late proposal

under NFS 1815.208, Submission, Modification, Revision, and Withdrawal of

Proposals. If necessary to segment the proposal on multiple diskette files either

because of diskette space or other limitations, the files should be as large as

possible and have a logical relationship to the proposal structure.

All information shall be provided on DOS-compatible (version 5.0 or higher), highdensity (1.44 megabytes), 3-1/2" diskettes. All text portions of the proposal shall be
LightSAR Announcement of Opportunity

22

provided in Microsoft Word for Windows format (version 6.0 or earlier) and in ASCII

(DOS) format on separate diskettes.

Three copies of each proposal diskette (all certified as virus-free) shall be provided. A

brief description explaining the diskette file structure, naming conventions used and

any other information that the Proposer feels may be helpful to use these files

effectively for the intended purpose shall be included. These pages do not count

toward the proposal page limit.

4.1.2 Proposal Format

The following requirements pertain to proposal format. The cover page, signature

page(s), table of contents, reference list, personnel information, Executive Summary,

certifications, fact sheet, fact sheet transparency, non-U.S. participant agreements,

Statements of Work, cost spreadsheets and all other required contract documentation

will not be counted against the page limits.

< Cover Page

The cover page must be signed by an official of the team leader’s organization

proposing to NASA who is authorized to commit the organization that is directly

responsible for the proposal and its contents. The cover page must reference the

LightSAR AO title and number and include the full names, signatures, titles,

affiliations, addresses with zip codes, telephone and fax numbers, and electronic

mail addresses of the authorizing official(s); and annual funding requirements for

the mission in real year dollars by Government fiscal year, clearly identifying the

amount requested from NASA and the amount to be contributed by the Proposer.

This cover page should be attached to the front of the proposal.

< Signature Page

A signature page containing the endorsements of the implementing, funding and

sponsoring proposal team member organizations must be forwarded with the

proposal, immediately following the cover page. The signatures shall serve as

endorsements of the proposed mission cost, schedule and implementation as

defined by the proposal, and commit each institution to carry out its proposed

responsibilities for the resources proposed. The signature page must reference

the LightSAR AO title and number and include the full names, signatures, titles,

affiliations, and addresses of the Project Manager, all applied science research

investigators, and lead representatives from every organization represented on the

team (including contributing and non-U.S. members), as well as the authorizing

official from each organization represented on the team who is authorized to

commit that institution to the proposed investigation. In the case of non-U.S.

participants, signatures from the institutional and/or government funding providers

must be included. The authorizing official signatures, phone numbers,

addresses, etc., included on the cover page need not be repeated on the signature
LightSAR Announcement of Opportunity

23

page. Should it not be feasible to have all individuals sign the same sheet due to

time or page constraints, more than one sheet may be used to enable concurrent

signatures. Appendix M, Figure M-5 provides the format to be followed in preparing

the signature page(s).

< Table of Contents

A table that lists the title and page number of the proposal’s major subdivisions

should follow the cover page.

< Executive Summary

The Executive Summary should provide an overview of all aspects of the

investigation. This summary should be presented in five parts reflecting the major

sections of the proposal (Science, Technical, Opportunity, Cost, and

Management). It is recommended that the Executive Summary be constructed by

writing abstracts of each of the five major sections and should serve as the

Introduction and Summary for the proposal. The Executive Summary is limited to a

maximum of 5 single-spaced typewritten pages, without reduction. No foldout

pages are allowed.

< Fact Sheet

A separate one-page summary (“Fact Sheet”) of the proposal shall be included

with the Executive Summary, but is not included in the 5-page limit. This fact sheet

shall reference the LightSAR AO title and number and include the following

information, in order: identity of the team member organizations and their role

and/or contribution; a brief vision statement; a brief statement of applied science

objectives; a brief mission and system concept description; a brief description of

proposed instrumentation; a brief description of how mission and system concept

meets or exceeds minimum science requirements and (if cost sharing is

proposed) a brief description of the market analysis; a brief list of instrument and

spacecraft heritage (if any); the proposed launch service; cost; schedule; and cost/

schedule reserves. Other relevant information, including figures or drawings, may

be included at the Proposer’s discretion. This fact sheet is restricted to one (1)

side of one page of paper. There are no restrictions on the type of paper upon

which the fact sheet is printed (i.e., glossy paper is permitted). In addition, one

transparency (viewgraph) of the fact sheet must be included.

< Proposal Body

The proposal body shall consist of five sections in order: “Science”, “Technical”,

“Opportunity”, “Cost” and “Management”.

The Science, Technical and Opportunity sections together are limited to a

maximum of 100 single-spaced typewritten pages, without reduction, including
LightSAR Announcement of Opportunity

24

illustrations and tables, and may contain no more than 5 foldout pages (28 x 43

cm) (i.e., 11 x 17 inches).

The Cost and Management sections together are limited to a maximum of 35

single-spaced typewritten pages, without reduction, including figures, tables, and

charts. The proposed Statements of Work, contract list of deliverables, any

requested supplemental plans, proposed contractual documentation, and the

requested cost spreadsheets in the designated layouts will not be counted

against the page limit.

The Science, Technical and Opportunity sections must provide a clear description

of the approach to be used in attaining the scientific objectives of the mission, as

well as the educational and/or social benefits and any commercial opportunities

offered by the mission. These sections should contain enough background

information to be meaningful to a reviewer who, although not necessarily a

specialist, is generally familiar with the field.

The Cost and Management sections must provide a clear statement of all costs

associated with the mission, along with the management approach to be used in

attaining the mission objectives.

< Certifications

Certifications required by Federal law are included as Appendices J and K to this

AO and should be appended to the proposal.

4.2 Proposal Content

The following sections describe in detail the content requirements of proposals.

4.2.1 Science

The Science Section shall contain all pertinent information that will allow the scientific

merit of the proposed mission to be evaluated. Both basic and applied science

objectives will be addressed. All of this information is counted as part of the proposal

page limit.

SCIENTIFIC GOALS AND OBJECTIVES - This section shall describe how well the

proposed mission addresses the stated LightSAR science objectives in terms of

mission characteristics, image acquisitions, and instrumentation. The LightSAR

science objectives are identified in Section 2, above.

This section shall also describe how the proposed mission addresses the

Proposer’s applied science objective(s) in terms of mission characteristics image

acquisitions, and instrumentation. The proposed applied science investigation(s)

and/or applications shall be described and justified. This description shall identify the
LightSAR Announcement of Opportunity

25

problem(s) to be addressed, the underlying physics, the required measurement(s),

and the present state of knowledge with respect to the problem(s), including existing

models and observations.

APPLIED SCIENCE TEAM - The Proposer’s applied science/applications team

members should be identified, together with their related area of expertise,

experience, and role in the mission. The minimum number of investigators required

to guide the development of the mission and prepare the necessary algorithms

should be identified.

NATURE OF PROPOSED MISSION - This section shall present an end-to-end

overview of the proposed mission. Note that the detailed mission description is

furnished in the Technical Section, described below.

ANTICIPATED SCIENCE DATA RETURN - This section shall fully describe the

science data to be acquired, processed, and distributed in the course of the mission.

This description shall identify the quality (e.g., resolution, coverage, accuracy, etc.),

and the quantity of acquired data (e.g., average and peak bits/orbit, bits/year,

minutes/orbit and minutes/year, etc.), and the data acquisition spatial and temporal

specifics. The Proposer should demonstrate that the data acquisition capability is

derived from a spatial and temporal analysis that considers a variety of acquisition

scenarios for each operating mode (e.g., including extreme cases, focused

campaigns, etc.) to ensure the science objectives are met.

Proposals should identify the procedures, processes, and tools to be used in

mission planning that will allow conflict resolution, and permit optimum use of

LightSAR resources.

A plan for processing, distributing, and archiving the data should be included that

describes the anticipated format of the final data products, data product generation,

and data product dissemination, and explicitly describes data quality assessment

(i.e., calibration, validation and evaluation) processes. Proposals should address

how the data will be processed in a timely manner to Level 0 and Level 1 standard

data products, which are defined as:
LightSAR Announcement of Opportunity

26

Level Definitions

0 Reformatted raw signal data

1 Processed image data (one-look, complex, multi-look) at full

resolution and reduced resolution, time referenced, annotated

with ancillary information, including radiometric and geometric

calibration coefficients and georeferencing parameters

(ephemeris) computed and placed in a header but not applied to

the image data, and data that has been geometrically resampled

and radiometerically corrected to radar backscatter cross section.

Notes: These are generic definitions. The proposal should provide

more technical definitions. NASA Science Investigators will need both

calibrated and uncalibrated Level 1 products. These products include

single-look, complex, multi-look detected, polarimetric and interferogram

products.

The proposal should describe the algorithms and the theoretical basis for the Level 0

and 1 data processing software to be developed by the Proposer. In addition, the

proposal should describe the approach to producing calibrated data products.

The proposal should address how the data will be distributed in a timely manner.

NASA will consider proposals for any data distribution arrangements that will provide

the NASA Science Investigators with rapid and complete access to the science data.

It may also be required to ship processed data from each scene to multiple NASA

Science Investigators. The proposal should address NASA Science Investigator data

rights; see also Appendix A, Section XII.

If needed to afford protection for potential commercial opportunities arising from a

resource sharing proposal, a data management approach including appropriate data

rights shall be included. The data management approach should address

prioritization of data acquisition (e.g., allocation of SAR “on” time), including the

resolution of conflicts between science and commercial data taking requests.

This section shall also describe the measurements to be made in support of the

applied science objectives in the course of the mission, the observational data to be

returned, and the approach to be used to analyze the data, to achieve the research

objectives. Required data quality (spatial and temporal resolution, coverage, pointing

accuracy, measurement precision, etc.), and quantity (number of bits, images, etc.)

shall also be described. Plans for science validation and correlative measurement,

algorithm development, and data processing and distribution shall be discussed.

The expected results shall be described, and the relationship between the generated

applied science data products and the potential commercial applications discussed.
LightSAR Announcement of Opportunity

27

INSTRUMENTATION - This section shall fully describe the proposed instrumentation

and the criteria used for its selection. Instrumentation performance requirements

should be related to the proposed science measurement objectives described above.

The linkage between the required physical measurements and the proposed

instrumentation should be detailed. A block diagram and an overall functional

description for all instrumentation should be provided, together with a description of

operational scenarios /modes. A summary should be provided of any instrumentation

concept, feasibility or definition studies already performed. An assessment of the

maturity of the instrumentation should be furnished, including design heritage and

existing instruments, breadboards, brassboards, and prototypes. Identify use of

advanced technology and its performance and/or cost benefits for LightSAR and/or

future SAR missions. The technology/ development risks should be described and

the plan to address them. A schedule for instrument development should be

provided. The following preliminary information shall be provided:

< Size

< Mass with margins

< Power with margins (nominal, peak, duty cycle, standby)

< Data rate with margins

< Mechanical, electrical, and thermal layouts

< Ground and on-orbit calibration scheme

< Pointing requirements (knowledge, control, and stability)

< Command and control requirements

< Flight software development plan (use of existing or commercial off the shelf

software shall be identified)

REFERENCES - List all references cited in the Science Section of the proposal. Cited

references should be from the extant literature (i.e., widely available journals, books,

etc.) or available as preprints.

4.2.2 Technical

The Technical Section shall detail the proposed technical implementation of the

LightSAR mission. This section must also detail the expected products and end

items associated with each mission phase (see Appendix I). The team may use its

own processes, procedures, and methods. The use of innovative processes,

techniques, and activities in accomplishing mission objectives is encouraged when

total mission cost, schedule, and technical improvements can be demonstrated. The

experience and qualifications of performing organizations shall be discussed.

MISSION DESIGN - This section shall fully describe the design, development, launch

and operation of the proposed LightSAR mission. Mission design and development,

including systems engineering and requirements flowdown and allocation, shall be

described. Information on the proposed launch service, orbital parameters and a

preliminary mission timeline indicating periods of data acquisition, data downlink, etc.
LightSAR Announcement of Opportunity

28

shall be included. The mission description shall also define the type and source of

communications network interface required.

The rationale that justifies both the cost effectiveness and technical effectiveness of

the mission design shall be described. A "Mission Traceability Matrix" showing how

the proposed mission design is derived from the stated objectives, requirements, and

constraints shall be included. The format of the Mission Traceability Matrix shall be as

shown in Appendix M, Figure M-9. The rationale for the selection of launch vehicle

must be provided. If not NASA-provided, the prior demonstrated flight record and

qualification history of the launch vehicle shall be provided. The proposal shall

identify any innovative features of the mission design that minimize total mission

costs, such as the use of commercial off-the-shelf technology.

SPACECRAFT - This section shall describe the spacecraft design approach,

particularly as it relates to new versus existing hardware and redundant versus

single-string hardware. It shall fully identify the spacecraft and describe its

characteristics and requirements. A preliminary description of the spacecraft design

with a block diagram showing the spacecraft subsystems and their interfaces shall

be included, along with a description of the flight software and a summary of the

estimated performance of the spacecraft. The flight heritage and/or rationale used to

select the spacecraft and its subsystems, major assemblies, and interfaces shall be

described. In addition, an assessment of the technical maturity of each subsystem

and critical component shall be provided. This “Spacecraft Technical Maturity Matrix”

shall define the technology readiness level (as defined in Appendix M, Figure M-1) of

each item, along with a rationale for the assigned rating. The Spacecraft Technical

Maturity Matrix is counted as part of the proposal page limit. The format of the

Spacecraft Technical Maturity Matrix shall be as shown in Appendix M, Figure M-8.

Subsystem characteristics and requirements shall be described to the greatest extent

possible. Such characteristics include: mass, volume, and power requirements;

pointing knowledge and accuracy; new developments needed; spaceflight

qualification plan; and logistics support. Any design features incorporated to effect

cost savings shall be identified. A summary of the resource elements of the

spacecraft design concept, including key margins, shall be provided. The rationale for

margin allocation shall also be provided. Those design margins that are driving

costs shall be identified.

Plans for all phases of software development, including the use of existing (including

"commercial off-the-shelf") software, shall be described. The method planned for

development and validation of flight software shall be addressed.

The method for resolving any major open spacecraft issues, major systems trades,

and technology development planned in Phase B (see Appendix I) shall be

addressed. A schedule for the spacecraft development must be included.
LightSAR Announcement of Opportunity

29

PAYLOAD INTEGRATION - This section shall characterize the interface between the

science instrumentation and the spacecraft. The planned process for physically and

analytically integrating the science payload with the spacecraft shall be described.

Along with a description of the payload layout and configuration, the accommodation

of the science instrumentation by the spacecraft shall be addressed as follows:

< Instrument location constraints

< Mechanical/structural interface

< Field of view, alignment and pointing

< Baffling or other protection

< Thermal environment/temperature limits

< Data collection and storage

< Data processing (onboard and on the ground)

< Telemetry

< Commands

< Timing (clocks)

< Environmental sensitivities (electrical cleanliness, magnetic fields,

contamination, etc.)

MANUFACTURING, INTEGRATION, AND TEST - This section shall describe the

manufacturing strategy to produce and verify the hardware/software necessary to

accomplish the mission. It shall include a description of the main processes/

procedures planned in the fabrication of flight hardware and software development;

use of production personnel resources; incorporation of new technology /materials;

and the preliminary test and verification program.

The approach, techniques, and facilities planned for manufacturing, integration, test

and verification, and launch operations phases, consistent with the proposed

schedule and cost, shall be described. A preliminary schedule for manufacturing,

integration, and test activities shall be included. A description of the planned end

items, including engineering and qualification hardware, shall be included. The use

of any existing test facilities and processes shall be described.

GROUND AND DATA SYSTEMS - This section shall discuss the ground operations

support required for the proposed investigation. The approach to the development of

the ground data system (GDS), including the use, if any, of existing facilities shall be

described. Any mission-unique facilities must be adequately described. Include a

block diagram of the GDS showing the end-to-end concept (acquisition through

archiving) for operations and data flow to the subsystem level. Describe the use of

standards, such as Consultative Committee for Space Data Systems (CCSDS)

recommendations or commercial standards, on the space/ground communications

link. Describe all communications, tracking, and ground support requirements,

including space /ground link spectrum requirements and licensing approach.

Describe the software development approach and its relationship to the flight system

software development.
LightSAR Announcement of Opportunity

30

MISSION OPERATIONS - This section shall describe the planned approach for

managing mission operations and all flight operations support, including mission

planning. A description of the operational phase of the mission shall be included.

Operational constraints, viewing requirements, and pointing requirements shall also

be identified. Describe any special communications, computer security, tracking, or

near real-time ground support requirements, and indicate any special equipment or

skills required of ground personnel.

The acquisition of data and the processing of that data both onboard the spacecraft

and on the ground shall be described. The plan for processing the data after it has

been delivered to the ground shall be discussed, including the method and format of

the data reduction, data validation, and preliminary analysis. The process by which

data will be prepared for archiving shall be discussed.

Specific features incorporated into the flight and ground system design that lead to

low-cost operation shall be identified. The use of any existing mission operations

facilities and processes shall be described, as well as any new facilities required to

meet mission objectives.

4.2.3 Opportunity

This section shall describe the benefits offered by the mission beyond the scientific

benefits brought by obtaining and distributing the desired data. These benefits may

be educational and/or social.

EDUCATIONAL AND PUBLIC OUTREACH - This section shall discuss the degree to

which this investigation will generate educational opportunities and contribute to the

Nation's educational initiatives. The involvement of teachers and/or students in the

investigation shall be documented here, as will any educational activities to be

implemented. Coordination and collaboration with educational institutions shall be

discussed. Activities to enhance the level of understanding and awareness of Earth

Science by the public shall be described.

SMALL DISADVANTAGED BUSINESSES, WOMEN-OWNED SMALL BUSINESSES,

HISTORICALLY BLACK COLLEGES AND UNIVERSITIES, AND OTHER MINORITY

EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS - This section shall describe the opportunities offered

by the mission for small disadvantaged and women-owned small businesses,

Historically Black Colleges and Universities, and other minority educational

institutions. This section shall describe the type and percentage of work, expressed

as a percentage of the proposed total contract price/cost, to be performed by these

entities.

4.2.4 Cost

Proposals submitted in response to this AO must be of sufficient cost detail to enable

NASA to make a fair and reasonable assessment of the NASA Mission Cost (NMC)
LightSAR Announcement of Opportunity

31

and the Total Mission Life Cycle Cost (TMLCC) of the proposed mission. The term

“cost” is defined as dollars actually expended for accomplishment of the mission

during a given time period. Cost differs from “funding”, which is defined in the

Funding Profile section below. The NMC represents the NASA-funded portion of the

mission. The TMLCC is the total amount of resources used to produce the mission;

that is, the NMC plus, if appropriate, all non-NASA-funded contributions. This includes

direct and indirect costs that contribute to the mission, regardless of funding sources.

If cost sharing, dependent on the realization of potential commercial applications, is

part of the proposal, the proposal shall contain a plan that describes how its goals for

LightSAR will be achieved. The plan should address the Proposer’s vision of the

future. The plan must clearly describe the business market, identify the sources of

market data, and identify any assumptions about the market. Describe the impact

and status of any relevant licenses. Most importantly, the financing plan, sources of

funding, and evidence of funding commitment shall be presented. Perceived risk

should be quantified and discussed. Content may follow Proposer’s standard

practices. A brief summary of the complete plan should be included in the proposal

body. The complete plan may be provided as an attachment (not counted against

page limit).

The NMC for a LightSAR mission must include the full cost of all civil service support

to the mission, including applied science research investigators, technical advisors,

facilities, etc., unless contributed by their agency. If contributed, these resources must

be included in the TMLCC.

Direct costs that can be specifically identified with a LightSAR mission include: (a)

salaries and other benefits for employees who work directly on the mission, (b)

materials and supplies used directly in support of the mission; (c) various costs

associated with office space, equipment, facilities, and utilities that are used

exclusively to produce the mission; and (d) costs of goods or services received from

other segments or entities that are used to produce the LightSAR mission.

Indirect costs include resources that are jointly or commonly used to produce two or

more types of products but are not specifically identifiable with any of the products.

Typical examples include labor overheads, material handling, cost of money (COM),

general administration, general research and technical support, security, rent,

employee health and recreation facilities, operating and maintenance costs for

buildings, equipment, and utilities.

Cost estimating procedures shall be based upon generally accepted cost accounting

principles and practices and must be in accordance with the Proposer's approved

accounting system. Additional information on cost principles, procedures and

definitions are found in the Federal Acquisition Regulations (FAR) in parts 30 and 31.

The methods by which the cost estimates are derived shall be described. If an

estimate is based on heritage, the performance and cost parameters that the
LightSAR Announcement of Opportunity

32

proposed system has in common with the previous or existing system shall be

provided. An analysis of the impact of the referenced heritage on the risk of the

proposed mission and on the proposed mission cost estimate shall also be

provided. If cost models are used, a description of the model and the assumptions

used to derive the cost estimates shall be documented. Identify any “discounts”

assumed in the cost estimates for business practice initiatives or streamlined

technical approaches. Describe how these have been incorporated in the cost

estimate.

Copies of applicable forward pricing rate agreements shall be provided. Costing of

Federal Government elements of proposals must follow the agency cost accounting

standards for full cost. If no standards are in effect for the agency, the Proposers

must then follow the Managerial Cost Accounting Standards for the Federal

Government as recommended by the Federal Accounting Standards Advisory Board.

NASA Centers may submit full cost proposals based on the instructions in the NASA

Financial Management Manual, Section 9091-5, Cost Principles for Reimbursable

Agreements.

All costs, including non-U.S. contributions, must be in U.S. Government real year

dollars. Real year dollars are current fiscal year (FY) dollars adjusted to account for

inflation in future years. The inflation rate index provided in Appendix M, Figure M-2

shall be used to calculate all real year dollar amounts unless an industry forward

pricing rate is used and documented. Where cost phasing is requested, the cost plan

shall provide data by U.S. Government fiscal year (October 1 - September 30) for

Phases C/D and E and by Government fiscal quarter for Phase B. Requests for cost

by "Phase" refer to Phases B, C/D, and E as defined in Appendix I. Costs shall be

broken down to the system or subsystem level, as requested, in accordance with the

Proposer’s Work Breakdown Structure (WBS), which shall be included for reference.

Separate Summaries of Elements of Cost by mission phase and Government fiscal

year (fiscal quarter for Phase B) shall be provided at the appropriate WBS level for

each major mission organization (i.e., the applied science research investigators,

each NASA-funded team member, each contributor, and each subcontract exceeding

$500,000) as defined below. In addition, a roll-up Summary of Elements of Cost shall

be provided for each organization. Appendix M, Figure M-3 is provided as a template

for these costs. This format can be expanded to show additional phases and fiscal

years. Major categories of cost shall be provided at the subsystem level for the flight

system and at least the system level for all other items. The value of reserves shall

be included and separately identified by WBS at the system level. A mission level

Summary of Elements of Cost for the total NMC and the total TMLCC, which

represents the total of all separate Summaries, shall also be provided, but need not

be broken down by skill categories, overhead centers, etc.

The Summaries of Elements of Cost shall contain the following direct and indirect

elements:
LightSAR Announcement of Opportunity

33

< DIRECT LABOR HOURS - Show productive hours by individual skill categories

for Phases B, C/D, and E.

< DIRECT LABOR COSTS - The labor costs shall be itemized by skill categories

for Phases B, C/D, and E.

< LABOR OVERHEAD - Overhead shall be itemized by cost centers (engineering,

manufacturing, etc.) for Phase B and as totals by fiscal year for Phases C/D

and E. Rates shall be documented for Phases B, C/D, and E.

< SUBCONTRACTS - Supporting information shall be provided for all

subcontracts exceeding $500,000 for phases B, C/D, and E. This detail shall

include name/address, cost, fee/profit, type of contract, number of quotes

solicited/ received, basis of selection, affiliation with the Prime, type of

business, type of cost and price analysis accomplished, concise basis of

estimate, and basis of selection.

< MATERIALS - Supporting detail for major vendors (exceeding $500,000) in

Phases B, C/D, and E shall include WBS element, fiscal year or quarter,

description, vendor name/address, quantity, and current/proposed unit prices.

Material burden rates shall be documented for Phases B, C/D, and E.

< TRAVEL - Travel shall be summarized as totals for Phases B, C/D, and E.

< OTHER DIRECT COSTS - Other direct costs shall be summarized as totals for

Phases B, C/D, and E.

< GENERAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE (G&A) EXPENSE - G&A expense represents

the institution’s general and executive offices and other miscellaneous

expenses related to business. G&A expense shall be itemized by cost pool for

Phase B and summarized as totals for Phases C/D and Phase E. Rates shall

be documented for Phases B, C/D, and E.

< COST OF MONEY (COM) - COM represents interest on borrowed funds

invested in facilities and is not reimbursable. COM shall be itemized by indirect

pools and overhead centers for Phase B and summarized as totals by fiscal

year for Phases C/D, and E. Rates shall be documented for Phases B, C/D,

and E.

< PROFIT/FEE - Document the basis, rate, and amount of fee for Phases B, C/D,

and E.

< ESCALATION FACTORS - Document the escalation factors used to determine

real year dollars for Phases B, C/D, and E.
LightSAR Announcement of Opportunity

34

In addition to the Summaries of Elements of Cost, the Proposer shall provide the

following mission level information:

< Total costs will always equal total funding at program completion.

< SUMMARY OF COST RESERVES - A time phased summary of cost reserves

shall be presented by Phase for all WBS elements that contain reserve. The

proposed cost by element, the amount of reserve for each element, and the

reserve as a percentage of the TMLCC for each element shall be provided. A

rolled up summary of cost reserves, which represents a total of reserves for all

WBS elements, shall also be provided.

< TOTAL MISSION LIFE CYCLE COST PHASING - Appendix M, Figure M-4 is

provided as a template for the TMLCC phasing by fiscal year. Resources

provided as contributions/investments or cost shares shall be included and

clearly identified as separate line items. This is the only chart where NASAfunded costs and contributions/investments by other partners are presented

together.

< DESCOPE OPTIONS - The cost savings associated with each descope option

presented in the Management Section shall be time-phased and provided for

all mission phases.

< FUNDING PROFILE - Provide a profile of required NASA-funding by fiscal year.

The funding profile is derived from the cost profile that is the basis of the

proposal. The funding for a given fiscal year is determined from the estimated

costs in that year, less the funding carried over from the previous fiscal year,

plus the forward funding needed to cover the costs of the first month in the

following fiscal year, plus the forward funding required for “unfilled orders”.

Unfilled orders refers to long lead items for which funding and costing takes

place in different Government fiscal years. Because of forward funding, costs

will not equal funding in any given fiscal year. Total costs shall equal total

funding at program completion.

A complete cost plan as defined above is required. In addition, a Cover Sheet shall

be provided that contains the level of information contained on a SF1448, Proposal

Cover Sheet (see Appendix G), with entries for (1) Phase B, (2) Phase C/D, (3) Phase

E, and (4) the total mission.

4.2.5 Management

The Management Section shall summarize the management approach and the

facilities and equipment required. This section sets forth the Proposer's approach for

managing the work, the recognition of essential management functions, and the

overall integration of these functions. This section shall specifically discuss the

decision-making process to be used by the team, focusing particularly on the roles,
LightSAR Announcement of Opportunity

35

responsibilities and authority of the proposing team Project Manager (PM) in that

process relative to each of the contributing team member organizations. The

Management Section shall provide insight into the organizations proposed for the

work, including the internal operations and lines of authority, together with internal

interfaces and relationships with NASA/ JPL, other team members, major

subcontractors, and applied science research investigators. It also identifies the

institutional commitment of all team members, and the institutional roles and

responsibilities. The use of innovative processes, techniques, and activities by the

proposing team in accomplishing its objectives is encouraged when cost, schedule,

and technical improvements can be demonstrated.

MANAGEMENT PROCESSES AND PLANS, SCHEDULES AND PROCUREMENT

STRATEGY - This section shall describe the management processes and plans,

schedules, and procurement strategy necessary for the logical and timely pursuit of

the work, accompanied by a description of the work plan. This section shall also

describe the proposed methods of hardware and software acquisition. Specifically, it

shall include the following, as applicable:

< Capabilities that each member organization brings to the team, as well as

previous experience with similar systems and equipment.

< Management processes which the mission team proposes to:

< develop and maintain the hardware and software requirements and

specifications;

< manage and control development progress;

< manage and conduct technology development;

< manage and conduct design;

< manage, review, and control changes to hardware/software, documentation,

etc.;

< manage and conduct mission systems engineering and integration;

< manage and conduct procurement, including long-lead item acquisitions,

make or buy decisions, subcontract management, etc.;

< manage, control, and allocate resources, including reserves;

< manage and conduct the testing and verification programs, including final

checkout and calibration;

< manage and conduct launch operations;
LightSAR Announcement of Opportunity

36

< manage and conduct mission operations;

< manage and conduct a continuous system validation process that

demonstrates flight and ground segment capabilities on an incremental basis

(e.g., through the use of an end-to-end system test bed);

< manage and conduct data processing and distribution;

< coordinate with team members and document agreements;

< provide NASA/ JPL with insight;

< report progress to NASA/ JPL;

< manage the resolution of conflicts impacting the project; and

< manage and conduct proposed applied and/or basic research.

< Specific decision-making process to be used in all aspects of the mission,

including mission descoping and distribution of reserves, and the individual

authorized to make those decisions in such cases.

< Availability of proposed personnel on the team to successfully administer the

mission contract and subcontracts and to technically monitor the implementation.

< A document tree that describes key proposed documentation, including

development schedule and current status of each document.

The mission schedule and workflow should be clearly laid out, including critical path,

schedule margins, deliveries of end items and major interdependencies. The

method for internal review, control, and direction shall be discussed, including

whether or not a form of performance measurement system will be used.

ROLES, RESPONSIBILITIES, AND EXPERIENCE OF TEAM MEMBERS - The roles,

responsibilities, time commitment, and experience of all key personnel must be

described in this section, with particular emphasis placed on the responsibilities

assigned to the Project Manager and other key personnel. In addition, information

shall be provided which indicates what percentage of time will be devoted to the

mission, the duration of service, and how changes in personnel will be

accomplished. (Note: The experience of the applied science research investigators is

addressed in the Science Section and does not need to be included in this section.)

< TEAM PROJECT MANAGER - The role, responsibilities, time commitment, and

experience of the team Project Manager shall be discussed. Provide a

reference point of contact including address and phone number.
LightSAR Announcement of Opportunity

37

< OTHER KEY PERSONNEL - The roles, responsibilities, time commitments,

and experience of other key personnel in the team shall be described.

The management organizational structure of the team must be described in the

proposal. The proposal must identify the teaming approach to be used and describe

the responsibilities of each team member and their contributions to the mission. The

work of these individuals and institutions must be accounted for in the cost element

breakdowns provided in the Cost Section.

Of special interest is the organizational approach and plan for efficient and effective

management of the multi-organizational interfaces between cooperating partners and

team members. Particular emphasis shall be placed on the organizational

relationships of the PM. The capability of the team to respond quickly and effectively to

problems and inter-organizational conflicts must be demonstrated. Proposed lines of

communication and authority must be demonstrated.

The contractual/financial responsibilities and relationships of all team members,

including contributions, must be described. The mechanisms (contracts,

subcontracts, cooperative agreements, memoranda of agreement, etc.) by which

organizations commit to participate as partners on a proposing team must be clearly

identified. Include a description of incentives and fee strategy, where appropriate, and

their rationale. The proposal signature page must include the signature of an official

from each organization represented on the team or contributing to the mission who is

authorized to commit that organization to the proposed mission. Failure to include

any such authorization may be grounds for rejection of the proposal. Non-U.S.

organizations and funding sources participating as team partners must also meet

this requirement.

Information on procurement of long lead items and proposed major and critical

subcontracts, including procurement activities of all team partners, must be provided.

The information shall consist of, at a minimum, name of the item, scope of the work to

be performed, name and location of supplier or subcontractor, proposed award

schedule, deliverable items and delivery schedule, proposed performance assurance

requirements, and contingency plans if a supplier or subcontractor fails to perform.

Describe the relationships and controls you will exercise over suppliers and

subcontractors from both cost and schedule standpoints.

The experience (successes and failures) of team partners in managing projects of

similar scope, including cost and schedule performance within the last ten years

shall be discussed.

COST MANAGEMENT - The specific means by which costs will be tracked, managed

and reported to the Government shall be defined. A Work Breakdown Structure (WBS)

and WBS dictionary, consistent with the plans set forth elsewhere in the proposal,

shall be included. Specific reserves and the timing of their application, if needed,
LightSAR Announcement of Opportunity

38

shall be described within the proposal. This shall include the strategy for maintaining

reserves as a function of cost-to-completion. All funded schedule margins must be

identified. The relationship between the use of such reserves, margins and potential

descope options, and their effect on cost, schedule and performance, shall be fully

discussed.

RISK MANAGEMENT AND DESCOPE OPTIONS - This section shall describe the

approach to, and plans for, risk management to be taken by the team, both in the

overall mission design and in the individual systems and subsystems. Particular

emphasis shall be placed on describing how the various elements of risk will be

managed to ensure successful accomplishment of the mission within cost and

schedule constraints. In the event risks cannot be managed successfully and

mission objectives must be revised, this section shall describe the descope options

and viable contingency options (e.g., additional reserves, etc.) available to the team,

their phasing, and their effect on mission performance. This section shall identify the

latest possible dates at which descope options may be implemented and the

procedure by which they would be accomplished.

MISSION ASSURANCE - This section shall describe the process by which mission

success is assured and achieved. This section shall describe mission assurance

plans, including specific plans for reviews, problem/failure resolution, inspections,

quality assurance, reliability, parts selection and control, and software validation

activities compatible with industry best practices, ISO 9000 quality standards, and the

Mission Assurance Guidelines in Appendix N. A table similar to that shown in

Appendix M, Figure M-6 shall be used to illustrate compatibility of the Proposer’s own

mission assurance processes with the Mission Assurance Guidelines and

Requirements.

SAFETY - This section shall describe the process by which safety standards are met

and hazards mitigated. The mission team member responsible for implementing the

system safety program for the proposed mission shall be identified. Past

experiences of this mission team member in implementing system safety program

from previous missions shall be described. This section shall also describe all

safety plans and practices to be used in mission development. These plans and

practices shall be compliant with the Safety Requirements in Appendix O. This

section shall also address the mission’s compliance with NASA Safety Standard

(NSS) 1740.14, “Guidelines and Assessment Procedures for Limiting Orbital Debris”,

which can be found in the Program Library (see Appendix G).

REVIEWS, AUDITS AND INSIGHT - Propose a schedule of mission reviews (both

NASA/ JPL and internal), including reviews of technical and programmatic status and

any other informal reviews intended to report status and accomplishments, discuss

problems, and provide technical and programmatic information to JPL. Include review

description, content, planned schedule and duration, planned documentation and

schedule for document delivery. The proposed implementation of mechanisms that

will provide NASA/ JPL insight into the mission shall be described.
LightSAR Announcement of Opportunity

39

Describe the audit process from contract award through performance and contract

close-out.

FACILITIES AND EQUIPMENT - All major facilities, laboratory equipment, and

ground-support equipment (GSE) (including those of the team's proposed contractors

and those of NASA and other U.S. Government agencies) essential to the mission in

terms of its system and subsystems are to be indicated, distinguishing insofar as

possible between those already in existence and those that will be developed in order

to execute the mission. The outline of new facilities and equipment shall also

indicate the lead-time involved and the planned schedule for construction,

modification, and/or acquisition of the facilities.

STATEMENTS OF WORK (SOWs) - Provide Statements of Work/Task Plans for Phase

B, Phase C/D, and Phase E covering all aspects of the mission. These documents

shall cover all phases and include, as a minimum, Scope of Work, Deliverables (with

emphasis on science data products), and Government Responsibilities (as

applicable). Example SOWs and Task Plans are available in the Program Library

(see Appendix G).

CONTRACTUAL REQUIREMENTS - In order to expedite mission contract awards,

Proposers are required to propose mission contract terms, conditions and

deliverables. An example specimen contract is available in the Program Library

(Appendix G). If no exceptions are taken, the sample generic contractual documents

will be used as the basis for selected mission contract formulation.

4.3 International Participation

Participation of non-U.S. mission team members is allowed under the guidelines

discussed in Section 3.3.3. Participation by non-U.S. partners as team members

must be endorsed in writing by these organizations and, where foreign government

funding is provided, by the foreign government involved. All proposals with non-U.S.

participants shall include a binding contractual agreement between the Team Leader

and each non-U.S. organization. The agreement must clearly identify the intended

role of the non-U.S. organization, the business relationship with the rest of the team,

the resources being provided, and any data rights agreements. The agreement must

also clearly commit to make available to the partnership, within an identified time that

is compatible with the mission’s proposed milestones, all identified resources upon

selection. Appendix F contains specific language to be included in these

agreements. The documented agreement must be signed by an official with the

authority to commit his/her organization’s resources.

NASA recognizes that these contractual agreements may dictate that a separate

agreement also be reached between a foreign government and NASA. If necessary,

NASA is willing to assist in finalizing such a government-to-government agreement
LightSAR Announcement of Opportunity

40

after selection. If such government-to-government agreements are required, they

must be requested in the proposal.

Non-U.S. institutions providing only applied science research investigators are not

required to submit a formal agreement, but should submit a commitment letter. The

Letter of Commitment must clearly identify the intended role of the organization in the

proposed mission and the resource(s) being provided, and must clearly commit

identified resources to the mission upon selection as the LightSAR mission. The

Letter of Commitment must be signed by an official with the authority to commit

his/her organization’s resources. Letters of Commitment do not count as part of the

page limit for proposals.

4.4 Submittal of Proposals

4.4.1 Certification

The original copy of all proposals shall include a signature page(s) signed by an

institutional official from each organization represented on the team authorized to

certify institutional support and sponsorship of the investigation as well as

concurrence in the management and financial parts of the proposal. This

requirement includes all non-U.S. organizations. Additional certifications identified in

Appendices J and K are required by law and must also be included.

4.4.2 Quantity

All Proposers must provide 35 copies of their bound paper proposal, including the

original signed proposal, on or before the proposal deadline. The proposals must be

numbered sequentially from 1 to 35 in the upper right-hand corner of the cover page;

the original signed proposal should be number 1. In addition to the 35 requested

proposal copies, all Proposers must provide 15 copies of all foldout pages and color

diagrams. The requirements for submittal of diskette copies of the proposal are

defined in Section 4.1.1.

4.4.3 Submittal Address

All proposals shall be mailed to the following address:

LightSAR AO Coordinator

Code Y Phone: 202-554-2775 (for delivery only)

400 Virginia Avenue SW, Suite 700 Fax: 202-554-2970

Washington, DC 20024 Email: oesresponse@hq.nasa.gov
LightSAR Announcement of Opportunity

41

4.4.4 Submittal Deadline

All proposals must be received on or before 4:00 p.m. Eastern Time on May 10, 1999.

Proposals received after the established closing date and time will be treated in

accordance with NASA's provisions for late proposals (NFS 1815.208, Submission,

Modification, Revision, and Withdrawal of Proposals).

4.4.5 Notification

NASA will notify Proposers in writing that their proposals have been received.

Proposers not receiving this confirmation within two weeks after submittal of their

proposals should contact NASA at the address given in Section 4.4.3.

4.4.6 Proposals Involving International Participation

The procedures for submission of proposals with non-U.S. participants are the same

as those for strictly U.S. proposals, as previously outlined in this section. Additionally,

one copy (over and above the copies identified in Section 4.4.2) of any proposal that

includes non-U.S. participants shall be sent to:

Office of External Relations

Code IY, Ref. AO-99-OES-01

National Aeronautics and Space Administration

Washington, DC 20546 U.S.A. Phone: 202-358-0793
LightSAR Announcement of Opportunity

42

5.0 PROPOSAL EVALUATION, SELECTION, AND IMPLEMENTATION

5.1 Evaluation Criteria

The selection of the proposal that best meets the scientific and programmatic

objectives stated in the AO is the fundamental aim of the proposal evaluation process.

The information requested in Section 4 will enable the evaluation panel to determine

how well the proposing team understands the complexity of the proposed mission, its

technical risks, and any challenges which require specific action during Phase B.

This information will also enable the evaluation panel to select the proposal which

best meets all guidelines and constraints, and which addresses all elements viewed

necessary for mission success.

The proposal will be evaluated in a manner that provides emphasis on the science

value of the mission, which will be assessed by integrating the science and cost

evaluations of the mission.

Science value will be rated at approximately the same weight as the combination of

Technical and Opportunity. Technical will be approximately equal in importance to

Management and will be weighted significantly greater than Opportunity.

A general description of evaluation criteria for each of the five proposal sections

follows. The degree to which a LightSAR mission proposal meets the various criteria

will be determined by the evaluators and ratings assigned.

5.1.1 Science Evaluation Criteria

Each proposal will be evaluated for its scientific return, feasibility, risk-managed

incorporation of advanced technologies, resiliency and the probability of success.

Scientific return will be evaluated as to how well the proposed mission addresses the

LightSAR basic science objectives and Minimum Science Mission requirements. The

degree to which the quality and the quantity of acquired data meet the science

objectives will be assessed. In addition, the timeliness of dissemination of mission

data product(s) to the broad user community and the methods to be employed will be

considered. The proposed mission planning procedures, processes, and tools,

including the approach for conflict resolution and the approach to data management

(including appropriate data rights) will be evaluated for their soundness,

completeness and specificity. The overall scientific merit of the proposed applied

science investigations will be assessed, as measured by: the scientific justification of

the proposed investigations, the coherence of the traceability between the proposed

scientific objectives and the measurements required to fulfill these objectives (i.e.,

instrument functional requirements), as well as the traceability between the

instrument functional requirements and the instrument/ mission engineering

requirements. Feasibility will be determined by evaluating the degree to which the

mission will address the stated scientific goals and objectives; the degree to which

the instrument set can provide the necessary data; the basis of scientific
LightSAR Announcement of Opportunity

43

understanding for retrieving the information content of the observations; the adequacy

of any proposed correlative measurements to calibrate and/or validate the

observations; the approach to data quality assessment, production of calibrated

science data products, and external data product dissemination; and the capability of

the proposed system to provide the predicted quality and quantity of acquired data.

The proposed instrumentation will be evaluated for soundness, achievability, and the

feasibility of making the required measurements. The differences in available

descope and contingency options, if any, will be assessed in order to determine the

mission's scientific resiliency in the event that development problems lead to

reductions in scope. Risk mitigation plans will also be considered. Finally, the

probability of success will be determined by considering the experience, expertise,

and organization of the team; the overall risk associated with the science objectives;

and the soundness of the proposed instrumentation.

5.1.2 Technical Evaluation Criteria

The Technical evaluation will consider the adequacy of the proposed approach to

developing all mission elements (e.g., flight segment, ground and data systems,

mission operations, etc.) and executing the mission, as well as the Proposer's

understanding of the processes, products, and activities required. The Mission

Traceability Matrix will be evaluated to assess the derivation of the proposed mission

design from the stated objectives, requirements, and constraints. The technical

approach will be examined in its entirety to ensure that: (1) all elements and

processes are addressed; (2) weaknesses and design issues are understood and

plans for resolution have been identified; (3) fundamental design trades have been

identified and studies planned; and (4) primary performance parameters have been

identified and minimum thresholds established. The overall approach (including

schedule), the specific design concepts, and the known hardware/software will be

evaluated for soundness, achievability, and maturity. The evaluation will consider

proposed technologies, including commercial off-the-shelf technology, their benefit to

the mission and potential risk. Resiliency and margins will be a consideration in the

evaluation. The probability of success will be determined by evaluating the

experience and expertise of the technical organizations and the programmatic and

technical risk associated with the mission design and technical approach, including

the launch service. The Spacecraft Technical Maturity Matrix will be evaluated to

determine the maturity level of the proposed spacecraft design. The reliability and

capability of the launch vehicle will be evaluated. In addition, innovative features,

processes, or approaches will be rewarded if shown to be cost-effective and sound.

5.1.3 Opportunity Evaluation Criteria

The information provided in the Opportunity Section will demonstrate the Proposer's

plans for educational and public outreach programs, and opportunities for small

disadvantaged and women-owned small businesses and minority educational

institutions. Relevance to the current NASA and National strategies will also be

evaluated, as well as the plans for monitoring and assessing progress in these
LightSAR Announcement of Opportunity

44

areas. Educational program activities will be evaluated on their potential impact for

different educational levels. Public information programs will be evaluated for their

potential to excite and involve the public. The extent of participation at the prime or

subcontract level of small disadvantaged businesses, women-owned small

businesses, Historically Black Colleges and Universities, and other minority

educational institutions will be evaluated.

5.1.4 Cost Evaluation Criteria

The information provided in the Cost section will be used to evaluate the adequacy

and realism of the total proposed cost within the constraints established in this AO for

the LightSAR mission. The intent of the cost evaluation process will be to appraise

the total mission cost and determine the overall risk associated with the cost

elements. The basis, heritage and quality of the cost estimates and the probability

that the mission can be achieved within the proposed schedule for the proposed

resources (including NASA funding and contributions/investments) will be assessed.

The same evaluation standards will be applied to NASA-provided and

contributed/invested resources. If resource sharing is proposed, evaluation will focus

on the financing plan, evidence of funding commitment, status of any required

licenses, the potential commercial market, and plans for expanding the market and

creating sustained providers and consumers of SAR data, in order to measure the

viability of the proposed resource sharing plan. Given the risks associated with full-up

end-to-end missions, the adequacy of cost measures to decrease the risk to mission

success will be evaluated. The clarity of the relationship between identifiable

technical and schedule risks and the planning, identification, tracking, and application

of reserves will be assessed.

5.1.5 Management Evaluation Criteria

The information provided in the Management section will demonstrate the Proposer's

plans, processes, organization and personnel for managing and controlling the

development and operation of the mission and will be evaluated on the soundness,

completeness and specificity of the approach and the probability that the

management team can assure mission success. The soundness and

completeness of the approach will be determined by reviewing the organizational

structure (including roles, responsibilities, accountability, and decision making

process), the key personnel, and the processes, plans, and strategies the team will

use to manage the various mission elements (including contributions) and provide

NASA/ JPL insight. Criteria will include clear lines of authority; clean interfaces;

prudent scheduling and cost control mechanisms and review processes;

demonstrated awareness of all necessary management processes, etc. The

probability of mission success will consider, for both NASA-funded and contributing

organizations, the experience, expertise, and commitment of key personnel, as well

as the organizations to which they are attached; past cost performance by the team

leader and major partners on similar missions; the proposed contractual

arrangement between JPL and the mission team as well as between team members,
LightSAR Announcement of Opportunity

45

including contractual performance and incentives; the adequacy of facilities and

equipment proposed for the mission; the adequacy of proposed mission assurance

and safety plans, including compatibility with the Mission Assurance Guidelines and

Requirements and compliance with the Safety Requirements; the adequacy of the

team's approach to risk management, including descoping options; and the

adequacy of the management and control mechanisms. The quality and specificity of

the proposed Statements of Work and other required contractual documentation will

be evaluated to assess the maturity of the mission management approach.

Innovative management processes and plans which are expected to improve

performance and reduce costs will be rewarded.

5.2 Evaluation and Selection Process

Proposals received in response to this AO will be reviewed and selected in

accordance with the procedures stated in NFS 1872.4 as modified by this section.

Evaluation panels, using scientific, technical, management and administrative peers

and experts, will assess the strengths and weaknesses of each proposal and will

provide the NASA Headquarters Office of Earth Science with a summary report.

The scientific and technical aspects of each compliant proposal will be assessed in

accordance with the evaluation criteria in Section 5.1 by individuals who are scientific

peers of the Proposers and technical experts. Concurrently, the implementation

aspects (management, cost, and opportunity) will be evaluated by management, cost

and technical experts. After the individual evaluations, the Science, Technical,

Management, Cost and Opportunity panels will meet to consider the total quantitative

and qualitative aspects of the evaluations in order to integrate the findings of the

individual reviewers. The evaluation panels may also prepare questions requesting

clarification, which will be transmitted to the appropriate Proposers for prompt

response. For purposes of clarification, the panel may request oral proposal

presentations and conduct fact-finding by making on-site visits to the Proposers’

facilities. The panel will provide ten days’ notice of such visits.

After these evaluations, the panels will meet in plenary in order to integrate the

separate panel results. Panel evaluation reports will represent the final product of the

combined evaluation team.

The LightSAR Evaluation Executive Committee, consisting of the Evaluation

Chairperson and the chairs of the individual evaluation panels will, upon

consideration of the reports of the evaluation panels, integrate the science return and

cost evaluations of each proposal to provide an assessment of science value. The

committee will then categorize all proposals in accordance with the category

definitions contained in NFS 1872.4. On the basis of these categorizations and

review and recommendation of the LightSAR Program Office, the Associate

Administrator for Earth Science will select the proposal to be implemented.

Certain key provisions concerning selections are also given in Appendix A.
LightSAR Announcement of Opportunity

46

5.3 Contract Administration and Funding

It is anticipated that JPL will negotiate and award a contract to implement the selected

proposal. A post-selection survey may be conducted by the JPL LightSAR Project

Office to ensure that commitments of equipment, technical resources, facilities, and

letters of agreement between affiliated mission team members reflect the written

proposal, Statements of Work, and other proposed contract documents.
LightSAR Announcement of Opportunity

47

6.0 CONCLUSION

LightSAR is an exciting, innovative approach to accomplishing important Earth

Science investigations in the 21st century. Besides its science, LightSAR offers new

frontiers that will further U.S. national objectives and promote practical applications of

Earth remote sensing. With this Announcement, NASA invites innovative partnership/

implementation strategies to make LightSAR a reality.

Ghassem R. Asrar

Associate Administrator

Office of Earth Science

NASA Headquarters
LightSAR Announcement of Opportunity

A-1

APPENDIX A

GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS AND PROVISIONS

[Per NFS 1872.705-1]

I. Instrumentation and/or Ground Equipment

By submitting a proposal, the investigator and institution agree that NASA has the

option to accept all or part of the offeror's plan to provide the instrumentation or ground

support equipment required for the investigation or NASA may furnish or obtain such

instrumentation or equipment from any other source as determined by the selecting

official. In addition, NASA reserves the right to require use, by the selected

investigator, of Government instrumentation or property that becomes available, with

or without modification, that meets the investigative objectives.

II. Tentative Selections, Phased Development, Partial Selections, and Participation

with Others

By submitting a proposal, the investigator and organization agree that NASA has the

option to make a tentative selection pending a successful feasibility or definition effort.

NASA has the option to contract in phases for a proposed experiment, and to

discontinue the investigative effort at the completion of any phase. The investigator

should also understand that NASA may desire to select only a portion of the proposed

investigation and/or that NASA may desire the individual’s participation with other

investigators in a joint investigation, in which case, the investigator will be given the

opportunity to accept or decline such partial acceptance or participation with other

investigators prior to a NASA selection. Where participation with other investigators

as a team is agreed to, one of the team members will normally be designated as its

team leader or contact point.

III. Selection Without Discussion

The Government reserves the right to reject any or all proposals received in response

to this AO when such action shall be considered in the best interest of the

Government. Notice is also given of the possibility that any selection may be made

without discussion (other than discussions conducted for the purpose of minor

clarification). It is therefore emphasized that all proposals should be submitted

initially on the most favorable terms that the offeror can submit.

IV. Foreign Proposals

See AO Section 3.3.3.
LightSAR Announcement of Opportunity

A-2

V. Treatment of Proposal Data

It is NASA policy to use information contained in proposals and quotations for

evaluation purposes only. While this policy does not require that the proposal or

quotation bear a restrictive notice, offerors or quoters should place the following

notice on the title page of the proposal or quotation and specify the information

subject to the notice by inserting appropriate identification, such as page numbers, in

the notice. Information (data) contained in proposals and quotations will be protected

to the extent permitted by law, but NASA assumes no liability for use and disclosure of

information not made subject to the notice. To prevent inadvertent disclosure,

proposal data shall not be included in submissions (e.g., final reports) that are

routinely released to the public.

RESTRICTION ON USE AND DISCLOSURE OF

PROPOSAL AND QUOTATION INFORMATION (DATA)

The information (data) contained in [insert page numbers or other identification] of this

proposal or quotation constitutes a trade secret and/or information that is commercial

or financial and confidential or privileged. It is furnished to the Government in

confidence with the understanding that it will not, without permission of the offeror, be

used or disclosed for other than evaluation purposes; provided, however, that in the

event a contract is awarded on the basis of this proposal or quotation the Government

shall have the right to use and disclose this information (data) to the extent provided in

the contract. This restriction does not limit the Government's right to use or disclose

this information (data) if obtained from another source without restriction.

VI. Status of Cost Proposals (U.S. Proposals Only)

The investigator’s institution agrees that the cost proposal is for proposal evaluation

and selection purposes, and that following selection and during negotiations leading

to a definitive contract, the institution may be required to resubmit cost information in

accordance with FAR 15.403-5.

VII. Late Proposals

The Government reserves the right to consider proposals or modifications thereof

received after the date indicated, should such action be in the interest of the

Government.

VIII. Source of Space Transportation System Investigations

Investigators are advised that candidate investigations for Space Transportation

System (STS) missions can come from many sources.
LightSAR Announcement of Opportunity

A-3

IX. Disclosure of Proposals Outside Government

NASA may find it necessary to obtain proposal evaluation assistance outside the

Government. Where NASA determines it is necessary to disclose a proposal outside

the Government for evaluation purposes, arrangements will be made with the

evaluator for appropriate handling of the proposal information. Therefore, by

submitting a proposal, the investigator agrees that NASA may have the proposal

evaluated outside the Government. If the investigator or institution desire to preclude

NASA from using an outside evaluation, the investigator or institution should so

indicate on the cover. However, notice is given that if NASA is precluded from using

outside evaluation, it may be unable to consider the proposal.

X. Equal Opportunity (U.S. Proposals Only)

By submitting a proposal, the investigator and institution agree to accept the following

clause in any resulting contract:

EQUAL OPPORTUNITY

During the performance of this contract, the Contractor agrees as follows:

(a) The Contractor will not discriminate against any employee or applicant for

employment because of race, color, religion, sex, or national origin.

(b) The Contractor will take affirmative action to ensure that applicants are employed,

and that employees are treated during employment without regard to their race,

color, religion, sex, or national origin. This shall include, but not be limited to, (1)

employment, (2) upgrading, (3) demotion, (4) transfer, (5) recruitment or

recruitment advertising, (6) layoff or termination, (7) rates of pay or other forms of

compensation, and (8) selection for training, including apprenticeship.

(c) The Contractor shall post in conspicuous places available to employees and

applicants for employment the notices to be provided by the Contracting Officer that

explain this clause.

(d) The Contractor shall, in all solicitations or advertisements for employees placed by

or on behalf of the Contractor, state that all qualified applicants will receive

consideration for employment without regard to race, color, religion, sex, or

national origin.

(e) The contractor shall send to each labor union or representative of workers with

which it has a collective bargaining agreement or other contract or understanding

the notice to be provided by the Contracting Officer, advising the labor union or

workers’ representative of the Contractor’s commitments under this clause, and

post copies of the notice in conspicuous places available to employees and

applicants for employment.
LightSAR Announcement of Opportunity

A-4

(f) The Contractor shall comply with Executive Order 11246, as amended, and the

rules, regulations, and orders of the Secretary of Labor.

(g) The Contractor shall furnish to the contracting agency all information required by

Executive Order 11246, as amended, and by the rules, regulations, and orders of

the Secretary of Labor. Standard Form 100 (EEO-1), or any successor form, is the

prescribed form to be filed within 30 days following the award, unless filed within

12 months preceding the date of award.

(h) The Contractor shall permit access to its books, records, and accounts by the

contracting agency or the Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs

(OFCCP) for the purposes of investigation to ascertain the Contractor’s

compliance with the applicable rules, regulations, and orders.

(i) If the OFCCP determines that the Contractor is not in compliance with this clause

or any rule, regulation, or order of the Secretary of Labor, the contract may be

canceled, terminated, or suspended in whole or in part, and the Contractor may be

declared ineligible for further Government contracts, under the procedures

authorized in Executive Order 11246, as amended. In addition, sanctions may be

imposed and remedies invoked against the Contractor as provided in Executive

Order 11246, as amended, the rules, regulations, and orders of the Secretary of

Labor, or as otherwise provided by law.

(j) The Contractor shall include the terms and conditions of subparagraph 1 through

9 of this clause in every subcontract or purchase order that is not exempted by the

rules, regulations, or orders of the Secretary of Labor issued under Executive

Order 11246, as amended, so that these terms and conditions will be binding

upon each subcontractor or vendor.

(k) The Contractor shall take such action with respect to any subcontract or purchase

order as the contracting agency may direct as means of enforcing these terms and

conditions, including sanctions for non-compliance; provided, that if the Contractor

becomes involved in, or is threatened with, litigation with a subcontractor or vendor

as a result of direction, the Contractor may request the United States to enter into

the litigation to protect the interests of the United States.

XI. Patent Rights

(a) For any contract resulting from this solicitation awarded to other than a small

business firm or nonprofit organization, the clause at 1852.227-70, “New

Technology”, shall apply (suitably modified to identify the parties). Such

contractors may, in advance of contract, request waiver of rights as set forth in the

provision at 1852.227-71, “Requests for Waiver of Rights to Inventions”.
LightSAR Announcement of Opportunity

A-5

(b) For any contract resulting from this solicitation awarded to a small business firm

or nonprofit organization, the clause at FAR 52.227-11, "Patent Rights--Retention

by the Contractor (Short Form)" (as modified by 1852.227-11) shall apply (suitably

modified to identify the parties).

[Per NFS 1852.227-14]

XII. Data Rights

For any NASA contract resulting from this solicitation, the clause at FAR 52.227-14,

"Rights in Data - General" (as modified by NFS 1852.227-14) shall apply (suitably

modified to identify the parties).

[Per FAR 52.219-8 and NFS 1852.219-76]

XIII. Participation Of Small, Small Disadvantaged, And Women-Owned Small

Businesses, And Minority Institutions

Offerors are advised that, in keeping with Congressionally mandated goals, NASA

seeks to place a fair portion of its contract dollars, where feasible, with small

disadvantaged business concerns, women-owned small business concerns,

Historically Black Colleges and Universities, and minority educational institutions, as

these entities are defined in FAR 52.219-8 and NFS 1852.219-76. For this

Announcement of Opportunity, NASA has established a goal of 8 percent for the

participation of these entities at the prime or subcontractor level. This goal is stated

as a percentage of the total contract value.

NASA encourages all offerors to propose to meet or exceed this goal to the maximum

extent practicable and to encourage the development of minority businesses and

institutions throughout the contract period. Offerors will be evaluated on the proposed

goal for participation of the entities listed above in comparison with the 8 percent goal

and on the methods for achieving the proposed goal.
LightSAR Announcement of Opportunity

A-6

[Not Used]
LightSAR Announcement of Opportunity

B-1

APPENDIX B

LAUNCH SERVICES INFORMATION

This appendix provides performance, interface, and cost information for NASAprovided expendable launch services. Launch services acquired from NASA to launch

a LightSAR payload must be managed in accordance with NASA Management

Instruction (NMI) 8610.23.

The Medium-Light Expendable Launch Vehicle (MLELV or “Med-Lite”) launch services

include launch on the Delta 7320, with three strap-on Solid Rocket Motors (SRMs),

and the Delta 7420, with four strap-on SRMs. The Small Expendable Launch Vehicle

Services (SELVS-KSC) launch services include launch on Taurus 2210, with a 92-

inch fairing, Taurus 2110, with a 63-inch fairing, and Pegasus XL vehicles. User’s

Guides for the MLELVs and SELVS-KSC launch vehicles are not currently available.

Figures B-1 and B-2 depict the payload mass capabilities of the available ELVs for

circular orbits of 28.5° and Sun-Synchronous inclinations.

Figures B-3, B-4, B-5, B-6, and B-7 depict the payload fairing envelopes of the Delta,

Taurus and Pegasus XL launch vehicles. The Taurus envelopes include sample

envelopes (A, B1, and B2) for a generic payload to which the LightSAR payload is not

constrained; the static envelope may be used.

Figure B-8 is a schedule of typical launch service activities. Standard NASA launch

service contracts provide for payload/ launch vehicle integration, analysis, and postflight mission data evaluation. NASA also provides payload processing at the launch

site, technical oversight of the launch vehicles, mission unique launch vehicle

modifications, and coordination of mission-specific integration activities, as well as

NASA contract administration, technical and mission support, and launch service

contract oversight.

Table B-1 shows the annual funding required to perform a typical mission for each

launch service. Funding estimates are in real year dollars and assume a fiscal year

2002 launch. Costs for launches after 2002 may be calculated by applying the

inflation indices in Appendix M, Figure M-2. Any cost penalties associated with

payload caused launch delays are not included in this estimate.

Additional information about NASA-provided launch services may be obtained from

Frank Stone e-mail: StoneFS@kscgws00.ksc.nasa.gov

Advance Mission Integration Manager Phone: 407-476-3625

Mail Code VB-B2, NASA FAX: 407-853-4357

Kennedy Space Center, FL 32899
LightSAR Announcement of Opportunity

B-2

Launch Service Mass Capability

Circular Orbit

Altitude (km)

0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200

Spacecraft Mass (kg)

1400

1600

1800

2000

2200

2400

2600

2800

3000

3200

NOTE:

196 deg WR Launch Azimuth

PAF: 6019 => 70.31 kg

7320-10C

28.5 incl.

7320-10C

Sun-synch

7420-10C

28.5 incl.

7420-10C

Sun-synch

Figure B-1. MLELV Payload Mass Capability for Circular Orbits
LightSAR Announcement of Opportunity

B-3

Figure B-2. SELVS-KSC Payload Mass Capability for Circular Orbits

Figure B-2. SELVS-KSC Payload Mass Capability for Circular Orbits

Launch Service Mass Capability

Circular Orbit

Altitude (km)

0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000 2200 2400

Spacecraft Mass (kg)

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

Pegasus XL 

28.5 incl.

Pegasus XL

Sun-synch

Taurus 2110

28.5 incl. (CCAS)

Taurus 2210

28.5 incl. (CCAS)

Taurus 2110

Sun_synch (NVAFB)

Taurus 2210

Sun-synch (NVAFB)
LightSAR Announcement of Opportunity

B-4

Figure B-3. Payload Envelope, MLELV 3m (10ft) Diameter Fairing
LightSAR Announcement of Opportunity

B-5
LightSAR Announcement of Opportunity

B-6

Figure B-6. Pegasus XL Payload Fairing Static Envelope with 38.810” Diameter

Payload Interface
LightSAR Announcement of Opportunity

B-7

Figure B-7. Pegasus Payload Fairing Static Envelope with 23.250” Diameter

Payload Interface
LightSAR Announcement of Opportunity

B-8

Weeks

Agency Milestones 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0

Spacecraft Spacecraft

Questionnaire

L-104 Launch

Spacecraft Spacecraft Dynamics

Mathematical Model

 L-90 Initial L-48 Final

Spacecraft Spacecraft Environ.

Test Document

 L-84

Launch

Vehicle

Mission Specification L-84 Initial

Spacecraft Spacecraft Drawings L-78 Initial L-44 Final

Launch

Vehicle

Coupled Dynamic

Loads Analysis

 L-68 Initial L-26 Final

Spacecraft Pre-Launch Safety

Package

 L-58

Spacecraft Mission Analysis

Inputs

 L-54 Prelim L-38 Final

Spacecraft S/C Program

Requirements Doc.

 L-52

Launch

Vehicle

Mission Analysis

Report

 L-44 Prelim L-28 Final

Spacecraft Spacecraft Launch

Site Procedures

 L-18

Figure B-8. Typical Mission Integration Activities

Table B-1. Launch Service Costs Summary ($ in Millions)

LAUNCH SERVICE FY’00 FY’01 FY’02 FY ‘03

TOTAL

COST

SELVS-KSC

Pegasus

Under

Review

Under

Review

Under

Review

Under

Review

Under

Review

SELVS-KSC

Taurus

Under

Review

Under

Review

Under

Review

Under

Review

Under

Review

MED-LITE

Delta 7320-10

Under

Review

Under

Review

Under

Review

Under

Review

Under

Review

MED-LITE

Delta 7420-10

Under

Review

Under

Review

Under

Review

Under

Review

Under

Review

NOTE: Assumes a Fiscal Year 2002 launch, in real year dollars.
LightSAR Announcement of Opportunity

C-1

APPENDIX C

[Not Used]
LightSAR Announcement of Opportunity

C-2

[Not Used]
LightSAR Announcement of Opportunity

D-1

APPENDIX D

[Not Used]
LightSAR Announcement of Opportunity

D-2

[Not Used]
LightSAR Announcement of Opportunity

E-1

APPENDIX E

REGULATIONS GOVERNING PROCUREMENT OF

FOREIGN GOODS OR SERVICES

The following Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) clauses apply to the purchase of

foreign goods and services and may be included in contracts resulting from this

Announcement of Opportunity:

FAR 52.225-1 Buy American Certificate (Dec 1989)

FAR 52.225-3 Buy American Act -- Supplies (Jan 1994)

FAR 52.225-7 Balance of Payments Program (Apr 1984)

FAR 52.225-8 Buy American Act -- Trade Agreements -- Balance of Payments

Program Certificate (Jan 1994)

FAR 52.225-9 Buy American Act -- Trade Agreements -- Balance of Payments

Program (Jan 1994)

FAR 52.225-10 Duty-Free Entry (Apr 1984)

FAR 52.225-11 Restrictions on Certain Foreign Purchases (Aug 1998)

FAR 52.225-18 European Union Sanction for End Products (Jan 1996)

FAR 52.225-19 European Union Sanction for Services (Jan 1996)

FAR 52.225-21 Buy American Act -- North American Free Trade Agreement

Implementation Act -- Balance of Payments Program (Jan 1997)

The Proposer is directed to the Federal Acquisition Regulation for further information

on these regulations.
LightSAR Announcement of Opportunity

E-2

[Not Used]
LightSAR Announcement of Opportunity

F-1

APPENDIX F

ELEMENTS TO BE INCLUDED IN ARRANGEMENTS BETWEEN U.S.

PROPOSAL TEAM LEADERS AND COOPERATING FOREIGN PARTIES

The following elements should be included in arrangements between the proposing

team leader and foreign Parties contributing to or cooperating in activities under the

LightSAR Announcement of Opportunity.

SCIENCE DATA RIGHTS

Unless otherwise agreed between NASA and the selected LightSAR Proposal Team

Leader, all science data resulting from this cooperative activity will be made available

to all users without restriction at no more than the cost of dissemination, through

appropriate data archives in the United States and [ foreign country ]. In the

event that reports or publications based upon this data are copyrighted, the Parties

and NASA shall have a right under the copyright to reproduce, prepare derivative

works from, perform, display, and distribute copies of such copyrighted work for their

own purposes royalty-free.

EXCHANGE OF TECHNICAL DATA AND GOODS

The Parties are obligated to transfer only those technical data (including software)

and goods necessary to fulfill their respective responsibilities under this agreement,

in accordance with the following provisions:

1. The transfer of technical data for the purpose of discharging the Parties’

responsibilities with regard to interface, integration, and safety shall normally be

made without restriction, except as required by national laws and regulations

relating to export control or the control of classified data. If design, manufacturing,

and processing data and associated software, which is proprietary but not export

controlled, is necessary for interface, integration, or safety purposes, the transfer

shall be made and the data and associated software shall be appropriately

marked. Nothing in this article requires the Parties to transfer goods or technical

data contrary to national laws and regulations relating to export control or control of

classified data.

2. All transfers of proprietary technical data and export-controlled goods and technical

data are subject to the following provisions. In the event a Party finds it necessary

to transfer goods which are subject to export control or technical data which is

proprietary or subject to export controls, and for which protection is to be

maintained, such goods shall be specifically identified and such technical data

shall be marked with a notice to indicate that they shall be used and disclosed by

the receiving Party and its related entities (e.g., contractors and subcontractors)

only for the purposes of fulfilling the receiving Party’s responsibilities under the
LightSAR Announcement of Opportunity

F-2

programs implemented by this Agreement, and that the identified goods and

marked technical data shall not be disclosed or retransferred to any other entity

without the prior written permission of the furnishing Party. The receiving Party

agrees to abide by the terms of the notice, and to protect any such identified goods

and marked technical data from unauthorized use and disclosure, and also

agrees to obtain these same obligations from its related entities prior to the

transfer.

3. All goods, marked proprietary data, and marked or unmarked technical data

subject to export control, which are transferred under this Agreement, shall be

used by the receiving Party exclusively for the purposes of the programs

implemented by this Agreement.

LIABILITY

If the successful proposing team has elements of foreign cooperative activity, a crosswaiver of liability may be required at the appropriate time.
LightSAR Announcement of Opportunity

G-1

APPENDIX G

CONTENTS OF THE PROGRAM LIBRARY

Virtual library of the LightSAR program comprises various sites and links on the World

Wide Web, as listed below.

Current versions of NASA directives may be obtained from URL

http://nodis.hq.nasa.gov

Current versions of NASA technical standards may be obtained from URL

http://standards.nasa.gov

Earth Science Enterprise Strategic Plan is available at URL

http://www.earth.nasa.gov/visions/stratplan/indet.html

Federal Acquisition Regulations (FARs) are available at URL

http://www.arnet.gov/far/

LightSAR Science Requirements and Mission Enhancements document is at URL

http://southport.jpl.nasa.gov/lightsar/

NASA FAR Supplements (NFSs) are available at URL

http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/procurement/regs/nfstoc.htm

NASA Financial Management Manual is accessible at URL

http://www.hq.nasa.gov/fmm/

Samples of contractual documents cited in the basic AO are available at URL

http://essp.gsfc.nasa.gov/essplib/

http://southport.jpl.nasa.gov/lightsar/specimen_contract.htm
LightSAR Announcement of Opportunity

G-2

[Not Used]
LightSAR Announcement of Opportunity

H-1

APPENDIX H

AO ACRONYMS

AO Announcement of Opportunity

AMM Antarctic Mapping Mission

ASCII American Standard Code for Information Interchange

CCSDS Consultative Committee for Space Data Systems

CDR Critical Design Review

COM Cost of Money

CRSP Commercial Remote Sensing Program

CVCM Collected Volatile Condensable Mass

DOS Disk Operating System

DPA Destructive Physical Analysis

EEE Electrical, Electronic, and Electro-Mechanical

EEO Equal Employment Opportunity

ELV Expendable Launch Vehicle

EOCAP Earth Observations Commercial Applications Program

EOS Earth Observing System

ERS European Remote-sensing Satellite

ESE Earth Science Enterprise

ESSP Earth System Science Pathfinder

FAR Federal Acquisition Regulation

Fax Facsimile

FFRDC Federally Funded Research and Development Center

FMEA Failure Modes and Effects Analysis

FY Fiscal Year

G&A General and Administrative

GDS Ground Data System

GIDEP Government Industry Data Exchange Program

GLAS Geoscience Laser Altimeter System

GPS Global Positioning System

GRACE Gravity Recovery and Climate Experiment mission

GSE Ground Support Equipment

GSFC Goddard Space Flight Center

HH Horizontal linear polarized beam transmitted and received

IPCC Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change

ISO International Organization for Standardization

JERS Japanese Earth Resources Satellite

JPL Jet Propulsion Laboratory

KSC Kennedy Space Center

Landsat Visible/near visible band Earth-imaging series of satellites

LightSAR Lightweight Synthetic Aperture Radar

LSWG LightSAR Science Working Group

LRR Launch Readiness Review

MLELV Medium-Light Expendable Launch Vehicle
LightSAR Announcement of Opportunity

H-2

MODIS Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectrometer

MRR Mission Readiness Review

MTPE Mission To Planet Earth (now known as Earth Science Enterprise)

NASA National Aeronautics and Space Administration

NFS NASA FAR Supplement

NHB NASA Handbook

NMC NASA Mission Cost

NOI Notice of Intent

NPD NASA Policy Directive

NRA NASA Research Announcement

NRC National Research Council

NSS NASA Safety Standard

OAR Operational Acceptance Review

OES Office of Earth Science

OFCCP Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs

PAF Payload Attach Fitting

PDR Preliminary Design Review

PER Pre-Environmental Review

PM Project Manager

Radarsat C-band imaging radar satellite of the Canadian Space Agency

SAR Synthetic Aperture Radar

SE Support Equipment

SELV Small Expendable Launch Vehicle

SELVS Small Expendable Launch Vehicle Services

SF Standard Form

SI International System of Units

SIR-C Shuttle Imaging Radar - C

SOMO Space Operations Management Office

SOW Statement of Work

SRR System Requirements Review

SRM Solid Rocket Motor

SSC John C. Stennis Space Center

TML Total Mass Loss

TMLCC Total Mission Life Cycle Cost

TRL Technology Readiness Level

URL Universal Resource Locator

USGCRP U.S. Global Change Research Program

VCL Vegetation Canopy Lidar Mission

VV Vertical linear polarized beam transmitted and received

WBS Work Breakdown Structure

WTR Western Test Range

WWW World Wide Web

X-SAR X-band Synthetic Aperture Radar
LightSAR Announcement of Opportunity

I-1

APPENDIX I

GLOSSARY OF TERMS

NASA MISSION COST

That portion of the proposed mission cost to be funded by NASA, including full costing

of non-contributed civil service resources.

PHASE B

Project Formulation period that includes definition and preliminary design.*

PHASE C/D

Project Implementation period that includes detail design and development, mission

launch, and operational validation.*

Phase E

Project Implementation period that includes mission operations, data collection,

processing, distribution, and archiving.*

SCIENCE RETURN

The combination of the proposed mission’s relevance to the science priorities, goals

and objectives of the Earth Science Enterprise and LightSAR Program; overall

scientific merit; and quality, quantity, relevance and timeliness of deliverable science

data products.

SCIENCE VALUE

An assessment of the relationship between science return and the proposed NASA

Mission Cost.

TOTAL MISSION LIFE CYCLE COST

The total proposed mission cost, which is the sum of the NASA Mission Cost and all

contributions from the selected proposal Team partners.

*Note: Phase B/C/D/E notation, referring to a calendar sequence of project milestones

defined in the now-superceded NHB7120.5, is retained only for cost estimation

consistency in AO proposals.
LightSAR Announcement of Opportunity

I-2

[Not Used]
LightSAR Announcement of Opportunity

J-1

APPENDIX J

CERTIFICATION REGARDING

DEBARMENT, SUSPENSION, AND OTHER RESPONSIBILITY MATTERS

PRIMARY COVERED TRANSACTIONS

This certification is required by the regulations implementing Executive Order 12549,

Debarment and Suspension, 14 CFR Part 1265.

A. The applicant certifies that it and its principals:

(a) Are not presently debarred, suspended, proposed for debarment, declared ineligible, or

voluntarily excluded from covered transactions by any Federal department or agency;

(b) Have not within a three-year period preceding this application been convicted or had a

civil judgment rendered against them for commission of fraud or a criminal offense in

connection with obtaining, attempting to obtain, or performing a public (Federal, State, or

Local) transaction or contract under a public transaction; violation of Federal or State

antitrust statutes or commission of embezzlement, theft, forgery, bribery, falsification or

destruction of records, making false statements, or receiving stolen property;

(c) Are not presently indicted for or otherwise criminally or civilly charged by a government

entity (Federal, State, or Local) with commission of any of the offenses enumerated in

paragraph A.(b) of this certification;

(d) Have not within a three-year period preceding this application/proposal had one or more

public transactions (Federal, State, or Local) terminated for cause or default; and

B. Where the applicant is unable to certify to any of the statements in this certification, he or she

shall attach an explanation to this application.

C. Certification Regarding Debarment, Suspension, Ineligibility and Voluntary Exclusion -

Lowered Tier Covered Transactions (Subgrants or Subcontracts)

(a) The prospective lower tier participant certifies, by submission of this proposal, that neither it

nor its principles is presently debarred, suspended, proposed for debarment, declared

ineligible, or voluntarily excluded from participation in this transaction by any federal

department of agency.

(b) Where the prospective lower tier participant is unable to certify to any of the statements in

this certification, such prospective participant shall attach an explanation to this proposal.

Organization Name AO Number and Title

Printed Name and Title of Authorized Representative

Signature Date

Printed Proposal Team Leader Name Proposal Title
LightSAR Announcement of Opportunity

J-2

[Not Used]
LightSAR Announcement of Opportunity

K-1

APPENDIX K

CERTIFICATION REGARDING LOBBYING

As required by S1352 Title 31 of the U.S. Code for persons entering into a grant or cooperative

agreement over $100,000, the applicant certifies that:

(a) No Federal appropriated funds have been paid or will be paid by or on behalf of the

undersigned, to any person for influencing or attempting to influence an officer or

employee of any agency, a Member of Congress, in connection with making of any

Federal grant, the entering into of any cooperative, and the extension, continuation,

renewal, amendment, or modification of any Federal grant or cooperative agreement;

(b) If any funds other than Federal appropriated funds have been paid or will be paid to any

person for influencing or attempting an officer or employee of any agency, Member of

Congress, or an employee of a Member of Congress in connection with this Federal

grant or cooperative agreement, the undersigned shall complete Standard Form - LLL,

"Disclosure Form to Report Lobbying," in accordance with its instructions.

(c) The undersigned shall require that the language of this certification be included in the

award documents for all subawards at all tiers (including subgrants, contracts under

grants and cooperative agreements, and subcontracts), and that all subrecipients shall

certify and disclose accordingly.

This certification is a material representation of fact upon which reliance was placed when this

transaction was made or entered into. Submission of this certification is a prerequisite for making

or entering into this transaction imposed by S1352, Title 31, U.S. Code. Any person who fails to

file the required certification shall be subject to a civil penalty of not less than $10,000 and not

more than $100,000 for each such failure.

Organization Name AO Number and Title

Printed Name and Title of Authorized Representative

Signature Date

Printed Proposal Team Leader Name Proposal Title
LightSAR Announcement of Opportunity

K-2

[Not Used]
LightSAR Announcement of Opportunity

L-1

APPENDIX L

[Not Used]
LightSAR Announcement of Opportunity

L-2

[Not Used]
LightSAR Announcement of Opportunity

M-1

APPENDIX M

CHARTS AND TEMPLATES

Technology Definitions

Technology Readiness Levels (TRL), Research vs. Development, Relevant Cross-cutting Processes

Produce Aerospace Products and Capabilities Process (Development)

Generate Knowledge Process (Research)

LEVEL 1 BASIC PRINCIPLES OBSERVED AND 

REPORTED

LEVEL 2 TECHNOLOGY CONCEPT AND/OR APPLICATION FORMULATED

LEVEL 3 ANALYTICAL & EXPERIMENTAL CRITICAL FUNCTION AND/OR

CHARACTERISTIC PROOF-OF-CONCEPT

LEVEL 4 COMPONENT AND/OR BREADBOARD VALIDATION IN

LABORATORY ENVIRONMENT

LEVEL 5 COMPONENT AND/OR BREADBOARD VALIDATION IN

RELEVANT ENVIRONMENT

LEVEL 6 SYSTEM/SUBSYSTEM MODEL OR PROTOTYPE DEMONSTRATION

IN A RELEVANT ENVIRONMENT (Ground or Space)

LEVEL 7 SYSTEM PROTOTYPE DEMONSTRATION IN A SPACE

ENVIRONMENT

LEVEL 8 ACTUAL SYSTEM COMPLETED AND "FLIGHT QUALIFIED"

THROUGH TEST AND DEMONSTRATION (Ground or Space)

LEVEL 9 ACTUAL SYSTEM "FLIGHT PROVEN" THROUGH SUCCESSFUL

MISSION OPERATIONS

Basic Technology

Research

Research To

Prove Feasibility

Technology

Development

Technology

Demonstration

System/Subsystem

Development

System Test, Launch

and Operations

Figure M-1. Technology Readiness Level Definitions

Fiscal Year Inflation Rate

FY 1999 3.8%

FY 2000 4.1%

FY 2001 3.9%

FY 2002 3.9%

FY 2003 3.9%

FY 2004 3.9%

FY 2005 3.9%

FY 2006 and Outyears 3.9%

Figure M-2. NASA Inflation Index
LightSAR Announcement of Opportunity

M-2

SUMMARY OF ELEMENTS OF COST

(BY PHASE, FISCAL YEAR AND WBS LEVEL)

 PHASE

FY/Quarter FY/Quarter Total

Base Rate Cost Base Rate Cost Cost

Direct Labor

 Labor Hours:

 (by skill categories)

TOTAL HOURS

 Labor Costs ($):

 (by skill categories)

TOTAL DIRECT LABOR COSTS

Overhead (%, $)

 (by cost centers)

Subcontracts

Materials

Material Burdens (%, $)

Travel

Other Direct Costs

SUBTOTAL

G&A Expense (%, $)

 (by cost pools)

SUBTOTAL

Cost of Money (%, $)

 (by indirect pools & overhead centers)

Profit/Fee (%, $)

TOTAL COST PLUS FEE

* This exhibit can be used for all Phases and WBS levels.

Figure M-3. Summary Of Elements Of Cost
LightSAR Announcement of Opportunity

M-3

TOTAL MISSION LIFE CYCLE COST PHASING

Total

 Item FY1 FY2 FY3 FY4 FY5 ....... FYn Real Yr $

 Phase B $ $ $

 Phase C/D $ $ $ $ $ $ $

 Phase E $ $ $ $ $ $ $

 Launch Services $ $ $ $ $ $ $

 Ground System $ $ $ $ $ $ $

 Other (specify) $ $ $ $ $ $ $

 Other $ $ $ $ $ $ $

 Reserves $ $ $ $ $ $ $

 Total Cost to NASA $ $ $ $ $ $ $

Additional Contributions

by Organization (U.S. or

non-U.S.) to:

 Total Phase B $ $ $ $ $ $ $

 - Organization A

 - Organization B

 Total Phase C/D $ $ $ $ $ $ $

 - Organization A

 - Organization B

 Total Phase E $ $ $ $ $ $ $

 - Organization A

 - Organization B

 Launch Services Costs $ $ $ $ $ $ $

 - Organization A

 Ground System $ $ $ $ $ $ $

 - Organization A

 - Organization B

 Other $ $ $ $ $ $ $

 Contributed Costs $ $ $ $ $ $ $

 Total

Mission Totals $

Figure M-4. Total Mission Life Cycle Cost Phasing
LightSAR Announcement of Opportunity

M-4

Mission: LightSAR Announcement of Opportunity, AO-99-OES-01

Project Manager: __________(signature)___________ _________

Proposal Team Name Date

Leader Title, Affiliation, Address

Authorizing Official: __________(signature)___________ _________

Proposal Team Name Date

Leader Title, Affiliation, Address

Lead Representative: __________(signature)___________ _________

Proposal Team Name Date

Member “A” Title, Affiliation, Address

Authorizing Official: __________(signature)___________ _________

Proposal Team Name Date

Member “A” Title, Affiliation, Address

Lead Representative: __________(signature)___________ _________

Proposal Team Name Date

Member “B” Title, Affiliation, Address

Authorizing Official: __________(signature)___________ _________

Proposal Team Name Date

Member “B” Title, Affiliation, Address

Investigator: __________(signature)___________ _________

Proposal Team Name Date

Member “C” Title, Affiliation, Address

Authorizing Official: __________(signature)___________ _________

Proposal Team Name Date

Member “C” Title, Affiliation, Address

Investigator: __________(signature)___________ _________

Proposal Team Name Date

Member “D” Title, Affiliation, Address

Authorizing Official: __________(signature)___________ _________

Proposal Team Name Date

Member “D” Title, Affiliation, Address

Figure M-5. Sample Signature Page
LightSAR Announcement of Opportunity

M-5

Mission Assurance Element Check all

that

apply

Applicable Plan,

Document, Review or

Program

1. Mission Assurance Program

2.1 Quality System

 

2.2 Standards 

2.3 Non-Conformance Reporting 

2.4 Operating Time

3. Reviews

 

 System Requirements Review 

 Preliminary Design Review 

 Critical Design Review 

 Pre-Environmental Test Review 

 Mission Readiness Review 

 Launch Readiness Review

 Operational Acceptance Review

 

 Annual Operation Reviews

4.1 Parts Program

 

4.2 Materials and Processes Program 

4.3 Reliability Program 

4.4 Software Development Program 

5. Verification Program 

6. Contamination Control Program 

 

Figure M-6. Mission Assurance Compatibility Table
LightSAR Announcement of Opportunity

M-6

[Not Used]

Figure M-7. Science Traceability Matrix

Name of

Hardware Item

Item Description Maturity Level Rationale for

Maturity

Assessment

 

 

 

 

Figure M-8. Technical Maturity Matrix

Science

Measurement

Requirement

Mission

Requirement

Instrument

Requirement

Spacecraft

Requirement

Ground

System

Requirement

Operations

Requirement

 

Figure M-9. Mission Traceability Matrix
LightSAR Announcement of Opportunity

N-1

APPENDIX N

MISSION ASSURANCE GUIDELINES AND REQUIREMENTS

1. INTRODUCTION

The purpose of this document is to establish requirements and guidelines for the

Proposer in developing and implementing an appropriate mission assurance

program. Each section of this document contains high-level requirements and a

series of guidelines for implementing these requirements. These guidelines can be

tailored to meet the specific needs of the proposed mission and each team

member’s internal processes, but must meet the intent of each requirement.

The Proposer shall develop and implement an appropriate mission assurance

program in accordance with standard aerospace industry practices and the specific

needs of the mission. The Proposer, together with the LightSAR Project Office, will

continually review and verify the proper implementation of this mission assurance

program.

2. MISSION ASSURANCE

2.1 Quality System

The Proposer shall define and implement a quality system based on ANSI/ASQC

Q9001-1994 that meets the intent of ISO 9001. The Proposer’s quality system shall

encompass all LightSAR flight hardware, flight software and ground support

equipment development, as well as mission operations for flight hardware, software,

ground support equipment and operations. This quality system shall be described in

a product assurance requirements document and plan for the LightSAR project.

2.2 Standards

The Proposer shall impose NASA and industry design and development standards that

help assure that the required mission lifetime and performance are met in the expected

environments.

2.3 Non-Conformance Reporting

The Proposer shall utilize a reporting system for problems, failures and nonconformances. They may use their own system or the JPL web-based problem

reporting system. At a minimum, each report shall document the problem, failure, or

non-conformance description, verification of cause, and corrective action. Nonconformance reporting guidelines and requirements are summarized in Table 2.3-1.
LightSAR Announcement of Opportunity

N-2

Table 2.3-1. Non-Conformance Reporting Guidelines/ Requirements

HARDWARE/SOFTWARE

AFFECTED

DEVELOPMENTAL

PROBLEM LOG

FORMAL NON-CONFORMANCES

Engineering Models

(Electronic)

Not required* Starting with qualification

environmental testing

Flight Electronics Not required Starting with first application of

power at board level

Flight Mechanical

Assemblies

Not required Starting with assembly flight

design qualification acceptance

test

Software Not applicable Subsequent to software

acceptance and when used with

flight hardware

Support Equipment (SE)

Hardware/Software

Not applicable Subsequent to SE acceptance in

use with flight hardware

Part Failures Not applicable For any part failure from certified

flight lot

*Note: Recommended as a means to record incidents for future reference.

Informal reporting, starting early in the development phase with breadboards,

prototypes, and engineering models, is encouraged. Informal problem reporting can

be documented with a simple log, and will complement the design file, reviews and

later formal reporting.

Copies of formal reports, including an indication of the appropriate risk rating as

defined in Table 2.3-2, will be furnished JPL LightSAR Project Office within 24 hours of

initiation. Closure of each report shall be approved by the Proposer’s product

assurance representative and reviewed by JPL.
LightSAR Announcement of Opportunity

N-3

Table 2.3-2. Failure Rating Chart For Risk Assessment

Failure Effect Rating

(Ignoring Redundancy)

Failure Cause/Corrective Action Rating

Negligible Known Cause/Certainty in Corrective Action

No possibility of recurrence.

Significant 2 2 Unknown Cause/Certainty in Corrective Action

No possibility of recurrence.

Major 3 3 Known Cause/Uncertainty in Corrective Action

Some possibility of recurrence.

 4 Unknown Cause/Uncertainty in Corrective Action

Some possibility of recurrence.

Reports with failure ratings inside this box are designated “Red Flag” reports

2.4 Operating Time

All subsystems shall accumulate as much operating time as possible both prior to

integration and as an integrated Facility. The goal is 100 hours of operating time prior

to integration and an additional 1000 hours (including system thermal/vacuum

testing) as an integrated system prior to Launch.

Operating time includes time operated with replacement parts inserted due to a

failure during cumulative operation of the system or subsystem.

3. REVIEWS

To assure that satisfactory progress is being made, competent and independent

assessment teams shall periodically review mission implementation.

Required Mission Reviews will concentrate on critical technical and programmatic

aspects of the system and mission, and include participation by the LightSAR Project

Office. Additional reviews should be conducted by the Proposer to identify and resolve

potential problems before they reach formal, high-level system reviews. The LightSAR

Project Office will assess the thoroughness, competence and independence of the

total review process.

3.1 Required Mission Reviews

The required Mission Reviews are the Preliminary Design Review (PDR), the Critical

Design Review (CDR), the Mission Readiness Review (MRR), and the Operational

Acceptance Review (OAR). The review chairman, in concert with the LightSAR Project

Office, appoints independent key technical experts as review team members. Every

effort will be made to maintain continuity of the chairman and the key technical experts

for the duration of the mission. Other experts will be added or deleted from the review
LightSAR Announcement of Opportunity

N-4

team according to the needs and phase of the mission. The scope and function of

these required reviews is as follows:

Preliminary Design Review (PDR): The PDR shall occur near the end of the mission

Definition Phase. The purpose of the PDR is to examine preliminary designs for

technical feasibility and to assess the mission design as it relates to the mission

requirements. The PDR should also confirm:

• final design and test plans for each subsystem

• final interface control documents

• mission integration and verification plans

• complete programmatic plan through launch

• requirements flow-down traceability

• risk identification and mitigation plans, including descopes

• comprehensive cost, schedule and resource plans

• complete ground system architecture

• comprehensive system engineering plan

• final definition of mission science requirements

• final definition of environmental design/test requirements

• mission assurance planning including reliability analyses, qualification and

selection of electronic parts/ materials/ processes, quality assurance activities

• preliminary hazards list

• reliability analysis for inherited flight hardware and software or their designs

• thoroughly defined roles and responsibilities of all LightSAR Team members

The Proposer will conduct the PDR, with participation from the LightSAR Project

Office.

Critical Design Review (CDR): The CDR is conducted after the design has been

completed, but prior to the start of flight hardware manufacturing or coding of the flight

software. It will emphasize implementations of design approaches, results of design

and reliability analyses and prototype testing, completeness and control of the design

documentation, final fabrication plan, status of safety surveys, mission operations

planning, as well as test planning for all flight systems. Long lead procurements and

manufacturing may be initiated prior to CDR as required to meet schedule.

The Proposer will conduct the CDR, with participation from the LightSAR Project

Office.

Mission Readiness Review (MRR): The MRR is conducted near the end of the

Development Phase. The MRR shall verify that all system elements meet the

requirements of the mission and are ready to proceed into final launch preparations.

The MRR shall verify that testing to validate the readiness of the flight hardware and
LightSAR Announcement of Opportunity

N-5

software has been completed with no unacceptable open issues. The MRR should

also cover:

• determination of completion of testing flight hardware and software

• verification of system requirements

• verification and documentation of hardware and software configuration

• identification of outstanding safety risks

• approved procedures for safe handling

• disposition of waivers, deviations, open issues

• compatibility of spacecraft and ground support equipment

• end-to-end system level testing verification

• launch vehicle and launch operations readiness

• on-orbit checkout and operational certification plans

• orbital operations plans

• mission operations, ground system and data processing system readiness

• evaluation of the acceptance data packages

The Proposer will conduct the MRR, with participation from the LightSAR Project

Office.

Operational Acceptance Review (OAR): The OAR shall take place following

completion of on-orbit checkout and operational verification activities, approximately

90 days following launch. This review is to certify system performance and

operational readiness of the LightSAR system. All open issues from the MRR must

be resolved before the OAR.

The Proposer will conduct the OAR, with participation from the LightSAR Project Office.

3.2 Recommended Additional Formal Reviews

Additional formal, top-level reviews that supplement the required Mission Reviews are

recommended.

System Requirements Review (SRR): The SRR should be the first major mission

review during the Definition Phase. The purpose of this review is to finalize mission

science, operations and technical requirements. Traceability among these

requirements should be demonstrated.

Pre-Environmental Test Review (PER): The PER should be held prior to the full

system integration and functional test in preparation for environmental testing. The

purpose of this review is to assess the readiness of the flight hardware, software and

required environmental test facilities to begin acceptance testing. The PER should

also cover:
LightSAR Announcement of Opportunity

N-6

• design changes since CDR

• status of non-conformances

• test documentation (plans, procedures, waivers) and facilities/personnel

readiness

• hardware and software configuration (documented and verified)

• mission operations status

Launch Readiness Review (LRR): The LRR should be held just prior to launch to

confirm readiness to launch. The LRR should also cover:

• disposition of all open work items

• launch system readiness

• ground system readiness

Annual Operation Reviews (AORs): The AORs should occur at one-year intervals

following the Operational Acceptance Review, to address status, plans, and funding

matters of mutual interest to the Proposer and the LightSAR Project Office.

3.3 Peer Reviews

Engineering peer reviews should occur during all phases of the project life cycle.

These technical reviews provide participants with a detailed understanding of the

design’s ability to meet higher-level requirements. Effective peer reviews will enable

significant streamlining of the content of higher level formal reviews described in 3.1

and 3.2. Topics that should be addressed in the peer reviews are:

• requirements validation

• interface control design verification

• parts and materials review

• analyses and studies

• safety issues

• risk assessment, resolution and contingency plans

• procurements

• confirmation of technology items

• hardware and software configuration management

• detailed cost, schedule and resource availability

• manufacturability and testability

• integration and test planning, including test anomalies and resolution

4. RELIABILITY

4.1 Parts Program
LightSAR Announcement of Opportunity

N-7

The Proposer shall implement a parts program that assures mission reliability and

performance requirements are met. A list of all Electrical, Electronic, and Electromechanical (EEE) parts should be prepared during design, maintained during

hardware build, and furnished at scheduled reviews.

The Proposer will use Grade 2 parts unless there is a significant adverse impact to

cost and schedule. Grade 1 parts will be used where there is a significant reduction of

risk to the mission at a minimal impact to cost and schedule. Management, selection,

application, evaluation, and acceptance of all parts should be controlled through a

parts control board, or similar documented parts control system. The parts control

board /system will determine requirements for qualification, fabrication, and

screening for all other parts, based on part failure history, GIDEP Alerts and Problem

Advisories, new/unknown technology, or other similar concerns. DPA performance,

when required, should be in accordance with the Proposer’s DPA procedure.

All EEE parts should be selected, or the design otherwise implemented, to meet the

maximum predicted mission ionizing radiation level requirements and to minimize

Single Event Upsets (SEU) and be latch up immune.

The Proposer should monitor Government Industry Data Exchange Program (GIDEP)

reports for parts problems applicable to LightSAR. All EEE parts should be derated in

accordance with the guidelines in MIL-STD-975, or equivalent. Failure analysis should

be performed on flight parts/ components that fail after final assembly.

4.2 Materials and Processes Program

The Proposer shall implement a Materials and Processes program that assures

mission reliability and performance requirements are met. A list of materials,

processes, and appropriate usage records should be prepared during design,

maintained during hardware build, and furnished at scheduled reviews.

Management, selection, application, evaluation, and acceptance of materials and

processes should be controlled through a materials and processes control board, or

similar system.

Materials with a total mass loss (TML) <1.00% and a collected volatile condensable

mass (CVCM) <0.10% should be used on the LightSAR spacecraft. NASA Reference

Publication 1124 entitled “Outgassing Data for Selecting Spacecraft Materials” may be

used as a guide for materials selection.

4.3 Reliability Program

The Proposer shall plan and implement a reliability program that enhances the

expected mission lifetime. The reliability program tasks should effectively, efficiently,

and responsively interact with systems engineering, hardware design, parts

selection, and systems safety. The reliability program takes its lead from the project

implementation plan in which mission objectives, task responsibilities, and
LightSAR Announcement of Opportunity

N-8

schedules are addressed. The reliability program should at least respond to the

following objectives:

I. By Design

a) Provide for graceful degradation/ degraded operation not catastrophic failure.

b) Eliminate unnecessary parts and components to reduce series complexity.

c) Promote failure workarounds that allow continued successful but degraded operation.

d) Isolate failure impact so that effects do not propagate to other functions.

e) Ensure that failure of non-critical functions do not affect critical functions.

f) Show that electrical stress applied to parts and devices meets derating requirements

over the extremes of operating temperature range, voltage temperature range, and

current variations.

g) Show that parts meet total dose and single event effects radiation requirements.

h) Verify that the reliability process is flowed down consistently to subcontractor(s) and

suppliers.

II. In Manufacture

a) Assure that hardware is assembled as-designed.

b) Assure that specified manufacturing processes are followed.

III. In Test

a) Verify that the finished product meets specification.

b) Verify that the finished product functions as-designed.

A Failure Modes and Effects Analysis (FMEA) should be performed early in the design

process to identify problem areas that require corrective action, and updated as the design

matures. MIL-STD-1629A “Procedures for Performing a Failure Mode, Effects and Criticality

Analysis”, or equivalent, can be used as a guide. The FMEA should be available for review

by the LightSAR Project Office.

4.4 Software Development Program

The Proposer shall employ a structured program for software development. The

program shall address appropriate development life cycle phases, such as

requirements analysis, design, code and unit test, integration and build test,

performance verification, and maintenance. The program shall include internal and

external software reviews to validate software requirements, software design,

operating characteristics, and external interface requirements. Software

requirements, external interface specifications and user guides shall be identified

and document during the preliminary design process. Code produced shall be

structured, error-free, and maintainable.

The Proposer should employ a software configuration management process to

manage requirements, code, documentation, and data, and to track and report on the

status of changes to them. The process should include a means to record, track and

disposition identified discrepancies in the product (i.e., non-conformance control).
LightSAR Announcement of Opportunity

N-9

5. VERIFICATION

The Proposer shall conduct a verification program to ensure that the flight hardware

meets the specified mission requirements. The program should comprise a logical

sequence of activities, including analytical investigations, functional demonstrations,

physical measurements, and tests that simulate expected environments.

Documentation of the verification program should include a system performance

verification matrix, environmental test matrix, plans, procedures, and reports.

6. CONTAMINATION

The Proposer shall establish and conduct a contamination control program consistent

with mission requirements.
LightSAR Announcement of Opportunity

O-1

APPENDIX O

FLIGHT AND GROUND SAFETY REQUIREMENTS

The Proposer shall implement a system safety program in accordance with the

requirements imposed by the appropriate launch range and launch service provider.

Although safety requirements are mandatory and non-negotiable, tailoring of safety

requirements to fit the specific mission is done through the applicable safety

organization(s).

The purpose of this document is to serve as a resource to the Proposer for complying

with necessary NASA safety requirements.

The following documents describe the safety program implementation and

deliverables required to launch space hardware safely, and may reference other

requirements that must be met to gain access to the launch site.

KHB 1710.2C Kennedy Space Center Safety Practices Handbook

Note: Applies to Western Test Range (WTR) where KSC has

jurisdiction for reviewing procedures and facilities)

EWR 127-1 Eastern and Western Range Safety Requirements.

The following documents describe orbital debris assessment requirements.

NPD 8710.3 NASA Policy For Limiting Debris Generation

NSS 1740.14 Guidelines and Assessment Procedure for Limiting Orbital

Debris, NASA Safety Standard
LightSAR Announcement of Opportunity

O-2

[Not Used]