National Aeronautics April 14, 1997

and Space Administration AO-97-OSS-03

Announcement of

Opportunity

Small Explorer Program

Notice of Intent Due: May 12, 1997

Proposals Due: June 16, 1997

 

and

Missions of Opportunity
i

Small Explorer Program and Missions of Opportunity

Announcement of Opportunity

TABLE OF CONTENTS

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

1.1 General Provisions.........................................................................................1

1.2 Proposal Criteria and Selection Process.........................................................3

1.3 Proposal Opportunity Period and Schedule..................................................4

2.0 PROGRAM GOALS, OBJECTIVES, AND BACKGROUND..........................5

2.1 Space Science Research Goals........................................................................5

2.2 Programmatic Objectives...............................................................................6

2.3 Program Background......................................................................................6

3.0 PROGRAM CONSTRAINTS, GUIDELINES, AND REQUIREMENTS..........7

3.1 General Program Constraints and Guidelines................................................7

3.2 Science Requirements.....................................................................................9

3.3 Education, Outreach, Technology, And Small Disadvantaged Business

Requirements.......................................................................................................10

3.4 Technical Approach Requirements..............................................................11

3.5 Management Requirements..........................................................................11

3.6 Cost and Schedule Requirements.................................................................13

3.7 International Participation...........................................................................17

3.8 Missions of Opportunity............................................................................18

4.0 PROPOSAL PREPARATION AND SUBMISSION.........................................18

4.1 Preproposal Activities.................................................................................18

4.2 Format And Content Of Proposals.............................................................21

4.3 Submission Information...............................................................................21

5.0 PROPOSAL EVALUATION, SELECTION, AND IMPLEMENTATION.....22

5.1 Evaluation, Selection, and Debriefing Processes..........................................22

5.2 Evaluation Criteria.......................................................................................24

5.3 Implementation Activities...........................................................................26

6.0 CONCLUSION........................................................................................................27
ii

Small Explorer Program and Missions of Opportunity

Announcement of Opportunity

APPENDICES

A General Instructions and Provisions

B Guidelines for Proposal Preparation

C Ground Data Systems and Mission Operations and Data Analysis

D Small Explorer Launch Services Information Summary

E Regulations Governing Procurement of Foreign Goods and Services

F Contents of the Explorer Program Library (EPL)

G Certifications

H Flight Assurance Requirements

I Services available from the Goddard Space Flight Center

J Guidelines for Concept Study Report Preparation
1

1.0 DESCRIPTION OF OPPORTUNITY

1.1 General Provisions

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) announces the opportunity

to conduct space science investigations through Small Explorer space flight missions and

through Missions of Opportunity. For the purposes of this announcement, the term

“space science” encompasses the scientific objectives of the following NASA science

themes:

Astronomical Search for Origins and Planetary Systems;

The Sun-Earth Connection; and

Structure and Evolution of the Universe.

Additional information concerning these themes is provided in Section 2.1.

This Announcement of Opportunity (AO) invites proposals for the sixth and seventh

Small Explorer missions and for participation in non-NASA space science missions,

identified in this AO as Missions of Opportunity. NASA intends to select two Small

Explorer missions--one to launch in 2000 and one to launch in 2001. Additional Small

Explorer investigations may be selected depending on funding availability. NASA may

also select investigations for Missions of Opportunity, depending on the perceived value

of the participation and the availability of funds.

The Small Explorer program is designed to accomplish frequent, high quality space

science investigations utilizing innovative, streamlined, and efficient management

approaches. It seeks to substantially reduce mission cost through commitment to, and

control of, design, development, and operations costs, as well as to improve performance

and reduce cost through the use of new technology. Finally, it seeks to enhance public

awareness of, and appreciation for, space science and to incorporate educational and

public outreach activities as integral parts of space science investigations.

The Small Explorer program demands careful tradeoffs between science and cost in order

to produce investigations with the highest possible science value consistent with a high

flight rate and limited resources. NASA is seeking to launch a Small Explorer mission

every 12 months within the Small Explorer funding profile. Accordingly, the total cost to

NASA for all phases of the investigation will be a determining factor in selection.

Participation in space science Missions of Opportunity may be undertaken through the

Explorer Program when the perceived value of participation is high and the proposed cost

of participation is within the funding limits of the Explorer Program. The Explorer

Program also expects Missions of Opportunity to meet other program objectives for

reducing cost, injecting new technology, and enhancing education and public outreach.
2

Proposals submitted in response to this AO must be for complete investigations

encompassing all mission phases. For the purposes of this AO, mission phases are

defined to be: Phase A - concept study; Phase B - definition and preliminary design;

Phase C - detail design; Phase D - development through launch plus 30 days; and

Phase E - mission operations and data analysis. Phase E is to include analysis and

publication of data in the peer reviewed scientific literature and delivery of the data to the

appropriate data archive.

NASA intends to select two primary investigations through this AO that will be awarded

contracts to conduct concept studies (Phase A) of Small Explorer missions with options

for follow-on phases. NASA may also select investigations that will be awarded

contracts to conduct concept studies for Missions of Opportunity. Further details

concerning the selection process are given in Section 1.2 and Section 5.

• Small Explorer Missions

This kind of investigation is characterized by offering a complete mission in which the

Principal Investigator (PI) is responsible to NASA not only for the scientific integrity of

the investigation but also for the management of the complete mission, including

provision of the spacecraft, instrument, and ground system. Such missions must be free

flyers that are launched on expendable launch vehicles (ELV’s) or as a secondary payload

on the Space Shuttle. Except for requirements specifically referring to Missions of

Opportunity, all requirements of this AO apply to proposals for Small Explorer

Missions. This kind of investigation has two options:

Expendable Launch Vehicle Option

Proposals are for complete missions to conduct an investigation that are launched

using expendable launch vehicles either as primary or secondary payloads. The

Principal Investigator is responsible for the complete investigation , including the

instrument, spacecraft, and ground system. Further information on expendable

launch vehicle requirements is given in Section 3.1.1. The NASA-provided Small

Expendable Launch Vehicle (SELV) is described in Appendix D.

Shuttle Free-Flyer Option

For this Small Explorer option, the Space Shuttle is the launch vehicle. Shuttlelaunched Small Explorer investigation payloads are considered as secondary

payloads, that is, they are not the reason for the Shuttle mission and are a lower

priority than a primary payload. Shuttle carriers (such as the Spartan 400,

Spartan Lite, and carriers from other agencies), into which the science instruments

are integrated, may be required. The Principal Investigator is responsible for the
3

complete mission, including making arrangements for carrier use and requesting an

appropriate flight assignment.

• Missions of Opportunity

This kind of investigation is characterized by offering to be part of a non-NASA space

science mission. Missions of Opportunity may be Space Station attached payloads if

also being proposed in response to the current European Space Agency AO. Selection by

NASA does not constitute selection of the investigation as part of the mission; that is a

decision made by the sponsor of the mission. Instead, selection results in a commitment

by NASA to fund the U.S. portion of the investigation as part of the Explorer Program,

although funding beyond basic studies does not begin until detailed design of the mission

itself is underway. If an investigation is selected both by NASA and by the mission

sponsor, the PI is responsible to NASA for the scientific integrity and the management of

their contribution to the mission. If a commitment from NASA is not needed by the

sponsoring organization before December 31, 1997, then the proposal should be

submitted to a subsequent Explorer program AO. See Section 3.8 for more details.

1.2 Proposal Criteria and Selection Process

The prime criterion for evaluation of proposals in either mode submitted in response to

this AO will be the excellence of their scientific merit as evaluated by peer review. The

technical merit and feasibility of the scientific investigation will be the next most

important criterion. The feasibility of the mission implementation approach, including,

for Small Explorers, the likelihood of being launched in 2000 and 2001, and the degree to

which the education and outreach, technology, and small disadvantaged business plans

meet program requirements are the next most important criteria. NASA Mission Cost

will also be a consideration in the selection of missions. Further discussion of the

evaluation criteria is given in Section 5.2.

• Small Explorer Missions

It is anticipated that two Small Explorer investigation proposals will be selected, with

each awarded a contract for a Phase A concept study with options for the subsequent

mission phases. In addition, one or more Small Explorer proposals may also be selected

as alternates in case any difficulties are encountered with the primary selections during

the concept study. Investigations not implemented under this AO may recompete for a

future flight opportunity under a subsequent, appropriate Explorer AO.

A two-to-five month Phase A concept study will be conducted by each selected

investigation team. See Appendix J for information on the report to be prepared by the

investigation team during the concept study. The required duration and cost (up to

$250K) of the concept study should be part of the initial proposal. At the end of the
4

concept study, NASA will conduct a detailed review to evaluate the implementing details

of the selected investigations, namely, any modifications to the scientific objectives, the

proposed cost to NASA, design details of the experiment hardware, plans for mission

implementation including technical and management factors, details of the education and

public outreach programs, and plans for the infusion of new technology (as appropriate).

Assuming a positive outcome, NASA will exercise the contract options and confirm the

primary missions for definition, design, and development (Phase B/C/D). If, during the

concept study phase, a primary mission is judged not suitable to proceed, then an

alternate mission may be selected to replace it.

The concept study will conclude with a commitment by the PI for the cost, schedule, and

scientific performance of the investigation. If at any time this commitment appears to be

in jeopardy, the investigation is subject to cancellation.

Each mission’s definition phase will culminate with an independent technical and

programmatic review, at which time the investigation may be confirmed for continuation

into subsequent mission phases.

• Missions of Opportunity

NASA may select one or more Mission of Opportunity proposals. If such an

investigation is selected, NASA will commit to funding the U.S. participation in the

investigation as long as performance, cost, and schedule commitments of all parties are

met. As with Small Explorer missions, a selected Mission of Opportunity investigation

will be awarded a study contract and will be expected to submit a concept study report

for NASA's detailed review. The concept study will conclude with a commitment by the

PI for the cost, schedule, and scientific performance of the investigation. If at any time

this commitment appears to be in jeopardy, the investigation is subject to cancellation.

Each mission’s definition phase will culminate with an independent technical and

programmatic review, at which time the investigation may be confirmed for continuation

into subsequent mission phases. As a condition for confirmation, the organization

sponsoring the full mission must make a commitment to enter into an appropriate

agreement with NASA that shall include provisions for sharing of flight data.

Provided that the opportunity is still tenable, investigations not selected under this AO

may recompete under a subsequent Mission of Opportunity AO, now planned as a

regular part of the Explorer Program.

1.3 Proposal Opportunity Period and Schedule

NASA is seeking Small Explorer investigations with mission launch dates no later than

September 30, 2000, and September 30, 2001; investigations with anticipated launch
5

dates later than these should be proposed in response to a subsequent Small Explorer AO.

Mission of Opportunity launch dates may be at any time.

The following schedule describes the major milestones for this Small Explorer and

Missions of Opportunity AO:

AO release....................................................................................April 14, 1997

Notice of intent due......................................................................May 12, 1997

Proposal submittal due by 4 p.m. EDT.......................................June 16, 1997

Non-U.S. Letter(s) of Endorsement due......................................July 16, 1997

Selections for Concept Study (target)..........................................September 1997

Contract Award (target)...............................................................October 1997

2.0 PROGRAM GOALS, OBJECTIVES, AND BACKGROUND

2.1 Space Science Research Goals

The scientific goals of space science research within the Office of Space Science (OSS) are

generally contained in Space Science for the 21st Century: The Space Science Enterprise

Strategic Plan, (August 1995); see Appendix F. The goals in this plan are supported by

the following documentation (see also Appendix F):

National Research Council report, titled A Science Strategy for Space Physics (1995);

Report of the “HST and Beyond Committee,” titled HST and Beyond. Exploration

and Search for Origins: A Vision for Ultraviolet - Optical - Infrared Space Astronomy

(May 1996);

Report Synopsis of the Gamma Ray Astronomy Program Working Group titled

Recommended Priorities for NASA’s Gamma-Ray Astronomy Program 1996-2010

(1997); and

The Jet Propulsion Laboratory report, titled Exploration of Neighboring Planetary

Systems (ExNPS) (October 1995).

The goals and strategies outlined in these documents encompass a wide range of scientific

questions spanning a variety of scientific disciplines that NASA seeks to address by

supporting investigations in three broad categories: (1) laboratory research and theoretical

analyses; (2) ground-based astronomical observations; and (3) flight projects. This Small

Explorer and Missions of Opportunity AO solicits only those investigations that fall into
6

this third category. The scientific goals in these referenced documents as they relate to

the NASA science themes listed in Section 1.1 will form the basis of the science

evaluation criteria. Further information on the science themes may be obtained through

the World Wide Web URL address <http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/oss/>.

2.2 Programmatic Objectives

The Small Explorer program seeks to conduct scientific investigations of modest

programmatic scope. The program intends to provide a continuing opportunity for

quickly implemented flights of small-class free-flyers to conduct focused investigations

that complement major flight missions, prove new scientific concepts, or make other

significant contributions to space science. It is the goal of the program to obtain a flight

frequency of one flight per year.

By funding U.S. participation in Missions of Opportunity, NASA seeks to bring the

capabilities of the U.S. scientific community to bear on important scientific missions

conducted as part of non-NASA space science program. These are typically missions

sponsored by non-U.S. governments, although space science missions from other U.S.

sponsors will also be considered.

Inclusion of the public and education communities in space science research programs and

missions are goals of the Office of Space Science. The Explorer program is committed to

identifying appropriate approaches to capture and hold public interest and to provide

education program activities that support the Nation’s educational initiatives.

Additionally, the proposed inclusion of new technology to achieve performance

enhancements and reduce costs, as well as the potential for transfer of those technologies

to a broader community, are important aspects of the Explorer program.

2.3 Program Background

The Explorer program provides several classes of flight opportunities for the science

themes described in Section 1.1 above. Recent changes to the Explorer program are

designed to increase the number of flight opportunities in response to recommendations

from the scientific community. These changes include providing new classes of Explorer

missions and opening up additional opportunities within each class. Explorer program

classes will continue to be characterized by the scope of the mission, based primarily on

definition and development cost and secondarily on instrument and spacecraft payload

size and mass and launch vehicle capabilities. The current Explorer program classes are:

• University-class Explorers (UNEX) are characterized by a definition and

development cost not to exceed $6M (in FY 1997 dollars). UNEX missions will be

launched by a variety of methods still under consideration. At least one launch per

year is anticipated for this program.
7

• Small Explorers (SMEX) are characterized by investigations achievable for no

more than $38M (in FY 1997 dollars) in definition and development costs that can

generally be launched within the capabilities of small expendable launch vehicles. It

is NASA's intent to launch one Small Explorer mission per year.

• Medium-class Explorers (MIDEX) are characterized by investigations achievable

for definition and development costs of no more than $76M (in FY 1997 dollars)

that can generally be launched within the capabilities of the NASA Med-Lite launch

vehicle. NASA intends to launch one MIDEX mission per year.

• Missions of Opportunity are characterized by being part of a non-NASA space

science mission of any size with the NASA contribution that is typically under $20

million (in FY 1997 dollars). These missions are conducted on a no-exchange-offunds basis with the organization sponsoring the mission. NASA intends to solicit

proposals for Missions of Opportunity with each future AO issued for UNEX,

SMEX, and MIDEX investigations. With each AO, the cost limit for Missions of

Opportunity is expected to be constant. Note that the selection of a Mission of

Opportunity is expected to decrease the flight rate of the free-flying Explorers

rather than reduce the cost cap for any particular class of missions.

3.0 PROGRAM CONSTRAINTS, GUIDELINES, AND REQUIREMENTS

This section describes the constraints, guidelines, and requirements applicable to all

phases of the Small Explorer program including Missions of Opportunity. Specific

directions for proposal preparation are included in Section 4 and in Appendix B.

3.1 General Program Constraints and Guidelines

The major responsibility for implementing a selected investigation rests with the

investigation team, which will have a large degree of freedom to accomplish its proposed

objectives within the stated constraints with only essential NASA oversight. Once an

investigation has been selected for flight, failure to maintain reasonable progress on an

agreed upon schedule or failure to operate within the constraints outlined below may be

cause for its termination by NASA.

Every aspect of a selected investigation must reflect a commitment to mission success

while keeping total costs as low as possible. Consequently, investigations should be

designed and planned to emphasize mission success within cost and schedule constraints

by incorporating sufficient margins, reserves, and content resiliency.

Only those investigations whose proposed cost, schedule, and launch vehicle

requirements do not exceed the constraints and guidelines identified herein will be

considered as candidates for selection.
8

3.1.1 General Program Guidelines for Small Explorer Missions

Small Explorer mission investigation teams must be led by a single Principal Investigator

(PI) who may be from any category of U.S. or non-U.S. organization, including

educational institutions, industry or nonprofit institutions, or from one of the NASA

Centers, the Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL), other Federally-funded research and

development centers, or other U. S. Government agencies. Teams may be formed from

any combination of these institutions.

Contributions of any kind, whether cash or noncash (property and services) to Small

Explorer investigations by organizations other than the Office of Space Science are

welcome. Values for all contributions of property and services shall be established in

accordance with applicable cost principles. Such contributions may be applied to any

part or parts of a mission. See Section 3.6 for a discussion of cost requirements. The

resultant mission must not exceed the scope and cost (Phase A/B/C/D limit of $38 million

in FY 1997 dollars) of a Small Explorer mission. A letter of endorsement that contains a

statement of financial commitment from each responsible organization offering to make a

contribution to the investigation must be submitted with the proposals for all U.S.

components. For non-U.S. components of proposals, see Section 3.7.

NASA anticipates that investigators will propose to use the small expendable launch

vehicle (SELV) or the Space Shuttle to launch Small Explorer missions. Information on

these options is given in Appendix D. However, other launch options are available.

NASA seeks to take advantage of all reasonable sources of commercial expendable launch

vehicle (ELV) services while assuring that NASA-funded payloads are not exposed to

excessive risk. Accordingly, U.S. launch vehicles that may be proposed to launch Small

Explorer missions pursuant to this AO must be acquired and managed consistent with

NASA Launch Services Qualification Requirements. The demonstrated reliability of the

proposed launch vehicle and the resultant probability of mission success will be

evaluated. The following types of services may be proposed:

Launch services for launch as a secondary or co-manifest payload aboard a Delta II or

Atlas-Centaur (IIA or IIAS) on commercial missions that are subject to Department of

Transportation commercial launch licenses may be proposed and directly acquired by a

proposer. Other domestic dedicated launch services that are subject to a Department of

Transportation commercial launch license may also be proposed only if fully

contributed by the mission team.

The use of non-U.S. manufactured launch services may be proposed on a no-exchangeof-funds basis.
9

3.1.2 General Program Guidelines for Missions of Opportunity

Investigation teams for Missions of Opportunity must be led by a single Principal

Investigator (PI) who may be from any category of U.S. or non-U.S. organization,

including educational institutions, industry or nonprofit institutions, or from one of the

NASA Centers, the Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL), other Federally-funded research and

development centers, or other U.S. Government agencies.

Missions of Opportunity are conducted on a no-exchange-of-funds basis between NASA

and the organization sponsoring the mission. Contributions of any kind to NASA’s

participation, whether cash or noncash (property and services) by organizations other

than the Office of Space Science are welcome for Mission of Opportunity investigations.

A letter of endorsement that contains a statement of financial commitment from each

responsible organization offering to make a contribution to the investigation must be

submitted with the proposals for all U.S. components. For non-U.S. components of

proposals, see Section 3.7.

3.2 Science Requirements

The relationship between the proposed scientific objectives, the data to be returned, and

the instrument payload to be used in completing the proposed investigation must be

unambiguous and clearly stated in the proposal. Small Explorer investigation teams will

be responsible for initial analysis of the data, its subsequent delivery to an appropriate

data repository, the publication of scientific findings, and communication of results to the

public.

In accordance with NASA policy, there shall be no proprietary data rights period for

Small Explorer investigations. Small Explorer teams will be responsible for collecting the

scientific, engineering, and ancillary information necessary to validate and calibrate the

scientific data prior to depositing it in the appropriate data repository. The time required

to complete this process should be the minimum necessary to provide appropriate data to

the scientific community and the general public. As part of their funded Phase E

activities, investigation teams must include an appropriate period for data analysis

independent of archiving activities.

Mission of Opportunity investigation teams will have data analysis responsibilities

defined by the policies of the mission sponsor; nevertheless, NASA expects that the

mission sponsor will enter into an agreement with NASA to assure that data returned

from at least those aspects of the mission in which the U.S. is involved, if not the entire

mission, will be made available to the U.S. scientific community in a timely way.
10

3.3 Education, Outreach, Technology, and Small Disadvantaged Business

Requirements

The education, outreach, technology, and small disadvantaged business requirements

apply to both Small Explorer and Mission of Opportunity investigations.

3.3.1 Education and Outreach

Education and outreach activities directed toward precollege education and the public

understanding of science are a required component of Small Explorer and Mission of

Opportunity investigations. Such activities should be developed to be consistent with

and support the Office of Space Science Education/Public Outreach Strategy contained in

Partners in Education, A Strategy for Integrating Education and Public Outreach into

NASA’s Space Science Programs, dated March 1995, and its accompanying

implementation plan, Implementing the Office of Space Science (OSS) Education/Public

Outreach Strategy, dated October 1996 (see the Explorer Program Library described in

Section 4.1.1 and Appendix F). Guidance contained in the Education/Outreach Strategy

and Implementation Plan will be used as the basis for evaluating proposed activities in

this area. Proposed activities may also include public information programs that will

inform the public by mass media or other means, or utilize other innovative ideas for

bringing space science to the public. Proposed Small Explorer investigations must include

the PI’s approach for planning an education/outreach program, arranging for appropriate

partners and alliances, implementing the education/outreach program including

appropriate evaluation activities, and disseminating education/outreach products and

materials. Costs for such activities must be included as part of mission planning,

development, and operations costs. The Education/Public Outreach Task Force of the

OSS Space Science Advisory Committee has recommended that, as a long term goal, OSS

should plan to spend one to two percent of its total budget on education and the public

understanding of science. This and further guidance on education and outreach activities

are contained in the implementation plan mentioned above.

3.3.2 Advanced Technology

NASA seeks to infuse new technologies that enhance performance and reduce costs into

its programs and to strengthen the mechanisms by which it transfers such technologies to

the private sector, including the nonaerospace sector. The means by which NASA's

Office of Space Science plans to implement new technology is described in the Office of

Space Science Integrated Technology Strategy, which is included in the EPL described in

Section 4.1.1. Small Explorer and Mission of Opportunity investigations present an

opportunity to develop and test new technologies and applications. Investigations

dependent on new technology will not be penalized for risk provided that adequate plans

are described to provide reasonable assurance of the success of the investigation.
11

3.3.3 Small Disadvantaged Business and Minority Institutions

The PI and 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 viewed as an investment in our Nation’s future. Offerors, other than

small business concerns, are also advised that contracts resulting from this AO will be

required to contain a subcontracting plan that includes goals for subcontracting with small

businesses, small disadvantaged businesses, and women-owned small business concerns.

(See Appendix A, Section XIII.)

3.4 Technical Approach Requirements

Proposals must encompass all technical aspects of the investigation from the Phase A

concept study through delivery of the data to the appropriate data repository and their

analysis (the final part of the operations phase, Phase E). NASA Handbook NHB

7120.5, Management of Major System Programs and Requirements, delineates activities,

milestones, and products typically associated with each of these phases and may be used

as a reference in defining a team’s mission approach. This Handbook is included in the

EPL (see Appendix F). Mission teams have the freedom to use their own processes,

procedures, and methods, and the use of innovative processes is encouraged when cost,

schedule, technical improvements, and reliability can be demonstrated.

Selected investigations shall have a product assurance program that is consistent with the

ISO 9000 series, American National Standard, “Quality Systems - Model for Quality

Assurance in Design, Development, Production, Installation, and Servicing,” ANSI/ASQC

Q9001-1994 (see Appendix H).

Investigation teams may use non-NASA or NASA navigation, tracking, control,

communications, and other services. For Small Explorer proposals, however, costs for

such services, whether obtained from NASA or from other sources, must be included in

the cost estimate. For Mission of Opportunity proposals, only the costs for NASAprovided services must be included. Information on space communications capabilities

and costing is given in Appendix C.

3. 5 Management Requirements
12

NASA intends to allow the Principal Investigator and his/her team to use their own

management processes, procedures, and methods to the fullest extent possible.

Investigation teams should define the management approach best suited for their

particular teaming arrangement. This approach should be commensurate with the

investigation’s implementation approach, while retaining a simple and effective

management structure necessary to assure the adequate control of development within the

cost and schedule constraints. The investigation team should develop a Work Breakdown

Structure (WBS) that best fits its organizational approach and mission design concept.

The PI is singularly expected to be in charge of each investigation, with full responsibility

for its scientific integrity. The PI is responsible for assembling a team to propose and

implement the investigation. In forming teams, proposers may obtain services from any

qualified institution. (Note that information on services available through the NASA

Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC) is given in Appendix I.)

Likewise, the PI is accountable to NASA for the scientific success of the investigation.

Therefore, the PI must be prepared to recommend mission termination if in his/her

judgment the successful achievement of established science objectives, as defined in the

proposal, is no longer likely within the committed cost and schedule reserves.

In accordance with NASA’s transfer of program management responsibility to its

Centers, Explorer program management responsibility has been assigned to GSFC. In this

role, GSFC is responsible for NASA’s fiduciary responsibility to ensure that Explorer

missions are achieved in compliance with committed cost, schedule, performance,

reliability, and safety requirements. The level of GSFC’s involvement in this role may

vary from mission to mission depending on the implementing organization and other

programmatic considerations. It is expected that the Explorer Program Office will work

with the Principal Investigator and implementing organization to define roles and

responsibilities to fulfill this responsibility in the most effective manner.

Each selected investigation must have a Project Manager (PM) who reports to the PI and

who will oversee the technical implementation of the investigation. The role,

qualifications, and experience of the PM should be adequate to ensure that the technical

and managerial needs of the investigation will be met.

Each investigation must define the risk management approach it intends to use to ensure

successful achievement of the mission objectives within established resource and schedule

constraints. Included in this discussion of risk management should be risk mitigation

plans for new technologies and the need for any long-lead items that need to be placed on

a contract before the start of the development phase, to ensure timely delivery. In

addition, any manufacturing, test, or other facilities needed to ensure successful

completion of the proposed investigation should be identified.
13

3.6 Cost and Schedule Requirements

3.6.1 Cost and Schedule Requirements for Small Explorer Missions

The Small Explorer program is part of an effort to develop frequent, small space science

investigations. To this end, NASA will limit its funding of Small Explorer missions as

outlined in the table below. Further, the schedule for missions selected through this AO

is expected to be such that launch of the first mission can take place by September 30,

2000, and that of the second mission by September 30, 2001. The proposer should

specify the launch date in the proposal. Phase A (concept study) is of two-to-five

months duration. Phase B/C/D is defined as ending 30 days after launch. Procurement of

long lead materials is permitted during the Phase B/C time frame and should be defined

during the concept study. No time constraint is placed on Phase E.

3.6.1a NASA Mission Cost

The NASA Mission Cost is the funding that NASA would be expected to provide to the

investigation team over the course of the investigation, beginning with Phase A and ending

with the conclusion of Phase E. This total funding is limited as is the funding for major

mission elements, as shown in the following table. The NASA Mission Cost is a

consideration in the selection of investigations and in the continuing assessment of

ongoing missions.

LIMITATIONS ON NASA MISSION

COSTS

Item Mission Element Limitations in FY

1997 Dollars

Comments

1 Launch services including launch

vehicle

$19 million May be increased if Item 2

is decreased accordingly.

2 Phase A/B/C/D $38 million Must not be exceeded.

3 Development of the Ground Data

System

$3 million Must not be exceeded.

4 Phase E -- Mission Operations and

Data Analysis

$9 million Must not be exceeded.

5 Total $69 million Must not be exceeded.
14

Although the launch costs of the SELV and the Space Shuttle will be funded directly by

NASA, these costs are none-the-less to be included in the proposal. Costing and other

information on the SELV and the Space Shuttle Free Flyer option are given in Appendix

D. However, other launch options may be provided by NASA for launch on U.S.

expendable launch vehicles other than the small-class SELV. (See Section 3.1.1 for

discussion of other possible launch options and restrictions.) If the cost to NASA

exceeds the proposed launch service cap identified in the preceding table, then the

proposed Phase A/B/C/D cost cap must be reduced accordingly. Launch services may

also be proposed at no cost to NASA as part of a teaming proposal. For proposal

purposes, the launch vehicle cost to be used to calculate the NASA Mission Cost for the

free-flyer released from the Space Shuttle is the same as the cost of the small-class fairing

option of the SELV as given in Table D-2 of Appendix D.

Proposers must estimate the NASA Mission Cost in the proposal and, if selected through

this AO, in much more detail in the concept study report. The specific cost information

required for proposals is contained in Appendix B.

Since cost details are not anticipated until the conclusion of the concept study, cost

estimates in the proposal may be generated with models or cost estimating relationships

from analogous missions. However, during any phase of the investigation, the

estimated cost to NASA shall not increase by more than 20% from that offered in the

original proposal and must not exceed the NASA cost constraints.

Once established at the end of the concept study, the estimated cost baseline must assure

adequate funding to meet cost-to-complete requirements. The Small Explorer program

does not maintain a reserve pool from which investigations exceeding their cost

commitments may draw.

3.6.1b U.S. Government Mission Cost

A proposal to this AO may include partnership with a U.S. agency other than NASA. If

so, the U.S. Government Mission Cost is that which the U.S. Government, including

NASA, would incur over the course of the investigation, beginning with Phase A through

the conclusion of Phase E. This funding is limited to $69 million in FY 1997 dollars.

3.6.1c Total Mission Cost

The Total Mission Cost is defined as all costs that are necessary to complete an

investigation beginning with Phase A through Phase E, including reserves, contributions

from U.S. and non-U.S. entities, and contract fees. In general, proposers should assume
15

all costs must be included unless specifically excluded. Examples of costs to be included

are: launch vehicles and any upper stages, launch services, education and outreach

activities, new technology, subcontracting costs (including fees), science teams, all

personnel required to conduct the investigation, analyze and publish results, and deliver

data in archival format, insurance, ground data system (see Appendix C), and all labor

(including contractor and Civil Servant labor). Proposers must estimate the Total

Mission Cost in the proposal and, if selected through this AO, in much more detail in the

concept study report. The Total Mission Cost including contributions may exceed the

NASA Mission Cost; however, Phase A/B/C/D funding including contributions is limited

to $38 million in FY 1997 dollars. See the table below.

LIMITATIONS ON TOTAL MISSION

COSTS

Item Mission Element Limitations in FY

1997 Dollars

Comments

1 Launch services including launch

vehicle

Not limited

2 Phase A/B/C/D $38 million Must not be exceeded.

3 Development of the Ground Data

System

Not limited

4 Phase E -- Mission Operations and

Data Analysis

Not limited

5 Total Not limited

3.6.1d Full Cost Accounting

NASA Civil Service labor and supporting NASA Center infrastructure must be costed on

a full cost accounting basis. If NASA guidance for full cost accounting has not been fully

developed by the closing date for proposal submission or for completion of the definition

studies, 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,” or based on their own Center-approved full cost accounting

models. Other Federal Government elements of proposals must follow their agency cost

accounting standards for full cost. If no standards are in effect, the proposers must then
16

follow the Managerial Cost Accounting Standards for the Federal Government as

recommended by the Federal Accounting Standards Advisory Board.
17

3.6.1e Contributed Costs

The cost of contributed hardware or software should be estimated as either: (1) the cost

associated with the development and production of the item if this is the first time the

item has been developed and if the mission represents the primary application for which

the item was developed; or (2) the cost associated with the reproduction and modification

of the item (i.e., any recurring and mission-unique costs) if this is not a first-time

development. If an item is being developed primarily for an application other than the

one in which it will be used in the proposed investigation, then it may be considered as

falling into the second category (with the estimated cost calculated as that associated with

the reproduction and modification alone).

The cost of contributed labor and services should be consistent with rates paid for similar

work in the offeror's organization. The cost of contributions does not need to include

funding spent before the start of the investigation (before completing a contract with

NASA). The value of materials and supplies shall be reasonable and shall not exceed the

fair market value of the property at the time of the contribution. If any NASA resources

are to be contributed through partnership in a proposal, the contributed items or services

must be separately funded and the funding sources must be identified.

3.6.2 Cost and Schedule Requirements for Missions of Opportunity

Although the level of funding available for each proposal will be decided on a case-by-case

basis, proposers should be aware than any Mission of Opportunity investigation costing

the Explorer Program more than $20M will be difficult to support. NASA's funding for a

selected investigation's concept study will be limited to $250K. Follow-on work prior to

selection by the mission's sponsoring organization will be limited to $100K and the limit

for all studies prior to the initiation of mission detailed design (Phase C) is 25% of the

total NASA commitment for funding of the investigation. The PI assumes all risk for

delays in the mission and should propose appropriate reserves.

Launch date will not be the key milestone that determines whether a Mission of

Opportunity investigation will be considered as a result of this AO. Instead, the date

required for a commitment from NASA to the investigation will be the key milestone. If a

commitment from NASA is not needed by the sponsoring organization before

December 31, 1997, then the proposal should be submitted to a subsequent Explorer

program AO.

Full-cost accounting requirements as given in Section 3.6.1d apply to Missions of

Opportunity.
18

3.7 International Participation

Recognizing the potential scientific, technical, and financial benefits offered to all partners

by international cooperation, participation by non-U.S. individuals and organizations as

team members in Small Explorer and Mission of Opportunity investigations is welcomed.

Participation may include, but is not limited to, the contribution of scientific instruments,

the spacecraft (or a portion thereof), and the subsequent sharing of the data from the

mission, all on a no-exchange-of-funds basis. Carriers, launch vehicles and launch

services, and space operations may also be contributed by international partners and must

be included in all calculations and discussions of the Total Mission Costs. There is no

limit on the percentage of non-U.S. contribution to a Small Explorer mission.

The direct purchase of goods and/or services from non-U.S. sources is permitted except

for following restriction: NASA will not purchase non-U.S. launch vehicles for Small

Explorer missions or Missions of Opportunity, nor may funds provided to a mission

team be used to purchase a launch vehicle from a non-U.S. source. The provision of

launch services as a contribution to a Small Explorer mission by a non-U.S. partner is

acceptable only on a no-exchange-of-funds basis (i.e., at no cost to NASA). Only those

non-U.S. launch vehicles with demonstrated reliabilities may be proposed for Small

Explorer missions.

Proposers are advised that a contract or subcontract by a U.S. team with a non-U.S.

participant using funds derived from NASA must meet NASA and Federal regulations.

Proposers are further advised that these regulations will place an additional burden on

investigation teams that should be explicitly included in discussions of the investigation's

cost, schedule, and risk management. Information regarding regulations governing the

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

Any proposed international participation must be described at the same level of detail as

that of U.S. partners. This includes the provision of cost, schedule, and management data

in the proposal and in subsequent reviews. Failure to document cost and schedule data,

management approaches and techniques, or failure to document the commitment of all

team partners to those costs and schedules may cause a proposal to be found

unacceptable.

Participation by non-U.S. individuals and/or institutions as team members or contributors

to Small Explorer or Mission of Opportunity investigations must be endorsed by the

institutions and/or governments involved. Government endorsement is required if the

contribution is critical. For noncritical contributions, institutional endorsement is

sufficient. The letter of endorsement will provide evidence that the non-U.S. institution

and/or government officials are aware and supportive of the proposed investigation and

will pursue funding for the investigation if selected by NASA. Such endorsements must

be submitted per the schedule in Section 1.3.
19

3.8 Missions of Opportunity

For Missions of Opportunity, the proposer offers to participate in a non-NASA mission

that is planned or that has been approved by its sponsoring organization. Such

participation could take many forms, such as providing a complete science instrument,

providing hardware components of a science instrument, or providing expertise in critical

areas of the mission. However, the U.S. investigator must fully document the complete

investigation in their proposal. It is incumbent on the proposing investigator to provide

evidence that the sponsoring organization intends to fund the mission and that the

endorsement of NASA for U.S. participation is required by the sponsoring organization

prior to December 31, 1997. The Principal Investigator is accountable to NASA for the

scientific integrity and the management of his or her contribution to the mission.

Proposers for non-NASA, non-U.S. missions should recognize that all such proposals

must be consistent, and in compliance with, all U.S. Government laws, regulations, and

policies governing the export of hardware and/or technical data. Further, any such

successful proposal will require the appropriate agreement(s) and export license(s).

Therefore, all proposers for non-NASA, non-U.S. missions should contact the Office of

External Relations, International Science and Aeronautics Division, at NASA

Headquarters at the address in Section 4.1 during the preparation of the concept study to

obtain information about U.S. Government laws or policies (e.g., export control), as well

as NASA policy and procedures regulating international cooperation that may be relevant

to the proposal.

Proposals for Mission of Opportunity investigations will be evaluated using the same

criteria as the Small Explorer missions except that the Total Mission Cost is not

constrained and the launch date is not constrained.

Like other missions proposed to this AO, the NASA contribution is subject to

cancellation if there is a cost overrun charged to NASA for any reason, including a launch

delay caused by the non-NASA partner.

4.0 PROPOSAL PREPARATION AND SUBMISSION

4.1 Preproposal Activities

4.1.1 Explorer Program Library

The Explorer Program Library (EPL) is intended to provide additional background

information on the Small Explorer program including science goals, technology and

education/outreach strategies, and background information on management aspects of

flight programs. Additional information on the EPL is contained in Appendix F.
20

4.1.2 Technical and Scientific Inquiries

Inquiries of a technical nature should be directed to Dr. David Gilman, the Explorer

Program Executive, at the address below. Inquiries of a scientific nature should be

directed to Dr. Hashima Hasan, the Small Explorer Program Scientist, at her address

below. Inquiries are preferred in writing and may be sent by FAX or e-mail.

Dr. David Gilman Dr. Hashima Hasan

Mission and Payload Development Division Research Program Management Division

Code SD Code SR

National Aeronautics and Space National Aeronautics and Space

 Administration Administration

Washington, DC 20546-0001 Washington, DC 20546-0001

Fax Number: 202-358-3987 Fax Number: 202-358-3097

E-mail: david.gilman@hq.nasa.gov E-mail: hashima.hasan@hq.nasa.gov

Phone: 202-358-0349 Phone: 202-358-0377

4.1.3 Preproposal Questions and Answers

In lieu of a preproposal conference, questions about this AO may be sent to either

Dr. Gilman or Dr. Hasan at the address above. Answers will be provided within five

working days. Answers to all questions (with anonymity preserved) will also be posted

following the Small Explorer AO and may be accessed through “Research Opportunities”

from the menu at the World Wide Web URL address

<http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/oss/>.

Questions and answers will be posted at the end of each week during the proposal

preparation period. Prospective proposers are advised to check this site for new

postings.

4.1.4 Notice of Intent to Propose

To assist NASA's planning of the proposal evaluation process, a Notice of Intent must

be submitted by all prospective proposers in accordance with the schedule in Paragraph

1.3. This Notice must be typewritten in English and may be submitted in one of the

following three ways:
21

By mail to:

Small Explorer 1997 Support Office

Jorge Scientific Corporation

400 Virginia Avenue SW, Suite 700

Washington, DC 20024

or by FAX to:

Small Explorer 1997 Support Office

202-554-2970

or by e-mail to:

<deb.tripp@hq.nasa.gov>, with Subject designated as <SMEX NOI - (PI Name)>

To the extent the following information is known by the due date, the Notice of Intent

should include:

(a) Names, addresses, telephone numbers, e-mail addresses, and fax numbers of the (1)

Principal Investigator; (2) any Co-Investigators; and (3) the lead representative

from each organization (industrial, academic, educational, not-for-profit, and/or

Federal) expected to be included in the proposal team;

 (b) Title of the proposed investigation, a brief statement of the scientific objectives,

and the primary NASA science theme (see Section 1.1) that the investigation

supports;

(c) Mission mode (Small Explorer or Mission of Opportunity) and launch vehicle;

(d) Identification of any new technologies that may be employed as part of the

mission; and

(e) A brief statement describing the education/public outreach objectives in the

proposed investigation.

Material in a Notice of Intent is for NASA planning purposes only, is confidential, and is

not binding on the submitter.
22

Principal Investigators whose investigation teams include non-U.S. institutions must also

send a copy of their Notice of Intent to:

Ms. Bettye Jones

International Science and Aeronautics Division

Code IS

Ref: Small Explorer 1997

National Aeronautics and Space Administration

Washington, DC 20546-0001

USA

Phone: 202-358-1664

FAX: 202-358-3029

In cases where investigators or team members from non-U.S. institutions are to

participate, their names, addresses, and affiliations must be included in the Notice of

Intent, even if the details of their participation cannot be formalized by the deadline for

receipt of the Notice of Intent.

4.2 Format and Content of Proposals

General NASA guidance for proposals in general is given in Appendix A, which is

considered binding unless specifically amended in this Section of this AO. A uniform

proposal format is required from all proposers to aid in proposal evaluation. The

required proposal format and contents are summarized in Appendix B. Failure to follow

this outline may result in reduced ratings during the evaluation process, or in extreme

cases, could lead to rejection of the proposal without review. General information and

further proposal preparation information are provided as Appendices to this AO.

4.3 Submission Information

4.3.1 Certification

The original copy of all proposals shall include a letter of endorsement signed by an

institutional official from each partner and each organization expecting to provide

contributions of hardware, software, facilities, services, etc. This official must certify

institutional support and sponsorship of the investigation, as well as concurrence in the

management and financial parts of the proposal. Non-U.S. organizations must submit

such endorsements to Ms. Bettye Jones with a copy to the Small Explorer 1997 Support

Office at the addresses given in Section 4.1 by the due date given in the schedule in

Section 1.3.

Additional certifications identified in Appendix G are required and must be included with

the original, signed proposal.
23

4.3.2 Quantity

Proposers must provide 30 copies of their proposal, plus the original signed proposal, on

or before the proposal deadline given in Section 1.3.

4.3.3 Submittal Address

All proposals must be received at the following address by the schedule in Section 1.3:

Small Explorer 1997 Support Office

Jorge Scientific Corporation

400 Virginia Avenue SW, Suite 700

Washington, DC 20024

Point of contact for commercial delivery: Ms. Debra Tripp; phone: 202-554-2775

Additionally, one copy (over and above the 30 copies) must be sent to the Small Explorer

Program Scientist, Dr. Hashima Hasan, at the address given in Section 4.1.2.

Furthermore, one copy of any proposal that includes any non-U.S. participants and/or

institutional and governmental commitments must be sent to Ms. Bettye Jones at the

address listed in Section 4.1.4.

4.3.4 Deadline

All proposals must be received at the address above by the closing date specified in

Section 1.3. All proposals received after the closing date will be treated in accordance

with NASA's provisions for late proposals (Appendix A, Section VII).

4.3.5 Notification of Receipt

NASA will notify the proposers in writing that their proposals have been received.

Proposers not receiving this confirmation within two weeks after submittal of their

proposals should contact Dr. David Gilman at the address given in Section 4.1.2.

5.0 PROPOSAL EVALUATION, SELECTION, AND IMPLEMENTATION

5.1 Evaluation, Selection, and Debriefing Processes

All proposals submitted in response to this AO will be subjected to a preliminary

screening to determine their compliance to the constraints, requirements, and guidelines of

the AO. Proposals not in compliance will be returned to the proposer without review.

Proposals in compliance with this AO will then be assessed against the criteria given in

Section 5.2 by panels of individuals who are peers of the proposers in the relevant
24

technical, scientific, and other areas. Panels will be instructed to evaluate all proposals

independently and not to compare larger missions with smaller ones. These panels may

be augmented through the solicitation of mail-in reviews as well, which the panels have

the right to accept, modify, or reject. (Note: Owing to this policy of the primacy of the

review panels, mail-in reviews as may be solicited are not subject to disclosure or

discussion during any subsequent debriefing requested by the proposer; see further below

in this Section).

Proposers should be aware that during the evaluation and selection

process, NASA may request clarification of a specific point or points in a

proposal. Such a request and the proposer’s response shall be in writing.

Once the panel evaluations are complete, a Panel Executive Committee, composed wholly

of Civil Servants, will convene to consider the peer review results. This Executive

Committee will then finalize the evaluations of each criteria for each proposal. Based on

these results the Executive Committee will then serve as an Ad Hoc Subcommittee of the

Space Science Steering Committee (SSSC; see further below in this Section) to categorize

the proposals in accordance with procedures required by Appendix I of Federal

Acquisition Regulations (FAR) Supplement 1870.102. These Categories are defined as

follows:

Category I. Well conceived and scientifically and technically sound investigation

pertinent to the goals of the program and the AO’s objectives and offered by a

competent investigator from an institution capable of supplying the necessary

support to ensure that any essential flight hardware or other support can be

delivered on time and that data can be properly reduced, analyzed, interpreted,

and published in a reasonable time. Investigations in Category I are recommended

for acceptance and normally will be displaced only by other Category I

investigations.

Category II. Well conceived and scientifically or technically sound investigations

which are recommended for acceptance, but at a lower priority than Category I.

Category III. Scientifically or technically sound investigations which require

further development.

Category IV. Proposed investigations which are recommended for rejection for

the particular opportunity under consideration, whatever the reason.

(Note: NASA anticipates selecting and funding only Category I investigations.)

The results of the proposal evaluations and categorizations will then be presented by the

Headquarters Small Explorer Program Scientist to the SSSC, which is composed wholly of
25

NASA Civil Servants and appointed by the Associate Administrator for Space Science.

The SSSC will conduct an independent review of the evaluation and categorization

processes regarding both their compliance to established policies and practices as well as

their completeness, self-consistency, and adequacy of all materials related thereto. After

this review, the final evaluation and categorization results will be forwarded by the SSSC

to the Associate Administrator who will make the final selections.

With regard to final selections, proposers to this AO should recognize that the program of

the Office of Space Science is an evolving activity that critically depends upon

Administration policies and budgets as well as space science objectives and priorities, any

of which may change quickly with time. Therefore, it is incumbent upon the Associate

Administrator of the Office of Space Science to use all relevant science planning, policy,

and cost considerations when making selection(s) among top ranked proposals submitted

in response to this AO. In addition, proposers to this AO are advised that it is an

objective, but not a requirement, that the final selections reflect a balance among the

applicable scientific themes listed in Section 1.1 of this AO.

The overriding consideration for the final selection of proposals submitted in response to

this AO will be to maximize scientific return within the available budget. Depending on

the availability of proposals of appropriate merit, this objective may be achieved by the

selection of two investigations each at the cost ceiling for Small Explorer investigations, or

a larger number of significantly lower cost investigations, or a combination of

investigations of various costs. Finally, should the Explorer program budget allow, a

Category I investigation offered at an exceptionally low cost to NASA may also be

considered for tentative selection with the intent of possible implementation after the

confirmation of the primary missions resulting from this AO.

Selected proposers will be notified immediately by phone and by letter and provided with

instructions for initiating their concept studies. Proposers not selected will be notified

immediately by letter and will be offered a debriefing. Such debriefings may be in person

at NASA Headquarters or, if the investigation team prefers, may be conducted by

telephone. In the latter case, NASA funds may not be used to defray travel costs by the

proposer for a debriefing. In either case, along with the proposing Principal Investigator,

a senior representative from key institution(s) of a proposal may also participate in such

debriefings.

5.2 Evaluation Criteria

The evaluation criteria below, which will be used as described in Section 5.1 by the peer

evaluation Panels and then by selection officials, are designed to determine those

proposed investigations with the best overall combination of relevant characteristics. For

Missions of Opportunity, the proposed investigation encompasses only the contribution
26

to the mission, not the entire mission. The evaluation factors (which are defined more

fully in subsections below) are as follows:

• The scientific merit of the proposed investigation;

• The technical merit and feasibility of the proposed investigation;

• The feasibility of the proposed approach for mission implementation, including

the realism of the proposed cost;

• The plan for education, outreach, technology, and small disadvantaged business

activities; and

• The proposed NASA Mission Cost.

The proposal categorizations, discussed in Section 5.1 above, will be based on the first

four criteria, which are listed in descending order of priority with the first two together

having a combined weight of approximately twice that of the second two together. The

last criterion will be used in the selection process.

5.2.1 Scientific Merit of the Proposed Investigation

To evaluate the intrinsic scientific merit, the goals and objectives of the proposed

investigation will be assessed to determine the impact of the investigation on science as a

whole and, in particular, on the U.S. space science program (see goals in Section 2.1).

This evaluation will include how well the investigation fills important gaps at the frontiers

of knowledge and thereby provides for fundamental progress in a space science theme,

whether or not it provides ancillary benefits to the U.S. space science program (e.g., major

progress or development in the development of a new technology), and how well the

proposed investigation may synergistically support other ongoing space science missions

sponsored by NASA or a non-U.S. space agency. Another major element in this

assessment will be whether the data that are to be gathered will be sufficient to complete

the proposed investigation.

5.2.2 Technical Merit and Feasibility of the Proposed Investigation

Each proposed investigation will be evaluated for its technical merit, feasibility, and the

probability of success. Technical merit and feasibility will be evaluated by assessing the

degree to which the proposed instrument(s) can be built using the proposed technologies

and the degree to which the proposed instrument(s) can provide the necessary data, as

well as the degree to which the mission will support the accomplishment of acquisition of

the required data. Other major elements include the proposed data analysis and archiving

plan, and the proposed plan for the timely release of the data to the public domain.
27

Should a new technology that represents an untested advance in the state of the art be

proposed for use, an independent assessment will be made of the likelihood of its success.

Finally, the probability of success will be evaluated by assessing the experience,

expertise, and organizational structure of the science team and the technical risk associated

with overall mission design and/or instrument set.

5.2.3 Feasibility of the Proposed Approach for Mission Implementation

The technical and management approaches will be evaluated to assess the likelihood that

the investigation can be implemented as proposed. For Small Explorer investigations, this

will include an assessment of the likelihood of launching in 2000 and 2001. Since it is

recognized that teaming arrangements for implementing the mission may not be complete

before the proposal closing date, proposers will not be penalized if the proposal indicates

only candidate (but credible) implementation approaches for the spacecraft, launch

vehicle, communications, and ground systems that should reasonably allow successful

implementation of the mission.

5.2.4 Education, Outreach, Technology, and Small Disadvantaged Business

Activities

The tentative plans for education, outreach, technology, and small disadvantaged business

activities described in the proposal will be rated by evaluating their likely credibility and

the degree to which they propose to meet the program requirements in each of these areas

as described in Section 3.3.

5.2.5 The Proposed NASA Mission Cost

The total proposed NASA Mission Cost will be a factor in the final selections. In

addition, consideration will be given to NASA’s confidence that the mission can be

accomplished within those proposed costs.

5.3 Implementation Activities

5.3.1 Notification of Selection

Following selection, the PI’s of the selected investigations will be notified immediately by

telephone, followed by formal written notification. The formal notification will include

any issues noted during the evaluation that may require resolution and any special

instructions for the concept study. Proposers of investigations that were not selected
28

will be notified in writing and offered an oral or in person debriefing. The proposer has

the option of including a representative from each principal partner in this debriefing.
29

5.3.2 Contract Administration and Funding

Different mission management approaches and organizational arrangements of the selected

proposals may require different contract administration and funding arrangements. Each

PI, in his or her proposal, is expected to recommend, as part of the teaming arrangement,

the organizations and contract mechanisms NASA should use in awarding work to the

team. Where appropriate, cost type contracts with incentives should be considered,

particularly where performance incentives are measured based on delivery of

calibrated/validated science data products.

It is anticipated that contracts will be awarded for concept studies for at least three (two

primary and one alternate) Small Explorer and any Mission of Opportunity investigations

selected as a result of this AO, with options for the follow-on mission phases (Phases

B/C/D and E). NASA will provide up to $250K to each selected investigation to

perform the study, to be initiated as soon as possible after notification of selection.

NASA may request presentations and/or site visits to review the concept study results

with the investigation teams. The concept studies are intended to provide NASA with

more definitive information regarding the cost, risk, and feasibility of the investigations

before proceeding to the definition, design, and development phase. As a result of

evaluation of the concept studies, NASA expects to proceed with the primary

investigations to Phase B/C/D by exercising a contract option. In no case, however, is

NASA required to exercise any option. An alternate Small Explorer mission may be

continued if NASA determines, after reviewing the concept study results, that a primary

investigation is no longer feasible.

5.3.3 Confirmation of Investigations

If the Phase B/C/D contract option is exercised, an independent review of the

investigation’s readiness to proceed will be conducted before being authorized to spend

more than 25 percent of the total NASA commitment for Phases A/B/C/D. Results of

this Confirmation Review and a decision to proceed (or not) will be rendered within 30

days of the review. This decision will be based upon review of the Phase B results, and

evidence of satisfactory technical, cost and schedule performance. In addition, for any

Mission of Opportunity, a commitment from the organization sponsoring the full mission

to enter into an appropriate agreement with NASA is required.

6.0 CONCLUSION

The Explorer program continues to represent a challenging new way for NASA to

accomplish important scientific exploration. It provides an opportunity for frequent

flights to execute important space science investigations, as well as to generate

opportunities to enhance education initiatives and engage the public in the excitement of

science discoveries. NASA invites both the U.S. and international science communities to
30

participate in proposals for Small Explorer and Mission of Opportunity investigations to

be carried out as a result of this Announcement.

 

Alan N. Bunner Jurgen H. Rahe

Science Program Director Science Program Director

Structure and Evolution of the Universe Solar System Exploration

Office of Space Science Office of Space Science

 

Edward J. Weiler George L. Withbroe

Science Program Director Science Program Director

Astronomical Search for Origins The Sun-Earth Connection

 and Planetary Systems Office of Space Science

Office of Space Science

 

Wesley T. Huntress, Jr.

Associate Administrator

 for Space Science
A-1

APPENDIX A

GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS AND PROVISIONS

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 of Government

instrumentation or property that subsequently 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 the 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. NASA may desire to select only

a portion of the proposed investigation and/or that the individual participates with other

investigators in a joint investigation. In this 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 leader or

contact point.

III. SELECTION WITHOUT DISCUSSION

The Government intends to evaluate proposals and award contracts without discussions

with offerors. Therefore, each initial offer should contain the offeror's best terms from a

cost or price and technical standpoint. However, the Government reserves the right to

conduct discussions, if later determined by the Contracting Officer to be necessary.

IV. NONDOMESTIC PROPOSALS

The guidelines for proposals originating outside of the United States are the same as those

for proposals originating within the United States, except that the additional conditions

described in Sections 3.7 and 3.8 shall also apply.
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, in order to maximize

protection of trade secrets or other information that is commercial or financial and

confidential or privileged, 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. In any event, 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.

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

Submission of a Standard Form (SF) 1411 "Contract Pricing Proposal Cover Sheet" for

the concept study is not required. The SF 1411 will be required for all subsequent

contract options. The investigator's institution agrees that the cost proposal submitted in

response to the Announcement is for proposal evaluation and selection purposes, and

that, following selection and during negotiations leading to a definitive contract, the

institution will be required to resubmit or execute all certifications and representations

required by law and regulation.

VII. LATE PROPOSALS
A-3

The Government reserves the right to consider proposals or modifications thereof

received after the date indicated for such purpose, if the selecting official deems it to offer

NASA a significant technical advantage or cost reduction. (See NFS 18-15.412.)

VIII. SOURCE OF SPACE INVESTIGATIONS

Investigators are advised that candidate investigations for space missions can come from

many sources. These sources include those selected through the AO, those generated by

NASA in-house research and development, and those derived from contracts and other

agreements between NASA and external entities.

IX. DISCLOSURE OF PROPOSALS OUTSIDE THE 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 and institution agree that NASA may have the proposal evaluated outside

the Government. If the investigator or institution desires 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

For any NASA contract resulting from this solicitation, the clause at FAR 52.222-26,

"Equal Opportunity," shall apply.

XI. PATENT RIGHTS

A. For any NASA contract resulting from this solicitation awarded to other than a

small business firm or nonprofit organization, the clause at NFS 18-52.227-70,

"New Technology," shall apply. Such contractors may, in advance of a contract,

request waiver of rights as set forth in the provision at NFS 18-52.227-71,

"Requests for Waiver of Rights to Inventions."

B. For any NASA 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 NFS

18-52.227-11) shall apply.
A-4

XII. RIGHTS IN DATA - LIMITED EXCLUSIVE RIGHTS (January 1992)

Any contract resulting from this solicitation will contain the following "Rights in Data"

clause:
A-5

(A) Definition

"Computer software," as used in this clause, means computer programs, computer

data bases, and documentation thereof.

"Data," as used in this clause, means recorded information, regardless of form or

the media on which it may be recorded. The term includes technical data and

computer software. The term does not include information incidental to contract

administration, such as financial, administrative, cost or pricing, or management

information.

"Form, fit, and function data," as used in this clause, means data relating to items,

components, or processes that are sufficient to enable physical and functional

interchangeability, as well as data identifying source, size, configuration, mating,

and attachment characteristics, functional characteristics, and performance

requirements; except that for computer software means data identifying source,

functional characteristics, and performance requirements but specifically excludes

the source code, algorithm, process, formulae, and flow charts of the software.

"Limited exclusive rights," as used in this clause, means the rights of the

Government and others acting on its behalf to use, duplicate, and disclose for

Government purposes, the rights of the Contractor to use, duplicate, and disclose

for its purposes within the United States, and the rights of other entities

designated or approved by the Government to use and duplicate (but not to

further disclose) for their purposes within the United States, provided that in all

instances the data are made subject to disclosure restrictions that protect and

preserve its limited exclusive rights.

"Limited exclusive rights data," as used in this clause, means technical data

(including system studies and computer source programs and code) first produced

in the performance of this contract that have been specifically identified in this

contract (either at the time of contract or subsequently by amendment) as subject

to limited exclusive rights, provided such data are not generally known, or such

data have not, without obligation as to its confidentiality, been made available to

others by the Contractor or are not already available to the Government. The

limited exclusive rights of the Government, the Contractor, and other entities

regarding the disclosure and use of such data are as set forth in subparagraph (g)(4)

of this clause.

"Limited rights," as used in this clause, means the rights of the Government in

limited rights data as set forth in the Limited Rights Notice of subparagraph (g)(2)

if included in this clause.
A-6

"Limited rights data," as used in this clause, means data (other than computer

software) developed at private expense that embody trade secrets or are

commercial or financial and confidential or privileged.

"Restricted computer software," as used in this clause, means computer software

developed at private expense and that is a trade secret; is commercial or financial

and is confidential or privileged; or is published copyrighted computer software;

including minor modifications of such computer software.

"Restricted rights," as used in this clause, means the rights of the Government in

restricted computer software, as set forth in a Restricted Rights Notice of

subparagraph (g)(3) if included in this clause, or as otherwise may be provided in a

collateral agreement incorporated in and made part of this contract, including

minor modifications of such computer software.

"Technical data," as used in this clause, means data (other than computer

software) which are of a scientific or technical nature.

"Unlimited rights," as used in this clause, means the right of the Government to

use, disclose, reproduce, prepare derivative works, distribute copies to the public,

and perform publicly and display publicly, in any manner and for any purpose,

and to have or permit others to do so.

(B) Allocation of rights.

(1) Except as provided in paragraph (c) of this clause regarding copyright, the

Government shall have unlimited rights in -

(i) Data first produced in the performance of this contract unless provided

otherwise for limited exclusive rights data in accordance with

subparagraph (g)(4) of this clause;

(ii) Form, fit, and function data delivered under this contract;

(iii) Data delivered under this contract (except for restricted computer

software) that constitute manuals or instructional and training materials

for installation, operation, or routine maintenance and repair of items,

components, or processes delivered or furnished for use under this

contract; and

(iv) All other data delivered under this contract unless provided otherwise for

limited rights data, restricted computer software, or limited exclusive

rights data in accordance with paragraph (g) of this clause.
A-7

(2) The Contractor shall have the right to -

(i) Use, release to others, reproduce, distribute, or publish any data first

produced or specifically used by the Contractor in the performance of

this contract, unless provided otherwise in paragraph (d) of this clause or

in subparagraph (g)(4) of this clause;

(ii) Protect from unauthorized disclosure and use those data which are limited

rights data, restricted computer software, or limited exclusive rights data,

to the extent provided in paragraph (g) of this clause;

(iii) Substantiate use of, add or correct limited rights, restricted rights, limited

exclusive rights, or copyright notices and to take other appropriate action,

in accordance with paragraphs (e) and (f) of this clause; and

(iv) Establish claim to copyright subsisting in data first produced in the

performance of this contract to the extent provided in subparagraph (c)(1)

of this clause.

(C) Copyright.

(1) Data first produced in the performance of this contract.

Unless provided otherwise in paragraph (d) of this clause, the Contractor

may establish, without prior approval of the Contracting Officer, claim to

copyright subsisting in scientific and technical articles based on or containing

data first produced in the performance of this contract and published in

academic, technical or professional journals, symposia proceedings, or similar

works. The prior, express written permission of the Contracting Officer is

required to establish claim to copyright subsisting in all other data first

produced in the performance of this contract. When claim to copyright is

made, the Contractor shall affix the applicable copyright notices of 17 U.S.C.

401 or 402 and acknowledgment of Government sponsorship (including

contract number) to the data when such data are delivered to the Government,

as well as when the data are published or deposited for registration as a

published work in the U.S. Copyright Office. For data other than computer

software, the Contractor grants to the Government, and others acting on its

behalf, a paid-up, nonexclusive, irrevocable worldwide license in such

copyrighted data to reproduce, prepare derivative works, distribute copies to

the public, and perform publicly and display publicly, by or on behalf of the

Government. For computer software, the Contractor grants to the
A-8

Government and others acting in its behalf, a paid-up nonexclusive,

irrevocable worldwide license in such copyrighted computer software to

reproduce, prepare derivative works, and perform publicly and display

publicly by or on behalf of the Government.

(2) Data not first produced in the performance of this contract.

The Contractor shall not, without prior written permission of the Contracting

Officer, incorporate in data delivered under this contract any data not first

produced in the performance of this contract and which contains the

copyright notice of 17 U.S.C. 401 or 402, unless the Contractor identifies

such data and grants to the Government, or acquires on its behalf, a license of

the same scope as set forth in subparagraph (c)(1) of this clause; provided,

however, that if such data are computer software the Government shall

acquire a copyright license as set forth in subparagraph (g)(3) of this clause if

included in this contract or as otherwise may be provided in a collateral

agreement incorporated in or made part of this contract.

(3) Removal of copyright notices.

The Government agrees not to remove any copyright notices placed on data

pursuant to this paragraph (c), and to include such notices on all reproductions

of the data.

(D) Release, publication, and use of data.

(1) The Contractor shall have the right to use, release to others, reproduce,

distribute, or publish any data first produced or specifically used by the

Contractor in the performance of this contract, except to the extent such data

may be subject to the Federal export control or national security laws or

regulations, or unless otherwise provided in this paragraph, in paragraph (g) of

this clause or as expressly set forth in this contract.

(2) The Contractor agrees that, to the extent it receives or is given access to data

necessary for the performance of this contract which contain restrictive

markings, the Contractor shall treat the data in accordance with such markings

unless otherwise specifically authorized in writing by the Contracting Officer.

(3) The Contractor agrees not to establish claim to copyright or publish or release

to others any computer software first produced in the performance of this

contract other than pursuant to subparagraph (g)(4) of this clause without the

Contracting Officer's prior written permission.
A-9
A-10

 (E) Unauthorized marking of data.

(1) Notwithstanding any other provisions of this contract concerning inspection

or acceptance, if any data delivered under this contract are marked with the

notices specified in subparagraph (g)(2), (g)(3), or (g)(4) of this clause and use

of such is not authorized in this clause, or if such data bears any other

restrictive or limiting markings not authorized by this contract, the Contracting

Officer may, at any time, either return the data to the Contractor, or cancel or

ignore the markings. However, the following procedures shall apply prior to

canceling or ignoring the markings.

(i) The Contracting Officer shall make written inquiry to the Contractor

affording the Contractor 30 days from receipt of the inquiry to provide

written justification to substantiate the propriety of the markings;

(ii) If the Contractor fails to respond or fails to provide written justification

to substantiate the propriety of the markings within the 30-day period

(or a longer time not exceeding 90 days approved in writing by the

Contracting Officer for good cause shown), the Government shall have

the right to cancel or ignore the markings at any time after said period and

the data will no longer be made subject to any disclosure prohibitions.

(iii) If the Contractor provides written justification to substantiate the

propriety of the markings within the period set in subdivision (e)(1)(i) of

this clause, the Contracting Officer shall consider such written

justification and determine whether or not the markings are to be canceled

or ignored. If the Contracting Officer determines that the markings are

authorized, the Contractor shall be so notified in writing. If the

Contracting Officer determines, with the concurrence of the head of the

contracting activity, that the markings are not authorized, the Contracting

Officer shall furnish the Contractor a written determination, which

determination shall become the final agency decision regarding the

appropriateness of the markings unless the Contractor files suit in a court

of competent jurisdiction within 90 days of receipt of the Contracting

Officer's decision. The Government shall continue to abide by the

markings under this subdivision (e)(1)(iii) until final resolution of the

matter either by the Contracting Officer's determination becoming final (in

which instance the Government shall thereafter have the right to cancel or

ignore the markings at any time and the data will no longer be made

subject to any disclosure prohibitions), or by final disposition of the

matter by court decision if suit is filed.
A-11

(2) The time limits in the procedures set forth in subparagraph (e)(1) of this

clause may be modified in accordance with agency regulations implementing

the Freedom of Information Act (5 U.S.C. 552) if necessary to respond to a

request thereunder.

(3) This paragraph (e) does not apply if the contract is for a major system or for

support of a major system by a civilian agency other than NASA and the U.S.

Coast Guard agency subject to the provisions of Title III of the Federal

Property and Administrative Services Act of 1949.

(4) Except to the extent the Government's action occurs as the result of final

disposition of the matter by a court of competent jurisdiction, the Contractor

is not precluded by this paragraph (e) from bringing a claim under the Contract

Disputes Act, including pursuant to the Disputes clause of this contract, as

applicable, that may arise as the result of the Government removing or

ignoring authorized markings on data delivered under this contract.

(F) Omitted or incorrect markings.

(l) Data delivered to the Government without either the limited rights, restricted

rights, or limited exclusive rights notice as authorized by paragraph (g) of this

clause, or the copyright notice required by paragraph (c) of this clause, shall be

deemed to have been furnished with unlimited rights, and the Government

assumes no liability for the disclosure, use, or reproduction of such data.

However, to the extent the data has not been disclosed without restriction

outside the Government, the Contractor may request, within 6 months (or a

longer time approved by the Contracting Officer for good cause shown) after

delivery of such data, permission to have notices placed on qualifying data at

the Contractor's expense, and the Contracting Officer may agree to do so if the

Contractor -

(i) Identifies the data to which the omitted notice is to be applied;

(ii) Demonstrates that the omission of the notice was inadvertent;

(iii) Establishes that the use of the proposed notice is authorized; and

(iv) Acknowledges that the Government has no liability with respect to the

disclosure, use, or reproduction of any such data made prior to the

addition of the notice or resulting from the omission of the notice.
A-12

(2) The Contracting Officer may also (i) permit correction at the Contractor's

expense of incorrect notices if the Contractor identifies the data on which

correction of the notice is to be made, and demonstrates that the correct notice

is authorized, or (ii) correct any incorrect notices.

(G) Protection of limited rights data, restricted computer software, and limited

exclusive rights data.

(1) When data other than that listed in subdivisions (b)(1)(i), (ii), and (iii) of this

clause are specified to be delivered under this contract and qualify as either

limited rights data or restricted computer software, if the Contractor desires to

continue protection of such data, the Contractor shall withhold such data and

not furnish them to the Government under this contract. As a condition to

this withholding, the Contractor shall identify the data being withheld and

furnish form, fit, and function data in lieu thereof. Limited rights data that are

formatted as a computer data base for delivery to the Government are to be

treated as limited rights data and not restricted computer software.

(2) [Reserved]

(3) [Reserved]

(4) (i) Notwithstanding any other provisions of this clause, the contract may

specify or NASA may require by written request that any data first

produced in the performance of this contract be delivered to NASA or

furnished to others in accordance with (iii)(a) below, and if so specified or

required, the Contractor shall affix the following "Limited Exclusive Rights

Notice" to data that are identified in this contract as limited exclusive rights

data prior to delivery to the Government or prior to release to others by

the Contractor:

LIMITED EXCLUSIVE RIGHTS NOTICE

These data are subject to limited exclusive rights under Government

contract No.....(and subcontract ....., if appropriate). These data may be:

used, duplicated, and disclosed by or on behalf of the Government for

Government purposes; used, duplicated, and disclosed by or on behalf of

the Contractor for its purposes within the United States; and used and

duplicated (but not further disclosed) by other recipients that have been

designated or approved by NASA as participants in the program of which

this contract is a part for their purposes within the United States with the

express limitation that any release or disclosure for any of the foregoing

purposes are to be made subject to disclosure conditions that protect and
A-13

preserve its limited exclusive rights. These limited exclusive rights shall be

effective until (insert a date certain). No other disclosure and use of these

data is authorized without the written permission of (insert name of

contractor or subcontractor). This Notice shall be marked on any

reproduction of these data, in whole or in part.

(End of Notice)

(ii) The Contractor is to place the Limited Exclusive Rights Notice on limited

exclusive rights data as soon as practicable after the data is reduced to

some tangible, recorded form as defined by the term "data" in this clause,

but in any event no later than the earlier of either the date of delivery to

NASA if delivery is requested, or of release of data. The "date certain" to

be inserted in the Notice, indicating the period of limited exclusive rights,

shall be 5 years from the date the Notice is placed on the data, unless

otherwise agreed to and stated with respect to any item, component,

process, or computer software specifically identified in this contract.

(iii) The Contractor agrees:

(a) to make limited exclusive rights data available to any other entity

designated or approved by NASA as a participant in the program of

which this contract is a part, either as specifically designated in this

contract or as subsequently approved and directed in writing by

NASA;

(b) obtain written affirmation that any entity receiving limited exclusive

rights data pursuant to (a) above will abide by the use, duplication,

and disclosure prohibitions of the Limited Exclusive Rights Notice;

and

(c) not to authorize any disclosure and use of limited exclusive rights

data than as set forth in the Limited Exclusive Rights Notice without

the concurrence of NASA.

(H) Subcontracting.

(1) The Contractor has the responsibility to obtain from its subcontractors all

data and rights therein necessary to fulfill the Contractor's obligations to the

Government under this contract. If a subcontractor refuses to accept terms

affording the Government such rights, the Contractor shall promptly bring

such refusal to the attention of the Contracting Officer and not proceed with

subcontract award without further authorization.
A-14
A-15

(I) Relationship to patents.

(1) Nothing contained in this clause shall imply a license to the Government under

any patent or be construed as affecting the scope of any license or other right

otherwise granted to the Government.

(2) Nothing in this clause shall restrict the rights of the contractor under the New

Technology clause of this contract.

(J) Immigrant Aliens.

(1) For the purpose of this clause, disclosure of "limited exclusive rights data" to

Immigrant Aliens in the course of their employment by the Contractor shall

not be interpreted as disclosure outside the United States. An immigrant alien

is defined as "any person lawfully admitted in the United States under an

immigration visa for permanent residence.”

XIII. SMALL AND SMALL DISADVANTAGED BUSINESS SUBCONTRACTING

A. 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 52.219-8 of the FAR and 1852.219-76

of the NASA FAR Supplement. For this Announcement of Opportunity, NASA

has established a recommended goal of 8 percent for the participation of these

entities at the prime and subcontract level. This goal is stated as a percentage of

the total contract value. NASA encourages all offerors 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.

B. Offerors are advised that for NASA contracts resulting from this solicitation

which offer subcontracting possibilities, exceed $500,000, and are with

organizations other than small business concerns, the clause FAR 52.219-9 shall

apply. Offerors who are selected under this AO will be required to negotiate

subcontracting plans which include subcontracting goals for small, small

disadvantaged, and women-owned small business concerns. Note that these

specific subcontracting goals differ from the 8 percent goal described in paragraph

A above, and need not be submitted with the proposal. Failure to submit and
A-16

negotiate a subcontracting plan after selection shall make the offeror ineligible for

award of a contract.
B-1

APPENDIX B

GUIDELINES FOR PROPOSAL PREPARATION

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

Explorer Program and Missions of Opportunity AO. The material presented is a guide

for the prospective proposer, and is not intended to be all encompassing. The proposer

should, however, provide information relative to those items applicable, as well as other

items required by the AO. In the event of an apparent conflict between the guidelines in

this Appendix and those contained within the body of the AO, those within the AO shall

take precedence.

GENERAL GUIDELINES

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

and be clearly legible. Submission of proposal material by facsimile (fax), electronic

media, videotape, floppy disk, etc., is not acceptable. In evaluating proposals, NASA

will only consider printed material. No proposal may reference a World Wide Web site

for any data related to the proposal.

The proposal must consist of only one volume, with readily identified sections

corresponding to sections D through I given below. Note the guidance on page count for

the various sections specified in the table on page B-2.

In order to allow for recycling of proposals after the review process, all 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 (including cover page,

certifications, and non-U.S. endorsements) should be bound in a manner that makes it

easy to disassemble for reproduction. Except for the original, two-sided copies are

preferred. Every side upon which printing appears will be counted against the page

limits.

Proposals shall contain no more than 33 pages, including no more than three fold out

pages (28 x 43 cm; i.e., 11 x 17 inches). All pages other than fold out pages shall be 8.5 x

11 inches or A4 European standard. The following table provides guidance on page count

within the proposal:
B-2

Section Pages

Science Investigation description 20

Education and Outreach, Technology, and Small Disadvantaged

Business Plan

 3

Mission Implementation

Management, Schedule, and Cost Estimating Methodology

 7

 3

Appendices: (no others permitted)

Resumes

Letters of Endorsement

Statement(s) of Work (SOW) for each contract option

Reference List (optional)

No page limit,

but small size

encouraged

Single- or double-column format is acceptable. In complying with the page limit, no page

should contain more than 55 lines of text and the type font should not be smaller than 12-

point Times (i.e., approximately 15 characters per inch).

The content of each proposal is described below.

A. INVESTIGATION SUMMARY

A summary of the proposed investigation must be included with the proposal.

The Investigation Summary does not count against the page limit. The

information conveyed on this Investigation Summary should include the following:

PI and Co-I’s, abstract, the primary and any secondary science themes that the

proposal addressees, mission mode (Small Explorer or Mission of Opportunity),

and anticipated launch vehicle. The form to be used for this Summary is located at

the end of this Appendix.

B. COVER PAGE

A cover page must be a part of the proposal, but will not be counted against the

page limit. It must be signed by the Principal Investigator and an official by title

of the investigator's organization who is authorized to commit the organization.

The full names of the Principal Investigator and the authorizing official, their

addresses with zip code, telephone and fax numbers, and electronic mail addresses,

shall be included.
B-3

C. TABLE OF CONTENTS

The proposal should contain a table of contents, which will not be counted against

the page limit. This table of contents should parallel the outlines provided below

in Sections D through I.

D. SCIENCE

The science section should describe the scientific objectives of the proposed

investigation, including the value of the investigation to the space science themes.

The primary science theme to which the investigation applies should be identified.

A discussion of the scientific products and how the science products and data

obtained will be used to fulfill the scientific objectives should be provided. A

discussion of how the science data will be obtained, including a plan for delivery

of the products, and the individuals responsible for the data delivery, should also

be provided.

1. Scientific Goals and Objectives. This section should consist of a discussion of

the goals and objectives of the investigation, their value to the primary and any

secondary science themes, and their relationships to past, current, and future

investigations and missions. It should describe the history and basis for the

proposal and discuss the need for such an investigation. An overview of the

mission should be provided.

The measurements to be taken in the course of the mission, the data to be

returned, and the approach that will be taken in analyzing the data to achieve

the scientific objectives of the investigation should be discussed. This

description should identify the investigation to be performed, the quality of

the data to be returned (resolution, coverage, pointing accuracy, measurement

precision, etc.), and the quantity of data to be returned (bits, images, etc.).

The relationship between the data products generated and the scientific

objectives should be explicitly described, as should the expected results.

2. Science Implementation.

a. Instrumentation. This section should describe the instrumentation and the

criteria used for its selection. It should identify the individual instruments

and instrument systems, including their characteristics and requirements.

It should indicate items that are proposed to be developed, as well as any

existing instrumentation or design/flight heritage.

A preliminary description of each instrument design with a block diagram

showing the instrument systems and their interfaces should be included,
B-4

along with a description of the estimated performance of the instrument.

Performance characteristics should be related to the measurement and

investigation objectives as stated in the proposal. Such characteristics

include a discussion of the data rates, fields of view, resolution,

precision/sensitivity, pointing accuracy, etc.

b. Mission. Mission observing strategy and spacecraft performance required

for obtaining the necessary data with the proposed instrumentation must

be described. The concept for operating the mission and the requirements

for mission operations must be given.

c. Data Analysis and Archiving. The data reduction and analysis plan, after

the data have been delivered to the ground, should 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 should be discussed, including a list of the specific data products

and the individual team members responsible for the data products. The

plan must include a detailed schedule for the submission of raw and

reduced data to the appropriate data archive in the proper formats, media,

etc. Delivery of the data to the data archive must take place in the shortest

time possible.

d. Science Team. This section must identify the investigation science team

and their roles and responsibilities. The capabilities and experience of all

members of the proposed science team should be described. Alternately,

resumes or curriculum vitae of team members may be included as

attachments to the proposal (see Section J, below). The role of each

science team member in the investigation should be explicitly defined.

E. EDUCATION, OUTREACH, TECHNOLOGY, AND SMALL

DISADVANTAGED BUSINESS PLAN

The education, outreach, technology, and small disadvantaged business section

shall provide a summary of the benefits offered by the mission beyond the

scientific benefits. This plan should reflect the proposer’s commitment to

achieving the goals of the OSS education and outreach strategy as reflected in the

Implementation Plan for that strategy, participation of small disadvantaged

business, and the use of new technology in the implementation of the

investigations. Further information on the OSS’ broad approach to education and

outreach can be found in Implementing the Office of Space Science (OSS)

Education and Outreach Strategy, (see contents of the EPL, Appendix F).

Appendix A, Section XIII discusses requirements for small disadvantaged
B-5

businesses. Guidance on the use of new technology in investigations can be found

in the OSS Integrated Technology Strategy in the EPL.

F. MISSION IMPLEMENTATION

This section should provide a brief overview of the mission, including mission

design, instrument accommodation, spacecraft, launch vehicle required, ground

systems, and communication approach. Specific information should be included

that describes the unique requirements placed on these mission elements by the

science investigation. Tables with mass, power, data, and communications

resources and margins would be helpful in understanding the degree of maturity of

the proposed approach. Potential risk areas to the proposed investigation and

plans for mitigating those risks should be discussed. Investigation that depend on

new technology will not be penalized for risk if adequate plans are described to

ensure success of the investigation.

It is recognized that teaming arrangements to implement the mission may not be

complete at the time of the proposal. Proposers will not be penalized for this if it

is demonstrated that there are candidate implementation approaches for the

spacecraft, launch vehicle, communications, and ground systems that will allow

the successful implementation of the investigation.

G. MANAGEMENT AND SCHEDULE

This section should briefly summarize the investigator's proposed management

approach. The management organization and decision-making process should be

described and the teaming arrangement (as known) should be discussed. The

responsibilities of team members, including contributors, and institutional

commitments should be discussed. Unique capabilities that each team member

organization brings to the team, as well as previous experience with similar

systems and equipment, should be addressed. The specific roles and

responsibilities of the Principal Investigator and Project Manager should be

discussed. Key project personnel (e.g., the Project Manager) need not be

identified by name at this time.

A project schedule to meet the proposed launch date and covering all phases of

the investigation should be provided. The schedule should include proposed

major project review dates; instrument development; spacecraft development;

instrument to spacecraft integration and test; launch vehicle integration; and

mission operations and data analysis.
B-6
B-7

H. COST AND COST ESTIMATING METHODOLOGY

This section shall include a first-order estimated cost of the investigation that

encompasses all proposed activities, including Phase A/B/C/D/E, launch services,

development of the ground data system, fee, and contributions. These costs shall

be consistent with the program requirements described in Section 3 of the AO.

The amount to be costed in each fiscal year should be identified by providing the

data in Table B1, which will not be counted against the page limit. The top

portion of Table B1 requests cost data relative to the NASA Mission Cost. The

lower portion addresses contributions. Table B2 gives the NASA inflation index

to be used to calculate real year dollars.

The methodology used to estimate the cost, for example, specific cost model, past

performance, cost estimating relationships from analogous missions, should be

discussed.

I. APPENDICES

The following additional information is required to be supplied with the proposal.

This information can be included as Appendices to the proposal, and, as such, will

not be counted within the specified page limit. NO OTHER APPENDICES ARE

PERMITTED.

1. Resumes. Provide resumes or curriculum vitae for all science team members

identified in the science section. Resumes or curriculum vitae should be no

longer than two pages in length.

2. Letters of Endorsement. Letters of endorsement must be provided from all

organizations offering to make a contribution to the investigation. Letters of

endorsement should be signed by both the lead representative from each

organization represented on the team, and by institutional and Government

officials authorized to commit their organizations to participation in the

proposed investigation.

3. Statement of Work (SOW): For investigations managed from non-Government

institutions, provide a SOW for all potential contracts with NASA. For

investigations managed from Government institutions, provide a SOW as if the

institution were non-Government. This SOW must include the requirement

for a concept study report as defined in Appendix J. In addition, the SOW

must include general tasks statements for Phases B/C/D, and for Phase E for

the investigation. All SOW’s should include the following as a minimum:

Scope of Work, Deliverables (including science data), and Government
B-8

Responsibilities (as applicable). SOW’s need not be no more than a few pages

in length.

4. References List: Proposals may provide, as an appendix, a list of reference

documents and materials used in the proposal. The documents and materials

themselves cannot be submitted, except as a part of the proposal.
B-9

TABLE B1

TOTAL MISSION COST FUNDING PROFILE TEMPLATE

(FY costs* in Real Year Dollars, Totals in Real Year and FY 1997 Dollars)

Item FY1 FY2 FY3 FY4 FY5 ... FYn

Total

(Real Yr.)

Total

(FY 1997)

Phase A $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $

Phase B/C/D $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $

- Instrument A

 - Instrument B

 - Spacecraft

 - MSI&T **

Ground Data

System Dev

$ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $

Launch services $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $

Phase E $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $

Other (specify) $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $

NASA Mission

Cost $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $

Contributions by Organization (Non-U.S. or

U.S.) to:

Phase A/B/C/D $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $

 - Organization A

 - Organization B

Ground Data

System Dev

$ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $

- Organization A

Launch Services $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $

- Organization A

Phase E $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $

 - Organization A

Other $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $

Contributed

Costs (Total) $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $

Mission Totals $

* Costs should include all costs including any fee

** MSI&T - Mission System Integration and Test and preparation for operations
B-10

TABLE B2

NASA NEW START INFLATION INDEX

Fiscal Year 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005

Inflation Rate 0.0% 3.7% 3.9% 3.8% 3.8% 3.8% 3.8% 3.8% 3.8%

Cumulative Inflation Index 1.0 1.037 1.077 1.118 1.161 1.205 1.251 1.300 1.350

Use an inflation rate of 3.8% for years beyond 2005.
B-11

Small Explorer and Missions of Opportunity

Investigation Summary Form

AO 97-OSS-03 Small Explorer Program and Missions of Opportunity

Principal Investigator

Title First Name Middle Name Last Name

Department

Company/Institution

Street Address City/Town

State Zip/Postal Country

Telephone Fax E-Mail Address

Proposal Title

Science Theme Supported (1 = primary; 2 = secondary)

[ ]Structure and Evolution of the Universe

[ ]The Sun-Earth Connection

[ ]Astronomical Search for Origins and Planetary Systems

Abstract (Limit 150 words)
B-12

Small Explorer and Missions of Opportunity

Investigation Summary Form (Page 2)

Principal Investigator

Title First Name Middle Name Last Name

Proposal Title

Mission Mode (Check one)

[ ]Small Explorer

[ ]Mission of Opportunity

Cost

NASA Mission Cost $_______

Total Mission Cost $_______

Anticipated Launch Vehicle:

Co-Investigator(s)

Name Institution E-mail
C-1

APPENDIX C

GROUND DATA SYSTEMS AND MISSION OPERATIONS

 AND DATA ANALYSIS (MO&DA)

BACKGROUND

In the past, prelaunch development of the ground data system and postlaunch mission

operations for Earth-orbiting missions were funded by the former Office of Space

Communications (Code O). As part of NASA's reorganizations, and transition to fullcost accounting, such funds will be transferred to the appropriate enterprise, in this case

the Office of Space Science. Therefore, funding for such functions must be included in

mission proposals, including responses to this AO, and evaluated and reviewed

accordingly.

The following sections describe the elements of the ground data systems and operations

and provide guidance on how costs associated with these functions should be allocated

against the various Small Explorer cost cap categories. Proposers are free to propose

development of their own operations systems and services, propose the use of operations

system and services provided by NASA or third parties, or some combination of these

options.

1. DEVELOPMENT OF THE GROUND DATA SYSTEM

The development of the ground data system encompasses the items listed below. Note

that this does not include the development of systems for science data processing or

science operations (e.g., instrument performance evaluation or instrument calibration

scheduling). The cost of the ground data system development is considered to be prelaunch costs and NASA Mission Cost shall not exceed the cost limit given in Section 3.6

of the AO for development of the ground data system. These costs are those typically

incurred in developing systems, or arranging for the use of existing shared systems, such

as ground stations.

• Space/ground communications. Includes arrangements for or development of

telemetry acquisition and commanding. This may include the development of a new

ground station, the arrangement for the use of existing ground stations, the

arrangement for the use of the Tracking Data Relay Satellite System, or other methods

of communicating between the spacecraft and the ground.
C-2

• Data Transport. Includes arrangement for or development of the data transport

among the ground system components, including electronic communications and

physical media shipment.

• Mission Operations System. Includes arranging for or developing the system for

mission planning, scheduling, commanding, and spacecraft telemetry monitoring.

• Level Zero Processing. Includes arranging for or developing the system for the

removal of the artifacts of the data downlink and recreation of the data in the form

that it was generated. The output of level zero processing is ready for processing into

science products.

• Tracking and Attitude. Includes arranging for or developing the system for attitude

determination, attitude sensor calibration and alignment, attitude maneuver and

control, trajectory determination, trajectory design and control, acquisition data, and

launch support.

• Test Systems. Includes arranging for or developing the system for the exercise of

the interfaces and the end-to-end system

• Management, Systems Engineering, and Testing. Required to develop the

operations ground system, verify its functionality, and test for RF compatibility with

the spacecraft. Management functions also include spectrum licensing. NASA will

provide assistance in obtaining licenses to missions that use Government frequencies

for noncommercial applications.

• Maintenance. Any maintenance, licensing, or system administration that is required

prior to the MO&DA phase.

2. PREPARATION FOR OPERATIONS

The proposer is responsible for the prelaunch operations preparation for the mission.

This includes all efforts to prepare for operations until the start of the MO&DA phase

and includes operations from launch through spacecraft and instrument checkout within

the first 30 days after launch. It includes maintaining the spacecraft operations data base

that defines operations parameters such as telemetry limits and the definition of all

procedures for operating the spacecraft for all phases of the mission. Preparation for

operations also includes the responsibility to see that the requirements for the Mission

Operations and Data Analysis phase are understood and fully costed. The cost of

Preparation for Operations must be included in the Phase A/B/C/D cost cap given in

Section 3.6 of the AO.
C-3

The scope of this effort includes:

• Defining operations plans and procedures. Includes pertinent operations

agreements with other support elements. Detailed operations requirements should be

documented to define the functional mission needs for developers of other

components of the system. This effort includes developing the procedures for

operating the mission, including contingency procedures.

• Training. The effort of the operations team to be trained on the operation of the

ground system and the operation of the spacecraft and instruments. This includes

participation in tests and simulations.

• Testing. Acceptance testing of the operations ground system from the

developers/providers (if they are a different group than the operators) and verification

that the ground system and operations team are ready for operations.

• Mission Development Participation. Any involvement in the development and test

of other components of the mission, such as reviews or system evaluation.

• Reviews. Preparation and presentation of any reviews held to verify operational

status or readiness.

• Configuration. Configuration of the operations ground system as required (for

example, any augmentations to the telemetry and commands parameter data base or

the generation of user specific display formats)

• Pre-MO&DA Operations. Operations until the MO&DA phase begins (launch

plus 30 days)

3. MISSION OPERATIONS AND DATA ANALYSIS (MO&DA)

The proposer is responsible for the MO&DA phase of the mission, including mission

operations and science processing in support of the proposed research objectives. The

Mission Operations and Data Analysis phase encompasses the items listed below. This

phase (Phase E) is expected to begin 30 days after launch. The NASA Mission Cost for

Phase E must not exceed the cost limit given in Section 3.6 of the AO.

• Mission operations. This includes the personnel to operate the spacecraft and the

ground system for the proposed mission lifetime. It includes mission scheduling,

command generation, telemetry monitoring, and level zero processing of the science

data. It also includes support of orbit determination, attitude processing, and any
C-4

needed on-orbit attitude sensor calibration or alignment and provision of any needed

calibration constants to the level zero or science data processing functions.

• Uplink and Downlink Communications. This includes use of NASA's space

network (Tracking and Data Relay Satellite System - TDRSS), low-Earth orbit

ground network or space/ground links provided by the proposer or third parties.

• Ground communications. This includes the costs of moving data among the ground

elements. It may include the shipment of physical media as well as electronic

communication

• Science operations. This includes the personnel to plan the science operations and

to monitor the performance of the science instrument. It also includes any needed onorbit instrument calibration and alignment, as well as providing any needed calibration

constants to the level zero or science data processing functions.

• Science data processing. This processes the data from level 0 to higher level data

products, stores the products for the life of the mission, and distributes the products

to the science team. This includes any effort to prepare the data for permanent

archiving after the completion of the mission.

• Science team activities, including data validation and analysis.

• Maintenance and sustaining engineering of the ground data systems. This

includes hardware maintenance, spares, renewal of commercial-off-the-shelf software

licenses, and any problem correction or enhancement of the ground system for the

proposed life of the mission.

The recently established Space Operations Management Office (SOMO) at the Johnson

Space Center, is responsible for the functional management of all of NASA space

operations efforts.

NASA is currently in transition to full-cost accounting principles. These principles, and

their implementation in direct cost accounting, will evolve during the next two years, and

specific price lists are currently not available. To assist the proposers, this section

provides information on typical costs. Contact the NASA point of contact given below if

you wish to consider using NASA institutional resources and the point of contact will

assist the proposer in developing the cost of institutional system usage required for the

unique needs of the mission.

Cost of the ground system development, operations preparation, and operations will

depend on the unique combination of requirements and systems associated with a
C-5

particular mission. However, costs for a typical missions in response to this AO would

consist of:

Ground data system development. The cost to procure hardware and configure

and extend commercial off the shelf software (or adapt existing software from a

similar mission) would be approximately $2 million. The allocation of functions

between the spacecraft and ground system can have significant impact on the

ground system development costs

Operations Preparation. The effort to prepare for operations would typically

cost about $700 K for a mission that is similar to a previous mission.

Operations. The mission operations team for a simple mission would cost about

$400 K per year. Maintenance and other supporting services would cost about

$100 K per year.

Use of a ground station would cost:

Selected NASA Ground Station Services Fees in (FY 97) $K, per

hour (for the purpose of

this AO only)

18m L/S-band in Wallops Virginia $1.3K

8m TOTS at Wallops and Fairbanks $0.4K

10m McMurdo $1.0K

5m S-band at Fairbanks $0.4K

34 m DSN (Madrid, Canberra, Goldstone) $1.6K

70 m DSN (Madrid, Canberra, Goldstone) $3.9K

26m S-Band (Madrid, Canberra, Goldstone) $2.0K

Note that the 34 m and 70 m DSN stations are projected to be significantly

oversubscribed in the time frame for these missions.
C-6

Use of the Tracking and Data Relay Satellite System (the Space Network) would cost:

TDRSS Service Description Fees in (FY 97) $K, per

hour (for the purpose of

this AO only)

TDRSS Flexible Support (Flexible Support. implies that

the user requests contacts which permit NASA, at its

option, to schedule service at any time during the period of

a single orbit of the user mission.)

If the requests are not

flexible, the cost of the

service doubles.

Single Access (S or Ku-band) $0.6K

Multiple Access (S-band) Forward Service $0.3K

Multiple Access (S-band) Return Service $0.06K

(Nominal for SA Users)

The ground station and TDRSS service costs are for proposal purposes only; they may

change in the future as full cost accounting is implemented. These are typical costs to aid

in estimating the cost of a proposed mission. These costs are provided for illustrative

purposes and do not change the caps defined elsewhere in this AO. Actual costs could be

lower if the mission can take advantage of existing systems or higher, if the mission has

unique requirements. The proposer must provide an estimate of the cost to support the

proposed mission, working within the proposer's team, with NASA, or with a third party

supplier of ground systems and operations services.

Proposers who have questions on NASA services or require assistance in defining ground

data system and operations approaches should contact:

Stanley Fishkind

Program Integration Office

Code MG

National Aeronautics and Space Administration

Washington DC 20546-0001

Fax number: 202-358-3520

E-mail: stanley.fishkind@hq.nasa.gov

Phone: 202-358-0709
C-7

Additional information regarding NASA ground systems and operations is available via

Internet at the home pages listed below.

http://joy.gsfc.nasa.gov

http://www.jsc.nasa.gov/somo/svc_cat.html

http://deepspace1.jpl.nasa.gov/advmiss/
D-1

APPENDIX D

SMALL EXPLORERS LAUNCH SERVICES INFORMATION SUMMARY

This appendix provides data and guidelines for Small Expandable Launch Vehicles

Services, and for Space Shuttle Launched Free Flyers.

SMALL EXPENDABLE LAUNCH SERVICES (SELVS II)

Small Expendable Launch Services (SELVS II) available to Small Explorer missions for the

purpose of this AO are provided in this section of the appendix. Emphasis is given to

those characteristics that either affect or constrain the payload.

As stated in the AO, the total cost of SMEX missions assumes baseline launch services

and performance; also referred to in this appendix as Small Class/Fairing A.

Investigations requiring launch vehicle performance and services beyond the baseline may

do so, but the additional cost must be deducted from the phase A/B/C/D mission cost.

Information on SELVS II may be obtained through the Orbital Launch Services Project

Office, Code 470, NASA Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, MD 20771; contact

Mark Roberts (mark.roberts@gsfc.nasa.gov), (301) 286-5532.

Launch Vehicle Description

SELVS II is currently in the procurement cycle. Since the actual launch vehicle(s) and

Contractor(s) have not been selected, the launch vehicle will be referred to as "SELVS II"

throughout this appendix. The selected Contractor will use the SELVS II to provide

launch services for the Small Explorer missions to be selected and confirmed from

proposals received in response to this AO. SELVS II will be a multistage solid- or liquidpropellant vehicle.

Payload/Vehicle Integration and Launch

Integration of the payload to the SELVS II vehicle will be accomplished at the yet-to-bedetermined launch site. The SELVS II Contractor will manage the mission integration of

the payload flight and ground systems with the launch vehicle and its associated GSE.
D-2

Payload Mass

The SELVS II RFP specifies minimum performance requirements for a number of

missions, as shown in Table D-1. Spacecraft mass capability anticipated as available

under the SELVS II Contract is shown for circular orbits of 28.5 degrees inclination in

Figure D-1 and for sun-synchronous inclinations in Figure D-2. Low inclination missions

(0 to <28.5 deg) will be possible with SELVS II as a nonstandard service costing

approximately 20% more than the standard price for the vehicle chosen. To obtain

spacecraft mass capabilities for these types of orbits use the “Request for Clarification

for a Specific Payload to Orbit” form found on page

D-11 of the appendix.

Orbit Injection Accuracy

Orbit injection accuracy varies with the mission orbit. For low Earth circular orbits, the

3 altitude errors are defined in Table D-1.

Fairing Envelope and Payload Attach Fittings

The payload, consisting of the spacecraft and instruments, must fit within the static

envelope of the SELVS II vehicle. The vehicle selected for the SELVS II service may offer

several fairings. Figure D-3 shows the minimum payload envelopes specified in the

SELVS II RFP. Generally, the larger payload envelopes are required by higher mass

payloads. Table D-1 relates fairing envelope requirements to payload mass

requirements. Fairing envelope B2 is to be assumed for missions requiring an upper

stage, e.g. highly elliptical or escape orbits.

Two standard mechanical interfaces are specified in the SELVS II RFP as 38.810 and

23.250 inch bolt circles at the top of the payload attach/separation system provided by

the vehicle. Other attach fittings may be available.

Environments

Environment specifications from the SELVS II RFP are shown in Figure D-4.

Electrical Interface

The vehicle electrical interface will allow payload ground support equipment to supply

power, command and control, and payload status monitoring until 6 minutes before

launch.
D-3

Spin

The SELVS II vehicle will be capable of separating the payload in either a spinning or non

spinning mode. The SELVS II RFP specifies that the range of spin rates is to be

proposed.

Cost

Baseline vehicle (Small Class/Fairing A) and services cost will be $19 million, and

enhanced launch vehicle and services (Large Class/Fairing B1 or B2) will be $28 million.

Amortized costs are provided in Table D-2. Any vehicle performance required above the

“Baseline Vehicle” line in figures D-1 and D-2 will increase the launch cost for that

mission to $28 million (Large Class vehicle cost).
D-4

Table D-1

SELVS II RFP Minimum Performance Requirements

Insertion

Apse (km)

NonInsertion

Apse (km)

Inclination

(deg)

Argument of

Perigee (deg)

Payload

Mass (kg)

Payload

Envelope

1 600 600 74.4 N/A 660 B1

2 1,334 1,334 66 N/A 500 B1

3 600 600 94 N/A 600 B1

4 705 705 98.2 N/A 180 A

5 500 1,000 90 270 180 A

6 500 500 70 N/A 320 A

7 500 500 28.5 N/A 380 A

8 705 705 98.2 N/A 800 B1

9 500 1,000 90 270 870 B1

10 500 500 28.5 N/A 1,260 B1

Notes: 1. Required minimum payload envelopes are specified in Figure A-3

2. Spacecraft mass does not include vehicle-provided attach hardware (PAF).

3. Altitudes specified are relative to the equatorial radius of the Earth.

4. The launch service shall be capable of targeting a right ascension of the

ascending node within ±0.5 degrees

5. The launch service shall be capable of providing any required argument of

perigee from 0° to 360°.

6. The required 3 accuracy on the above requirements is as follows:

Insertion Apse: ±20 km

Non-Insertion Apse: ±90 km

Inclination: ±0.20°

Argument of Perigee: ±5°
D-5

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200

Spacecraft Mass, kg

Altitude, km

SELVS II

Range

Baseline Vehicle

Enhanced Services

Figure D-1. Anticipated SELVS II Spacecraft Mass Capability for Circular

Orbits, Inclination 28.5
D-6

0

500

1000

1500

2000

0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400

Spacecraft Mass, kg

Altitude, km

SELVS II

Range

Baseline Vehicle

Enhanced Services

Figure D-2. Anticipated SELVS II Spacecraft Mass Capability for Circular

Sun Synchronous Orbits
D-7

Fairing envelope B2 is to be assumed for missions requiring an upper stage,

e.g. highly elliptical orbits.

Figure D-3. Maximum Fairing Static Envelopes Specified by the SELVS II RFP
D-8

(a) Spacecraft Acoustic Environment - Maximum Flight Level

(b) Spacecraft Interface Random Vibration Environment
D-9

Figure D-4. Maximum Spacecraft Environments for the SELVS II Vehicle

(c) Spacecraft Interface Shock Environment - Maximum Flight Levels

Axis Maximum Acceleration (g's)

Axial +11.0 / -4.0

Lateral ± 6.0

Notes: (1) Sign convention: Positive axial acceleration

produces compression

 (2) Axial and lateral accelerations are simultaneous

(d) Spacecraft Design CG Limit Load Factors

Figure D-4 (continued). Maximum Spacecraft Environments for the SELVS

II Vehicle
D-10

Table D-2

Launch Service Cost

(Real Year $ in Millions)

Launch in 12/00

Launch Service FY’98 FY’99 FY’00 FY’01 Total Total

FY’97$

Small Class

(Fairing A)

0 12 7 2 21 19

Large Class

(Fairing B1 or B2)

5 12 10 4 31 28

Launch in 12/01

Launch Service FY’99 FY’00 FY’01 FY’02 Total Total

FY’97$

Small Class

(Fairing A)

0 13 7 2 22 19

Large Class

(Fairing B1 or B2)

5 13 10 4 32 28
D-11

Request for Clarification of a Specific Payload to Orbit

Send the following information to determine if the mission orbit is achievable.

Apogee (km) 

Perigee (km) 

Inclination (deg) 

Argument of Perigee (deg) 

Total mass to orbit (kg) 

Send the completed form to the following:

Mark Roberts

Orbital Launch Services Project Office

Code 470

NASA Goddard Space Flight Center

Greenbelt, MD 20771

Telephone: (301)286-5532.

FAX: (301) 286-1696

E-Mail: mark.roberts@gsfc.nasa.gov
D-12

SMALL EXPLORER SPACE SHUTTLE LAUNCHED FREE FLYERS

The Space Shuttle offers unique opportunities to launch payloads that are large, heavy

and/or require recovery. It can also carry small payloads on a space-available basis. Since

secondary payloads share the mission with other payloads, the resources and capabilities

of the Space Shuttle are shared among all payloads on a mission. Free flyers can be either

dedicated satellites or carriers to which the instrument mounts, which in turn interface

with the Orbiter. The capabilities and resources available to the experimenter are the

combination of the satellite/carrier design and the portion of Shuttle resources allocated to

that payload.

Proposers using shuttle services should contact the Special Payloads Division, Mail Code

740, NASA Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, MD 20771; contact Donald E.

Carson (301) 286-8813, E-mail address: dcarson@gsfc.nasa.gov for additional information

and guidance.

Payload Size

While the capacity of the Space Shuttle is in excess of 32000 pounds, secondary payloads

generally do not exceed 8000 pounds. Similarly, the shuttle payload bay volume (15’ dia.

x 60’ long) is shared among the entire payload complement. Instrument size, shape, and

mass are driven by the capabilities of the carrier within the constraints of the Shuttle and

the other manifested payloads.

Orbits

The Shuttle can carry payloads into orbits with an inclination ranging from 28.5 degrees

to 57 degrees. Altitudes at which free flyers can be deployed depend on a variety of

factors but can vary from 110 nmi to over 300 nmi. Free flyers can carry orbit adjust

systems to modify orbit parameters.

Mission Duration

Shuttle launched free flyer mission duration varies depending on the mission design.

Mission designs can include deployment and retrieval on the same Shuttle mission,

deployment on one mission and retrieval by a later mission , or deployment and no

retrieval.

Spacecraft that are deployed and retrieved on the same mission are generally free flying

for two weeks or less. Spacecraft not retrieved on the same mission as deployment can

have durations from months to years.
D-13

Environment

Launch, orbital, and landing environments are driven by a combination of the Shuttle

environment, the presence of other payloads in the bay, and the free flyer design.

Specific environments are available from spacecraft and carrier providers.

General design and qualification recommendations for payloads that will fly on the

Shuttle can be found in the Goddard Space Flight Center’s General Environmental

Verification Specification (GEVS), available from the Small Explorers Project Office. In

many cases these specifications are conservative and can be relaxed by mission specific

analysis.

Payload/Launch Vehicle Integration and Launch

Integration of the payload with the Space Shuttle will be accomplished at the Kennedy

Space Center in Florida. The PI’s launch site integration and testing team will work with

the KSC ground operations team during the integration and of the payload flight and

ground systems with the Shuttle and its associated GSE.

Cost

As stated in the AO, for proposal purposes the launch vehicle cost to be used to calculate

the NASA Mission Cost for a Shuttle launched free flyer is the same as the cost of the

baseline SELV-II services. The cost of integration to the Shuttle, however, must be

included in the Phase A/B/C/D cap. Likewise, the development cost of a new carrier or

the recurring cost of an existing carrier (if applicable) and/or the cost of a dedicated

spacecraft, integration and test to the carrier (if one is used), and any mission uniques,

must also be included in the Phase A/B/C/D cost cap. These costs can vary widely

depending on mission implementation approach and other requirements. Therefore,

proposers should contact the Special Payloads Division, Mail Code 740, NASA Goddard

Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, MD 20771; contact Donald E. Carson (301) 286-8813,

E-mail address: dcarson@gsfc.nasa.gov for additional information and guidance.
E-1

APPENDIX E

REGULATIONS GOVERNING PROCUREMENT OF

FOREIGN GOODS OR SERVICES

The following Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) clauses cover the purchase of foreign

goods and services and may be included in contracts resulting from this Announcement of

Opportunity:

52.225-3 Buy American Act -- Supplies (January 1994)

52.225-7 Balance of Payments Program (April 1984)

52.225-9 Buy American Act -- Trade Agreements -- Balance of Payments Program

(January 1994)

52.225-10 Duty-Free Entry (April 1984)

52.225-11 Restrictions on Certain Foreign Purchases (May 1992)

52.225-17 Buy American Act -- Supplies Under European Community Agreement

(May 1995)

52.225-18 European Community Sanction for End Products (May 1995)

52.225-19 European Community Sanction for Services (May 1995)

52.225-21 Buy American Act -- North American Free Trade Agreement

Implementation Act -- Balance of Payments Program (January 1994)

The proposer is directed to the Federal Acquisition Regulation and the NASA FAR

Supplement for further information on these regulations.
F-1

APPENDIX F

CONTENTS OF THE EXPLORER PROGRAM LIBRARY

The Explorer Program Library (EPL) includes documents available electronically via the

Internet, as well as paper copy. Proposers are requested to access the document

electronically where possible. Only limited paper copies of documents are available.

Please note that not all documents are available via the EPL, but access information is

provided.

It is incumbent upon the proposer to ensure that the documents used in proposal

preparation are of the date and revision listed in the AO or this Appendix.

The EPL is accessible on the World Wide Web at the URL address

<http://www.ssso.larc.nasa.gov>

Requests for paper copies should be submitted in writing to:

Explorers Program Library

Mail Stop 160

Langley Research Center

National Aeronautics and Space Administration

Hampton, VA 23681-0001

FAX: (757) 864-8894

E-mail: j.a.lintott@larc.nasa.gov

Space Science for the 21st Century: The Space Science Enterprise Strategic Plan

(August 1995)

This document is a concise statement of the goals and outlook of NASA’s Space

Science Enterprise. It is a compilation of the major ideas described in more detail in

the context of the overall NASA Strategic Plan

Space Science for the 21st Century: Strategic Plan for 1995-2000 (September 1994)

This document details plans for future missions during the period 1995-2000.

A Science Strategy for Space Physics (1995)

National Research Council report. A paper copy may be obtained by sending an

E-mail with name and address to <cchamber@nas.edu>.
F-2

HST and Beyond. Exploration and Search for Origins: A Vision for Ultraviolet -

Optical - Infrared Space Astronomy (May 1996)

Report of the “HST and Beyond Committee”

Exploration of Neighboring Planetary Systems (ExNPS) Study (October 1995)

Jet Propulsion Laboratory report. Mission and technology road map; presentation

to the Townes Blue Ribbon Panel

Recommended Priorities for NASA’s Gamma-Ray Astronomy Program 1996-2010

(1997)

Report synopsis of the Gamma Ray Astronomy Program Working Group

OSS Integrated Technology Strategy (April 1994)

Describes efforts to manage technology infusion into future OSS missions and to

promote technology transfer to the private sector

Partners in Education: A Strategy for Integrating Education and Public Outreach into

NASA’s Space Science Programs (March 1995)

This document describes the overall strategy for integrating education and public

outreach into NASA's space science programs.

Implementing the Office of Space Science (OSS) Education/Public Outreach Strategy

(October 1996)

This document describes OSS’s overall approach to implementing its

Education/Public Outreach strategy.

NHB 7120.5 -- Management of Major System Programs and Projects (November 1993)

This NASA Handbook provides a reference for typical activities, milestones, and

products in the development and execution of NASA missions.

Assessment of Recent Changes in the Explorer Program (December 1996)

Report by the Space Studies Board of the National Research Council. A paper

copy may be obtained from:

Space Studies Board

2101 Constitution Avenue, NW

National Research Council

Washington, DC 20418
F-3

ISO 9000 Series

The following ISO 9000 quality documents describe current national and NASA

standards of quality processes and procedures.

American National Standard, “Quality Systems - Model for Quality

Assurance in Design, Development, Production, Installation, and Servicing,”

ANSI/ASQC Q9001-1994.

“Quality Management and Quality System Elements - Guidelines,”

ANSI/ASQC Q9004-1-1994.

“Quality Management and Quality Assurance Standards - Guidelines for

Selection and Use,” ANSI/ASQC Q9000-1-1994

“ISO 9000 and NASA,” Code Q presentation, April 24, 1995.

Note: The first three ISO 9000-related documents are copyrighted and cannot be

reproduced without appropriate compensation. For copies contact:

American Society for Quality Control (ASQC)

P.O. Box 3066

Milwaukee, WI 53201-3066

800-248-1946

Example Mission Definition and Requirements Agreement

Example of such an agreement

Sample Terms and Conditions for the Phase A (Concept Study) Contract

MIDEX Lessons-Learned Workshop Report (August 1996)

Proceedings from the Medium-class Explorer (MIDEX) Lessons-Learned

Workshop held in June 1996.

Electronic versions only are available for the following:

Federal Acquisition Regulations (FAR) General Services Administration

(URL: http://www.gsa.gov/far/)

NASA FAR Supplement Regulations

(URL: http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/procurement/regs/nfstoc.htm)

NASA Financial Management Manual

(URL: http://www.hq.nasa.gov/fmm/
G-1

APPENDIX G

CERTIFICATIONS
CERTIFICATION REGARDING DRUG-FREE WORKPLACE REQUIREMENTS

This certification is required by the regulations implementing the Drug-Free Workplace Act of 1988, 34

CFR Part 85. Subpart F. The regulations, published in the January 31, 1989 Federal Register , require certification

by grantees, prior to award, that they will maintain a drug-free workplace. The certification set out below is a

material representation of fact upon which reliance will be placed when the agency determines to award the grant.

False certification or violation of the certification shall be grounds for suspension of payments, suspension or

termination of grants, or government-wide suspension or debarment (see 34 CFR Part 85, Sections 85.615 and

85.620).

I. GRANTEES OTHER THAN INDIVIDUALS

A. The grantee certifies that it will provide a drug-free workplace by:

(a) Publishing a statement notifying employees that the unlawful manufacture, distribution, dispensing,

possession or use of a controlled substance is prohibited in the grantee's workplace and specifying the

actions that will be taken against employees for violation of such prohibition;

(b) Establishing a drug-free awareness program to inform employees about --

(1) The dangers of drug abuse in the workplace;

(2) The grantees policy of maintaining a drug-free workplace;

(3) Any available drug counseling, rehabilitation, and employee assistance programs; and

(4) The penalties that may be imposed upon employees for drug abuse violations occurring in the

workplace;

(c) Making it a requirement that each employee to be engaged in the performance of the grant be given a

copy of the statement required by paragraph (a);

(d) Notifying the employee in the statement required by paragraph (a) that, as a condition of employment

under the grant, the employee will

(1) Abide by the terms of the statement; and

(2) Notify the employer of any criminal drug statute conviction for a violation occurring in the

workplace no later than five days after such conviction;

(e) Notifying the agency within ten days after receiving notice under subparagraph (d) (2) from an employee

or otherwise receiving actual notice of such conviction;

(f) Taking one of the following actions, within 30 days of receiving notice under subparagraph (d) (2),

with respect to any employee who is so convicted --

(1) Taking appropriate personnel action against such an employee, up to and including termination; or

(2) Requiring such employee to participate satisfactorily in a drug abuse assistance or rehabilitation

program approved for such purposes by a Federal, State, or Local health, Law enforcement, or other

appropriate agency;

(g) Making a good faith effort to continue to maintain a drug-free workplace through implementation of

paragraphs (a), (b), (c), (d), (e), and (f)

B. The grantee shall insert in the space provided below the site(s) for the performance or work done in

connection with the specific grant:

Place of Performance (Street address, city, county, state, zip code)

__________________________________________________

__________________________________________________

__________________________________________________

Check _____ if there are workplaces on file that are not identified here.

II. GRANTEES WHO ARE INDIVIDUALS

The grantee certifies that, as a condition of the grant, he or she will not engage in the unlawful manufacture,

distribution, dispensing, possession or use of a controlled substance in conducting any activity with the grant.

Organization Name AO or NRA Number and Title

Printed Name and Title of Authorized Representative

Signature Date

Printed Principal Investigator Name Proposal Title
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, 34 CFR Part 85, Section 85.510, Participants' responsibilities. The regulations were published as

Part VII of the May 28, 1988 Federal Register (pages 19160–19211). Copies of the regulations may be obtained

by contacting the U.S. Department of Education, Grants and Contracts Service, 400 Maryland Avenue, SW (Room

3633 GSA Regional Office Building No. 3), Washington, DC 20202-4725, telephone (202) 732-2505.

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 or NRA Number and Title

Printed Name and Title of Authorized Representative

Signature Date

Printed Principal Investigator Name Proposal Title
CERTIFICATION REGARDING

LOBBYING

As required by S 1352 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 or NRA Number and Title

Printed Name and Title of Authorized Representative

Signature Date

Printed Principal Investigator Name Proposal Title
H-1

APPENDIX H

FLIGHT ASSURANCE REQUIREMENTS

1.0 GENERAL GUIDELINES

1.1 Overview

Missions selected under this Announcement of Opportunity (AO) will be structured so

that the Principal Investigator will be responsible for all aspects of their mission,

including Safety, Reliability, and Quality Assurance (SR&QA). Unlike previous Small

Explorer AO’s, NASA Headquarters has not imposed a payload classification per NMI

8010.1A, thus allowing Principal Investigators to tailor their SR&QA program in

accordance with ISO 9001 series standards. This approach maximizes the use of existing

and proven processes, procedures, and methodologies

The Product Assurance (PA) requirements for the program recognize a wide variation in

complexity, size, and technology for the mission which can affect program risks and

costs. In addition, the capabilities of investigators and their partners and subcontractors

vary widely. For those organizations with established SR&QA processes and a record of

success in space flight, the PA requirements for the Small Explorer program should be

considerably reduced from that of the past. For those organizations which do not have

established SR&QA processes for space flight hardware, NASA is providing in this

appendix a set of guidelines which supplement the more general standards of ISO 9001.

It is recommended that the Principal Investigator consider all aspects of the mission when

developing a comprehensive PA program. The effort to plan and invest from the

beginning in quality design and problem prevention should not be underestimated, as its

value in terms of reducing overall cost has been demonstrated.

It is the responsibility of the Principal Investigator to plan and implement a

comprehensive SR&QA program for all flight hardware, software, and Ground Support

Equipment (GSE). This responsibility extends to all of the Principal Investigator’s

subcontracts and suppliers. Only limited PA insight is planned by the Small Explorer

Project and will be focused primarily on those activities that contribute most to product

integrity. Deliverable documentation will be significantly reduced, provided the Principal

Investigator maintains an adequate internal record keeping system that provides the

necessary traceability for a program of this magnitude. The Small Explorer Project Office

will support and participate with the Principal Investigator in assuring that the SR&QA

program being implemented is valid, complete, and effective. Likewise, the Small

Explorers Project is prepared to assist the Principal Investigator in any aspect of PA and

to be the focus for ready and regular access to the Goddard Space Flight Center’s flight

assurance expertise.
H-2

Previous Small Explorer missions have been predominately single string systems, with

emphasis on simplicity of design and cost control. Rigorous and disciplined systems

engineering, combined with the prevention of problems by using high quality parts and

materials and using high standards of workmanship, have allowed a limited reliability and

quality assurance program, guarded by the test program, to achieve adequate reliability for

a low cost. It is recommended that the Principal Investigator consider similar approaches

that envelope all aspects of the mission development. A philosophy based on quick

design and development, followed by an extensive test and repair program, has been

shown to be the most expensive and unreliable approach.

An agreement between the Principal Investigator and the Small Explorer Project Office on

the quality assurance, reviews, safety, design assurance and verification system to be

implemented will be required prior to the confirmation of the mission.

2.0 QUALITY ASSURANCE

2.1 Quality System

During Phase B, the Principal Investigator is to define and implement a quality system

based on ANSI/ASQC Q9001-1994. The system is to be documented in a quality manual

and/or implementation plan. The Small Explorer Project Office will review the quality

system and provide the Principal Investigator with an assessment and recommendations.

2.2 Workmanship Standards

Workmanship requirements are a critical part of preventing reliability and quality

problems. The Principal Investigator is encouraged to use their own workmanship

standards, provided they meet the following minimum NASA guidelines:

• NHB 5300.4 (3A-2): Requirements for Soldered Electrical Connections

• NHB 5300.4 (3G): Requirements for Interconnecting Cables, Harnesses, and

Wiring

• NHB 5300.4 (3H): Requirements for Crimping and Wire Wrap

• NHB 5300.4 (3I): Requirements for Printed Wiring Boards

• NHB 5300.4 (3J): Requirements for Conformal Coating and Staking of Printed

Wiring Boards and Electronic Assemblies
H-3

• NHB 5300.4 (3K): Design Requirements for Rigid Printed Wiring Boards and

Assemblies

• NHB 5300.4 (3L): Electrostatic Discharge Requirements

2.3 Product Assurance Audits and Reporting

Assurance Status Reports will be part of the regular, monthly reporting by the Principal

Investigator to the Small Explorer Project Office and will summarize the status of all

assurance activities and report on any discrepancies (including corrective actions) that

could affect the performance of the investigation.

During all phases of the mission, NASA must be able to assess the reliability of the

mission and understand how the Principal Investigator is resolving problems. In order to

do this, the Principal Investigator is required to document and report failures to the Small

Explorer Project Office beginning with initial power-up of any flight component or

assembly (including critical GSE). Reporting is to continue until successful closure by the

Principal Investigator's Failure Review Board (FRB).

In order to ensure that the quality system is working the way it is intended to, the

Principal Investigator is required to plan and conduct audits of his/her internal PA

systems and those of his/her subcontractors and suppliers, examining documentation

(processes, procedures, analyses, reports, etc.), operations and products. The Principal

Investigator is required to generate and maintain an audit report for each audit. A

summary of all audit findings should be included in the monthly report.

The work activities and operations of the Principal Investigator's team, including

subcontractors and suppliers, may be evaluated, surveyed, or otherwise inspected by

designated representatives from the Small Explorer Project Office, the Government

Inspection Agency (GIA), or an independent assurance contractor. The Small Explorer

Project Office may delegate appropriate responsibilities and authority in letters of

delegation (LOD).

3.0 REVIEWS

The Principal Investigator is encouraged to focus resources from the beginning and

throughout the mission development phase on engineering working-level reviews (peer

reviews) to identify and resolve concerns prior to formal, system level reviews. The

Principal Investigator's quality system is to track and close-out all actions items identified

during these peer reviews to ensure that issues are resolved promptly at the lowest levels

and before system level reviews. A list of action items/closures for each peer review
H-4

should be maintained by the Principal Investigator's quality system and made available

during system level reviews. Any open action items from any peer reviews should be

addressed at the system level reviews.

Upon request, the Small Explorer Project Office will supply technical expertise as

required for participation in the areas undergoing detailed engineering reviews.

Unlike the many informal engineering peer reviews that will occur during the project life

cycles, there are two semiformal reviews focusing on requirements and the mission

concept and five formal, system level reviews that will concentrate on critical systems

and end-to-end mission level technical, safety, reliability, flight operations, ground

operations, and programmatic issues. If warranted, additional formal reviews may be

required for unusually complex areas such as safety and/or flight and ground operations.

The following represent the semiformal and formal reviews expected under this program:

• Requirements Review (Semiformal)

• Concept Review (Semiformal)

• Preliminary Design Review (Formal)

• Critical Design Review (Formal)

• Pre-Environmental Review (Formal)

• Pre-Ship Review (Formal)

• Flight Readiness Review (Formal)

Semiformal and formal reviews are to be chaired by the Principal Investigator's

organization with copies of the presentation materials provided to the Small Explorer

Project Office for information. It is the Principal Investigator's responsibility to address

all concerns and action items identified during these reviews.

Independent reviews, including a Confirmation Review as described in the AO, will also

be conducted. These reviews will be coordinated with the Principal Investigator so that

they coincide with other reviews. It is the Principal Investigator's responsibility to

address all concerns and action items identified during these reviews.

4.0 SAFETY

The Principal Investigator is responsible for the overall safety of the mission, from start

of development through launch activities. In fulfilling this responsibility, the Principal
H-5

Investigator is required to define an overall safety program for documenting hazard

analyses, hazard reports, operations hazards analyses, and the safety data package. The

Small Explorer Project Office will provide the necessary interfaces with the GSFC testing

facility (if applicable), and the launch vehicle and/or range safety points of contact (if

applicable).

4.1 General

The Principal Investigator is required to plan and implement a system safety program

that accomplishes the following:

• Identifies and controls hazards to personnel, facilities, support equipment, and the

flight system during all stages of the mission development. The program is to address

hazards in the flight hardware, associated software, ground support equipment, and

support facilities.

• Meets the system safety requirements stated in the applicable launch site safety

regulation (EWRR 127-1 for the Eastern or Western Range) and the mission System

Safety Implementation Plan (SSIP).

• Meets the baseline industrial safety requirements of the institution, as well as any

special contractually imposed mission unique obligations.

The Small Explorer Project Office will provide assistance, as necessary to assure that the

Safety Plan meets the requirements established above. The Principal Investigator is

required to give the Small Explorer Project Office a description of the system down to the

subsystem level, and a preliminary assessment of the system’s compliance with the

requirements of this section.

The Principal Investigator is required to submit, in accordance with a schedule in the

contract, all ground operations procedures to be used at GSFC facilities, other integration

facilities, or the launch site for review and approval. All hazardous operations, as well as

the procedures to control them, are to be identified and highlighted. All launch site

procedures are to comply with the applicable launch site safety regulations.

When a specific safety requirement cannot be met, the Principal Investigator is required to

provide the Small Explorer Project Office with an associated safety noncompliance

request that identifies the hazard and shows the rationale for approval of such a

noncompliance, as defined in the applicable launch site safety regulation.
H-6

4.2 Safety Data Package

The Principal Investigator is required to submit a safety data package consistent with the

design maturity of the mission at each of the independent reviews, up to and including the

Pre-Ship Review (PSR) and the Flight Readiness Review (FRR). The contents of each

package is to be consistent with the requirements of the applicable launch vehicle and

launch site.

4.3 Launch Site Safety Plan

The Principal Investigator is required to submit a Payload Organization launch Site Safety

Plan consistent with the launch site requirements for review and approval by the Small

Explorer Project Office. The details of the plan and submittal milestones is dependent on

the selected launch site safety regulations.

5.0 DESIGN ASSURANCE

5.1 Electrical, Electromechanical, and Electronic (EEE) Parts

The Principal Investigator is required to implement an appropriate EEE parts program

consistent with the scope of a Small Explorer mission. Previous Small Explorer missions

have utilized parts programs that provided early and frequent interaction between the

design team and performance assurance personnel to ensure reliable EEE parts while at

the same time maintaining a cost effective parts program. The Small Explorer Project

Office recommends that the Principal Investigator consider a similar approach with the

parts program.

As a guideline, EEE parts should be selected and processed in accordance with GSFC

311-INST-001, “Instructions for EEE Parts Selection, Screening, and Qualification” for

Grade 3 quality parts level, or an internal procedure that meets these standards.

The Principal Investigator is responsible for verifying that any part used in the mission is

flight worthy and is not affected by any GIDEP Alert throughout the mission

development cycle.

5.2 Materials

The Principal Investigator is required to implement a materials and processes control

program beginning with the start of Phase B. The Principal Investigator is required to
H-7

maintain lists and usage records for inorganic and metallic, polymeric, lubricants, and

processes.

5.3 Reliability

Early in the program’s preliminary design phase, the Principal Investigator is required to

identify specific reliability concerns and the steps being taken to mitigate them. As a

minimum, the Principal Investigator is to conduct a Failure Mode and Effect Analysis to a

sufficient depth so that mission critical failures are identified and dealt with effectively.

It is strongly recommended that the Principal Investigator accumulate several hundred

hours of error-free operation at the observatory prior to the start of environmental

testing.

5.4 Contamination

The Principal Investigator is required to plan and implement a contamination control

program consistent with the requirements of the mission. The plan should address all

aspects of contamination control throughout the mission, including transportation and

launch site processing. The contamination control plan should be made available to the

Small Explorer Project Office if requested.

5.5 Software

The Principal Investigator is required to employ a structured program for the

development of flight and ground software. The program must address appropriate

development life cycle phases such as requirements analysis, design, code, and unit test,

integration and build test, performance verification, and maintenance. All code produced

is to be structured, error-free, properly documented, and maintainable.

6.0 VERIFICATION

The Principal Investigator is required to conduct a verification program to ensure that the

spacecraft and instrument(s) meet the specific mission requirements. It is recommended

that the Principal Investigator use the Goddard Space Flight Center’s General

Environmental Verification Specification for STS and ELV Payloads, Subsystems, and

Components (GEVS-SE), available from the Small Explorers Project Office, as a tool and

a model to prepare the mission verification plan and specification.

The Principal Investigator is required to prepare and submit adequate verification

documentation including a verification matrix, environmental test matrix and verification

procedures to the Small Explorer project office for review.
I-1

APPENDIX I

SERVICES AVAILABLE FROM THE GODDARD SPACE FLIGHT CENTER

In keeping with its mission, the Goddard Space Flight Center will provide access to the

Center’s institutional capabilities, including facilities, equipment, and expertise in science,

engineering, technology, and project management to support and enhance the abilities of

the scientific and supporting technical communities to conduct scientific investigations.

Upon request, GSFC is prepared to assist Principal Investigators (PI’s) selected to

proceed into the concept study phase (Phase A) in any or all aspects of mission

development, from systems engineering and mission management through on-orbit

satellite operation. In this role, Goddard will work with the Principal Investigator to plan

and coordinate agreed upon services both within the Center and with external partners to

draw on the best capabilities of each to develop the missions at low cost.

GSFC services are available on a full cost basis. Mr. Orlando Figueroa, recently

appointed Head of the new GSFC System Technology and Advanced Concepts

Directorate, will serve as the single point-of-contact to coordinate any or all aspects of

the Center’s capabilities requested under this Announcement of Opportunity (AO)

including cost estimates during proposal preparation. The possible GSFC services are:

• Mission management, including the planning and execution of all phases of the

mission;

• Instrument and spacecraft systems engineering and technologies;

• Mission operations and data systems engineering and technologies. (Refer to

Appendix C for additional information and point of contact);

• Discipline engineering, including design, analysis, and implementation in areas

such as structural/mechanical, thermal, attitude control and determination,

command and data handling, communications, and optics;

• Reliability and quality assurance, including parts, materials, analysis, safety,

review, and inspection;

• Spacecraft development, including the specification, acquisition or build, and

qualification of spacecraft or spacecraft components;

• Test facilities including vibroacoustic, electromagnetic, thermal/vacuum,

magnetics, class 10,000 or better integration and test facilities; and
I-2

• Launch services, including expendable launch vehicles and the space shuttle.

Access information for Mr. Figueroa is:

Mr. Orlando Figueroa

System Technology and Advanced Concepts Directorate

Goddard Space Flight Center

National Aeronautics and Space Administration

Greenbelt, MD 20771

E-mail: orlando.figueroa@gsfc.nasa.gov
J-1

APPENDIX J

GUIDELINES FOR CONCEPT STUDY REPORT PREPARATION

This appendix is intended to provide guidelines to investigations selected under this AO

for the preparation of a concept study report. This report is to be prepared by each

investigation team during their Phase A concept study. It is due at the completion of the

concept study and will be used by NASA to determine if the investigation is ready to

proceed into subsequent mission phases. These guidelines may be updated at notification

of selection.

The concept study report should contain the following: (i) executive summary; (ii) science

investigation description; (iii) education and outreach, technology, and small

disadvantaged business plan; (iv) technical approach; (v) management plan; (vi) Phase

B/C/D plan; (vii) cost plan; and (viii) appendices. Any changes to the basic data provided

in the original proposal should be clearly identified in the concept study report.

The concept study report shall contain no more than 123 pages, including no more than 4

fold out pages (28 x 43 cm; i.e., 11 x 17 inches). The fact sheet, cover page, table of

contents, and appendices will not be counted against the page limit. The following page

limits apply to individual sections:

Section Page Limit

Executive Summary 3 pages

Science Investigation description (changes only) 20 pages

Technical Approach

Management Plan

Education and Outreach, Technology, and Small Disadvantaged

Business Plan

Phase B/C/D Plan

Cost Plan

100 pages

Appendices (no others permitted)

Resumes

Letters of Endorsement

Mission Definition and Requirements Agreement

Statement(s) of Work for Each Contract Option

Incentive Plan(s)

Relevant Experience and Past Performance

International Agreement(s)

Reference List

No page limit,

but small size

encouraged
J-2

The content of the concept study report is defined below.

A. INVESTIGATION SUMMARY

The same guidelines as for the proposal apply. The form to be used for this

summary is located at the end of Appendix B.

B COVER PAGE

The same guidelines as for the proposal apply.

C. TABLE OF CONTENTS

The same guidelines as for the proposal apply.

D. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The executive summary should provide an overview of the investigation, including

the science objectives and their relationship to the OSS science themes, technical

approach, including any new technology planned, management, cost, and education

and outreach approaches. This section should not exceed three (3) pages.

E. SCIENCE INVESTIGATION DESCRIPTION

This section should describe any science investigation changes resulting from the

Concept Study. Any changes to the investigation from the original proposal should

be discussed as should the rationale for such changes.

F. EDUCATION AND OUTREACH, TECHNOLOGY, AND SMALL

DISADVANTAGED BUSINESS PLAN

The education and outreach, technology, and small disadvantaged business plan

should provide a summary of the benefits offered by the mission beyond the

scientific benefits.

1. Educational Program Activities. This section should discuss the degree to which

this investigation will generate educational opportunities and contribute to the

Nation's educational initiatives. The breadth of involvement of the educational

program, including educators, researchers, amateur organizations, and the public

at large, should be discussed, as should educational activities to be implemented.

Coordination and collaboration with educational institutions should be

discussed, along with a discussion of how the investigation team will implement
J-3

the educational program. A summary of the proposed budget targeted to

educational activities, including any potential leveraging of other resources, and a

timeline for the execution of the education program, should be provided.

2. Public Awareness. This section should describe the degree to which the

scientific investigation and discoveries will be communicated to the public. The

public awareness plan should address how the progress of and results from the

mission will be disseminated to the public; the interaction of the various team

members; and a schedule of the public awareness activities with mission

progression.

3. Small Disadvantaged Business. A summary plan is required specifying the

proposed investigation’s commitment to meet the SDB participation goal of 8%

as described in Section XIII of Appendix A of this AO. In addition, as also

specified in Appendix A, subcontracting plans will be required to execute the

contract option for investigation implementation.

4. New Technology. This section should discuss how new technology is used in

the proposed investigation and its benefits.

G. TECHNICAL APPROACH

The Technical Approach section should detail the method and procedures for

investigation definition, design, development, integration, ground operations, and

flight operations. A discussion of all new technologies to be used for the

investigation, including back-up plans for those technologies, should be provided.

This section should also detail the expected products and end items associated with

each phase. Mission teams have the freedom to use their own processes,

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

activities by mission teams in accomplishing their objectives is encouraged when

cost, schedule, and technical improvements can be demonstrated. The benefits of

such processes and products should be discussed. This section must be complete in

itself without the need to request additional data.

1. Mission Design. This section should fully describe the operational phase of the

mission from launch to end of mission. It should include information on the

proposed launch vehicle, orbit, preliminary mission timeline indicating periods

of data acquisition, data downlink, etc. The mission design should also describe

the communications network to be used and interface requirements, along with

potential impacts or conflicts with other users of the selected communications

resources.
J-4

A "traceability matrix" showing how the proposed mission design complies with

the stated objectives, requirements, and constraints of the proposed

investigation should be included. The rationale for the selection of launch

vehicle should be included. The proposal should identify any innovative

features of the mission design that minimize total mission costs.

2. Spacecraft. This section should describe the spacecraft design approach,

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

single-string hardware. It should fully identify the spacecraft systems and

describe their characteristics and requirements. A preliminary description of the

flight system design with a block diagram showing the flight element subsystems

and their interfaces should be included, along with a description of the flight

software and a summary of the estimated performance of the flight system. The

flight heritage or rationale used to select the flight system and its subsystems,

major assemblies, and interfaces should be described.

Subsystem characteristics and requirements should be described to the greatest

extent possible. Such characteristics include: mass, volume, and power

requirements; pointing knowledge and accuracy; new developments needed;

space qualification plan; and logistics support. These subsystems may include:

structural/mechanical, solar array/power supply (and batteries), electrical,

thermal control, propulsion, communications, attitude control, command, data

handling, etc. Any design features incorporated to effect cost savings should be

identified; however, benefits should be specified and enabling assumptions or

risks should be identified. A summary of the resource elements of the flight

systems design concept, including key margins, should be provided. The

rationale for, and derivation of, margin allocations including mass, power, link,

etc., should be provided. Those design margins that are driving costs should be

identified.

3. Science Payload. This section should briefly describe the science payload for

the investigation. Reference may be made to the proposal. Any changes to the

payload or individual instruments or their performance since submission of the

proposal should be discussed. Information pertinent to the accommodation of

the instrumentation on the spacecraft should also be included. Subsystem

characteristics and requirements should be described. Such characteristics

include: mass, volume, and power requirements; pointing requirements; new

developments needed; and a space qualification plan. Any design features

incorporated to effect cost savings should be identified. A summary of the

resource elements of the instrument design concept, including key margins,

should be provided. The rationale for margin allocation should be provided.

Those design margins that are driving costs should be identified.
J-5

4. Payload Integration. This section should characterize the interface between the

instruments and the flight system. These include, but are not limited to:

volumetric envelope, fields of view, weight, power requirements, thermal

requirements, command and telemetry requirements, sensitivity to or generation

of contamination (e.g., electromagnetic interference, gaseous effluents, etc.), data

processing requirements, as well as the planned process for physically and

analytically integrating them with the flight system. The testing strategy of the

science payload, prior to integration with the spacecraft, should be discussed.

5. Manufacturing, Integration, and Test. This section should describe the

manufacturing strategy to produce and test the hardware/software necessary to

accomplish the mission. It should include a description of the main

processes/procedures planned in the fabrication of flight hardware, software,

production personnel resources, incorporation of new technology/materials, and

the preliminary test and verification program. Describe the approach for the

transition from design to manufacturing and specify data products which will be

used to assure producibility and adequate tooling availability.

The approach, techniques, and facilities planned for integration, test and

verification, and launch operations phases, consistent with the proposed

schedule and cost, should be described. A preliminary schedule for

manufacturing, integration, and test activities should be included. A description

of the planned end items, including engineering and qualification hardware,

should be included.

6. Mission Operations, Ground, and Data Systems. This section should discuss

mission operations and the ground operations support required for the proposed

investigation. The planned approach for managing mission operations and all

flight operations support, including mission planning should be discussed.

Describe any special communications, computer security, tracking, or near realtime ground support requirements, and indicate any special equipment or skills

required of ground personnel.

The approach to the development of the ground data system, including the use,

if any, of existing facilities, including Government facilities, should be described.

All usage of the Deep Space Network (DSN) and of any existing non-DSN

facilities, including Tracking and Data Relay Satellite System (TDRSS), should

be explicitly described. Any mission-unique facilities must be adequately

described. Include a block diagram of the Ground Data System (GDS) showing

the end-to-end concept (acquisition through archiving) for operations and data

flow to the subsystem level. Describe all communications, tracking, and ground

support requirements. Describe the space/ground link spectrum requirements

and the licensing approach. The NASA Frequency Spectrum Management
J-6

organizations can be used if the mission uses frequencies allocated to the

government and the data transmitted is not used directly for commercial

purposes. Describe the software design heritage and software development

approach and its relationship to the flight system software development.

Specific features incorporated into the flight and ground system design that lead

to low-cost operation should be identified. The use of any existing mission

operations facilities and processes should be described, as well as any new

facilities required to meet mission objectives.

7. Facilities. Provide a description of any new, or modifications to existing,

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) required to execute the investigation. The

outline of new facilities and equipment should also indicate the lead time

involved and the planned schedule for construction, modification, and/or

acquisition of the facilities.

8. Product Assurance and Safety. This section should describe the process by

which the product quality is assured to meet the customer's specifications,

including identification of trade studies, the parts selection strategy, and the

plans to incorporate new technology. This section should also describe the

product assurance plan, including plans for problem/failure reporting,

inspections, quality control, parts selection and control, safety assurance, and

software validation.

H. MANAGEMENT PLAN

This section sets forth the investigator's approach for managing the work, the

recognition of essential management functions, and the overall integration of these

functions. This section should specifically discuss the decision-making process to

be used by the team, focusing particularly on the roles of the Principal Investigator

and Project Manager in that process. The management plan gives insight into the

organizations proposed for the work, including the internal operations and lines of

authority with delegations, together with internal interfaces and relationships with

NASA, major subcontractors, and associated 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

mission teams in accomplishing their objectives is encouraged; however, they should

be employed only when cost, schedule, or technical improvements can be

demonstrated and specific enabling assumptions are identified.
J-7

1. Team Member Responsibilities. This section should describe the roles,

responsibilities, time commitment, and experience of all team member

organizations and key personnel, with particular emphasis placed on the

responsibilities assigned to the Principal Investigator, the Project Manager, and

other key personnel. In addition, information should be provided which

indicates what percentage of time key personnel will devote to the mission, the

duration of service, and how changes in personnel will be accomplished. (Note:

The experience of the PI and science team members does not need to be included

in this section since it would have been addressed in the proposal.)

a. Organizational Structure. The management organizational structure of the

investigation team must be described in the proposal. The proposal must

describe the responsibilities of each team member organization and its

contributions to the investigation. Each key position, including its roles and

responsibilities, how each key position fits into the organization, and the

basic qualifications required for each position, must be described. A

discussion of the unique or proprietary capabilities that each member

organization brings to the team, along with a description of the availability of

personnel at each partner organization to meet staffing needs, should be

included. The contractual and financial relationships between team partners

should be discussed.

If experience for a partner is not equivalent to, or better than, the

requirements for the proposed mission, explain how confidence can be

gained that the mission can be accomplished within cost and schedule

constraints.

b. Experience and Commitment of Key Personnel. Provide a history of

experience explaining the relationship of the previous experience to each key

individual's role; include the complexity of the work and the results. Include

changes in scope during development, if appropriate.

i. Principal Investigator. The role(s), responsibilities, and time

commitment of the Principal Investigator should be discussed. Provide a

reference point of contact, including address and phone number.

ii. Project Manager. The role, responsibilities, time commitment, and

experience of the Project Manager should be discussed. Provide a

reference point of contact, including address and phone number.

iii. Other Key Personnel. The roles, responsibilities, time commitments,

and experience of other key personnel in the investigation should be

described.
J-8

2. Management Processes and Plans. This section should describe the management

processes and plans necessary for the logical and timely pursuit of the work,

accompanied by a description of the work plan. This section should also

describe the proposed methods of hardware and software acquisition. The

management processes which the investigator team proposes, including the

relationship between organizations and key personnel should be discussed,

including the following, as applicable: systems engineering and integration;

requirements development; configuration management; schedule management;

team member coordination and communication; progress reporting, both internal

and to NASA; performance measurement; and resource management. This

discussion should include all phases of the mission including preliminary

analysis, technical definition, the design and development, and operations

phases, along with the expected products and results from each phase. Unique

tools, processes, or methods which will be used by the investigation team

should be clearly identified and their benefits discussed. All project elements

should be covered to assure a clear understanding of project-wide

implementation.

3. Schedules. The schedule and work flow for the complete mission life-cycle

should be clearly defined, and the method and tools to be used for internal

review, control, and direction discussed. Schedules for all major activities,

interdependencies between major items, deliveries of end items, critical paths,

schedule margins, and long-lead procurement needs (defined as hardware

procurements required before the start of Phase D) should be clearly identified.

4. Risk Management. This section should 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 should be placed

on describing how the various elements of risk, including new technologies used,

will be managed to ensure successful accomplishment of the mission within cost

and schedule constraints. Investigations dependent on new technology will not

be penalized for risk if adequate backup plans are described to ensure success of

the investigation.

A summary of margins and reserves in cost and schedule should be identified by

Phase and project element and year and the rationale for them discussed. The

specific means by which integrated costs, schedule, and technical performance

will be tracked and managed should be defined. Specific reserves and the timing

of their application should be described. Management of the reserves and

margins, including who in the management organization manages the reserves and

when and how the reserves are released, should be discussed. This should

include the strategy for maintaining reserves as a function of cost-to-completion.
J-9

All funded schedule margins should be identified. The relationship between the

use of such reserves, margins, potential descope options, and their effect on

cost, schedule, and performance should be fully discussed.

5. Government Furnished Property, Services, Facilities, etc. This section should

clearly delineate the Government-furnished property, services, facilities, etc.

required to accomplish all phases of the mission.

6. Reporting and Reviews. This section should clearly describe the approach to

reporting progress to the Government and the reviews the Government is

invited to attend to provide independent oversight. The process, including the

individual or organization responsible for reporting integrated cost, schedule, and

technical performance should be discussed. A description of the information to

be presented should be included.

I. DEFINITION, DESIGN, AND DEVELOPMENT (PHASE B/C/D) PLAN

This section should describe the means by which the definition study and the design

and development phases will be performed. This section should identify the key

mission tradeoffs and options to be investigated during the Phase B studies and

should identify those issues and technologies critical to the mission success. These

plans should also define the products of each phase and the schedule for their

delivery.

J. COST PLAN

The cost plan should provide information on the anticipated costs for all phases of

the mission. A detailed cost proposal is required, including a completed SF 1411,

for Phase B/C/D. Cost estimates are required for Phase E, including a description of

the estimating technique used to develop the cost estimates. A discussion of the

basis of the estimate should be provided with a discussion of heritage and

commonality with other programs. All costs, including all contributions made to the

investigation, should be included. Proposers should complete a summary of total

mission cost phased by fiscal year as shown in Figure J1. In addition, for each

phase for the investigation (B/C/D, and E) a Time Phased Cost Breakdown for each

Work Breakdown Structure (WBS) element, as shown in Figure J2, should be

completed.

It is anticipated that during the period of performance of the proposed mission,

NASA will implement full cost accounting for NASA Centers or other Government

laboratories. To plan for this, proposers should include any contributions provided

by NASA Centers, including Civil Servant services, as well as the cost for the use of

Government facilities and equipment. All direct and indirect costs associated with
J-10

the work performed at NASA Centers should be fully costed and accounted for in

the proposal. Teams with NASA partners should work with their respective

NASA Centers to develop estimates for these costs.

The inflation index provided in Appendix B should be used to calculate all real-year

dollar amounts, unless an industry forward pricing rate is used. If something other

than the provided inflation index is used, the rates used should be documented.

All costs shall include all burdens and profit/fee in real-year dollars by fiscal year,

assuming the inflation rates used by NASA (provided in Appendix B) or

specifically identified industry forward pricing rates.

1. Definition, Design, and Development (Phase B/C/D) Cost Proposal. This

section provides a detailed cost proposal for performing Phase B/C/D. The cost

proposal should correlate with the plans set forth in the Science, Technical

Approach, and Management sections of the proposal

a. Contract Pricing Proposal Cover Sheet. A completed Contract Pricing

Proposal Cover Sheet, SF 1411, must be included with the proposal for

Phase B/C/D. The SF 1411 must be signed by the proposer's authorized

representative.

b. Work Breakdown Structure. A Work Breakdown Structure (WBS) should

be included for Phase B/C/D. The structure of the WBS should be

consistent with the plans set forth in the Technical Approach and

Management sections of the proposal and the Statement of Work provided

as an Appendix to the proposal. The WBS shall be described to the

subsystem level (e.g., Attitude Control System, Propulsion, Structure and

Mechanisms) for the spacecraft and to the instrument level for the payload.

All other elements of the WBS should be to the major task level (e.g., Project

Management, Systems Engineering, Ground Support Equipment).

c. Workforce Staffing Plan. Provide a workforce staffing plan which is

consistent with the Work Breakdown Structure. This workforce staffing

plan should include all team member organizations and should cover all

management, technical (scientific and engineering), and support staff. The

workforce staffing plan should be phased by month. Time commitments for

the Principal Investigator, Project Manager, and other key personnel should

be clearly shown.

d. Proposal Pricing Technique. Describe the process and techniques used to

develop the Phase B/C/D cost proposal. Provide a description of the costestimating model(s) and techniques used in the Phase B/C/D cost estimate.
J-11

Discuss the heritage of the models and/or techniques applied to this

estimate, including any known differences between missions contained in the

model's data base and key attributes of the proposed mission. Include the

assumptions used as the basis for the Phase B/C/D cost and identify those

which are critical to cost sensitivity in the investigation. 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 and will be managed by the investigation

team.

e. Phase B/C/D Time-Phased Cost Summary. Provide a summary of the total

Phase B/C/D costs consistent with Figure J2. The Phase B/C/D cost

summary should be developed consistent with the Work Breakdown

Structure and should include all costs to NASA along with all contributed

costs. The Phase B/C/D time phased cost summary should be phased by

month.

f. Cost Elements Breakdown. To effectively evaluate the Phase B/C/D cost

proposals, NASA requires costs and supporting evidence stating the basis

for the estimated costs. The proposal will include, but is not limited to:

i. Direct Labor.

(1) Explain the basis of labor-hour estimates for each of the labor

classifications.

(2) State the number of productive work-hours per month.

(3) Provide a schedule of the direct labor rates used in the proposal.

Discuss the basis for developing the proposed direct labor rates for

the team member organizations involved; the forward-pricing method

(including midpoint, escalation factors, anticipated impact of future

union contracts, etc.); and elements included in the rates, such as

overtime, shift differential, incentives, allowances, etc.

(4) If available, submit evidence of Government approval of direct labor

rates for proposal purposes for each labor classification for the

proposed performance period.

(5) If Civil Servant labor is to be used in support of the Phase B/C/D

study, but is not to be charged directly to the investigation, then this

labor must be considered as a contribution by a domestic partner,

subject to the same restrictions as other contributions by domestic or

foreign partners. A discussion of the source of funding for the Civil

Servant contributions must be provided.

ii. Direct Material. Submit a summary of material and parts costs for each

element of the WBS.
J-12

iii. Subcontracts. Identify fully each effort (task, item, etc. by WBS

element) to be subcontracted, and list the selected or potential

subcontractors, locations, amount budgeted/proposed, and types of

contracts. Explain the adjustments, if any, and the indirect rates (or

burdens) applied to the subcontractors' proposed amounts anticipated.

Describe fully the cost analysis or price analysis and the negotiations

conducted regarding the proposed subcontracts.

iv. Other Direct Costs.

(1) Travel, Relocation, and Related Costs. Provide a summary of the

travel and relocation costs including the number of trips, duration,

and purpose of the trips.

(2) Computer. Provide a summary of all unique computer-related costs.

(3) Consultants. Indicate the specific task area or problem requiring

consultant services. Identify the proposed consultants, and state the

quoted daily rate, the estimated number of days, and associated costs

(such as travel), if any. State whether the consultant has been

compensated at the quoted rate for similar services performed in

connection with Government contracts.

(4) Other. Explain and support any other direct costs included in the

Phase B/C/D proposal in a manner similar to that described above.

v. Indirect Costs.

(1) List all indirect expense rates for the team member organizations.

Indirect expense rates (in the context of this AO) include labor

overhead, material overhead, general and administrative (G&A)

expenses, and any other cost proposed as an allocation to the

proposed direct costs.

(2) If the proposal includes support services for which off-site burden

rates are used, provide a schedule of the off-site burden rates.

Include a copy of the company policy regarding off-site vs. on-site

effort.

(3) If available, submit evidence of Government approval of any/all

projected indirect rates for the proposed period of performance.

Indicate the status of rate negotiations with the cognizant

Government agency, and provide a comparative listing of approved

bidding rates and negotiated actual rates for the past five (5) fiscal

years.

(4) Discuss the fee arrangements for the major team partners.

2. Mission Operations and Data Analysis (Phase E) Cost Estimate. This section

provides a cost estimate for performing the Mission Operations and Data

Analysis Phase (Phase E) portion of the mission. The Phase E cost estimates

should correlate with the plans set forth in the Science, Technical Approach, and
J-13

Management sections of the proposal. In completing this section, the following

guidelines will apply:

a. Work Breakdown Structure. A Work Breakdown Structure (WBS) should

be included for the Mission Operations and Data Analysis Phase of the

mission. The WBS should be consistent with the plans set forth in the

Technical Approach and Management sections of the proposal and the

Statement of Work that is provided as an Appendix.

b. Cost Estimating Technique. Describe the process and techniques used to

develop the Phase E cost estimate. Provide a description of the costestimating model(s) and techniques used in your Phase E cost estimate.

Discuss the heritage of the models applied to this estimate including any

known differences between missions contained in the model's data base and

key attributes of the proposed mission. Include the assumptions used as the

basis for the Phase E cost and identify those which are critical to cost

sensitivity in the investigation. Identify any "discounts" assumed in the

cost estimates for business practice initiatives or streamlined technical

approaches, and the basis for these discounts. Describe how these have

been incorporated in the cost estimate and will be managed by the

investigation team.

c. Workforce Staffing Plan. Provide a workforce staffing plan (including civil

service) which is consistent with the Work Breakdown Structure. This

workforce staffing plan should include all team member organizations and

should cover all management, manufacturing, technical (scientific and

engineering), and support staff. The workforce staffing plan should be

phased by fiscal year. Time commitments for the Principal Investigator,

Project Manager, and other key personnel should be clearly shown.

d. Phase E Time-Phased Cost Summary. Provide a summary of the total Phase

E costs consistent with Figure J2. The Phase E cost summary should be

developed consistent with the Work Breakdown Structure and should

include all costs to NASA, along with all contributed costs. The Phase E

time phased cost summary should be phased by fiscal year.

3. Total Mission Cost (TMC) Estimate. This section should summarize the

estimated costs to be incurred in Phases A through E including launch vehicle,

upper stages, and launch services; ground segment costs; and cost of activities

associated for social or educational benefits (if not incorporated in any of Phases

A through E). The total mission cost estimate should be developed consistent

with the Work Breakdown Structure.
J-14

This section should include:

Detailed plans for all aspects of the mission not discussed elsewhere in the

proposal, including: the launch vehicle, upper stages, and launch services;

ground segment; and activities associated with social or educational benefits.

Reference may be made to the Technical Approach section of the proposal. In

completing this section, the following guidelines will apply:

a. Total Mission Cost. A summary of the Total Mission Cost time-phased by

fiscal year must be included in the format shown in Figure J1. This

summary should represent the optimum funding profile for the mission.

Assets provided as contributions by international or other partners should

be included, and clearly identified, as separate line items.
J-15

FIGURE J1

TOTAL MISSION COST FUNDING PROFILE TEMPLATE

(FY costs* in Real Year Dollars, Totals in Real Year and FY 1997 Dollars)

Item FY1 FY2 FY3 FY4 FY5 FYn ...

Total

(Real Yr.)

Total

(FY 1997)

Phase A $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $

 - Organization A

 - Organization B

- etc.

Phase B/C/D $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $

 - Organization A

Phase E

- Organization A

Launch services $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $

- Organization A

Ground Data

System Dev $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $

 - Organization A

Other (specify) $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $

NASA Mission

Cost $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $

Contributions by Organization (Non-U.S. or

U.S.) to:

Phase A $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $

 - Organization A

Phase B/C/D $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $

 - Organization A

Phase E

- Organization A

Launch Services $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $

 - Organization A

Ground Data

System Dev

$ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $

 - Organization A

Other $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $

Contributed

Costs (Total) $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $

Mission Totals $

* Costs should include all costs including fee
J-16

FIGURE J2

(Phased costs in Real Year Dollars, Totals in Real Year Dollars)

TIME PHASED COST BREAKDOWN BY WBS AND MAJOR COST CATEGORY

WBS/Cost Category Description Month 1

or FY1

Month 2

or FY2 • • • Month nor FYn

Total

(RY$)

Total Direct Labor Cost $ $ $ $ $

WBS 1.0 Management

WBS 2.0 Spacecraft

WBS 2.1 Structures & Mechanisms

WBS 2.2 Propulsion

etc.

Total Subcontract Costs $ $ $ $ $

WBS # and Description

:

etc.

Total Materials & Equipment Cost $ $ $ $ $

WBS # and Description

:

etc.

Total Reserves $ $ $ $ $

WBS # and Description

:

etc.

Total Other Costs $ $ $ $ $

WBS # and Description

:

etc.

Fee

Other (Specify)

Total Contract Cost $ $ $ $ $

Total Other Costs to NASA $ $ $ $ $

Launch Services

Ground Segment

Other (Specify)

Total Contributions

(Non-U.S. or U.S.) $ $ $ $ $

Organization A:

WBS # and Description

etc.

Organization B:

WBS # and Description

etc.

TOTAL COST FOR PHASE $ $ $ $ $
J-17

K. APPENDICES

The following additional information is required to be supplied with the concept

study report. This information can be included as appendices to the report, and as

such, will not be counted within the specified page limit.

1. Resumes. Provide resumes for all key personnel identified in the Management

section.

2. Letters of Endorsement. Letters of endorsement must be provided from all

organizations offering to make a contribution to the investigation. Letters of

endorsement should be signed by both the lead representative from each

organization represented on the team, and by institutional and Government

officials authorized to commit their organizations to participation in the

proposed investigation.

3. Mission Definition and Requirements Agreement. A draft Mission Definition

and Requirements Agreement should be provided. An example of a Mission

Definition and Requirements Agreement is provided in the Explorer Program

Library.

4. Statements of Work for each Contract Option. Provide draft Statement(s) of

Work for all potential contracts with NASA. These Statement(s) of Work

should (as a minimum) be for each contract option (i.e., Phase B/C/D, and Phase

E) and clearly define all proposed deliverables (including science data) for each

option, potential requirements for Government facilities and/or Government

services, and a proposed schedule for the entire mission.

5. Incentive Plan. A draft Incentive Plan should be included with the proposal.

This Incentive Plan should outline contractual incentive features for all major

team members. Incentive Plans should include both performance and cost

incentives, as appropriate.

6. Relevant Experience and Past Performance. Relevant experience and past

performance (successes and failures) of the major team partners in meeting cost

and schedule constraints in similar projects within the last ten years should be

discussed. A description of each project, its relevance to the proposed

investigation, cost and schedule performance, and points of contact (including

addresses and phone numbers), should be provided.

7. International Agreement(s). Draft International Agreement(s) are required for all

non-U.S. partners in the investigation.
J-18

8. Reference List. Proposals may provide, as an appendix, a list of reference

documents and materials used in the proposal. The documents and materials

themselves cannot be submitted except as a part of the proposal.