National Aeronautics JUNE 30, 1997

and Space Administration AO 97-OSS-04

ANNOUNCEMENT OF OPPORTUNITY

MARS SURVEYOR PROGRAM

2001 ORBITER, LANDER, ROVER MISSIONS:

SCIENCE INVESTIGATIONS AND

CHARACTERIZATION OF ENVIRONMENTS

Notice of Intent Due: July 18, 1997

Proposals Due: August 29, 1997
OMB Approval No. 2700-0085

MARS SURVEYOR PROGRAM

2001 ORBITER, LANDER, AND ROVER MISSIONS:

SCIENCE INVESTIGATIONS AND

CHARACTERIZATION OF ENVIRONMENTS

Announcement of Opportunity

Soliciting Proposals for Basic Research

for Period Ending

August 29, 1997

AO 97-OSS-04

Issued: June 30, 1997

Office of Space Science

Office of Space Flight

Office of Life and Microgravity Sciences and Applications

National Aeronautics and Space Administration

Washington, DC 20546-0001
ANNOUNCEMENT OF OPPORTUNITY

Mars Surveyor Program 2001

Orbiter, Lander, and Rover Missions:

Science Investigations and

Characterization of Environments

TABLE OF CONTENTS

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

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

1.2 Announcement Objectives.......................................................................................1

1.3 Availability of AO Documentation.............................................................................2

1.4 Availability of Reports Referenced In This AO.........................................................3

1.5 Schedule for Proposal Submission and Selection....................................................3

2.0 MSP 2001 MISSIONS.............................................................................................................3

2.1 Orbiter Mission Overview and Objectives................................................................3

2.2 Lander and Rover Missions Overview and Objectives............................................4

2.2.1 Lander Mission Objectives...........................................................................5

2.2.2 Rover Mission Objectives.............................................................................6

3.0 MSP 2001 SCIENCE AND MEASUREMENT OBJECTIVES......................................................6

3.1 Orbiter Science and Measurement Objectives.........................................................6

3.2 Lander Science and Measurement Objectives.........................................................7

3.3 Rover Science and Measurement Objectives..........................................................8

4.0 TYPES OF PROPOSALS.......................................................................................................9

4.1 Principal Investigator/Instrument/Science Team Proposals......................................9

4.1.1 Orbiter Investigations....................................................................................9

4.1.2 Lander Investigations.................................................................................10

4.1.3 Rover Investigations...................................................................................11
4.2 Future Solicitations.................................................................................................11

5.0 FORMATION OF PROJECT SCIENCE GROUP......................................................................11

6.0 CONSTRAINTS AND REQUIREMENTS.................................................................................12

6.1 Constraints on Cost and Mass...............................................................................12

6.2 Mars Surveyor Operations Project.........................................................................13

6.3 Science Operations Site Requirements..................................................................13

6.4 Data Records Requirements and Data Validation...................................................14

6.5 Approaches to Reducing Instrument and Instrument Operations Costs................14

6.6 Technical Approach Requirements........................................................................15

6.7 Education and Public Outreach...............................................................................15

6.8 Technology Development and Transfer Requirements..........................................15

7.0 PROPOSAL EVALUATION, SELECTION, AND

IMPLEMENTATION...............................................................................................................16

7.1 Evaluation Criteria...................................................................................................16

7.2 Evaluation and Selection Procedures.....................................................................16

7.2.1 Evaluation Process.....................................................................................17

7.2.2 Categorization Process..............................................................................17

7.2.3 Selection Process.......................................................................................18

 7.3 Implementation Procedures.....................................................................................18

8.0 PROGRAM MANAGEMENT.................................................................................................18

9.0 CONCLUSION......................................................................................................................18

APPENDIX A GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS AND PROVISIONS..........................................A-1

APPENDIX B GUIDELINES FOR PROPOSAL PREPARATION AND

SUBMISSION.............................................................................................B-1

APPENDIX C CERTIFICATION FORMS............................................................................C-1
1

1.0 DESCRIPTION OF THE OPPORTUNITY

1.1 Introduction

General scientific objectives for the exploration of the solar system have been established by the

appropriate National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) scientific advisory

committees, including the Committee on Planetary and Lunar Exploration (COMPLEX) of the Space

Studies Board of the National Research Council, and the Solar System Exploration Subcommittee

of the NASA Space Science Advisory Committee (SScAC). In response to these

recommendations, NASA has initiated a long-term systematic program of Mars exploration, the

Mars Surveyor Program (MSP). The overarching goal of the program is to answer the question

“did life ever exist on Mars?” The scientific objectives established by the program to address this

goal are to search for evidence of past or present life, to understand the climate and volatile

history of Mars, and to assess the nature and inventory of resources on Mars, with the common

thread of these objectives being the role of water. NASA has also determined that the Mars

Surveyor Program will play a critical role in acquiring the knowledge through the conduct of

science investigations and the demonstration of critical technologies necessary to make a

decision early in the next century to initiate the exploration of Mars by humans.

The MSP is a sustained series of missions to Mars, each of which will provide important,

focused scientific return. Within a level funding profile, two launches will take place

approximately every 26 months in every launch window opportunity from now until 2005. It is

expected that during the 2005 opportunity a mission will be launched whose goal will be to return

samples of martian surface and atmosphere to Earth. It is possible that these samples will have

been collected by one of the landed missions launched in the 2001 and 2003 opportunities. In the

2001 launch opportunity, proposals for which are solicited by this Announcement of Opportunity

(AO), the MSP intends to launch on separate Delta-class launch vehicles an Orbiter and a Lander

that will carry a Rover to the surface.

The theme for the 2001 Orbiter, Lander, and Rover Missions is the exploration of the ancient

highlands of Mars in order to characterize the surface environment in terms of its geologic and

aqueous history. The theme is derived from the Report prepared by the Mars Expeditions

Strategy Group chartered by NASA’s Office of Space Science, entitled “The Search for

Evidence of Life on Mars.” A MSP 2001 Science Definition Team (SDT) was also chartered by

the Office of Space Science to recommend scientific objectives for the 2001 Orbiter and Rover

Missions.

In addition to providing opportunities for scientific investigations of Mars, the 2001 Mars Surveyor

Missions represent key opportunities to collect data and demonstrate technologies critical to

initiating the exploration of Mars by humans. To this end, a Human Exploration Payload Definition

Team (HEPDT) was jointly chartered by the NASA Office of Space Flight, Office of Life and

Microgravity Science and Applications, and Office of Space Science. As determined by the

HEPDT, the goals of the 2001 Orbiter and Lander Missions in addressing those needs are to

characterize the radiation environment, to characterize martian dust and soil, to demonstrate the

technologies of aerocapture and precision landing, and to demonstrate components needed for

in-situ propellant production. The Reports of the SDT and HEPDT formed the bases for the

science and measurement objectives given in this AO (for information on accessing these

Documents, see Section 1.4).

1.2 Announcement Objectives

NASA announces an opportunity to propose science investigations to be carried into Mars orbit

by the MSP 2001 Orbiter. The investigations will require instrumentation that can provide high

spatial and spectral resolution mineralogical/morphological data. The three-axis stabilized Orbiter

will use aerocapture to achieve a near-polar orbit around Mars at 400 km altitude, with

descending node crossing near 4:30 P.M. Mean Solar Time. The instrumentation will be nadir-
2

pointed throughout the near-circular mapping orbits, which are planned to continue for about

three Earth years.

NASA also announces an opportunity to propose science investigations to be carried out with

data returned by an integrated suite of instruments for the MSP 2001 Rover to be carried to the

martian surface by a Lander. The Lander will use an active descent propulsion system, similar

to the Mars Surveyor 1998 Lander, to land on the surface of Mars. It is expected that the Rover

will have a Mars surface lifetime of one Earth year, a range of ten or more kilometers, and will

provide a platform for in situ scientific analyses, and the collection and storing of samples of

surface materials for possible return to Earth in a future opportunity. NASA also announces an

opportunity to propose science investigations to be carried out using a descent imaging system

to be mounted on the Lander.

NASA also announces opportunities to propose instrumentation to characterize and measure the

near-space radiation environment in the Mars orbital mission phase, and instrumentation to

characterize and measure the radiation, and the dust and soil environments, at the surface of

Mars. Instrumentation for these surface investigations will be flown on the Mars Surveyor 2001

Lander. The Lander will also serve as a platform for demonstration of several key components

of an in situ propellant production facility.

1.3 Availability of AO Documentation

This AO is available electronically via Internet host <http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/oss/> by

opening “Research Opportunities” from the menu. Paper copies and additional information on the

AO may be obtained from:

Dr. Patricia G. Rogers

MSP 2001 Program Scientist

Code SR

NASA Headquarters

Washington, DC 20046-0001

USA

Facsimile: 202/358-3097

e-mail: progers@hq.nasa.gov

A Proposal Information Package (PIP) provides detailed background information on the Mars

Surveyor Program 2001 Orbiter, Lander, and Rover Missions that will be needed for the

preparation of a formal proposal.

The PIP contains the Technical Descriptions and Instrument Interface Definitions for the MSP 2001

Orbiter, Lander, and Rover Missions and is available using anonymous file-transfer-protocol (ftp)

via Internet host <ftp://mgsw3.jpl.nasa.gov/pub/mars01-ao>. Paper copies of the PIP and further

information on access procedures may be obtained from:

Ms. Lynn Lowry

Mail Stop 180-401

Jet Propulsion Laboratory

4800 Oak Grove Drive

Pasadena, CA 91109-8099

USA

Facsimile: 818/393-6800

e-mail: lynn.e.lowry@jpl.nasa.gov
3

Questions regarding clarification of items in the PIP should be submitted in writing or electronically

to Ms. Lynn Lowry at the above address. Responses to inquiries received will be available

electronically on the ftp site given above.

1.4 Availability of Reports Referenced In This AO

The following reports are referenced in this AO and are available electronically via Internet host

<http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/oss/> by opening “Research Opportunities” from the menu:

* Report of the Mars Expeditions Strategy Group

* Report of the MSP 2001 Science Definition Team

* Report of the Human Exploration Payload Definition Team

* NASA Draft Document NPG 8020.12B, entitled “Planetary Protection Provisions 

for Robotic Extraterrestrial Missions”

1.5 Schedule for Proposal Submission and Selection

A written Notice of Intent signifying the writer's intent to submit a proposal in response to this AO

should be submitted by all proposers and is due at the address given below on or before July 18,

1997. The Notice of Intent should briefly describe the objectives, and include a brief description

of the proposed investigation. Proposers should include their name, address, telephone number,

and the names and addresses of all Co-Investigators known by that deadline date as well as

their sponsoring organizations. Proposers whose investigation teams include members from

non-U.S. institutions should also send a copy of their Notice of Intent to Ms. Bettye Jones at the

address given in Appendix B, section 3.0.

Proposals must be received at the address given below (original plus 30 copies) on or before

close of business August 29, 1997, in order to be considered for this opportunity. Proposals

received after this deadline will be returned to the proposer.

Jorge Scientific Corporation

Mars Surveyor Program

Suite 700

400 Virginia Avenue, SW

Washington, DC 20024

USA

Point of contact for commercial delivery: Ms. Debra Tripp (telephone 202/554-2775)

A review committee appointed by NASA will review all instrument, instrument suite, and science

team proposals submitted in response to this AO for possible flight on the MSP 2001 Orbiter,

Lander, and Rover Missions. The selection of investigations for the MSP 2001 Orbiter, Lander,

and Rover Missions is planned to take place within three months after the proposal deadline.

2.0 MSP 2001 MISSIONS

2.1 Orbiter Mission Overview and Objectives

The MSP 2001 Orbiter attached to its Cruise Stage will be launched on a Delta-class launch

vehicle in March 2001. It is expected to arrive at Mars in December 2001 where the Cruise Stage

will be jettisoned several minutes before the Orbiter is captured into Mars orbit. The Orbiter will

be aerocaptured into Mars orbit, which will require accurate navigation of its Mars approach orbit
4

and the angle of entry into the upper martian atmosphere, as well as active attitude control during

the period of atmospheric braking. The aerocapture technique provides a fuel efficient means

for effecting orbital capture and substantially reduces the total propellant mass required to

achieve low circular orbit. The aeroshell surrounding the Orbiter will be instrumented for

aerothermal measurements to be made during its passage through the atmosphere. After being

aerocaptured into an elliptical orbit, the spacecraft will perform maneuvers to raise its periapsis

altitude and circularize its orbit at approximately 400 km altitude. The mapping orbit configuration

will be a nearly polar orbit with descending node crossing near 4:30 P.M. Mean Solar Time.

Mapping orbits, with a period of approximately 118 minutes, will continue for three Earth years.

The Orbiter will be capable of relaying data from the 2001 Lander and Rover Missions to

antennas of the NASA Deep Space Network. Approximately 500 days after entering Mars orbit,

a maneuver will be performed to slightly change the orbital inclination to initiate a slow orbital

precession that is stopped when the orbit has precessed to a nearly 6:00 P.M. orientation.

The MSP 2001 Orbiter will be designed to accommodate the remaining Mars Observer science

investigation, namely the Gamma Ray Spectrometer (GRS), a mineralogical/morphological

investigation, a radiation investigation, and a UHF relay system for communication with the

Lander and with the Rover. Once in its mapping orbit, the Orbiter will provide the platform for the

GRS and for science instruments solicited through this AO.

The principal objectives of the Orbiter Mission and its scientific payload are to:

* Demonstrate the capability to perform the aerocapture function;

* Achieve global mapping of the elemental composition of the surface, and the 

abundance of hydrogen in the shallow subsurface, using measurements 

from the GRS and its neutron spectrometer, respectively;

and, by virtue of investigations selected through this AO, to:

* Acquire high spatial and spectral resolution mapping of surface mineralogy;

* Acquire high spatial resolution data on surface morphology; and

* Characterize specific aspects of the martian near-space radiation environment.

It is expected that the Orbiter will achieve its mission objectives within three Earth years after

reaching Mars orbit. The Orbiter is expected to continue to serve as a communications relay for

landed vehicles for an additional two Earth years.

2.2 Lander and Rover Missions Overview and Objectives

The Lander and Rover, attached to a Cruise Stage, will be launched on a Delta-class launch

vehicle in April 2001 and are expected to arrive at Mars in January 2002, which will be the

martian southern summer/northern winter season. The Lander descent to the surface will be

slowed initially by an aeroshell and then by parachute. Final descent will be controlled by an

active terminal descent system that uses monopropellant hydrazine similar to the Mars Surveyor

1998 Lander. It is expected that the nominal landing accuracy will be approximately 50 km, threesigma. The feasibility of augmenting the Lander flight system to enable the demonstration of a

landing accuracy of 10 km, three-sigma, is currently being studied. 

The primary engineering considerations for selection of the landing site for the Lander and Rover

are site elevation (which determines the trajectory path length and atmospheric mass for

aerobraking through the lower atmosphere), and solar illumination (which determines power

availability and thermal control needs) and thus determines the possible range of landing site

latitudes. Based on these considerations, the landing site will tentatively be limited to sites less

than approximately 2.5 km above the mean martian datum, and between the latitudes of

approximately 15 degrees South and approximately 30 degrees North.
5

The specific landing site will be tentatively selected prior to launch based upon the requirements

of the selected Rover science investigations and within the engineering constraints outlined

above. In addition, it is expected that prior to the launch of the Mars 2001 Lander and Rover,

present knowledge of Mars will have been improved considerably by analyses of scientific data

to be returned by the Mars Pathfinder, Mars Global Surveyor, and Mars 1998 Missions. More

accurate surface elevation profiles will be derived from altimetry expected to be provided by the

laser altimetry investigation carried aboard the Mars Global Surveyor Mission. Thus, the final

selection by NASA of the landing site for the 2001 Lander and Rover Missions will also be based

on the most current knowledge of Mars that exists prior to the launch of the 2001 Lander and

Rover Missions.

Deployment of the Rover and subsequent initiation of its science activities commence within one

day of landing. It is expected that the duration of the Rover Mission will be approximately one

Earth year. Communications with the Rover will be accomplished through a relay link to the 2001

Orbiter. The Rover will operate autonomously between communication links; since the Rover is

solar-powered, its operations will occur only during martian daylight hours.

2.2.1 Lander Mission Objectives

The 2001 Lander Mission will provide high resolution imaging of the selected landing site and the

immediate vicinity during its descent to the martian surface. In addition the Lander Mission will

provide a platform for surface environmental measurements and will also serve as a platform for

demonstration of several key components of an in situ propellant production facility. The Lander

will communicate with Earth via the 2001 Orbiter and is expected to survive on the martian

surface for approximately 100 days.

The principal objectives of the Lander Mission and its payload are to:

* Deliver the Rover and its scientific payload safely to the martian surface;

* Provide high spatial resolution descent imaging of the selected landing site and its

immediate vicinity for use in site analyses and in initial operations of the Rover

and planning of initial Rover traverses;

* Demonstrate the capability to perform precision landing, with the goal of achieving

an accuracy of approximately 10 km, 3-sigma;

* Characterize the performance of processes and hardware which are important to

in-situ propellant production concepts and which interact with the Mars

environment during operation;

and, by virtue of investigations selected through this AO, to:

* Characterize the martian surface radiation environment as related to radiationinduced risk to human explorers;

* Characterize martian dust and soil to identify undesirable and harmfulinteractions

with human explorers and associated hardware systems, and to support the

design of extravehicular activities (EVA) and habitation systems;

* Characterize the geology of the landing site and provide geologic context for 

collected samples; and

* Determine the nature of local surface geologic processes from surface

morphology, and provide a link between local and regional geologic processes.
6

2.2.2 Rover Mission Objectives

The 2001 Rover Mission will provide surface traverse capability of ten or more kilometers over a

time period of approximately one Earth year and will communicate with Earth via the 2001 Orbiter.

The principal objectives of the Rover Mission and its scientific payload, as provided by

investigations selected through this AO, are to:

* Characterize in situ sites in the ancient highlands where the environmental

conditions may have been favorable to the preservation of evidence of possible

prebiotic or biotic processes including the emergence (and, potentially, the

persistence) of life;

* Analyze and document surface materials, for example, rocks, soil, duricrust; and

* Acquire and store diverse samples for possible return to Earth by subsequent 

missions.

The Mars Surveyor 2001 Project will provide the basic elements of a mobile platform from which

these objectives can be met, and will work with the selected science team to create a Rover

Mission that is optimized to accomplish the goals of their investigations.

3.0 MSP 2001 SCIENCE AND MEASUREMENT OBJECTIVES

3.1 Orbiter Science and Measurement Objectives

Knowledge of elemental composition of the martian surface is fundamental to understanding the

origin and geochemical evolution of the planet. In addition to understanding the elemental

composition, it is also necessary to understand the manner in which those elements form

minerals and the petrology of the rocks that occur on the martian surface. Therefore, mapping

the mineralogy of the surface from orbit is a critical objective of the 2001 Orbiter Mission.

Understanding the mineralogy and petrology of the martian surface is key to understanding the

geologic evolution of the planet and to the search for appropriate environments for landed

missions particularly with respect to sites that might hold evidence of prebiotic or biotic activity.

To this end, the Orbiter payload will include the GRS and instrumentation that is expected to be

selected through this AO capable of high spatial resolution mineralogical and morphological

surface mapping.

The science measurement objectives of the GRS are to:

* Globally map the elemental composition of the martian surface with an 

accuracy of 10 percent or better and a spatial resolution of approximately 

300 km; and

* Determine the abundance of hydrogen in the shallow subsurface.

The mineralogical/morphological surface mapping investigations solicited through this AO are

nominally expected to:

* Determine the mineralogical composition of the martian surface for minerals

whose abundance is approximately 10% or greater and at spatial scales of

approximately 100 m; and

* Provide information on the morphology of the martian surface such that features 

significantly less than 100 m can be adequately resolved.

Data will be acquired at a late afternoon illumination (nodal crossing at approximately 4:30 P.M.),

and data rates will be constrained as described in the Proposal Information Package. It is
7

anticipated that in addressing the above objectives, proposers would consider trade-offs

between spatial resolution, areal coverage, and detection levels.

In addition, if proposed and selected as supporting instrumentation to a radiation environment

investigation on the martian surface, Orbiter instrumentation will characterize specific aspects of

the Mars near-space radiation environment. The primary goal of these investigations would be

to monitor and measure components of solar particle events that are significant to human health

and safety, specifically the incident spectra of protons and helium from 30 MeV per nucleon to

approximately 500 MeV per nucleon, so that their contribution to the total dose on the surface of

Mars can be determined. It is intended that the space measurements will complement and aid in

the interpretation of measurements made on the martian surface. Favorable consideration will be

given to instruments that have the capability to provide data applicable in the broader context of

“Mars space weather.”

3.2 Lander Science and Measurement Objectives

As part of the planning for human exploration of Mars, the radiation environment must be

understood such that appropriate countermeasures can be developed. Understanding the

radiation environment on the surface and how the atmosphere interacts with the externally

imposed radiation field is critical if humans are to spend significant time on the martian surface.

Specific questions about the effective shielding by the martian atmosphere and the formation of

secondary radiation within the atmosphere must be addressed.

The physical and chemical properties of the soil and dust that occur on the martian surface need

to be understood such that the interaction of that material with both mechanical and human

systems can be assessed. Understanding the effects of the soil and dust on mechanical

systems is a critical issue in the development of long-lived robotic systems for Mars exploration.

Understanding the effects on humans is important in order that appropriate systems can be

developed to shield humans from any potential health risks.

The ability to manufacture propellant on the martian surface utilizing the martian atmosphere

provides a significant benefit in cost and mass reduction for missions that intend to leave the

surface (e.g., sample return and human return to Earth). Prior to conducting a mission that relies

on the in situ production of propellant, it is important to demonstrate that the key technologies can

operate effectively on the martian surface for the appropriate periods of time. The 2001 Lander

Mission will provide the platform to conduct these demonstrations.

The principal objectives of the Lander investigations are to characterize the radiation

environment at the martian surface, and the physical properties of the dust and soil. In addition,

the Lander will provide a platform for the descent imaging system, and for the demonstration of

particular components of an in situ propellant production facility to be provided by NASA.

The objectives of the radiation environment investigation solicited through this AO are to:

* Measure the accumulated tissue-equivalent absorbed dose and dose rate as a 

function of time with a resolution on the order of minutes;

* Measure the radiation quality of the radiation environment; and

* Distinguish the individual contributions of protons, neutrons, and energetic 

galactic cosmic radiation nuclei.

The energy deposition spectrum of interest is from approximately 0.1 KeV per nucleon to several

thousand KeV per nucleon, and includes charged particles, incident protons with energies

greater than 30 MeV, and other ions up to iron having energies up to several GeV per nucleon as

well as all the secondary radiation they produce, including neutrons. Surface measurements will

be correlated with measurements of the Mars near-space environment,
8

either through instrumentation making simultaneous measurements on the 2001 Orbiter, or

through the use of data from other, existing space missions.

Dust and soil investigations selected through this AO are expected to characterize dust

suspended in the atmosphere (including variations over time), and surface soil. The

measurement objectives are to:

* Determine the particle size and distribution, in the range 0.01 to 10.0 

microns (0.01 to about 10 cm surface depth), with higher emphasis on particles 

much smaller than 1.0 micron;

* Determine the total columnar suspended load of dust in the atmosphere;

* Determine the particle physical shape (e.g., crystalline/amorphous, 

fibrous/non-fibrous, smooth/jagged) and distribution;

* Determine the electrostatic properties such as adhesion potential, strength of 

adhesion, and character of the charge;

* Determine the chemical reactivities with a sensitivity of part per million (of 

particular interest are changes in the reactivities upon heating, with exposure 

to humidity, and with emphasis on the identification and volatility of the gases 

evolved) and, up to a maximum depth of 150 cm, determine the superoxidation 

zone (an essential feature of which could be the examination of the oxidation 

gradient between surface and subsurface materials).

* Determine the toxic trace elements including, but not limited to As, Be, Cd, 

Cl, F, and Pb; and

* Determine the toxic and genotoxic potential of dust and soil to biological cell 

analogs (enzymes, lipids, nucleic acids, etc), with the objective of identifying 

reactivity towards quasi-cellular systems from which the potential for acute toxicity

for human explorers could be inferred.

The objectives of the descent imaging investigation solicited through this AO are to:

* Characterize the geology of the landing site and provide geologic context for 

collected samples; and

* Determine the nature of local surface geologic processes from surface

morphology, and provide a link between local and regional geologic processes.

3.3 Rover Science and Measurement Objectives

The functions of the 2001 Rover Mission will include the exploration and characterization of sites

in the ancient highlands and the collection and storage of samples for possible return to Earth by

missions launched in the 2005 or later opportunities.

It is expected that the Rover will be capable of traverses of ten or more kilometers over a time

period of one Earth year. A descent imaging camera on the Lander will be furnished by NASA to

provide images of the landing site for use in site analyses, initial Rover operations, and planning

of initial traverses. The science payload will be capable of conducting in situ scientific analyses

of surface materials and will also be capable of acquiring and storing samples of surface

materials.
9

The science and measurement objectives of the 2001 Rover Mission investigations include:

* Color stereo imaging of martian surface environments;

* Remotely-sensed point discrimination of mineralogical composition (e.g., using 

infrared reflectance or emission spectroscopy);

* Determination of the fine scale (20 microns) textural properties of martian 

surface materials; and

* Determination of the elemental and mineralogical composition of martian surface 

materials.

4.0 TYPES OF PROPOSALS

This AO invites Principal Investigator/Instrument/Science Team Proposals for the MSP 2001

Orbiter, Lander, and Rover Missions. All proposals submitted in response to this AO are to be

prepared and submitted in accordance with the policies and provisions of Appendices A, B, and

C of this AO. Proposals for Interdisciplinary Scientist Investigations or for Participating Scientist

Investigations are not solicited by this AO. Following the selection of investigations solicited

through this AO, NASA expects to solicit proposals for Interdisciplinary Scientist Investigations

and for Participating Scientist Investigations through one or more future announcements

(described in Section 4.2).

4.1 Principal Investigator/Instrument/Science Team Proposals

Proposers must explicitly state which of the 2001 Missions described in this AO (i.e., Orbiter

Mission, Lander Mission, or Rover Mission) are addressed by their proposals. Samples of martian

materials may be retrieved and returned to Earth by a future mission for curation at appropriate

facilities; investigators selected through this AO will not have proprietary access to such

samples.

4.1.1 Orbiter Investigations

Proposals for the GRS are not solicited by this AO.

NASA intends to provide instrumentation for measurement of properties of the martian

atmosphere during the aerocapture phase; such instrumentation is not solicited by this AO.

This AO solicits Principal Investigator/Instrument proposals for participation in the 2001 Orbiter

Mission for the following types of investigations:

* High spatial and spectral resolution mineralogical/morphological mapping; and

* Near-space martian radiation environment characterization.

The Proposal Information Package (PIP) provides a detailed description of the basic Orbiter

vehicle that will provide the platform for these investigations.

Investigations that are proposed to characterize the Mars near-space environment must also

address the martian surface radiation environment objectives specified in Section 3.2; that is,

stand-alone proposals that address only the space radiation environment are not solicited.

Proposals must address both the Mars near-space and martian surface radiation environment,

and all measurement objectives specified in Sections 3.1 and 3.2. Proposals to characterize the

near-space radiation environment may propose radiation instrumentation for the 2001 Orbiter or

may propose use of data from other existing space missions. Proposers of radiation

instrumentation must specify the approach taken to correlate martian surface measurements to

near-space measurements and must specify instrument system accuracy, precision, sensitivity,
10

and resolution over the range of intended energy deposition. Proposals must also specify the

approach taken for using data obtained from the investigation to validate or update existing

models of the radiation environment, to determine potential impacts on radiation forecasting and

warning strategies, and to determine their correlation with other relevant space radiation

measurements.

4.1.2 Lander Investigations

NASA intends to provide the facilities required for demonstration of particular components of in

situ propellant production. Proposals for these or other components of in situ propellant

production are not solicited by this AO.

This AO solicits Principal Investigator/Instrument proposals for participation in the 2001 Lander

Mission for the following types of investigations:

* Characterization of the radiation environment at the martian surface; and

* Characterization of martian dust and soil, including physical properties, oxidation 

properties, and chemical and mineralogical properties.

This AO also solicits proposals for investigations using a NASA-provided descent imaging

system (Facility Instrument). The Proposal Information Package (PIP) provides a detailed

description of this instrument. Proposals may be submitted for Team Leader or Team member;

NASA plans to select a Team composed of a total of two investigators for the following type of

investigations:

* Characterize the geology of the landing site and provide geologic context for 

collected samples; and

* Determine the nature of local surface geologic processes from surface

morphology, and provide a link between local and regional geologic processes.

Proposals for the radiation characterization investigations should address all measurement

objectives specified in Sections 3.1 and 3.2, including measurements on the martian surface, as

well as in the Mars near space environment. Proposers may specify the use of data from

existing space missions for obtaining the space environment data, or may propose an instrument

for inclusion on the 2001 Orbiter Mission; see Section 4.1.1.

Proposers of investigations that require radiation instrumentation for the Lander must specify

instrument system accuracy, precision, sensitivity, and resolution over the range of intended

energy deposition. Proposals must specify the approach taken to correlate surface

measurements to near-space measurements. Proposals must also specify the approach taken

for using data obtained from the investigation to validate or update existing models of the

radiation environment, to determine potential impacts on radiation forecasting and warning

strategies, and for its synergy with other relevant space radiation measurements.

Proposals for the dust and soil characterization investigations may include individual instruments

that address one or more of the measurement objectives given in Section 3.2, or an integrated

suite of instruments that addresses some or all of the measurement objectives given in Section

3.2.

For the Lander payloads, sample characteristics, deployment devices, sampling mechanisms, or

other devices necessary for the proposed instruments to accomplish their measurements must

be identified as part of the proposed payload instrument. Because such devices significantly

affect the basic design and function of the Lander, the MSP 2001 Project expects to provide

guidance in their development and integration. If a manipulation system on the Lander is to be
11

used as the means of acquiring samples for a Lander investigation, a detailed description of the

manipulator-instrument interaction must be provided.

The Proposal Information Package (PIP) provides a detailed description of the basic Lander

vehicle that will provide the platform for these investigations.

4.1.3 Rover Investigations

This AO also solicits Principal Investigator proposals for an integrated scientific investigation that

meets all of the 2001 Rover science and measurement objectives given in Section 3.3, using an

integrated suite of instruments for the Rover. Proposers of integrated suites of scientific

instruments must prioritize individual instruments, and the individual Co-Investigator responsible

for an instrument or a portion of a proposed integrated instrument suite must be identified in the

proposal.

The basic elements of a mobile platform that provide mobility, power, computation, and

communications will be supplied by the 2001 Mars Surveyor Project. Proposers must clearly

define instrument deployment devices, sampling mechanisms, drills, sample containers, or other

devices necessary for the instruments to accomplish their tasks for the Rover science payload.

Because such devices significantly affect the basic design and function of the Rover, the MSP

2001 Project expects to provide guidance in their development and integration. In the case of the

sample container, which must be transferable to a sample return vehicle at a later date, the

Project expects to assume responsibility for its development and, if necessary, to provide

guidance to the selected PI in the modification of sample acquisition devices that interface with

the sample container. The Project and the selected PI will work in close coordination to assure

the optimization of the Rover design to achieve the science objectives described in Section 3.3.

Within the limited resources available, this approach is expected to maximize the scientific return

from the Rover Mission.

The Proposal Information Package (PIP) provides a description of the basic vehicle that will

provide the mobile platform for the scientific instruments.

4.2 Future Solicitations

Following the selection of investigations solicited by this AO, NASA expects to solicit

Interdisciplinary Scientist proposals by individuals for investigations of an interdisciplinary nature

that require the use of scientific measurements acquired during the Orbiter, Lander, and Rover

Missions. In response to that solicitation, it is expected that proposers will define a specific

scientific investigation and also indicate how they would participate in the following 2001 Mission

activities: 1) the landing site selection process; 2) the sample characterization and selection

process; and 3) the planning and surface science operation of the Lander and Rover Missions.

NASA also expects through that future AO to solicit Interdisciplinary Scientist proposals to use

data acquired by the 2001 Missions to assess the readiness required for a decision by NASA to

initiate the exploration of Mars by humans, and identify the scientific knowledge that is expected

from the selected MSP 2001 Investigations needed for planning the 2003 Rover Mission and the

2005 Sample Return Mission. NASA may also solicit proposals through that future AO for

Participating Scientist investigations that are either interdisciplinary or instrument-specific, to be

carried out by scientists who wish to participate only in the data collection and analysis phases

of the 2001 Orbiter, Lander, or Rover Missions.

5.0 FORMATION OF PROJECT SCIENCE GROUP

After selection of investigations by NASA, a MSP 2001 Project Science Group (PSG) will be

established. All 2001 Orbiter, Lander, and Rover Principal Investigators and the Descent Imager

Team Leader selected through this AO as well as any subsequent Interdisciplinary Scientists

(see Section 4.2) will automatically become members of the PSG. The PSG will be co-chaired by
12

the MSP 2001 Project Scientist at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory and the NASA Headquarters

Program Scientist.

The PSG will meet regularly through the lifetime of the MSP 2001 Orbiter, Lander, and Rover

Missions, and will work with the Mars Surveyor 2001 Project Office. Responsibilities of the Mars

Surveyor 2001 PSG are further described in the PIP.

6.0 CONSTRAINTS AND REQUIREMENTS

Certain constraints are mandated by NASA's commitment to cost efficiency in the MSP 2001

Missions. The cost constrained nature of the missions required that: the scientific payload will

be limited by available resources of funding, mass, total energy consumption, volume, data rate,

duty cycle, and other key resources as specified in the PIP.

The PIP contains detailed descriptions of the 2001 Orbiter, Lander, and Rover Missions and

spacecraft, and also contains information on the environments in which the instruments are

expected to survive and operate, Principal Investigator (PI) responsibilities and deliverables, and

a description of the capabilities of the MSP ground system and mission operations. In case of a

conflict between this AO and the PIP, the AO takes precedence.

Costs of meeting planetary protection for the Orbiter, Lander, and Rover payloads, with

requirements given in the PIP, must be included by proposers in the instrument payload costs.

Briefly, planetary protection requirements depend on the specific mission. The Orbiter payload

can meet requirements with a long orbital lifetime; the Lander payload will be required to achieve

and maintain a reduced level of microbial contamination; and the Rover payload will be required to

meet a prescribed level of sterilization for all outside surfaces. Information on planetary

protection and its requirements are available from NASA Document NPG 8020.12B (for

information on accessing this Document, see Section 1.4).

6.1 Constraints on Cost and Mass

For all instrumentation proposed in response to this AO, innovative design approaches that

incorporate technological advances in light weight, high performance instruments are solicited.

The total mass available to support the Orbiter mineralogical/morphological mapping investigations

is 12 kg. The total allowable cost of Phases B through D (to Launch plus 30 days) for the Orbiter

mapping investigations solicited by this AO is not to exceed $9.5 M (in real year dollars).

For the entire set of Rover investigations, the total mass available, including the mass of

instruments, and devices for instrument deployment, sample collection and sample

containerization is 15 kg, and the total allowable cost of Phases B through D (to Launch plus 30

days) is not to exceed $17.0 M (in real year dollars).

The maximum funding available by Fiscal Year for the Orbiter mineralogical/morphological

investigations and the Rover science investigations is summarized in the Table below. Funding

will be through Phases B-D of the Mars Surveyor 2001 Project, which includes Fiscal Years

1998-2001.

FY 1998 FY 1999 FY 2000 FY 2001 TOTAL

Orbiter Mapping $2.5 M $4.5 M $2.0 M $0.5 M $9.5 M

Investigations

Rover $4.0 M $7.0 M $5.5 M $0.5 M $17.0 M

Investigations

TOTAL $6.5 M $11.5 M $7.5 M $1.0 M $26.5 M
13

The total mass available for radiation monitoring instrumentation on the Orbiter is 4 kg. The total

mass available for radiation monitoring instrumentation on the Lander is 4 kg. The total allowable

cost of Phases B through D (to Launch plus 30 days) for both the Orbiter radiation investigation

and the Lander radiation investigation is not to exceed $2.0 M; proposers should submit budgets

for Fiscal Years 1998-2001 whose total for all years does not exceed $2.0 M.

The total mass available for dust and soil characterization instrumentation on the Lander is 8.5

kg, and the total allowable cost of Phases B through D (to Launch plus 30 days) is not to exceed 

$5.0 M; proposers should submit budgets for Fiscal Years 1998-2001 whose total for all years

does not exceed $5.0 M.

The total allowable cost for the Lander Descent Imaging Team of Phases B through D (to Launch

plus 30 days) is not to exceed $0.4 M.

6.2 Mars Surveyor Operations Project

The Mars Surveyor Operations Project (MSOP) was established within the Mars Exploration

Directorate (MED) at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory to provide cost-effective mission operations

support to all Mars missions managed by the MED. Annual budgets are established for the

MSOP and must provide for the operation of all Mars Surveyor Missions beyond Launch plus 30

days, for the generation and archiving of science investigator Data Products, and for initial data

analysis activities.

According to the multi-mission operations management strategy established by the MED, the

management of Mars Surveyor Missions is transferred to the MSOP shortly after launch. The

first such transfer, of the management of Mars Global Surveyor, was effected in November

1996; it is expected that the management of the Orbiter and Lander elements of the Mars

Surveyor 1998 and Mars Surveyor 2001 Projects will be transferred to the MSOP in

approximately December 1998/January 1999 and March/April 2001, respectively.

MSOP budget profiles that address Phase E (mission operations phase, after Launch plus 30

days) of the 2001 Orbiter, Lander, and Rover Missions have not yet been established.

Proposers are requested to submit their budgets for Phase E and describe their expected

activities in the following areas: 1) science operations; 2) generation, validation, and archiving

of Data Products; and 3) data analysis activities leading to publication of the initial results of their

investigations. Budgets should be submitted for Phase E of the 2001 Mission (Orbiter, Lander, or

Rover) addressed by the proposal. Phase E of the Orbiter Mission extends from May 2001

through December 2005; Phase E of the Lander Mission extends from May 2001 through May

2003; Phase E of the Rover Mission extends from May 2001 through May 2004. Selection of an

investigation does not imply a commitment for Phase E funding at the budget level submitted by

the selected investigator. Phase E budgets will be negotiated by the MSOP with Principal

Investigators selected for the MSP 2001 Missions.

6.3 Science Operations Site Requirements

It is expected that Orbiter, Lander, and Rover PI’s will develop and maintain a science operations

facility that will provide instrument performance assessment and data records assimilation and

archiving. In addition, Orbiter, Lander, and Rover PI’s will provide instrument command

generation and transmission to the Project Database; command generation and transmission for

the Rover will be performed by the MSOP.

To enable these activities, the MSOP will provide to each PI a Science Operations and Planning

Computer (SOPC) complete with operations compatible software, connectivity, and maintenance.

In addition, Internet connections to each Co-I for data records transfer will be supplied.

Implementation of science operations facilities in time to support spacecraft/instrument testing will

be monitored by the MSOP Science Office by means of reviews, documentation, and

configuration control.
14

6.4 Data Records Requirements and Data Validation

The MSP 2001 Project requires that raw data, calibration records, and processed data be

maintained in an updated form throughout the period of investigation. Specifically, each selected

PI must plan to:

* Maintain a continually updated record of the "best version" of the data until 

meaningful changes in data calibration no longer occur;

* Make updated data records available to other investigators and project personnel 

during the mission for shared analysis; and

* Support the timely processing and distribution of data.

In addition, PI’s selected for investigations sponsored by the Office of Space Science must plan

to archive their Data Products in the Planetary Data System (PDS) in a PDS-compatible data

format.

Investigators sponsored by the Office of Space Science no longer have exclusive use of their

data for any proprietary period. Therefore, selected PI’s are expected to release data for public

access as soon as is feasible. After a short period for verification and validation, not to exceed

six months, the PI must deposit the validated data in the PDS. Data Products will be archived in

the PDS as soon as they are available, on a time scale commensurate with the level of data

processing identified in the Science Data Management Plan. Image data will be made available

publicly shortly after reception on the ground.

Initial data analyses will be accomplished by the PI's and their Co-I’s. Proposers are expected to

include, as part of their proposed Mission Operations and Data Analysis activities, an appropriate

data analysis period that is consistent with PDS archiving activities. In summary, the investigation

team will be responsible for initial analysis of the data, its subsequent delivery to the PDS, and

the publication of initial scientific findings. The investigation team is expected to define a set of

archival Data Products, negotiate a PDS-compatible data format and provide timely delivery of the

Data Products according to the Science Data Management Plan.

Investigators selected for investigations sponsored by the HEDS Enterprise must provide NASA

with two Reports:

1. A “quick-look” Report of preliminary results, due 30 days after data is provided by

NASA to the PI; and

2. A final Report containing all information on the investigation, due approximately 

one year after all original required data have been provided by NASA to the PI.

PI’s selected for investigations sponsored by the HEDS Enterprise must also provide NASA with

all investigation data for placement in the appropriate Data Archival. Data in this archive will be

made available to the scientific community.

6.5 Approaches to Reducing Instrument and Instrument Operations Costs

Because of the firm overall limitation on the science costs and the total costs to NASA of the

MSP 2001 Orbiter, Lander, and Rover Missions, prospective investigators are encouraged to

seek innovative approaches to reducing both instrument and instrument operation costs, and

also the resources required from the Orbiter, Lander, and Rover.

Investigators are encouraged to reduce costs by proposing, for example, Lander Mission

instrument suites that integrate a set of instruments which address several or all of the primary
15

scientific objectives of the Lander Mission. Another approach to U.S. (NASA) cost savings,

which proposers are also encouraged to investigate, may be to share payload development

costs through collaboration with other government agencies or with private industry, or through

international collaboration.

6.6 Technical Approach Requirements

The proposal must address all technical aspects of the investigation from the beginning of

funding through delivery of the data for archiving and the publication of results in the peerreviewed literature. Proposers are encouraged to propose innovative processes, techniques,

and activities to accomplish these objectives and to demonstrate cost, schedule, and technical

efficiencies.

The PI is responsible for the scientific success of his/her investigation, whether a single

instrument or integrated payload. The proposal must describe the technical approach the PI

plans to take for every element of his/her investigation to ensure that the investigation does not

go out of the bounds of the resources available including cost, that the payload will operate

reliably, and that the data can be interpreted.

6.7 Education and Public Outreach

The Mars Surveyor Program represents an opportunity for NASA to use knowledge gained from

its exploration of Mars to increase the science, technology, and mathematics literacy of students

and of the American public. Therefore, proposed investigations must include activities that will

make significant and measurable contributions to enhance the level of understanding and

awareness of Mars exploration. Such public outreach may be accomplished through i)

education activities, which might include substantial participation in the investigation by teachers

and students, and the development and utilization of programs that would involve educational

institutions at any level in the investigation; and/or ii) through public information programs that will

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

science to the public. This plan will be judged as part of the Evaluation criteria; see Section 7.1.

Proposers may wish to refer to the description of the NASA Office of Space Science

Education/Public Outreach program given in “Partners in Education, A Strategy for Integrating

Education and Public Outreach into NASA’s Space Science Programs (March 1995),” and its

accompanying implementation plan, entitled “Implementing the Office of Space Science (OSS)

Education/Public Outreach Strategy,” both of which may be accessed by opening “Publications”

from the menu of the Internet host <http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/oss/>.

6.8 Technology Development and Transfer Requirements

The Mars Surveyor Program represents an opportunity for NASA to develop and test new

technologies and applications, as well as transfer those technologies and applications to the

private sector. Mars Surveyor Missions are expected to help NASA achieve the goal of

technology transfer, defined here as the transition of scientific and engineering knowledge from

one entity to another for a potentially useful purpose. Emphasis is placed on technology transfer

from NASA to the private sector, including the non-aerospace industry, for use in or as a

commercial product or process. Proposals must include a description of expected new

technology, and how it will be developed, tested, and transferred to the private sector. This plan

will be judged as part of the Evaluation criteria; see Section 7.1.
16

7.0 PROPOSAL EVALUATION, SELECTION, AND IMPLEMENTATION

7.1 Evaluation Criteria

The fundamental aim of the NASA investigation acquisition process is to identify scientific ideas

that are tested and verified by unique instrumental and/or analytical capabilities that best suit the

overall scientific and cost objectives of the program as described in the AO. The following

criteria will be used in evaluating all proposals submitted in response to this AO. Criteria 1, 2,

and 3 are the most important, with criteria 1 and 2 having equal and greater weight than criterion

3 and criteria 4-6 are listed in order of descending importance. Criterion 5 carries a weight of

about 10% for the final score.

1. The scientific and technological merit of the proposed investigation and its relevance to

this specific opportunity and to the established mission plans and objectives. The degree

to which instrumentation incorporates advanced technology will be considered, as well

as the degree to which proposed instrumentation fulfills the data requirements as stated

in the AO.

2. For proposals involving provision of an instrument, the adequacy of the proposed

instrument or integrated instrument suite for the proposed investigation, with particular

regard to the instrument's or instrument suite's ability to supply the data needed for the

investigation within mission constraints such as mass, volume, available energy, available

data storage and transmission rates, and sequencing.

3. Total cost, cost realism, and management considerations. Total cost will be considered to

include not only that proposed for the instrument development and for data validation, but

also the impact on operations costs. The technical and cost risk (uncertainty) associated

with the investigation will also be considered. Due to the program's strict financial

constraints, any proposed instrument options that would enhance scientific return but

increase cost should be clearly identified and costed. Management aspects include

demonstrated capability to adhere to sound business practices.

4. The competence and relevant experience of the proposer and any proposed investigative

team as an indication of their ability to carry the investigation to a successful conclusion,

and the commitment of the proposer's institution, as measured by the willingness of the

institution to provide the necessary support (logistics, facilities, etc.) to ensure that the

investigation can be completed satisfactorily.

5. The proposed plan for education/public outreach activities.

6. Provision for transferring for other uses, potentially new scientific instrument technology

developed during the proposed investigation.

In accordance with Section 2.0 of Appendix A, NASA may desire to select only a portion of the

proposer's investigation and may also desire the proposer's participation with other investigators

in a joint investigation. In this case, the proposer will be given the opportunity to accept or

decline such partial acceptance and/or participation with other investigators.

7.2 Evaluation and Selection Procedures

Proposals received in response to this AO will be evaluated in accordance with the provisions of

NASA Federal Acquisition Regulations (FAR) Supplement Part 1872, “Acquisition of

Investigations”, that may be accessed through the Internet host

<http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/procurement/regs/1872.htm>.
17

7.2.1 Evaluation Process

All proposals will be subjected to a preliminary screening to determine their suitability and

responsiveness to the AO. Proposals that are not responsive to the intent and provisions of this

AO will be handled as technical correspondence and returned without further review. Those

proposals that are responsive to the AO will then be subjected to a preliminary technical,

management, and cost assessment.

NASA will make use of both the information in the investigator’s proposal, and an independent

technical and cost evaluation of the proposal provided by an engineering, management, and cost

evaluation panel. This panel will also assess the cost impact of accommodating the instrument or

integrated instrument suite in the mission payload.

Following these preliminary actions, the scientific and technical aspects of each proposal will be

assessed by panels composed of reviewers who are scientific and technical peers of the

proposers. The purpose of this peer evaluation will be to determine the scientific and technical

merit of each proposal, expressed in terms of its strengths and weaknesses. Results of the

earlier technical and cost evaluation will be available to these reviewers.

The educational/public outreach plan will be appraised by a subpanel of personnel having

professional qualifications in those fields.

7.2.2 Categorization Process

After all scientific, technical, management, education, and cost evaluations are completed, an ad

hoc Categorization Subcommittee of the Space Science and HEDS Steering Committee (see

further below), consisting of U.S. Civil Servants, will consider the totality of all evaluations as

weighted by provisions given in section 7.1 in order to categorize the submitted proposals

according to the following definitions:

Category I: Well conceived and scientifically and technically sound investigations

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 the data

can be properly reduced, analyzed, interpreted, and published in a reasonable time.

Category II: Well conceived and scientifically and technically sound investigations which

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

Category III: Scientifically and technically sound investigations which require further

development. (Note that it is not considered likely that any Category III proposals will be

selected through this AO.)

Category IV: Proposed investigations which are recommended for rejection for this

particular opportunity, for scientific, technical, cost, or other reasons.

After the categorization of proposals, further discussions among representatives of the

sponsoring NASA Program Offices, the MSP 2001 Project Offices, and the proposers may occur

for those proposals rated Category I and II to assess cost realism and development risk and to

further clarify the existing proposal(s). Any such discussions will not be an opportunity to

revise a submitted proposal. Note that if this option is exercised, all proposers in the Category I

and II range will be contacted, and all those not in these Categories will be so notified and

offered a debriefing (see also Section 7.3).
18

7.2.3 Selection Process

Following the evaluations described above, the three NASA Program Offices sponsoring this AO

will develop payload recommendations for their respective areas of solicitation. These

recommendations, and all peer review and categorization materials on all proposals will be

submitted to a Steering Committee composed of U.S. Civil Servants from NASA Headquarters, to

review the completeness and adequacy of all materials regarding the review and categorization

of proposals, and the soundness and justification for recommendations for selection resulting

therefrom. Selections of investigations will be made by the Associate Administrators for Space

Science, for Space Flight, and for Life and Microgravity Sciences and Applications in their

respective areas of solicitation.

7.3 Implementation Procedures

Immediately following selection appropriate letters of selection or rejection will be sent to all

proposers. All proposers will be offered a debriefing concerning the strengths and weaknesses

of their proposals. This debriefing may be by telephone or in person at NASA Headquarters at

the discretion of the proposer; however, in the latter case, NASA funds may not be used to

defray travel costs.

 All selected proposers will be contacted immediately in order to establish a funding mechanism

as quickly as possible. In particular, it is expected that all selected PI’s will attend a first meeting

of the PSG within approximately two weeks of selection notification.

8.0 PROGRAM MANAGEMENT

The Mars Surveyor Program Office is located in the Office of Space Science, NASA

Headquarters, Washington, DC. The Mars Surveyor 2001 Project is managed by the Mars

Exploration Directorate at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Pasadena, California, which also

manages Mars Pathfinder, Mars Global Surveyor, and Mars Surveyor 1998. The Mars

Exploration Directorate is responsible for implementation of the MSP 2001 Orbiter, Lander, and

Rover Missions, and the operation of Mars Surveyor Missions through the Mars Surveyor

Operations Project. Lockheed-Martin Company is the spacecraft contractor for the MSP 2001

Orbiter and Lander, and the Jet Propulsion Laboratory is the contractor for the MSP 2001 Rover.

9.0 CONCLUSION

The objectives of these Missions are wide ranging and represent significant steps forward in the

systematic study of Mars: to continue the orbital reconnaissance of Mars and prepare for the

selection of sites to be explored on the surface; to investigate with a roving vehicle sites in the

ancient martian highlands at which samples will be selected, analyzed, and collected; and to

characterize aspects of the martian environment and demonstrate several technologies that are

key to the decision of possible exploration of Mars by humans. We invite you to participate in the

important and exciting Mars Surveyor Program 2001 Missions.

Wesley T. Huntress, Jr. Jurgen H. Rahe

Associate Administrator for Science Program Director

 Space Science Solar System Exploration

Office of Space Science

Arnauld E. Nicogossian Wilbur C. Trafton

Associate Administrator for Associate Administrator for

 Life and Microgravity Sciences Space Flight

 and Applications
A-1

APPENDIX A

GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS AND PROVISIONS

1.0 Instrumentation and/or Ground Equipment

By submitting a proposal, the investigator and institution agree that NASA has the option to

accept all or part of the offeror's plan to provide the instrumentation or ground support equipment

required for the investigation, or NASA may furnish or obtain such instrumentation or equipment

from any other source as determined by the selecting official. In addition, NASA reserves the

right to require use, by the selected investigator, of Government instrumentation or property that

subsequently becomes available, with or without modification, that will meet the investigative

objectives.

2.0 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. The investigator should also understand that NASA may

desire to select only a portion of the proposed investigation and/or that NASA may desire the

individual's participation with other investigators in a joint investigation, in which case the

investigator will be given the opportunity to accept or decline such partial acceptance or

participation with other investigators prior to a NASA selection. Where participation with other

investigators as a team is agreed to, one of the team members will normally be designated as its

team leader or contact point.

3.0 Selection Without Discussion

The Government reserves the right to reject any or all proposals received in response to this

Announcement when such action shall be considered in the best interest of the Government.

Notice is also given of the possibility that any selection may be made without discussion (other

than discussions conducted for the purpose of minor clarification). It is, therefore, emphasized

that all proposals should be submitted initially on the most favorable terms that the offeror can

submit.

4.0 Non-U.S. Proposals

Guidelines for non-U.S. responses to this Announcement of Opportunity are presented in

Appendix B, Section 3.0. Requirements for PI/Instrument proposals involving U.S./non-U.S.

collaboration are summarized below:

4.1 Non-U.S. Proposals with U.S. Co-I's

In cases where the participation of a U.S. individual is included in a PI/Instrument proposal

submitted by a non-U.S. individual, and where it is anticipated that such participation will be

supported by NASA, a Management and Cost Plan covering such participation must be submitted

to NASA as part of the proposal. This Management and Cost Plan must be signed by the U.S.

individual and certified by the U.S. individual's institution. Such costs will be considered in the

review and evaluation of proposals submitted by non-U.S. individuals.

4.2 U.S. Proposals with Non-U.S. Co-I's

Non-U.S. individuals who plan to participate as Co-Investigators on a U.S. PI/Instrument proposal

must have such participation reviewed and endorsed by their appropriate governmental agency

before such participation can be selected. Evidence of such review and endorsement should be
A-2

provided at the time that the proposal is submitted or as soon as possible thereafter. Formal

arrangements for such participation will be made by NASA's International Relations Division after

selection of the investigation.

5.0 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 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.

6.0 Status of Cost Proposals (Proposals Requesting NASA Support)

Submission of Standard Form (SF) 1411 "Contract Pricing Proposal Cover Sheet" is required as

part of the cost proposal (see Section 1.2 of Appendix B). The investigator's institution agrees

that the cost proposal submitted in response to this 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 SF Form 1411 and all certifications

and representations required by law and regulation.

7.0 Late Proposals

Proposals received after the deadline given in this Announcement will not be accepted and will

be returned to the proposer.

8.0 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 Announcement of Opportunity,

those generated by NASA in-house research and development, and those derived from

contracts and other agreements between NASA and external entities.

9.0 Disclosure of Proposals Outside Government

NASA may find it necessary to obtain proposal evaluation assistance outside the Government.

Where NASA determines it is necessary to disclose a proposal outside the Government for

evaluation purposes, arrangements will be made with the evaluator for appropriate handling of

the proposal information. Therefore, by submitting a proposal, the investigator and institution

agree that NASA may have the proposal evaluated outside the Government. If the investigator or
A-3

institution desire to preclude NASA from using an outside evaluation, the investigator or institution

should so indicate on the cover. However, notice is given that if NASA is precluded from using

outside evaluation, it may be unable to consider the proposal.

10.0 Equal Opportunity (U.S. Proposals Only)

By submitting a proposal, the investigator and institution agree to accept the following clause in

any resulting contract:

Equal Opportunity

During the performance of this contract, the Contractor agrees as follows:

The Contractor will not discriminate against any employee or applicant for employment because

of race, color, religion, sex, or national origin.

The Contractor will take affirmative action to ensure that applicants are employed, and that

employees are treated during employment, without regard to their race, color, religion, sex, or

national origin. Such action shall include, but not be limited to (a) employment; (b) upgrading; (c)

demotion; (d) transfer; (e) recruitment or recruitment advertising; (f) layoff or termination; (g)

rates of pay or other forms of compensation; and (h) selection for training, including

apprenticeship.

The Contractor agrees to post in conspicuous places, available to employees and applicants for

employment, the notices to be provided by the Contracting Officer that explain this clause.

The Contractor shall, in all solicitations or advertisements for employees placed by or on behalf

of the Contractor, state that all qualified applicants will receive consideration for employment

without regard to race, color, religion, sex, or national origin.

The Contractor shall send to each labor union or representative of workers with which it has a

collective bargaining agreement or other contract or understanding, a notice, to be provided by

the Contracting Officer, advising the labor union or workers' representative of the Contractor's

commitments under this clause, and post copies of the notice in conspicuous places available to

employees and applicants for employment.

The Contractor shall comply with Executive Order 11246, as amended, and the rules, regulations,

and orders of the Secretary of Labor.

The Contractor shall furnish to the contracting agency all information required by Executive Order

11246, as amended, and by the rules, regulations, and orders of the Secretary of Labor.

Standard Form 100 (EEO-1), or any successor form, is the prescribed form to be filed within 30

days following the award, unless filed within 12 months preceding the date of award.

The Contractor shall permit access to its books, records, and accounts by the contracting

agency or the Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs (OFCCP) for the purposes of

investigation to ascertain the Contractor's compliance with the applicable rules, regulations, and

orders.

If the OFCCP determines that the Contractor is not in compliance with this clause or any rule,

regulation, or order of the Secretary of Labor, the contract may be canceled, terminated, or

suspended in whole or in part, and the Contractor may be declared ineligible for further

Government contracts, under the procedures authorized in Executive Order 11246, as amended.

In addition, sanctions may be imposed and remedies invoked against the Contractor as provided

in Executive Order 11246, as amended, and by the rules, regulations, and orders of the

Secretary of Labor, or as otherwise provided by law.
A-4

The Contractor shall include the terms and conditions of subparagraph 1 through 9 of this clause

in every subcontract or purchase order that is not exempted by the rules, regulations, or orders

of the Secretary of Labor issued under Executive Order 11246, as amended, so that these terms

and conditions will be binding upon each subcontractor or vendor.

The Contractor shall take such action with respect to any subcontract or purchase order as the

contracting agency may direct as a means of enforcing these terms and conditions, including

sanctions for noncompliance; provided, that if the Contractor becomes involved in, or is

threatened with, litigation with a subcontractor or vendor as a result of direction, the Contractor

may request the United States to enter into the litigation to protect the interests of the United

States.

11.0 Patent Rights

For any 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 contract, request waiver of rights as set forth in the provision at

NFS 18-52.227-73, "Requests for Waiver of Rights to Inventions.

For any contract resulting from this solicitation awarded to a small business firm or nonprofit

organization, the clause at FAR 52.227-1 1, "Patent Rights--Retention by the Contractor (Short

Form)" (as modified by NFS 18-52.227-1 1) shall apply.
B-1

APPENDIX B

GUIDELINES FOR PROPOSAL PREPARATION AND SUBMISSION

1.0 Proposal Preparation

The following guidelines apply to the preparation of proposals by potential investigators in

response to this AO. The material presented is merely a guide for the prospective

proposer and it is not intended to be all encompassing. The proposer should provide

information relative to those items applicable or as otherwise required by this AO.

In order to provide a firm basis for the comparison of proposals received in response to

this AO, the Mars Surveyor 2001 Orbiter, Lander, and Rover capabilities and constraints,

the expected flight environments, ground system capabilities and constraints, and

requirements for data archiving described in the Proposal Information Package (PIP) must

be used for proposal preparation (for information on accessing the PIP, see Section 1.3

of this AO).

A science investigation must be clearly defined. The description of any proposed

instrumentation must provide adequate technical information to permit evaluation. In

addition, it must specifically address those Orbiter, Lander, or Rover resources,

configurations, or special requirements necessary for successful implementation of the

proposed investigation. This information should be given in sufficient detail to permit an

evaluation of both the concept and the practical feasibility of the investigation. If

appropriate, the proposal should describe the heritage of any proposed instrumentation,

how the investigation is related to other proposed investigations, and the specific

approach being taken to coordinate measurement goals and/or to share instrument

hardware. The proposal should describe any technology developments that are

anticipated for development of the instrument or instrument suite, and also describe

backup strategies in the event that the expected technologies are not available. The

proposal should also describe any recognized need for supporting laboratory research

or ground-based, airborne, or other activities required to support development of the

instrument and its operation during the mission.

The proposal should also contain the best possible description of the proposer's plans for

data processing, management, and archiving. Many of the details of these procedures

are not established at this time, but the proposal should include as much information as

possible concerning the investigator's plans, requirements, and costs, especially those

for unique data management requirements (hardware and software).

A uniform proposal format will be required from all proposers in order to aid in proposal

evaluation and to facilitate comparative analysis. Therefore, each proposal must be

submitted in two separately-bound volumes: Volume 1, Investigation and Technical Plan;

and Volume 2, Management and Cost Plan. All documents must be typewritten in English

and must be clearly legible. At least one copy of each document should be clear black

print on white paper and of a quality suitable for reproduction. Submission of proposal

material by facsimile (Fax), electronic media, video tape, floppy disk, etc., is not

acceptable.

All proposals must be signed by an institutional official authorized to certify institutional

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

and financial parts of the proposal. Additionally, the original, signed copy

of all proposals requesting NASA funding must include certifications regarding drug-free

workplace requirements, debarment, and lobbying; Appendix C contains the forms for

these certifications.
B-2

The format required and the required contents are summarized below.

1.1 Volume 1: Investigation and Technical Plan

Volume 1 should consist of the main body of the proposal and any optional appendices.

The volume should provide a clear statement of the proposed investigation and how it will

address the objectives of the Mars Surveyor 2001 Orbiter, Lander, or Rover Mission.

The proposal should contain enough background information to be meaningful to a

reviewer who is generally familiar with the field, although not necessarily a specialist.

The title page of Volume 1 must clearly state which of the MSP 2001 Mission elements

(Orbiter, Lander, or Rover) are addressed by the proposal.

The title page of Volume 1 must state the title(s), names(s), addresses, affiliation(s), the

telephone and Fax numbers, and e-mail addresses of a single Principal Investigator and

Co-Investigators. The title page must also contain the authorizing signatures of

appropriate officials of participating organizations. Such organizations may include

industrial contractors who are part of the proposed team. In the Preface to Volume 1 the

proposer must also include the following two pages: (1) a separate abstract, one page or

less in length, describing the proposed investigation; and (2) a separate table, one page

or less in length, listing the major instrument parameters or specifications of the

investigation.

The main body of Volume 1 will generally contain the following:

1. Objectives and Significant Aspects. A brief definition of the proposed

investigation objectives, their value, and their relationships to past, current, and

future efforts. The history and basis for the proposal and a demonstration of the

need for such an investigation. A statement of present development in the

discipline field, and areas for insertion of new technology.

2. Investigation Approach. A full description of the concept of the investigation and

the method and procedures for carrying out the investigation.

3. Instrumentation. A full description of all information necessary to plan for

experiment development, integration, ground operations, and flight operations.

Proposers of integrated instrument suites for the Rover must provide a

prioritization of their individual instruments. This section must be complete in itself

without the need to request additional data. Failure to furnish complete data may

preclude evaluation of the proposal.

i. Payload/Instrument Description. This section should fully describe the

instrumentation (instruments and any associated

deployment/mobility/sampling devices) and indicate items which are

proposed to be developed, as well as any existing instrumentation.

Performance characteristics should be related to the experiment

objectives as stated in the proposal.

ii. Payload/Instrument Integration. This section should describe all

parameters of the instrument pertinent to the accommodation of the

instrument in the spacecraft. These include, but are not limited to:

volumetric envelope (including view angle requirements), weight,

power, and energy requirements, thermal requirements, telemetry

requirements, sensitivity to or generation of contamination (e.g.,

electromagnetic interference, gaseous effluent), data processing
B-3

requirements. Energy requirements and a time profile of power

requirements should be described.

iii. Prioritization of Individual Instruments of Integrated Rover Payloads.

Proposers of integrated scientific instrument suites for the Rover must

prioritize individual scientific instruments.

iv. Ground Operations. This section should identify requirements for prelaunch or post-launch ground operations support, science site

implementation, and configuration control.

v. Flight Operations. This section should identify any requirements for

flight operations support including instrument testing, calibration, and

mission planning. Describe any special communications or near realtime ground support requirements and indicate any special equipment

or skills required of ground personnel.

4. Data Reduction and Validation. A discussion of the data reduction and validation

plan including a definition of archival Data Products and, insofar as possible, the

method and format. The plan should include a schedule for the submission of

validated archival Data Products, as specified in this AO, and the plan for

submission of final interpretive papers to the peer-reviewed literature.

5. Education/Public Outreach. Provisions and plans for education and public

outreach activities of the proposed investigation, arrangements for appropriate

partners and alliances, implementation of the education/outreach program, and

dissemination of education/outreach products and materials.

6. Roles and Responsibilities. The specific roles and responsibilities of the PI and of

each Co-Investigator, along with a time-phasing of their activities. Because the

number of participants will be limited, each participant must have an identified

specific function that makes a demonstrable contribution to the development

and/or implementation of the investigation. A condensed description of all

prospective participants' relevant background, experience, and selected

publications (if appropriate) should be provided.

Volume 1 is limited to 25 pages for proposals for individual instruments and 50 pages for

proposals for integrated suites of instruments; these limits do not include title page,

preface pages, or Table of Contents. For either type of proposal, a maximum of 4 foldout

pages is allowed. Appendices are limited to a total of 5 single-spaced, typewritten

pages, without reduction for single instrument proposals, and 10 pages for instrument

suite proposals. In complying with page limits, no page should contain more than 50 lines

of text, and the type size should not be smaller than 10-point font, with a minimum margin

of 2.5 cm on all sides. Each side of a sheet of paper containing text or figures is

considered a page; each side of a foldout sheet of paper containing text or figures is

considered as 2 pages.

1.2 Volume 2: Management and Cost Plan

The management plan sets forth the investigator's approach for managing the work, the

recognition of essential management functions, and the overall integration of these

functions in order to meet the established review and delivery dates. It provides insight

into the organization 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. This volume is limited to 25 pages for proposals for individual

instruments and 50 pages for proposals for integrated instrument suites.
B-4

The following items must be supplied in Volume 2.

1. Method of Instrument/Payload Acquisition. Volume 2 must describe the proposed

method of instrument acquisition. Specifically, it must include the following, as

applicable:

(i) Rationale for the investigator to obtain the instrument/payload through or by

the investigator's institution.

(ii) Method and basis for the selection of the proposed instrument/payload

fabricator.

(iii) Unique or proprietary capabilities of the instrument/payload fabricator that

are not available from any other source.

(iv) Contributions or characteristics of the proposed fabricator's

instrument/payload that make it an inseparable part of the investigation.

(v) Availability of supporting personnel in the institution to successfully

administer the instrument/payload contract and technically monitor the

fabrication.

(vi) Status of development of the instrument/payload, e.g., what additional

development is needed. Areas that need further design or in which

unknowns are present. Backup options for any function or hardware

requiring technology development.

(vii) Method by which the investigator proposes to:

(a) Prepare instrument/payload hardware and software specifications.

(b) Review development progress and maintain configuration control.

(c) Review design and fabrication changes.

(d) Participate in testing program.

(e) Participate in final checkout and calibration.

(f) Provide for integration of instrument/payload.

(g) Support the flight operations.

(h) Coordinate with Co-Investigators, other related investigations, and the

payload integrator.

(i) Assure safety, reliability, and quality.

(j) Control cost.

(viii) For proposals seeking NASA funding, planned participation by small and/or

minority business in any subcontracting for instrument fabrication or

investigative support functions.

All major facilities, laboratory equipment, and ground-support equipment (GSE)

(including those of the investigator’s proposed contractors and those of

NASA and other U.S. Government agencies) essential to the experiment in
B-5

terms of its system and subsystems are to be indicated, distinguishing

insofar as possible between those already in existence and those that will

be developed in order to execute the 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.

2. Schedules and Responsibilities. Volume 2 must include schedules necessary for

the logical and timely pursuit of the work, accompanied by a description of the

investigator's work plan and deliverables to the Mars Surveyor 2001 Project, and

the responsibilities of the Co-Investigators. A discussion must be provided of the

specific roles that each of the participants and their institutions intend to play in

the investigation. This discussion should include a statement of the portion of time

which each participant expects to devote to the investigation and of the

institutional resources on which each can draw.

3. Cost Plan For Proposals Requesting NASA Support. Volume 2 must also provide

a detailed estimate of the total cost of the investigation and cost spread per

Government Fiscal Year, along with sufficient technical information on which to

judge the reliability of the figures. The assumptions on which the estimate is

based should be stated, particularly with regard to Government-furnished

equipment and services. Reserve should be shown explicitly. Details on Cost

Proposal Certifications are provided in Appendix A (General Instructions and

Provisions) to this AO.

In addition to submitting the SF 1411 the cost plan should summarize, in real-year dollars,

and by Government Fiscal Year (October 1 to September 30), the total investigation cost

by major categories of cost as well as by function.

The categories of cost should include the following:

a. Direct Labor. List by labor category, with labor hours and rates for each.

Provide actual salaries of all personnel, including civil service labor, and the

percentage of time each individual will devote to the effort. 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,

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. If any NASA costs are to be considered as

contributed costs, the contributed item(s) must be separately funded by an

effort complimentary to the proposed investigation, and the funding sources

must be identified. 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 follow the Managerial Cost

Accounting Standards for the Federal Government as recommended by the

Federal Accounting Standards Advisory Board.

b. Overhead. Include indirect costs which, because of their incurrence for

common or joint objectives, are not readily subject to treatment as a direct

cost. Usually this is in the form of a percentage of the direct labor costs.

c. Materials. This should give the total cost of the bill of materials, including

estimated cost of each major item. Include lead time of critical items.

d. Subcontracts. List those over $5,000, specify the vendor and the basis for

estimated costs. Include any baseline or supporting studies.
B-6

e. Special Equipment. Include a list of special equipment with lead and/or

development time. Include number of units and types.

f. Travel. List estimated number of trips, destinations, duration, purpose,

number of travelers, and anticipated dates.

g. Other Costs. Costs not covered elsewhere.

h. General and Administrative Expense. This includes the expenses of the

institution's general and executive offices and other miscellaneous

expenses related to the overall business.

i. Fee (if applicable).

Cost summaries should be attached to show total cost allocable to the following by

Government Fiscal Year:

a. PI and Co-I Costs for Science Support. Includes all efforts associated with

overall investigation management; support of the Mars Surveyor 2001 PSG;

the development of calibration requirements (but not calibration itself); the

planning for the mission operations/data analysis phase, including

necessary pre-launch development of ground software required for postlaunch activities; costs for education/public outreach. This category begins

on November 1, 1997, and ends on April 30, 2001 (approximately Launch

plus 30 days).

b. Hardware Costs. Consists of all efforts, including field support at JPL,

associated with the design, fabrication, test, calibration, operation and

maintenance of the flight instrument(s), enabling devices and a suitable

complement of spare components (and functional or nonfunctional models

such as Engineering, Models and Temperature Control Models if proposed);

the design, development, test, operation, and maintenance of instrument

ground support equipment; the design, test, and maintenance of instrument

and support equipment software; support to the Project regarding matters

related to the integration of the flight instrument with the spacecraft; and the

engineering management of the foregoing efforts. This category begins on

November 1, 1997, and ends on April 30, 2001.

c. Science Operations/Generation and Validation of Data Products/Data

Analysis Costs. Includes all costs associated with the investigation, beginning on

May 1, 2001, including support of the PSG, science operations, computer time,

and data reduction,generation, validation, and archiving of Data Products, and

education/public outreach. As with science support, it also includes investigator

support of the PSG working groups, but in the period from May 1, 2001, until

December 31, 2005 for the Orbiter Mission, or in the period from May 1, 2001 until

May 31, 2003 for the Lander Mission, or in the period from May 1, 2001 until May

31, 2004 for the Rover Mission.

1.3 Certification

All proposals must be signed by an institutional official authorized to certify institutional

support and sponsorship of the investigation as well as of the management and financial

parts of the proposal. In addition, Certifications regarding Drug-Free Workplace;

Debarment, Suspension and Other Responsibility Matters; and Lobbying must accompany

the original, signed proposal. Forms for submission of these three Certifications are

included as Appendix C.
B-7

2.0 Proposal Submission

The requirements for the submission of proposals from both U.S. and non-U.S. institutions

in response to this Announcement of Opportunity are given in Section 1.5.

3.0 Proposals From Non-U.S. Institutions

The following guidelines are established for non-U.S. responses to this AO.

Proposals from institutions outside the United States must be typewritten in English and in

the same format as U.S. proposals. Proposers from non-U.S. institutions operate on a no

exchange of funds basis and therefore are not required to submit a Cost Plan; however,

a Management Plan must be submitted.

In cases where the participation of a U.S. individual is included in a proposal submitted by

a non-U.S. individual, and where it is requested that such participation be supported by

NASA, a Management and Cost Plan covering such participation must be submitted to

NASA as part of the proposal. This Management and Cost Plan must be signed by the

U.S. individual and certified by the U.S. individual's institution. Such costs will be

considered in the review and evaluation of proposals submitted by non-U.S. individuals.

Proposers from non-U.S. institutions must have their proposals reviewed and endorsed

by their appropriate sponsoring government agency. Such endorsement by a non-U.S.

organization must indicate that:

1) The proposal merits careful consideration by NASA; and

2) If the proposal is selected, sufficient funds will be available

to undertake the activity proposed.

A letter of endorsement from the non-U.S. Governmental agency must be submitted to

NASA and one copy of the proposal must be sent to:

Ms. Bettye Jones

Mars Surveyor 2001 Program

International Relations Division

Code IR

NASA Headquarters

Washington, DC 20546-0001 USA

All proposals from non-U.S. institutions will compete on an equal basis with U.S.-

originated proposals, and go through the same review, evaluation, and selection process.

For those non-U.S. proposals selected, NASA will arrange with the sponsoring agencies

for participation on a cooperative (no exchange of funds) basis, in which NASA and the

sponsoring agencies will each bear the cost of discharging their respective

responsibilities. Depending on the nature and extent of the proposed cooperation, these

arrangements may entail:

1) A letter of notification by NASA; and

2) An exchange of letters between NASA and the sponsoring non U.S.

government agency; or

3) A Memorandum of Understanding between NASA and the sponsoring non

U.S. government agency.
C-1

APPENDIX C

CERTIFICATION FORMS

For all proposals requesting NASA funding, Certifications regarding Debarment, DrugFree Workplace requirements, and Lobbying must be supplied. The forms supplied in this

Appendix may be used by proposers to provide these certifications.
C-2

________________________________________________________________________

CERTIFICATION REGARDING

DEBARMENT, SUSPENSION, AND OTHER RESPONSIBILITY MATTERS

PRIMARY COVERED TRANSACTIONS

This certification is required by the regulations implementing Executive Order 12549, Debarment and

Suspension, 14 CFR Part 1265, Participants' responsibilities. The regulations were published as Part VII

of the May 28, 1988 Federal Register (pages 19160-19211).

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 or 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
C-3

CERTIFICATION REGARDING DRUG-FREE WORKPLACE REQUIREMENTS

Sheet 1 of 2

This certification is required by the regulations implementing the Drug-Free Workplace Act of 1988, 14

CFR Part 1265. 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.

1. 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.
C-4

`CERTIFICATION REGARDING DRUG-FREE WORKPLACE REQUIREMENTS

Sheet 2 of 2

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
C-5

________________________________________________________________________

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