Status Report

Official NASA Responses to Questions Submitted in response to COTS Announcement

By SpaceRef Editor

January 24, 2006

Filed under Commerce, Johnson Space Center, US

Official NASA Responses to Questions Submitted in response to COTS Announcement — http://images.spaceref.com/news/corplogos/cots.jpg

# Questions/Answers

1 Q: Who will NASA use to evaluate business plans?

A: NASA will evaluate business plans using an evaluation panel comprised of Government experts and may include the assistance of independent experts from the private sector.

2 Q: What criteria will NASA use to evaluate initial offers?

A: Specific evaluation criteria will be identified in the announcement. It is anticipated that at a minimum; technical, management, and cost areas and associated levels of confidence will be evaluated.

3 Q: How much/little will NASA have to throw in?

A: NASA’s five-year budget projection for the FY06 budget request to Congress includes $500 million for the Phase 1 (demonstration phase) of the Commercial Crew/Cargo project. The actual allocation to individual participants will be based on the number of participants selected and the types of capabilities proposed.

4 Q: Will NASA let a system go to the Space Station on the first demo? How will NASA ensure that a new system does not threaten the Space Station?

A: Yes, if the system is proven to satisfy NASA safety and certification requirements to be identified in the announcement. A new system may require more extensive testing and analysis before it is determined safe to approach the space station.

5 Q: Once NASA selects its initial round of demos, will NASA have a mechanism for qualifying additional future offerors to provide commercial crew/cargo services?

A: If service providers develop a demonstrated capability outside of NASA’s Phase 1 demonstration, they would be eligible to compete for any future NASA service contracts during Phase 2 (services phase).

6 Q: In the schedule chart on page 14 of the “Introduction” pitch (reference to ESMD Industry Day briefings held on Nov. 1, 2005 in Washington, DC), there is a “Decision on HTV” point shown on the “International Partners” bar. What does this mean?

A: The “Decision on HTV” point refers to the general timeframe when the International Space Station Program may decide to acquire additional HII Transfer Vehicles (HTV) to satisfy external cargo delivery needs.

7 Q: On page 2 of the “Commercial Crew/Cargo (CCC)” pitch (reference to ESMD Industry Day briefings held on Nov. 1, 2005 in Washington, DC), it says preference is for domestic commercial services, and, CEV variants for ISS or additional International Partner capabilities are backup alternatives. Does this mean NASA will possibly seek barter-based IP contribution beside the commercial purchase?

A: Yes, NASA will consider all options for satisfying ISS resupply obligations including the potential for additional barter-based International Partner contributions.

8 Q: What do “Space Act authority” and “non-FAR authority” on page 4 and “‘last-mile’ solution” on page 7 of the CCC pitch mean (reference to ESMD Industry Day briefings held on Nov. 1, 2005 in Washington, DC)?

A: “Space Act authority” refers to NASA’s authority granted by the National Aeronautics and Space Act to enter into “other transactions” with entities to fulfill NASA’s mission. “Non-FAR authority” refers to potential other appropriate legal instruments available to NASA not subject to the Federal Acquisition Regulation. “Last –mile solution” refers to techniques for rendezvous, proximity operations, and docking or berthing with the International Space Station.

9 Q: If JAXA launches HTVs atop the H-2B to the ISS by 2010, will a U.S. company still need to demonstrate their capability to launch the HTV by their own launch vehicle?

A: A participant must be able to demonstrate its own capability to meet the objectives provided in the announcement. If a U.S. company decides to use a HTV as part of the capability demonstration solution, then according to U.S. National Space Transportation Policy, it must be launched on a vehicle manufactured in the U.S., unless exempted by the Director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy.

10 Q: Will the opportunity to participate in NASA’s Commercial Orbital Transportation Services Space Flight Demonstrations be for US companies only or can foreign companies also participate?

A: U.S. entities shall be the signatories on the agreements, however foreign companies can participate. Foreign participation shall be in compliance with Federal laws, regulations, and policies. A reference to the key laws and policies will be provided in the announcement.

11 Q: Can you tell me when the black out date will be, after which nobody from NASA will be able to talk to our company?

A: This answer has been updated. See question number 126 below.

12 Q: Any chance that the release of the announcement would slip to after the Christmas holidays?

A: The schedule for this project will be posted and kept current at the following website: http://procurement.jsc.nasa.gov/cots/ Participants should refer regularly to this site for current news and updates.

13 Q: Our company is keenly interested in the upcoming COTS opportunity (Commercial Orbital Transportation Services) and we’re hoping to get your opinion on where it would be best to control a visiting vehicle from assuming it’s visiting ISS. Do you think there’d be a console available in the JSC Mission Control Center (MCC) to do this work or will it need to be done elsewhere?

A: It is the participant’s responsibility to propose the approach for controlling the visiting vehicle. A console may be made available in the MCC if requested, however the cost associated with this Government provided facility or any other service or property should be included in the proposal and will be considered.

14 Q: Will traditional section L&M “Instructions” and “Award Factors” be provided? What is the anticipated proposal scope, i.e. number of volumes, pages?

A: Proposal instructions and selection criteria will be provided in the announcement, however they will not be in traditional uniform contract format.

15 Q: Will award factors/selection criteria map directly to a single mission capability?

A: Selection criteria will be generic for all mission capabilities.

16 Q: If a contractor’s full service approach includes multiple mission capabilities, will bundling of mission capability demonstrations be allowed?

A: Yes.

17 Q: Will multiple demonstration offers require multiple proposals or will NASA facilitate a single proposal with options structure?

A: Participants may submit no more than one proposal per mission capability area if the participant intends for the capabilities to be considered separately. Participants may submit a single proposal to cover multiple mission capabilities. Participants should submit only the most preferred approach. Options to a proposed mission capability or multiple mission capabilities solution will not be considered.

18 Q: How will a single demonstration of multiple mission capabilites be credited in the award criteria?

A: The selection criteria, including capability coverage, will be provided in the announcement.

19 Q: Is NASA looking for demonstration of the key technical capabilities associated with a mission capability, a subscale version of the full service approach, or a full scale version of the full service approach?

A: The capability demonstration requirements will be specified in the announcement. NASA’s preference is for a full scale, end to end service capability demonstration.

20 Q: Will award criteria include details of the contractor-envisioned full service approach?

A: Mission capability requirements and selection criteria will be provided in the announcement.

21 Q: Industry Day FAQ’s mention the use of existing or developmental “last mile” solutions (Soyuz/Progress, ATV, HTV, Shuttle). What aspects of capabilities does NASA envision the need to “re-demonstrate” on the path to a full service offering?

A: All aspects of the selected mission capability shall be demonstrated including crew/cargo pickup and integration, launch, on-orbit operations including ISS integration, reentry disposal or return and delivery. The “last mile” solution must be demonstrated as part of the proposed integrated system even if it uses existing technology.

22 Q: At Industry Day it was suggested that the CEV RFI might be released after January 1 to reduce impact to personnel during the holiday season. Would NASA consider a similar approach on this procurement?

23 Q: Have you thought about limiting the length of responses to the announcement for easier preparation and evaluation?

A: Proposal page limitations will be specified in the announcement.

[END OF Q&A LOG R0]

24 Q: With regard to the No. 9 answer in the Q&A documents NASA recently posted, is demonstration of HTV WITH U.S. LAUNCH VEHICLE either in the phase 1 or in any other way prior to the phase 2 one of the necessary conditions to be selected in the phase 2, even if HTV is demonstrated by JAXA using Japanese launch vehicle and the U.S. launch vehicle is demonstrated with other payloads for other missions. (In other words, if NASA does NOT select HTV with U.S. Launch Vehicle configuration for the phase 1, should we understand that configuration has possibility of getting contract in phase 2 ONLY when the configuration is demonstrated by other ways than COTS before the phase 2.)

A: Participation in COTS Phase 1 is not a prerequisite to submit an offer for the potential Phase 2 (services phase). The detailed requirements for Phase 2 services have not been defined. However, it is anticipated that a demonstrated capability for the service will be a general prerequisite. The capabilities do not have to be demonstrated in the COTS Phase 1 demonstrations. A HTV, previously launched on a Japanese vehicle that was successfully demonstrated on orbit, proposed to be launched on a successfully demonstrated U.S. launch vehicle may be considered for a services contract.

25 Q: In the context of the Commercial Orbital Transportation Systems (COTS) procurement, how does NASA interpret the national policy calling for 51% US content? Does this apply just to the launcher or also to the space segment of the mission? For example, could foreign hardware be used as a space tug for “last mile” operations?

A: To clarify, the COTS Phase 1 demonstration is not a procurement. The 51% rule does not apply to content. In general, entities which are organized under the laws of the United States or of a State which is more than 50 percent owned by U.S. nationals may submit proposals under this announcement. The U.S. Space Transportation Policy addresses the use of launch vehicles manufactured in the U.S. for USG payloads. Foreign hardware may be used for “last mile” operations.[R2]

26 Q: Can NASA provide early access (by the Dec 8 briefing or earlier) to a complete list of visiting vehicle operational and safety requirements for the ISS rendezvous and docking?

A: Visiting vehicle operational and safety requirements for ISS rendezvous and docking may be found in the ISS-IIRD located online in the COTS technical library.

27 Q: In the original COTS synopsis, posted 10/28/05, it was noted that an intent to respond was due to the Contracting Officer on December 6. Will this date be relaxed/delayed now that the Draft Announcement Briefing isn’t until December 8?

A: The letter of intent date will not be delayed, however, participants may still submit proposals even if a letter of intent was not received.

28 Q: During the December 8th briefing you mentioned that you were interested in maximizing the number of participants in Phase 1 of the COTS Program. Would you consider modifying the announcement by adding one sentence to section 4.2 that would allow participation by such technically astute organizations as JHU/APL, Mitre Corp. and Aerospace Corp.? Adding the following sentence to the eligibility section of the announcement would accomplish this goal: “Participation in this solicitation is open to all categories of organizations that meet eligibility requirements stated elsewhere and includes educational institutions and nonprofit organizations including FFRDC’s.”

A: NASA will accept proposals from the companies stated above and will not require a change to the final announcement.

29 Q: Is the limitation regarding the participation of non US companies and/or US subsidiaries of non US companies, limited to the prime contractorship only, or to subs as well?

A: Yes. The limitation for eligible participants applies only to the primary partner.

30 Q: Considering the current restrictions by Iran and Syria Nonproliferation Act (ISNA), can Atlas V be used to launch a Transfer Vehicle (i.e. HTV, ATV) after 2011? (Depending on your answer, Launch Vehicle to be used in Phase 1 has to be re-considered.)

A: Participants will need to explain in the proposal how they intend to mitigate the risk of using Russian equipment post 2011 should the ISNA restrictions exception not be extended.

31 Q: Can another test bed be used?

A: Yes, an alternative orbital test bed may be proposed if provided by the participant. The alternate will be evaluated for its ability to simulate the ISS-IIRD interfaces and effectiveness in satisfying the technical performance goals of the demonstrations. The final announcement will be updated with this information.

32 Q: Can the Government manifest hardware needed for automated rendezvous and docking?

A: The Government will facilitate these requests but cannot guarantee they will be accommodated. Any associated NASA integration costs must be covered by the participant.

33 Q: What is NASA’s planning horizon for the purchasing phase?

A: The Government plans to purchase orbital transportation services once a capability is successfully demonstrated. This is expected to occur by 2010. ISS resupply services will be needed through at least 2015.

34 Q: Will NASA seek multi-year funding authorization?

A: No.

35 Q: Is the phase 1 requirement to dock with ISS and safely deorbit?

A: The Phase 1 demonstrations will culminate with a crew/cargo transportation mission to and from a LEO test bed for the orbital phase of the mission. NASA intends to provide the ISS as the orbital destination and active test bed if the ISS visiting vehicle requirements are satisfied. Participants may propose an alternative orbital test bed for the capability demonstrations. This will be reflected in the final announcement.

36 Q: Rephasing of FY06 budget will make financing more difficult. Is it the Government’s plan to rephrase FY06 budget?

A: No.

37 Q: What is the Government’s plan for level of insight?

A: Quarterly project status briefings and milestone reviews are anticipated at this time. Informal site visits and telecons are also planned.

38 Q: Can participants order hardware via NASA?

A: Instructions for requesting Government equipment will be provided in the final announcement.

39 Q: Will NASA add additional pages for additional capabilities areas?

A: Yes. The final announcement will be updated to allow additional pages for multiple capability discussions.

40 Q: Funding for our project in 2006 – wouldn’t we get better proposals if we front-loaded our funding?

A: $40M is the total available funding in FY06. Participants should propose their desired phasing for the proposed demonstrations. It should be recognized however, that the participant may need to replan during negotiations if NASA is not able to accommodate the proposed phasing.

41 Q: During Phase 1 demo, is the goal to reach orbit, rendezvous, etc?

A: The goals specified in the announcement are for an end to end demonstration of a system of services including ground operations and integration, launch, rendezvous, proximity operations, docking or berthing, orbital operations, reentry, and safe disposal or return. The Phase 1 demonstrations will culminate with a crew/cargo transportation mission to and from a LEO test bed for the orbital phase of the mission.

42 Q: Of the $500M, how much is for demos and how much for the project direct costs?

A: The final announcement will be updated to indicate that Participants should assume up to 3% of the funding will be withheld for NASA internal project costs. Additional integration costs internal to NASA, above this 3%, may also need to be covered out of the anticipated funding based on the complexity of participant’s proposed approach.

43 Q: What is the most effective method to gain selection credit for multiple mission capabilities?

A: The announcement allows for a single proposal to be submitted for a solution that accommodates multiple capabilities. Appropriate consideration will be given for multiple capability coverage.

44 Q: What is the appropriate path for JAXA to discuss barter considerations for an HTV demo?

A: This question is outside the scope of the COTS Demonstration announcement.

45 Q: Can a NASA entity be a partner?

A: Participants planning to include NASA services, facilities or equipment in the proposals must enter into Reimbursable Space Act Agreements (SAA’s) with the NASA Center(s). Services, including use of equipment and facilities, will be provided on a full-cost basis and will be available equally to all potential COTS participants.

46 Q: How can a company claim credit for International Partner demonstrated capability?

A: The participant should explain in the proposal the basis for an International Partner demonstrated capability.

47 Q: The Draft Announcement states:

“Each participant shall obtain sufficient intellectual property rights in inventions and data developed by any foreign related entities (e.g., foreign partners, contractors, and subcontracts)…Participants must demonstrate in their proposals how they will obtain such sufficient intellectual property rights.” Please clarify what is intended here beyond showing agreements exist for our access to foreign transfer vehicles or other content?

A: This language will be deleted from the final announcement.

48 Q: Is there a requirement to deliver real cargo provided by NASA?

A: No.

49 Q: What number should be allocated for internal NASA project costs?

50 Q: How does NASA internal cost vary with the need to include Safety Certification activities?

A: The final announcement will be updated to indicate the amount to be withheld for NASA internal project costs. Additional costs internal to NASA, above this amount, may also need to be covered out of the anticipated funding based on the participant’s proposed approach. For example, the costs for NASA to conduct the integration and certification of a new visiting vehicle to the ISS could be up to $20M.

51 Q: Is the $500 a fixed number for COTS-1?

A: Yes, $500 million is the total anticipated funding allocated for COTS Phase 1. 52 Q: Will there be an opportunity to alter the funding profile in the Draft Announcement?

A: The announcement states participants should propose their desired phasing for the proposed demonstrations. It should be recognized however, that the participant may need to replan during negotiations if NASA is not able to accommodate the proposed phasing.

53 Q: Is there a fixed allotment for COTS-2?

A: No.

54 Q: In regards to the Space Act Agreement, what access to Shuttle heritage is possible and what form can this access take, i.e., equipment loan, tech transfer, other?

55 Q: Demo flight, 11.2.1.1 – dock to something else?

56 Q: For Phase 2, how can industry be secured that investing in a large number of units would be worth it?

A: NASA is committed to buying commercial services if the objectives of the capability demonstrations are achieved. The potential need for services are described in the draft ISS Services Requirements Document as referenced in the announcement and available in the technical library.

57 Q: Will the Government pursue the leader/follower approach?

A: The Government does not plan to fund “follower” participants at this time.

58 Q: How do we feel about a depot?

A: Opinions from the Government will not be provided.

59 Q: If one contractor has demonstrated capability, will RFP for services be released immediately, or would it have to wait until others are ready so as to have competition?

A: The Government plans to issue a RFP for services as soon as a commercial capability is demonstrated. Although competition is preferred, NASA may not wait for multiple demonstrated capabilities.

60 Q: Are we planning on down-select in year 2 or 3, for example?

A: No.

61 Q: We say ISS is the primary test bed, which appears to assume others are available. How serious are we about letting companies go to ISS?

A: NASA intends to provide the ISS as the orbital destination and active test bed if the ISS visiting vehicle requirements are satisfied. Participants may propose an alternative orbital test bed for the capability demonstrations.

62 Q: Any restriction on using NASA developed hardware? If teaming increases utilization and rate for commercial purposes, would it be viewed as commercial utilization (reduced cost)?

A: There are no restrictions on using NASA developed hardware. Participants planning to include NASA services, facilities or equipment in the proposals must enter into Reimbursable Space Act Agreements (SAA’s) with the NASA Center(s). Services, including use of equipment and facilities, will be provided on a full-cost basis and will be available equally to all potential COTS participants. Utilization of demonstrated capabilities in addition to the Government’s potential use would be viewed as commercial utilization.

63 Q: When will DART data be available?

A: This question is outside the scope of the COTS Demonstration announcement.

64 Q: If they change their system after the demonstration phase, would they have to re-demonstrate before Phase 2?

A: The requirements for Phase 2 services have not been defined at this time.

65 Q: Is there a premium for being able to go into services quickly?

A: The demonstration schedule and readiness for commercial services will be considered in the selection evaluation.

66 Q: Late access – critical or something to work out on a best value basis?

A: Proposed solutions to technical goals will be evaluated as part of a tradeoff analysis to select a portfolio of approaches that best meets the objectives of the COTS project.

67 Q: How serious are we about getting a new launch vehicle?

A: Opinions will not be provided by the Government.

68 Q: ) To what extent will maximizing use of existing space launch technologies and infrastructure be viewed as a positive discriminator? Or is NASA looking for solutions that move away from existing technologies and capabilities?

A: Opinions will not be provided by the Government.

69 Q: During Industry Day NASA made the comment that “They had bigger objectives than ISS Re-supply”. What are those objectives (so that industry can properly address them)? To what extent will the successful bidder need to build in flexibility/robustness that goes beyond the requirements of this proposal? Will adding in additional capability at the expense of higher costs be a good trade?

A: The objectives of the project are to implement U.S. Space Exploration policy with an investment to stimulate commercial enterprises in space, facilitate U.S. private industry demonstration of cargo and crew space transportation capabilities with the goal of achieving reliable, cost effective access to low-Earth orbit, and create a market environment in which commercial space transportation services are available to Government and private sector customers. Opinions regarding specific approaches will not be provided by the Government.

70 Q: Two of the themes of Industry Day were: “Help us define requirements” and “We don’t want to tell you how to meet requirements”. When requirements are not defined and highly subject to interpretation, the likelihood of Contractor protests of awards goes up. What is NASA doing to strike the right balance between providing a clear set of requirements and level playing field while allowing contractor innovation?

A: A clear set of performance goals will be provided in the final announcement. Specific requirements are provided for interfaces with the ISS orbital test bed. This approach is intended to open up trade space and encourage innovations and efficiencies in system design solutions.

71 Q: Will the NASA Launch System repeatability requirements apply to the types of payload COTS carries?

A: NLS requirements do not apply for the Phase 1 demonstrations. Phase 2 services requirements have not been defined.

72 Q: What level of Government oversight should be assumed during PHASE I COTS development, capability establishment and demonstration? Will NASA’s culture be conducive to less Government oversight as opposed to more? How much flexibility will contractor have to propose greater application of commercial products and processes? Will NASA be open to application of commercial approaches that are 180 degrees out from the way NASA currently does business?

A: Quarterly project status briefings and milestone reviews are anticipated at this time. Informal site visits and telecons are also planned. NASA will be open to application of commercial approaches.

73 Q: A comment was made during Industry Day about NASA oversight associated with human rated systems and activities. What level of NASA involvement should be assumed for non-human rated activities? Would NASA’s level of involvement for launch services that they currently procure commercially be a guide?

A: Quarterly project status briefings and milestone reviews are anticipated at this time. Informal site visits and telecons are also planned. NASA’s level of involvement for launch services that are currently procured commercially would not be an appropriate guide for the demonstration phase.

74 Q: Will government proposed for COTS use need to support multiple program requirements?

A: The question is unclear.

75 Q: Is a positive discriminator the extent to which a proposed contracting approach fosters the involvement of organizations that do not typically participate in NASA procurements?

A: NASA will evaluate the proposals based on the requested content and criteria listed in the final announcement. Past participation in NASA procurements will not be a discriminator.

76 Q: Please elaborate on the Industry Day comment that NASA expects to enter into multiple Launch Services Agreements.

A: NASA expects to enter into multiple Space Act Agreements (not Launch Services Agreements). The actual number of SAAs will be based upon the types of proposed capabilities selected to fit within the available funding.

77 Q: NASA recently changed the NASA Launch Services contract on ramp provisions to eliminate the requirement to have demonstrated an orbital launch capability before receiving a service contract. Outside investment in the COTS demo is dependant upon the understanding that future ISS service contracts will require a demonstration (although not necessarily COTS) before contract award. What assurance do investors have that NASA will not remove the demonstration requirement from CCC services and award contracts essentially nullifying the investment?

A: NASA anticipates that a demonstrated capability will be a requirement for the services phase (Phase 2). However, the requirements have not been finalized for Phase 2 at this time.

78 Q: Since low cost is a/the driving factor, and since most of the IRDD requirements are cost drivers, how will NASA establish a level playing field with adequate time for all bidders to take advantage of agreed to push back from individual bidders?

A: NASA will assure all participants are provided fair and equal time to respond to any changes to requirements or goals.

79 Q: In Section 3.5.3, Crew Transport, can a commercial service be run on the paradigm of a rental car rather than a taxi, such that all three people using the COTS are NASA astronauts with one or more of them trained to fly the COTS?

A: Yes.

80 Q: Section 4.9.2 on Data calls for participants to provide “Project Status Briefings.” This should be clarified to state that Project Status Briefings will be based on the participant’s own internal progress tracking systems and will not require participants to adopt or conform to systems used by NASA or traditional aerospace companies.

A: NASA will negotiate the content of the project status briefings with the participants.

81 Q: Severability of Multi-Part Proposals Please clarify in the final acquisition document that for the single multi-capability proposal that NASA and the offeror can mutually agree to drop one of the capabilities during the discussion phase, presuming that its price is distinguished. For example, if an offeror proposes A+B+C and NASA believes the A+B demonstration is attractive but is not interested in C, the two parties during the discussion phase will be able to sever C and negotiate a deal on A+B.

A: The final announcement will provide instructions for submitting multiple proposals.

82 Q: Can foreign hardware be used on the proposed spacecraft? Any restrictions on degree to which foreign hardware can be used on spacecraft?

A: Foreign hardware may be used within the parameters of current U.S. laws and policies.

83 Q: Instead of having the Executive Summary be a screening mechanism for determining which proposal will be fully evaluated consider having white papers submitted as screening approach.

A: The suggestion was considered but NASA determined to not change the evaluation process in the final announcement.

[END OF Q&A LOG R1/R2]

84 Q: Why does the Government ask for cost data?

A: As this is a demonstration of competing technologies, NASA must be able to evaluate and to determine the most viable solutions both technically and commercially. If this were the purchase of a commercial service, we would not request cost data, a firm fixed price would be requested.

85 Q: Clarify whether or not Template 1 looks forward only?

A: Template 1 only includes projections from 2006 to 2012.

86 Q: NASA asks for cost per kilogram data in the price volume. A participant believes that cost per flight is just as important a metric and should be required in the templates.

A: NASA recognizes that Cost per Flight is also an important metric and has added this to Template 6.

87 Q: Will NASA incorporate into the estimate the cost of visiting vehicle interface requirements costs?

A: See sections 4.6 and 4.7 of the Final Announcement.

88 Q: Paragraph 5.2.5 cost data – why does NASA want cost data in a Firm Fixed Price (FFP) proposal?

89 Q: Funding sources templates relative to their existing facilities and items they’ll use for demo.

A: Question is unclear. However, note that Appendix C allows for a narrative in sufficient detail to support the numbers provided in the templates.

90 Q: Will the Government request price breakout by launch and by “last mile?”

A: The Government does not request the price breakout by launch, but does request the cost of the Launch Vehicle in Template 4 and the costs associated with Operations in Template 5. The “last mile” price has been added to Template 4. The last mile is captured as the cost of terminal rendezvous, proximity operations and docking.

91 Q: In the Industry Day meeting the NASA Team said something to the effect that we have $500M total for this program including NASA costs. If we are talking about getting to two teams and $250M each, what assumptions should be made regarding NASA costs in this Full Cost Accounting environment?

A: NASA has made no assumptions regarding the number of teams selected or the amount each team will receive from NASA. Participants should assume 3% of the total funding will be withheld for NASA internal project costs. The final announcement, section 4.6, addresses this question.

92 Q: With final RFP release in early January ’06 and proposal submittal about 30 days later, how can contractors obtain Full Cost Accounting (costs) for Government provided services and commitments from the Government for use of this support within this timeframe? Past experience indicates that the Government will be unable to support the proposal schedule for these two actions.

A: Participants planning to include NASA services, facilities or equipment in the proposals must enter into Reimbursable Space Act Agreements (SAAs) with the NASA Center(s). Services, including use of equipment and facilities, will be provided on a full-cost basis and will be available equally to all potential COTS participants. The SAAs shall include the tasks to be performed, facilities to be used with dates, and a full-cost assessment of all the work to be performed. Each participant shall include with its proposal a signed letter of commitment from an authorized NASA official at the respective Center for all NASA-specific work.

93 Q: A participant’s assumption is that Cost or Pricing Data will not be required with their proposal submittal. Is this assumption correct?

A: Yes, the assumption that “Cost or Pricing Data” as defined by the Federal Acquisition Regulations (FAR) will not be required with the proposal is correct. Appendix C in the Final Announcement includes all the templates required for the proposals.

94 Q: What level of Financial Reporting is contemplated associated with this OT?

A: Financial Reporting in a contractual sense is not anticipated once the fixed price Space Act Agreement has been executed.

95 Q: Can NASA clarify what, if any, ROM or estimated costing NASA is requiring if a participant proposes an Option Period 2 covering Capability D.

A: Final Announcement Templates 2, 3, 4, 5, and 7 are to be completed for an Option Capability D.

96 Q: Section 4.7 on anticipated funding should reverse the funding amounts in 2007 and 2008. The heaviest funding needs for most developers will come in FY 2007 as they complete their first milestones after small kickoff payments; FY 2007 likely also will include several second milestones from developers. Combined, these first and second milestones will have to cover all startup costs plus a substantial amount of hardware testing.

A: Participant may propose a different funding profile to be considered by the Government.

97 Q: Section 5.2.4, M3, and Paragraph D: Should the five years of projections in the business plan start at the execution date in May, or should it describe the operational services phase?

A: See section 5.2.3 B4 of the Final Announcement.

98 Q: 11. The RFA states that the price section is strictly limited to cost and pricing information. May a draft Space Act Agreement be provided in the price section?

A: No, a draft SAA is provided as Appendix A of the Final Announcement. Comments to the draft SAA may be submitted and evaluated in accordance with section 6.1.2 of the Final Announcement.

99 Q: 17. Is a SOW, WBS or WBS Dictionary required as part of the price volume?

A: A SOW, WBS or WBS Dictionary is not required as part of the price section.

100 Q: Appendix C Template 4 – Can a participant propose their own WBS and provide cost data at any level?

A: Yes, Template 4 can be completed in a participant’s WBS format. Instructions for the minimum required cost breakout can be found in the revised Template 4. Participants may provide additional breakout and cost data at any level. Template 4 has been updated to incorporate the answer to this question.

101 Q: Clarify how NASA support costs are reported and how costs for utilizing NASA supplied hardware are reported.

A: It is unclear what “NASA support costs” means in the context of the announcement. Information regarding use of Government services, facilities, or equipment can be found in Section 4.9.

[END OF Q&A LOG R3]

102 Q: Will NASA entertain payments to participants upon signing the agreements?

A: A startup milestone payment will be considered.

103 Q: Will the Government give additional consideration to companies that have successfully gone from concept to hardware in space (even sub-orbital space) with satellites, propulsion systems or launch vehicles?

A: Corporate past performance data is not requested and will not be evaluated. However, participants shall identify a history of relevant experience and business ventures for their top level management team and key personnel.

104 Q: Does the Announcement require socioeconomic goals?

A: No

105 Q: What is the significance of the NAICS code?

A: For the COTS demonstration, a North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) is not applicable.

106 Q: What is considered minimum acceptable past performance; launch experience?

A: There is no minimum acceptable corporate past performance or launch experience for this demonstration.

107 Q: Will orals be part of the proposal process?

A: The Government intends to enter into negotiations with the finalists, which may include, at the Government’s discretion, an oral presentation.

108 Q: What are the evaluation criteria? If evaluation can not be provided, provide examples.

A: The required proposal content and evaluation process are described in sections 5 and 6 of the Final Announcement. No additional evaluation criteria will be provided.

109 Q: Will NASA add additional requirements during phase 1?

A: It is not the intention of the Government to add requirements, however the Space Act Agreement will allow for negotiated changes as necessary.

110 Q: Clarify the number of proposals that are allowed.

A: No more than six (6) proposals will be accepted, as described in section 5.1.2 of the Final Announcement.

111 Q: Clarify whether or not a successful phase 1 demonstration is required in order to participate in the phase 2 competition.

A: Participation in the Phase 1 demonstrations is not a requirement to compete in the Phase 2 competition.

112 Q: What is the meaning of planned milestone dates?

A: The participant shall provide a proposed schedule of performance milestones including payment amounts, objective success criteria, rationale, and planned achievement dates.

113 Q: Can separate demonstrations of launch vehicles and spacecraft suffice without demonstrating the actual launch vehicles and spacecraft as an integrated system.

A: Participants are allowed to propose their concepts meeting as many of the goals as possible. Risks involved with not demonstrating an integrated system will be evaluated in the proposal.

114 Q: Are subscale demonstrations allowable as demonstrations?

A: Participants are allowed to propose their concepts meeting as many of the goals as possible. Risks involved with demonstrating a subscale system will be evaluated in the proposal.

115 Q: Will NASA consider limiting this Announcement to small businesses?

A: A Small Business Set-Aside was considered and was not selected as the method of competition.

116 Q: How important is past performance in passing a proposal through to the next stages.

117 Q: What things are critical for evaluation technical, management, and price confidence?

A: The required proposal content and evaluation process are described in sections 5 and 6 of the Final Announcement. No additional evaluation criteria will be provided.

118 Q: Does DOTS office want to know from NASA Centers that they want to team?

A: The COTS participant evaluation panel will be notified of a NASA Center’s involvement through a participant’s proposal.

119 Q: Is there a weighting for selection criteria?

A: No.

120 Q: Will definitions of these terms be provided?

A: It is unclear of which terms are being referenced.

121 Q: What is the weighting for mission capabilities?

A: There is no weighting for mission capabilities in the evaluation process.

122 Q: Do we anticipate much change between now and the final announcement?

A: All changes to date have been incorporated into the Final Announcement.

123 Q: How can a participant know additional requirements won’t be added by NASA during Phase 1?

A: It is not the intention of the Government to add requirements, however the Space Act Agreement will allow for negotiated changes as necessary.

124 Q: Government procurements typically have SB goals. Is it to contractors’ advantage to have SB’s on their teams?

A: The COTS Demo competition is not a procurement. The Final Announcement does not include small business (SB) goals and extent of SB participation will not be evaluated.

125 Q: Do you intend to release a list of attendees aside from those firms that registered before the briefing?

A: The list of Vendors Expressing Interest is provided on the COTS website.

126 Q: Blackout period?

A: The Blackout Notice has been posted to the COTS website.

127 Q: Do participants have to bid D now?

A: Yes, if a participant intends to propose a Capability D solution, it must be included with the proposal as an option to be considered after demonstration of Capability C.

128 Q: CEV teams have call for improvement (CFI) data embargoed. COTS and CFI teams have access and this is not fair to the others.

A: The CEV CFI is published on the NASA Acquisition Internet Service (NAIS). See the following site http://procurement.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/EPS/bizops.cgi?gr=D&pin=73.

129 Q: Why do NASA systems not have enough intelligence to find out how to get to Mars safely?

A: The question is unclear and outside the scope of the COTS project. Additional information concerning Mars projects can be found at http://mars.jpl.nasa.gov/.

130 Q: Why do the rockets not get enough power to go the Mars? Is it because the astronauts do not have the right kind of suits to stand the temperature or is that just wrong?

A: The question is unclear and outside the scope of the COTS project. Additional information concerning Mars project can be found at http://mars.jpl.nasa.gov/.

131 Q: There are generally restrictions associated with use of an “Other Transaction” acquisition approach in the case of prototype development. For example, in some cases, there must be at least one nontraditional contractor participating in the project. Can you further define NASA’s concept of the “Other Transaction” approach it is expecting to employ with this procurement? Are there any restrictions on its use that the contractor community needs to be aware of?

A: The COTS Demo competition is not a procurement. NASA’s authority to enter into other transactions is located at 42 U.S.C. Section 2473 (c)(5). A draft Space Act Agreement is included with the Final Announcement.

132 Q: Although this is a fixed-price contract there is still the potential for scope creep. Is the Government willing to recognize a formally defined contract requirements baseline and support its maintenance through contract changes?

A: The COTS Demo competition is not a procurement. It is not the intention of the Government to add requirements, however the Space Act Agreement will allow for negotiated changes as necessary.

133 Q: During Industry Day NASA made the comment that they were planning on entering into a “Flexible Services Contract”. Could you elaborate on what you mean by a “Flexible Services Contract”?

A: The question pertains to the Phase II project which has not been developed. Additional information concerning Phase II will be provided at a future time.

134 Q: What assumption should be made concerning contract changes? Should the contractor assume a change curve? Will the Changes clause apply? Can the Government make unilateral changes or would all changes be considered bilateral?

A: The COTS Demo competition is not a procurement. It is not the intention of the Government to add requirements, however the Space Act Agreement will allow for negotiated bilateral changes as necessary. The changes clause under the FAR will not apply.

135 Q: What assumptions should be made associated with procedures for resolving disputes?

A: The draft Space Act Agreement includes a Dispute Resolution provision.

136 Q: Is contract closeout covered under a separate contractual instrument?

A: The COTS Demo competition is not a procurement. The executed Space Act Agreement is the complete agreement between the parties.

137 Q: What FAR requirements will be applicable to this procurement?

A: The COTS Demo competition is not a procurement under the FAR.

138 Q: If the government makes changes to the applicable government documents post contract award, will the contractor be allowed a contract value adjustment?

A: The COTS Demo competition is not a procurement. It is not the intention of the Government to add requirements, however the Space Act Agreement will allow for negotiated, bilateral changes as necessary..

139 Q: What will be the provisions for contract termination for the convenience of the government? Will recovery of investment be provided?

A: The COTS Demo competition is not a procurement. The Final Announcement contains a draft Space Act Agreement that addresses termination and recovery.

140 Q: Please be more specific on disclosure of competitive information. Information of a competitive nature should only be disclosed to the government proposal evaluation team.

A: It is the policy of NASA to treat all proposals as sensitive competitive information and to disclose the contents only for the purposes of evaluation.

141 Q: Proposal date may be in error. Date listed is for hard copies. Date for determining responsiveness is Feb 10th, not Feb 14th?

A: Dates have been revised and published in the Final Announcement. The date for determining timeliness of response is March 03, 2006.

142 Q: Are milestone payments provisional in any way?

A: Milestone payments will be made only after successful completion of milestone criteria as agreed upon in the negotiated Space Act agreement.

143 Q: Assuming the resulting SAA is incrementally funded, will the Agreement include a limitation of funds clause? If so, are milestone payments and termination actions subject this limitation?

A: Yes. See Article 5 of the draft Space Act agreement provided in the Final Announcement.

144 Q: Under the resultant Agreement does the Government expect to have any unilateral change authority to the agreement terms or technical requirements? If so, will this authority include a means for equitable adjustment?

A: See Article 21 of the draft Space Act agreement provided in the Final Announcement.

145 Q: Under what criteria will Participant Provided Resources be accepted or rejected?

A: Criteria for acceptance of Participant Provided Resources should be proposed by participants and will be negotiated and included in the Space Act agreement.

146 Q: In Appendix A, Section 3.C. the payment is limited to the amount due upon completion of the next milestone. This may not be sufficient to cover adequately the termination liability including open commitments; could this section be amended to cap payment at the total price, or not provide a cap, but identify specifically the termination liability that will be covered?

A: The Government has considered this suggestion. See Article 17 of the draft Space Act agreement provided in the Final Announcement.

147 Q: At the COTS industry day (Dec. 8, 2005), it was stated that NASA is seeking to minimize any requirements “creep.” Given that the agreements will be structured on fixed, milestone-based payments, is it fair to assume that changes to requirements prompted by NASA after award (under non-FAR authority) can be negotiated and may include changes in payment and milestones?

A: It is not the intention of the Government to add requirements, however the Space Act Agreement will allow for negotiated changes as necessary.

148 Q: Do you need a letter of intent on file to propose? Can the letter of intent deadline be extended?

A: A letter of intent to propose is not required to propose. The deadline will not be extended.

149 Q: Will NASA be buying blocks of launchers, 5 Delta IVs, 5 Atlas 5s, 5 Falcon 9s, etc? If so, will these be available at cost?

A: No, NASA does not intend to buy any hardware for Phase 1 demonstrations. The requirements and terms for the Phase 2 services procurement have not yet been defined.

150 Q: Will NASA ensure that the price it pays for launch services is available to COTS contractors or will the launch service providers be able to skew the field?

A: COTS participants must provide or acquire their own launch services in the commercial market. Launch services will not be provided by NASA, nor will NASA interfere with commercial business.

151 Q: Is PRA required? Need confidence percentage on reliability percentage?

A: Probabilistic Risk Assessment (PRA) is not specifically required. NASA will review the proposed statistical analysis and techniques. Reliability shall be at a 50 percent confidence level. 152 Q: What is the evaluation criteria for credibility for 50 percent confidence of reliability?

A: The required proposal content and evaluation process are described in sections 5 and 6 of the Final Announcement. No additional evaluation criteria will be provided.

153 Q: Will man-rating be per Federal Aviation Administration, rather than NASA?

A: FAA requirements apply. NASA human rating requirements will also apply when transporting NASA astronauts and crew.

154 Q: Launching limited to KSC?

A: No.

155 Q: Can they carry their own pilot for C? If they carry their own pilot for D, do they have to meet all human rating requirements?

A: The participant can carry its own pilot for any capability proposed, subject to FAA requirements. However, NASA human rating requirements will apply when transporting NASA astronauts and crew.

156 Q: Human factors – similarities to CRV. If participant proposes C, will Government be looking for extensibility to D?

A: No. If the participant proposes C, the Government will evaluate C.

157 Q: Human factors are a concern in that requirements can balloon from it. Stop button, go no-go is a big concern.

A: The ability for NASA to stop a launch has been removed from the Final Announcement.

158 Q: Specify whether or not a FAA license is required for demonstration flights?

A: An FAA license is required for demonstration flights.

159 Q: Licensing, re-entry licensing – will FAA have authority?

A: Yes.

160 Q: Mission reliability and crew survivability – design demo at proposal or first flight?

A: NASA expects a top-level analysis and a description of the reliability methodology in the proposal and the detailed analysis before first flight. 161 Q: Will reliability credit be given for milestone completion?

A: Reliability credit can be given at milestone completion if that milestone is an essential part of the reliability analysis. Negotiated milestones will be included in the Space Act agreement.

162 Q: Safety review process – who pays?

A: NASA will pay for all NASA employee and NASA contractor related safety review process costs. COTS participants will not be NASA contractors under Phase 1. The participant will be responsible for participant costs including any costs associated with a reimbursable Space Act agreement with a NASA Center.

163 Q: Are we assessing probability of mission success in the demo or from service phase? We need to scrub requirements for demo phase.

A: Probability of mission success is a goal for Phase 2 (services phase). Performance during the Phase 1 demo will contribute toward demonstration of system reliability.

164 Q: Planning to have pilot in C. Are we judging survivability as it relates to D?

A: Crew survivability goals apply only to Capability D.

165 Q: Do they have to pay for safety review process with their own funds? What about our oversight, since they will need to include the costs in their proposal?

166 Q: TRL 7 – don’t have to get there before they dock with station?

A: NASA does not have any specific Technology Readiness Level (TRL) requirement. NASA will have to certify flight readiness before allowing the participant to dock with the International Space Station.

167 Q: Will human rating apply to non-NASA astronauts?

A: FAA requirements apply. NASA human rating requirements will also apply when transporting NASA astronauts and crew.

168 Q: Does reliability include abort/reflight?

A: Crew survival probability and mission success reliability calculations would start at liftoff.

169 Q: Must NASA specify how we show safety? If statistical is necessary, when is it done?

A: The Final Announcement requires the participant to describe the approach for safety (range, ground, flight, etc.), reliability, maintainability, supportability, quality, software assurance, and risk management. NASA will not specify how participants calculate reliability. NASA expects a top-level analysis and a description of the reliability methodology in the proposal and the detailed analysis before first flight.

170 Q: Will the Government allow the participants freedom to choose ranges and negotiate range safety plan?

A: An FAA license is required for commercial launches. The FAA allows choice of ranges and the participant’s Range Safety Plan would have to be approved by the FAA.

171 Q: The requirements for PRA analysis became unclear during the industry day discussion. Can we actually promise that we will meet certain numbers but not provide PRA substantiation until after contract award? If not, what are the PRA standards?

A: The COTS Demo competition is not a procurement. NASA expects a top-level analysis and a description of the reliability methodology in the proposal and the detailed analysis before first flight. PRA is not the only way to show reliability. The NASA standard for PRA may be found in the COTS Technical Library.

172 Q: Is a formal Risk Mitigation Plan required in the proposal?

A: No, however the Final Announcement requires a participant to describe the technical risks associated with the effort and include the risk level (low, medium, or high) along with a strategy to mitigate each risk.

173 Q: The government has stated it will retain launch decision authority for manned flight. Does that apply to manned flight that does not include a NASA astronaut? What assurance do we have that NASA will not expand that to unmanned flight and thusly add undefined cost?

A: This requirement was deleted from the Final Announcement.

174 Q: What launch vehicle requirements are going to be imposed for human space flight?

A: FAA requirements apply. NASA human rating requirements will also apply when transporting NASA astronauts and crew.

175 Q: What safety requirements will be imposed on the design, development, testing and operation of COTS systems?

A: See Final Announcement section 3 for technical goals and requirements of the COTS system which includes safety.

176 Q: Compliance with what Range Safety regulations will be required?\

A: The FAA requirements, which include range safety, will apply.

177 Q: Will a Quality Assurance System will be required (e.g. AS 9100)? Will Government inspectors be required?

A: The Final Announcement requires the participant to describe the approach for safety (range, ground, flight, etc.), reliability, maintainability, supportability, quality, software assurance, and risk management. For systems that interface with or could affect the ISS, the IIRD requires AS 9100 compliance; however, AS 9100 certification is not required. Government inspectors will not be required by NASA.

178 Q: Will the requirement for COTS Participants and subcontractors to be compliant with AS-9100, the Aerospace Quality Management System, and shall develop, implement, and maintain quality management systems for all activities performed also be required for unmanned commercial flight?

A: For systems that interface with or could affect the ISS, the IIRD requires AS 9100 compliance; however, AS 9100 certification is not required.

179 Q: Will the requirement for COTS participants to perform software assurance on their software systems in accordance with NASA-STD-8739.8 “Software Assurance Standard” be required for unmanned commercial flight?

A: For systems that interface with or could affect the ISS, the IIRD requires software systems meet NASA-STD-8739.8 “Software Assurance Standard”.

180 Q: What Government requirements that are typically waived under a Government Launch Services will no longer be in effect under COTS?

A: The FAA licensing requirements shall apply.

181 Q: What FAA requirements will apply?

A: FAA Advanced Transportation licensing as described in 14 CFR Part 400-1199 apply.

182 Q: Please elaborate on the requirement that: NASA participation in “a human” launch may apply to some extent regarding NASA employees, but not necessarily other “non-NASA” employees. Statement “NASA will have the authority to stop the launch of a human into space or the return of a human from space” can be a real limiting factor and cause scope changes.

A: This requirement was deleted from the Final Announcement.

183 Q: Section 3.3.8, 3.2.9.1 When will COTS Human Systems Integration Requirements Document be released?

A: This document will be developed collaboratively by NASA and the COTS participant after execution of the Space Act Agreement.

184 Q: The Announcement (3.2.7, 3.3.6, 3.4.9) discusses a minimum 90% probability of success (Ps) with a 50% confidence level requirement for delivery of low value payloads to ISS. Could this Ps be stated as a tentative figure, leaving room for it to be refined, potentially downward, by studies performed during the ISS COTS program to a level that provides the best economic value to NASA?

A: The participant shall describe their preferred approach for meeting the mission reliability goals stated in the Final Announcement and may include alternative considerations.

185 Q: Is Human Rating only required for the manned flights? Does this assume that no human contact will occur at ISS with the unmanned flights?

A: FAA requirements apply. NASA human rating requirements will also apply when transporting NASA astronauts and crew. The IIRD defines interface requirements for all missions to the ISS, manned or unmanned.

186 Q: Human Rating – Compliance with COTS Human System Integration Requirements This is referenced in the RFA as being applicable to the Capability D (Crew Transportation Mission). Is this only applicable for the crewed flights or for all vehicles?

187 Q: Is it the intent of Section T7 to only address COTS Human Rating Certification and would be no more than 15 pages in length (this implies there would be no other content found in the 15 page optional technical response)?

A: No. The extra pages should describe all aspects of the proposed approach for Capability D, not just the Human Rating Certification.

188 Q: Will NASA seek regulatory authority for all commercial space flight, cargo and human?

A: No. The FAA is the regulatory authority for commercial space flight.

189 Q: Will NASA specify a standard launch reliability for human flight for both CEV and commercially-provided transport?

A: The reliability goals in the COTS Final Announcement are consistent with the CEV requirements.

190 Q: Paragraph 10.1.1 “ISS Program Safety Requirements” reads “a. The COTS shall meet requirements in SSP 50021, ISS Program Safety Requirements document as tailored by NASA.” Does NASA have a planned “tailoring” of this document in work, and if so, will it be provided?

A: The participant shall identify exceptions to SSP 50021 and any other documents in the proposal for NASA to consider in tailoring the documents.

191 Q: Can we assume that the Government will provide Indemnification for Unusually Hazardous Risks (PL 85-804) above some dollar value with the Contractor having to secure liability protection up to a certain dollar value? What dollar value threshold should be assumed?

A: The FAA licensing and indemnification authority will apply to the COTS Demonstrations.

192 Q: What assumption should be made concerning the treatment of Third-Party Liability?

A: See the draft Space Act agreement Article 10 provided in the Final Announcement.

193 Q: Who will bear the risk for Government provided assets that are deemed not suitable for their intended use (e.g. latent defects involving Government provided facilities).

A: See the draft Space Act Agreement Articles 7 and 15 provided in the Final Announcement.

194 Q: What assumptions can be made for Intellectual Property Rights for hardware developed under this “Other Transaction”?

A: See the draft Space Act Agreement Articles 12 and 13 provided in the Final Announcement.

195 Q: What assumptions should be made about the Government willingness to protect proprietary contractor information?

A: See the draft Space Act Agreement Article 12 provided in the Final Announcement.

196 Q: Will contractors be required to provide Warrantees?

A: No.

197 Q: What other Government requirements will we have to comply with?

A: The question is unclear.

198 Q: What is NASA’s plan for addressing OCI issues associated with COTS effort?

A: The Final Announcement does not require a formal Organizational Conflict of Interest plan.

199 Q: What is the OCI between CEV? CLV and COTS?

A: There is no OCI identified, however, participants shall describe how they intend to successfully perform the CEV and/or CLV and COTS Demonstrations concurrently, if applicable. See Final Announcement 5.2.3 B6.

200 Q: Will the CEV developers/teammates be allowed to leverage their government paid CEV work to gain a competitive advantage for COTS?

A: There are no restrictions regarding CEV developers/teammates participation in the COTS Demonstrations, however, participants shall describe how they intend to successfully perform the CEV and/or CLV and COTS Demonstrations concurrently.

201 Q: Termination due to lack of performance. Please elaborate on the termination for lack of performance.

A: See the draft Space Act Agreement Article 12 provided in the Final Announcement.

202 Q: The Announcement (3.2.1.2, 3.3.1.4) discusses safe disposal (expected to involve destructive re-entry) by the COTS operator of cargo removed from the ISS. What does NASA envision to for the liability issues for this operator, a private corporation or entity, should the infalling matter endanger persons or items of value on the surface of the Earth or in the atmosphere? Would NASA support a national policy or international agreement designating an area, e.g. in the mid-Pacific, free of liability for infalling space objects and their owners?

A: The liability provisions of the FAA licensing requirements shall apply. Related policy questions shall be addressed to the FAA.

203 Q: 4. In the event of termination by mutual consent or due to a lack of performance, are milestone payments returned to NASA?

A: No. See the draft Space Act Agreement Article 17 provided in the Final Announcement.

204 Q: 5. Under a termination due to lack of performance: (a) please clarify the statement NASA will take sufficient rights in inventions and data to use hardware and software produced in performance of this agreement in future NASA work., and (b) please clarify how NASA will make a determination of making progress towards a milestone, and will the contractor have any recourse to such a determination?

A: See the draft Space Act Agreement Article 17 provided in the Final Announcement.

205 Q: 13. Given the degree of foreseeable risk, and the level of importance NASA has placed on success of the COTS Demonstration, the resulting Space Act Agreement should reflect a risk allocation approach appropriate to this activity. Legal Liability and Risk of Loss will be serious considerations for both Parties to the Agreement. What is NASAs position with respect to mitigating these legal liabilities (e.g. cross-waivers, insurance and indemnification), particularly since the Participant will need to interface with the ISS?

A: See the draft Space Act Agreement Article 17 provided in the Final Announcement.

206 Q: Does NASA expect commercial ISS cargo suppliers to propose insurance coverage or will NASA provide indemnification?

A: NASA does not intend to provide cargo for the Phase 1 Demonstrations. The terms and conditions for services Phase 2 have not been defined.

207 Q: In Appendix A, Section 3.B. there is no explicit right to cure; could this section be amended to add such a right?

A: See the draft Space Act Agreement Article 17 provided in the Final Announcement.

208 Q: In Appendix A, Section 3.B. there is no provision for payment should NASA choose to take rights in inventions and data; could this section be amended to provide for such payment?

A: See the draft Space Act Agreement Articles 12 and 13 provided in the Final Announcement.

209 Q: Demonstration Mission Liability There are two liability issues NASA needs to address in the final announcement. First, will NASA indemnify the offeror against third party liability for the demonstration launch, just as it does for contractors launching NASA science payloads, or will NASA require all offerors to obtain an FAA license? If the latter, NASA will be imposing an additional insurance cost on all offerors, and therefore create another tax on the COTS budget of $500 million. Second, does NASA have current statutory authority to issue second party cross-waivers to protect offerors who have not been ISS contractors before?

A: The FAA licensing and indemnification authority will apply to the COTS Demonstrations. See the draft Space Act Agreement Article 10 provided in the Final Announcement for liability and risk of loss provisions.

210 Q: Are there any restrictions on using foreign launch vehicles to deliver spacecraft to orbit?

A: Yes. See Final Announcement section 4.3.

[END OF Q&A LOG R4]