NEW FRONTIERS PROGRAM AND MISSIONS OF OPPORTUNITY
ANNOUNCEMENT OF OPPORTUNITY

TABLE OF CONTENTS


1.0 DESCRIPTION OF OPPORTUNITY
1.1 INTRODUCTION
1.2 OVERVIEW OF PROPOSAL EVALUATION
1.3 NASA'S SAFETY PRIORITY
2.0 SCIENCE OBJECTIVES
2.1 SCIENCE OBJECTIVES
 
2.1.1 OVERVIEW
2.1.2 VENUS IN SITU EXPLORER
2.1.3 SOUTH POLE-AITKEN BASIN SAMPLE RETURN
2.1.4 JUPITER POLAR ORBITER WITH PROBES
2.1.5 COMET SURFACE SAMLE RETURN
2.2 ANCILLARY PROGRAM OBJECTIVES
3.0 PROGRAM BACKGROUND
4.0 PROPOSAL OPPORTUNITY PERIOD
5.0 REQUIREMENTS AND CONSTRAINTS
5.1 GENERAL
5.2 SCIENCE
 
5.2.1 SCOPE OF PROPOSED INVESTIGATIONS
5.2.2 PROTOCOLS AND POLICIES FOR HANDLING RETURNED SAMPLES
5.2.3 FORWARD AND BACKWARD CONTAMINATION
5.2.4 DATA RIGHTS POLICY
5.2.5 DATA ANALYSIS ACTIVITIES
5.3 TECHNICAL APPROACH
 
5.3.1 ADHERENCE TO ACCEPTED MANAGEMENT PROCESSES AND PRACTICES
5.3.2 USE OF RADIOACTIVE MATERIALS
5.4 MANAGEMENT
 
5.4.1 SINGLE PRINCIPLE INVESTIGATOR
5.4.2 MANAGEMENT PLANS AND STRUCTURE FOR FLIGHT INVESTIGATION
5.4.3 NASA PROGRAM AND PROJECT MANAGEMENT
5.4.4 RISK MANAGEMENT
5.5 CO-INVESTIGATORS
5.6 EDUCATION AND PUBLIC OUTREACH
5.7 ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY
5.8 SMALL DISADVANTAGED BUSINESS AND MINORITY INSTITUTION
5.9 COST
 
5.9.1 NASA OSS COST AND TOTAL MISSION COST
5.9.2 FULL COST ACCOUNTING FOR NASA FACILITIES AND PERSONNEL
5.9.3 CONTRIBUTIONS
5.10 INTERNATIONAL PARTICIPATION
5.10.1 OVERVIEW
5.10.2 ADDITIONAL GUIDELINES APPLICABLE TO FOREIGN PROPOSALS AND PROPOSALS INCLUDING FOREIGN PARTICIPATION
5.10.3 EXPORT CONTROL GUIDELINES APPLICABLE TO FOREIGN PROPOSALS AND PROPOSALS INCLUDING FOREIGN PARTICIPATION
5.11 SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS AND CONSTRAINTS FOR NEW FRONTIERS MISSIONS INVESTIGATIONS
 
5.11.1 OVERVIEW
5.11.2 LAUNCH SERVICES: EXPENDABLE LAUNCH VEHICLE OPTION
5.11.3 LAUNCH SERVICES: SPACE SHUTTLE FREE FLYER OPTION
5.11.4 BASELINE MISSION AND PERFORMANCE FLOOR
5.11.5 SCHEDULE
5.11.6 NASA OSS COST REQUIREMENTS AND COST CAPS
5.11.7 TOTAL MISSION COST
5.11.8 CONCEPT STUDY
5.11.9 INTERNATIONAL PARTICIPATION
5.12 SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS AND CONSTRAINTS FOR MISSION OF OPPORTUNITY INVESTIGATIONS
 
5.12.1 OVERVIEW
5.12.2 PARTNER MISSIONS
5.12.3 EXTENDED MISSIONS
5.12.4 NEW SCIENCE MISSIONS
5.12.5 SCIENCE DATA REQUIREMENTS
5.12.6 FUNDING POLICIES
5.12.7 NASA OSS COST REQUIREMENTS AND COST CAP
5.12.8 SCHEDULE
6.0 PROPOSAL SUBMISSION INFORMATION
6.1 PREPROPOSAL ACTIVITIES
 
6.1.1 NEW FRONTIERS PROGRAM LIBRARY AND ACQUISITION HOME PAGE
6.1.2 PREPROPOSAL CONFERENCE
6.1.3 NOTICE OF INTENT TO PROPOSE
6.2 POINT OF CONTACT FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
6.3 PROPOSAL FORMAT
 
6.3.1 STRUCTURE OF PROPOSAL
6.3.2 REQUIREMENT FOR PI AND AUTHORIZING INSTITUTIONAL SIGNATURES
6.3.3 NUMBER OF COPIES OF PROPOSAL TO BE SUBMITTED
6.3.4 ADDRESS FOR SUBMITTAL OF PROPOSAL
6.4 SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS FOR PROPOSALS INVOLVING NON-U.S. ORGANIZATIONS
7.0 PROPOSAL EVALUATION, SELECTION, AND IMPLEMENTATION
7.1 EVALUATION AND SELECTION PROCESSES
7.2 EVALUATION CRITERIA
 
7.2.1 OVERVIEW
7.2.2 SCIENTIFIC MERIT OF THE PROPOSED INVESTIGATION
7.2.3 TECHNICAL MERIT AND FEASIBILITY OF THE PROPOSED INVESTIGATION
7.2.4 FEASIBILITY OF THE PROPOSED APPROACH FOR MISSION IMPLEMENTATION INCLUDING COST RISK
7.3 PLANS FOR IMPLEMENTATION
 
7.3.1 NOTIFICATION OF SELECTION
7.3.2 CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION AND FUNDING
7.3.3 CONFIRMATION OF INVESTIGATIONS FOR IMPLEMENTATION
7.3.4 CONFIRMATION OF INVESTIGATIONS FOR PHASES SUBSEQUENT TO PHASE A
7.4 OPPORTUNITY FOR DEBRIEFING OF NONSELECTED PROPOSERS
8.0 SCHEDULE OF SOLICITATION
9.0 CONCLUSION
APPENDICES

Appendix A

GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS AND PROVISIONS
Appendix B GUIDELINES FOR PROPOSAL PREPARATION
Appendix C REGULATIONS GOVERNING PROCUREMENT OF FOREIGN GOODS OR SERVICES
Appendix D NEW FRONTIERS PROGRAM LIBRARY
Appendix E CERTIFICATIONS
Appendix F NEW FRONTIERS PROGRAM PLANNING BUDGET PROFILE
Appendix G PROPOSAL CHECKLIST

 

1.0 Description of Opportunity

1.1 Introduction

The Office of Space Science (OSS) of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) announces an opportunity to propose for two different types of scientific investigations through the New Frontiers Program:  New Frontiers Mission investigations specifically for the planet Venus, the Earth’s moon, Jupiter, or a comet nucleus (see Section 2.1); and Mission of Opportunity investigations.

New Frontiers Mission investigations are to be completed through space flight missions launched on Expendable Launch Vehicles (ELVs) no later than June 30, 2010, in order to accomplish science objectives in compliance with those stated in Section 2.1 of this Announcement of Opportunity (AO) for a total NASA OSS Cost through mission completion not to exceed  $700M in Fiscal Year (FY) 2003 dollars (see Sections 5.1 through 5.11 for a description of both general and specific restrictions).  Proposals submitted in response to this AO for New Frontiers Mission investigations must be for complete investigations, defined as a concept study (Phase A), preliminary design (Phase B), final design and development of all flight experiment hardware, spacecraft bus, and mission operations software and equipment (Phase C), spacecraft Assembly, Test and Launch Operations (ATLO) (Phase D), mission operations and data analysis (Phase E), and, if applicable, extended mission operations (Phase F).  Investigations must include analysis and publication of data in the peer reviewed scientific literature, delivery of the data to NASA’s Planetary Data System (PDS), and full implementation of an Education and Public Outreach (E/PO) program related to the mission. Section 5.11 contains information only applicable to Mission investigations.  Proposals that describe only portions of investigations (such as the provision of an instrument as part of a non-U.S. mission) may, if appropriate, be proposed as Mission of Opportunity investigations.

New Frontiers Mission of Opportunity (MO) investigations are part of non-OSS space missions of any size that will be launched no later than December 31, 2008, that require a commitment from NASA before December 31, 2005, (see Section 5.12.8), that may be accomplished within a cost to NASA OSS of  $35M (FY 2003 dollars), and that address any of the OSS Solar System Exploration (SSE) science objectives except those of the study of Mars, for which there is a separately funded Mars Scout program (see the recently completed NASA AO 02-OSS-02).  Such MO investigations may involve:  (i) the provision of flight hardware followed by data analysis, (ii) the development of physical models and their application to both the design and interpretation of instrumental data in Phases B, C, D, and E, or (iii) only the analysis of science data taken by the “parent” mission although, in general, MO investigations are not to be a substitute for a Data Analysis program that comes more appropriately after data are placed in the archive.  In any event, MO investigations are generally conducted on a no-exchange-of-funds basis with the organization sponsoring the parent mission.  MO investigations may be approved through the New Frontiers Program when their perceived value is high and their proposed cost to NASA OSS is within the above funding limits.  NASA is not required to select an MO investigation under this solicitation, but if such an investigation is selected, a reduced flight rate of New Frontiers Mission investigations may result.  NASA also expects MO investigations to meet other New Frontiers program objectives for reducing cost, infusing and transferring advanced technology, and enhancing education and the public understanding of science.   Section 5.12 contains information only applicable to MO investigations.

The MO category can also include proposals for Extended Missions for approved NASA SSE missions  in Phase E and nearing the end of their Prime Mission or already in an approved extended phase.  In addition, the MO category can also include proposals for Mission Extensions using an existing NASA space asset in Phase E to conduct a new science mission under certain several specific circumstances.  Sections 5.12.3 and 12.4 contain information only applicable to these categories of MO investigation.

New Frontiers investigation teams for either full Mission investigations or for MO investigations must be led by a single Principal Investigator (PI) who may come from any category of U.S. or non-U.S. organizations, including educational institutions, industry, nonprofit institutions, NASA field centers, the Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) and other Federally Funded Research and Development Centers (FFRDCs), and other Government agencies.

Contributions including services from non-OSS U.S. as well as non-U.S. sources are welcome, including contributions to the payload, to the spacecraft, and/or to the launch services, subject to certain exceptions and limitations detailed in section 5.9.3 below.

Regardless of the type of investigation offered, proposals to the New Frontiers Program will require careful tradeoffs between science and cost to produce investigations with the highest possible science value for the cost.  Investigations proposed at or near the respective cost caps may be selected only if the science is especially compelling since NASA is seeking program balance between lower and higher cost investigations that will allow a mission launch approximately every 36 months within the New Frontiers Program funding profile.  All missions must include adequate reserves at every phase of the mission lifecycle.  In particular, mission investigations must plan to maintain a reserve through the end of Phase B of at least 25 percent of all costs though the end of Phase D, except the cost of the ELV and any Radioisotope Power Sources (RPS). A cost reserve for Phase E must also be included as appropriate.

A major goal of all of NASA’s space science programs is to enhance the public awareness of, and appreciation for, space exploration and to incorporate E/PO activities into its science investigations (see Section 5.6 of this AO).  Additionally, the New Frontiers Program requires proposers to set goals for the participation of Small Disadvantaged Businesses (SDBs), Women-Owned Small Businesses (WOSBs), Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs), and other Minority Educational Institutions (MEIs) in proposed procurements (see Section 5.8).  Participating Scientist Programs (PSPs) and/orData Analysis Programs (DAPs) that involve more members of the community in the data analysis and/or mission operation are encouraged, as described in Section 5.2.5.

Proposals for both New Frontiers Mission investigations and MO investigations must comply with the requirements and constraints specified in this AO (see also checklist provided in Appendix G).  Proposals that are judged not to be in compliance will be returned to the proposers without further review.

Many documents that may be useful in the preparation of proposals may be found in the New Frontiers Program Library (NFPL) as listed in Appendix D.

1.2 Overview of Proposal Evaluation and Selection

Investigations proposed in response to this AO will be evaluated on the basis of their scientific and technical merits and feasibility (including cost risk) as evaluated by peer review (see Section 7.2 in this AO).  In accordance with NASA’s desire to fly missions as frequently as possible, the proposed cost to NASA OSS will be used as an important criterion at the time of selection to help discriminate between proposals of otherwise comparable merits.  Additional selection factors will be the investigation’s demonstrated commitment to E/PO, to technology infusion/transfer, and to participation of SDBs, including WOSBs, HBCUs, and other MEIs.  Pending the submission of proposals of adequate merit, it is anticipated that up to three New Frontiers Mission investigation proposals will be selected for further study as a result of this evaluation.  One or more MO investigation proposals may also be selected either for study or for immediate implementation, although NASA is not required to make such a selection under this solicitation.

Each of the selected mission investigation teams will be funded to perform a Phase A Concept Study of up to 7 months at a level up to $1.2M in Real Year (RY$) dollars, which must be budgeted in the initial proposal.  NASA may select an MO investigation for implementation without a Concept Study if it is satisfied with its readiness for development and implementation as proposed (see Section 5.12).  If a Concept Study is deemed necessary for an MO investigation, funding will be determined on a case-by-case basis but will not exceed $250K (RY$).  At the conclusion of the Concept Studies, NASA will conduct rigorous reviews to evaluate the detailed implementation of the selected investigations.  As a result of this Phase A evaluation, one New Frontiers Mission investigation and possibly one or more MO investigations are expected to be confirmed for implementation leading to flight, mission operations, data analysis, and execution of the approved E/PO program(s).

1.3 NASA’s Safety Priority

Safety is the freedom from those conditions that can cause death, injury, and occupational illness: damage to or loss of equipment or property, or damage to the environmental.  NASA’s priority is to protect—

2.0 Science

2.1 Science Objectives

2.1.1 Overview
Following the recent publication of the Decadal Solar System Exploration Survey, administered by the Space Studies Board of the National Research Council, entitled New Frontiers in the Solar System: An Integrated Exploration Strategy (hereafter called simply the Decadal Survey, and listed in the NFPL, Appendix D of this AO ), the OSS identified four of their five medium-class missions for immediate consideration for this first opportunity within the New Frontiers Program.  These four “strawman” missions are, in no order of priority: The scientific objectives of each of these missions are outlined below, and “strawman” mission concepts for each may be found in the Decadal Survey.  However, NASA will consider any mission concept for any of these archetype missions that goes to the appropriate object and effectively addresses the majority of the science objectives identified below for each generic type of mission.

MO proposals may be for any objective within the purview of the OSS SSE program (see The Space Science Enterprise Strategic Plan, referenced in the NFPL), except Mars.  However, all proposals for a New Frontiers Mission investigation that do not propose orbiting and in situ measurements of atmosphere of Jupiter, or surface and atmosphere in situ measurements of Venus, or sample returns from the South Pole-Aitken Basin area of the Earth’s Moon, or a sample return from a comet nucleus, and that do not address the scientific objectives for a mission to each object (or the class of objects as in the case of comet missions) as given below will be considered nonresponsive to this AO and will be returned without further review.

2.1.2 Venus In Situ Explorer
Although the exploration of the surface and lower atmosphere of Venus provides a major technical challenge, the scientific rewards are major.  Venus is Earth’s sister planet, yet  its tectonics, volcanism, surface-atmospheric processes, atmospheric dynamics, and chemistry are all remarkably different than on Earth, which has resulted in remarkably different end states for its surface crust and atmosphere.  While returning physical samples of its surface and/or atmosphere may not be possible within the New Frontiers cost cap, innovative approaches might achieve the majority of the following objectives: The strawman mission proposed by the Decadal Survey to accomplish these objectives utilized an orbiter and a lander that carried a drill to obtain a core sample, which was then returned from the surface to at least Venus’ middle atmosphere for remote analysis. However, any mission architecture that achieves the majority of the science objectives stated above for a cost within the New Frontiers cost cap will be considered responsive to this AO.
2.1.3 Lunar South Pole-Aitken Basin Sample Return
The surface of the South Pole-Aitken basin, located on the Moon’s far side southern polar region, is likely to contain some fraction of the mineralogy of the Moon’s lower crust.  Samples of these ancient materials that are not biased by nearside impact basin formation are highly desirable to further understand the history of Earth’s Moon.  Therefore, a mission to return a sufficient sample of material from the heretofore-unsampled South Pole-Aitken basin terrain, including useful samples from the deep crust of the early Moon, should accomplish (following chemical, isotopic, and petrologic analysis of returned materials as well as radiometric age dating on Earth) the majority of following science objectives: The Decadal Survey description of this mission places very high priority on the return of useful samples from the deep crust of the early Moon. The strawman mission considered by the Decadal Study is a robotic lander with automatic scooping and sieving capability to enhance the return of rock fragments and also to provide context to sampled areas. The return of at least 1 kg of sampled materials is expected.  However, any mission architecture that returns a sample assemblage adequate to achieve the majority of the science objectives stated above for a cost within the New Frontiers cost cap will be considered responsive to this AO.
2.1.4 Jupiter Polar Orbiter with Probes
NASA’s Galileo mission to Jupiter provided extensive knowledge about its upper atmosphere.  However, further study of Jupiter is crucial not only to the understanding of its origin and nature of the solar system, but also of giant extrasolar planets in general.  Therefore, this AO solicits proposals for spacecraft investigations that can achieve the majority of the following objectives for Jupiter: The strawman mission considered by the Decadal Study consisted of a highly instrumented spacecraft in polar orbit around Jupiter for the main portion of the mission and that would deploy three atmospheric probes to make in situ measurements of the atmosphere. However, any mission architecture that achieves the majority of the science objectives stated above for a cost within the New Frontiers cost cap will be considered responsive to this AO.
2.1.5 Comet Surface Sample Return
Detailed study of comets promises the possibility of understanding the physical condition and constituents of the very early solar system, including the early history of water and the biogenic elements and the compounds containing them.   Therefore, a mission that will sample and return the dust and organics from at least one if not several locations on the surface of a comet nucleus, including one in the vicinity of an active vent, is of prime interest in order to achieve the majority of the following science objectives: The first objective requires the analysis of returned samples, the highest priority objective of the mission, while the remaining objectives provide context for the environment from which the samples are obtained.  Of the three objectives the first is clearly the highest priority.  The strawman mission envisioned is a “touch and go” sampling with storage mechanisms for return to Earth, and if the comet has not been previously visited by spacecraft, an instrumented platform to characterize the cometary surface.  The return to Earth of samples might rely on the techniques developed for NASA’s Stardust and Genesis missions.  However, any mission architecture that returns sufficient sampled material (approximately 200-500 cc) in condition to allow the accomplishment of majority of the science objectives stated above for a cost within the New Frontiers cost cap will be considered responsive to this AO.

2.2 Ancillary Program Goals

While the principal objective of the New Frontiers Program is to provide regularly scheduled opportunities for high quality, cost effective scientific investigations that fulfill the OSS program for Solar System Exploration, there are several ancillary goals that are considered of high intrinsic value by NASA for the science community, the U.S. aerospace industry, and the nation at large, as follows.

Ancillary Goal 1:  Pursue innovative ways of doing business.

The development schedule and cost limits associated with New Frontiers suggest and encourage innovative teaming arrangements among industry, university, and/or Government partners.  Competitively selected teams will have the responsibility and authority to accomplish the entire mission investigation by utilizing innovative approaches to stay within the strict cost and schedule limits of the program.  NASA oversight and reporting requirements will be limited to those that are essential to assure the success of the science investigation in compliance with committed cost, schedule, performance, reliability, and safety requirements.

Ancillary Goal 2:  Encourage the use of advanced technologies to achieve program objectives and foster their transfer into the private sector.

The inclusion of new technologies to achieve performance enhancements and to reduce total mission cost is encouraged in New Frontiers proposals provided that appropriate risk mitigation measures are also included.  The use of new technologies will enable more aggressive and exciting scientific objectives to be pursued.  The teaming of industry, university, and Government as noted in Goal 1 above is meant to foster an environment conducive to technology development, utilization, and commercialization.

Ancillary Goal 3:  Enhance general public awareness of and appreciation for solar system exploration, and support mathematics, science, and technology educational reform initiatives at the local, state, and national level.

Contributing to the improvement of science education and the public understanding of science are explicit goals of the New Frontiers Program and of the OSS as a whole.  The New Frontiers Program is committed to incorporating program elements directed toward informing the public and providing educational opportunities that support local, state, regional, and national educational objectives and reform efforts.

3.0 Program Background

NASA’s budget for FY 2003 includes for the first time the New Frontiers Program that is specifically designed to provide a mechanism for identifying and selecting high-quality planetary missions that required resources beyond those available in the Discovery program.  This effort has benefited from the experience surrounding a successful competition for a Pluto Kuiper Belt (PKB) mission, which was completed in 2001. The mission selected through the PKB competition, New Horizons, is now considered the first New Frontiers mission.  Like the PKB opportunity, New Frontiers is patterned after NASA’s highly successful Discovery program. Unlike the Discovery program, however, the choice of destinations and science goals at these destinations for each New Frontiers opportunity is limited, and in general will be specified by NASA in cooperation with the appropriate science advisory committee.

The Decadal Survey identified the New Horizons mission as an acceptable implementation for their Kuiper Belt/Pluto mission. Accordingly, for this competition for the second New Frontiers mission, the Office of Space Science chose as eligible candidates the remaining medium-class missions identified in the Decadal survey for immediate consideration within the New Frontiers Program.  These four “strawman” missions are, in no order of priority:

NASA wishes to fully enable and challenge the creativity of the scientific community with full and open competition, and strongly encourages novel mission implementation strategies not considered by the Decadal Survey.  In order to allow such opportunities to emerge, proposed investigations for all four of the archetype missions are allowed to compete here on an equal footing.  This AO differs from other AOs, such as those for the periodic Discovery and Mars Scout programs, in both the size of investigation possible (larger cost cap, larger launch vehicle, and longer period in Phases C and D), and in the option to use RPS.

4.0 Proposal Opportunity Period

This AO is for a singular opportunity to propose science investigations in compliance with the schedule given in Section 8 below.  It is the intent of NASA OSS to release other New Frontiers program AOs for future opportunities as allowed by appropriate budget allocations.

5.0 Requirements and Constraints

5.1 General

In the New Frontiers Program, the major responsibility for the selected investigation rests solely with the PI who, along with the investigation’s Project Manager (PM) and investigation team, will have a large degree of freedom to accomplish its proposed objectives within the stated constraints with only essential NASA oversight.  Once an investigation has been confirmed for flight, failure to maintain reasonable progress on the agreed upon schedule or failure to operate within the constraints outlined in this section may be cause for its termination by NASA.

Every aspect of a New Frontiers investigation must reflect a commitment to mission success while keeping total costs as low as possible.  Consequently, proposed investigations must be designed and scoped to emphasize mission success within cost and schedule constraints by incorporating sufficient cost, schedule, and design margins, reserves, and resiliency.

Only those investigations for which the proposed cost, design/development schedule, and launch vehicle requirements are within the constraints and guidelines identified herein will be considered as candidates for selection.

New Frontiers investigation teams for either full mission investigations or for MO investigations must be led by a single PI who may come from any category of U.S. or non-U.S. organizations, including educational institutions, industry, nonprofit institutions, NASA Field Centers, JPL and other FFRDCs, and other Government agencies.

Teaming arrangements among universities, industry, nonprofit institutions, NASA field centers, JPL and other FFRDCs, and/or Government agencies (both foreign and domestic) are encouraged.  Teams are encouraged to utilize industry participation to the fullest extent reasonable.

For investigations selected through this AO for Phase A Concept Studies, specific guidance relative to Concept Study preparation is contained in a document entitled Guidelines and Criteria for the Phase A Concept Study, located in the NFPL.

5.2 Science

5.2.1 Scope of Proposed Investigations
The New Frontiers Program is intended to perform focused planetary science investigations on high-priority targets that conclude with published articles in the peer-reviewed archival literature, as well as deposition of appropriately reduced and calibrated data in designated data archives.  The relationship between the scientific objectives, the data to be returned, and the instrument payload to be used in obtaining the desired data must be unambiguous and clearly stated.  New Frontiers investigation teams will be responsible for initial analysis of the data, subsequent delivery of the data to the PDS, the publication of scientific findings, implementation of educational programs, and communication of results to the public.  Information on the PDS, its formats, and its requirements are included in the NFPL.

Options for extended missions (Phase F), if applicable, must be included in proposals to this AO.  Costs for such options must be included in the estimate of NASA OSS Cost (Section 5.9.1).  However, selected proposers must understand that inclusion of such options in their original proposal does not imply a commitment from NASA to select them (see Section II of Appendix A of this AO for a statement concerning partial selections).

5.2.2 Protocols and Policies for Handling Returned Samples
Any samples of extraterrestrial planetary materials returned by New Frontiers missions must be delivered to the NASA Astromaterials Curatorial Facility located at NASA's Johnson Space Center (JSC); contact Dr. Carlton Allen, Astromaterials Curator, telephone (281) 483-5126, (Email carlton.c.allen@nasa.gov).  Costs for the use of this facility must be included in the NASA OSS Cost.  Investigation teams will be responsible for all aspects of the delivery of such materials to this facility, and this facility will be given the task of providing for the physical security, inventory accountability, environmental preservation, and distribution of the samples in support of scientific research programs organized around each mission, including sample processing in support of the mission science team.  The science team will be allocated no more than one-quarter by mass of the returned sample unless a larger fraction has been fully justified by the proposed investigation.  NASA shall keep the remainder in pristine condition for research competitively proposed by the community at large.

As a proportionate return for investment by foreign participants in a mission that returns extraterrestrial materials, a fraction of the total returned sample may be forwarded to the national curatorial facility of the contributing country within six months after return to the NASA Astromaterials Curatorial Facility.  It is expected that the amount of sample so transferred will be approximately proportional to  the non-U.S. contribution, but in no case will be more than one-third of the total sample.  The terms and conditions of selection of a sample fraction for transmission to the contributing country must be specified in the proposal.  However, in the event of selection, the final arrangements for the transfer of a fraction of the sample to the contributing country must be established through an exchange of letters or a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between NASA and the contributing foreign participant.

5.2.3 Forward and Back Contamination
New Frontiers investigations will also be subject to the established protocols that address forward and back contamination with respect to other solar system bodies.  In particular, it should be noted that the forward contamination of Jupiter’s satellites is of concern, and the return of samples from certain target bodies may be subjected to rigorous containment and biohazard testing protocols in accordance with NASA planetary protection policy (NASA Policy Directive 8020.7E or current revision as listed in the NFPL).  Therefore, investigators proposing sample return missions must address their plans to comply with planetary protection requirements (also see Appendix B, Section J.6 of this AO).  For additional information, proposers may contact the NASA Planetary Protection Officer, Dr. John D. Rummel (telephone (202) 358-0702; E-mail: john.d.rummel@nasa.gov).
5.2.4 Data Rights Policy
Data must be made fully public, in a usable form, in a reasonable time (and not to exceed six months).  New Frontiers teams will be responsible for collecting the scientific, engineering, and ancillary information necessary to validate and calibrate the scientific data prior to delivery to the PDS.  Archival data products shall include low-level (raw) data, high-level (processed) data, and derived data products such as maps, ancillary data, calibration data (ground and in-flight), documentation, and related software or other tools necessary to interpret the data.  All data products shall be documented, validated, and calibrated in physical units usable by the scientific community at large.

The time required to complete this process shall be the minimum necessary to provide appropriate data to the scientific community and the general public and must be described in the proposal.  However, a short period for exclusive rights to data may be proposed with justification.  The proposed period of exclusivity should be the shortest period that is consistent with optimizing the science return from the mission and, except under exceptional circumstances, may not exceed six months, since any follow-on NASA DAPs cannot be initiated until the data have been delivered to the PDS.

5.2.5 Data Analysis Activities
Investigation teams must also include an adequately funded data analysis period, independent of PDS archiving activities as part of their proposed Phase E activities.  Data analysis should be understood to include publication of scientific results of the investigation in peer-reviewed journals.

It is OSS policy to emphasize and encourage the addition of PSPs and DAPs to broaden the scientific impact of missions.  These programs are usually initiated no earlier than Phase E.  Historically, OSS has funded DAPs at an annual level of between 1 and 3 percent of the mission’s Phases C and D development costs.  Although OSS will independently solicit and administer these programs using competitive peer review, if such a program is proposed the costs of implementing it must be included in the proposer’s estimate of the NASA OSS Cost (Section 5.9.1).  Investigations that include adequately funded PSPs and DAPs, where these are appropriate, will receive additional consideration at the time of selection.

5.3 Technical Approach

5.3.1 Adherence to Accepted Management Processes and Practices
New Frontiers projects must encompass all technical aspects of the investigation from Phase B through delivery of the data to the PDS and their analysis during Phase E.  The document NPG 7120.5B, NASA Program and Project Management Processes and Requirements, delineates activities, milestones, and products typically associated with Formulation and Implementation of projects and may be used as a reference in defining a team’s mission approach. NPG 7120.5B may be found in the NFPL.  All missions must adhere to NPG 7120.5B in order to receive approval for implementation.  While NPG 7120.5B does not define sub-phases, the OSS has defined “Formulation” as Phases A and B, and “Implementation” as Phases C, D, and E.

While mission teams have the freedom to use their own processes, procedures, and methods to meet the requirements of NPG 7120.5B, they must plan to obtain Independent Verification and Validation (IV&V) from the NASA IV&V Facility in Fairmont, West Virginia, for all flight and ground software.  IV&V must be accomplished in accordance with NPD 8730.4 (found, with NPG 7120.5B, in the NFPL).  The cost of IV&V can be significant and must be included in the cost proposal if applicable.  The NASA IV&V Facility provides an on-line self-assessment process, available at http://ivvcriteria.ivv.nasa.gov/, as a starting point for the proposal team to understand the risk and specific software development characteristics of their mission.  If the self-assessment indicates that some level of IV&V will be needed, it is recommended that proposals to this AO include 15 percent of their software costs for IV&V activities.

Finally, each New Frontiers project shall have a cost-effective mission assurance program that is consistent with the ISO 9000 series, American National Standard, Quality Management Systems – Requirements, ISO 9001:2000 (see Appendix D).

5.3.2 Use of Radioactive Materials
RPSs are permitted for provision of on-board power.  If such devices are proposed for a selected and confirmed investigation, they will be provided by NASA as Government Furnished Equipment (GFE) through the Department of Energy; however, their costs must be included in the proposal as described in Sections 5.9.1 of this AO.  The technical and cost parameters of such available units may be found in Specifications for Space Radioisotope Power Systems (RPS) for New Frontiers listed  in the NFPL.  Other, smaller, radioactive sources (e.g., radioisotope heater units and/or instrument sources) are also permitted.  Use of any such sources will require environmental documentation (see Environmental Quality Regulations, 40 CFR Parts 1500-1508, in the NFPL), including timely National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) documentation and additional approvals for the launch of radioactive materials.

Use of an RPS will require preparation of an Environmental Impact Statement to satisfy the NEPA requirements and a very detailed and rigorous nuclear material launch approval process.

Sufficient resources (cost and schedule) must be budgeted in the proposal to secure these units and support the development, submittal, and approval of the necessary NEPA process and the Nuclear Safety Launch Approval process.  More information may be found in the Specifications for Space Radioisotope Power Systems (RPS) for New Frontiers documents and the New Frontiers Launch Services Information Summary document listed in the NFPL.  Questions may be posed to the NASA NEPA Coordinator, Kenneth Kumor (telephone:  (202) 358-1112; E-mail: kenneth.n.kumor@nasa.gov), or Environmental Specialist Ann Clarke (telephone:  (202) 358-0007; E-mail: ann.clarke@nasa.gov).

5.4 Management

5.4.1 Single Principal Investigator
A single PI must be designated in each proposal and is the central person in charge of each New Frontiers investigation, with full responsibility for its scientific integrity and for the integrity of all other aspects of the mission including the E/PO program.  The PI is responsible for assembling a team to propose and implement a New Frontiers investigation.  The PI is accountable to NASA for the scientific success  of the investigation and must be prepared to recommend project termination when, in his/her judgment, the successful achievement of established minimum science objectives, as defined in the proposal as the Performance Floor (see section 5.11.4 in this AO), is not likely to be achievable within the committed cost and schedule reserves.
5.4.2 Management Plans and Structure for Flight Investigations
NASA intends to give the PI and his/her team the ability to use their own management processes, procedures, and methods to the fullest extent possible.  Therefore, proposers to this AO should define the management approach (compliant with NPG 7120.5B) best suited for their particular teaming arrangement commensurate with the investigation’s implementation approach, while retaining a simple and effective management structure that assures adequate control of development within the cost and schedule constraints.  The investigation team must develop a Work Breakdown Structure (WBS) that best fits its organizational approach and mission design concept (see also Appendix B).

Each New Frontiers investigation proposal must have a fully qualified and experienced PM who will oversee the technical implementation of the project.  The role, qualifications, and experience of the PM must be adequate to ensure that the technical and managerial needs of the investigation will be met. If the PI and his/her team wish to obtain project management and end-to-end systems engineering from a NASA field center, these functions may be obtained either at NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC) or at NASA JPL as directed by OSS.  Teams wishing to explore either possibility may contact either Ms. Bonnie G. Norris at NASA GSFC (301-286-5442 email: Bonnie.G.Norris@nasa.gov) or Mr. Gregg Vane at JPL (818-354-2851 email: gregg.vane@jpl.nasa.gov).

5.4.3 NASA Program and Project Management
Program management for New Frontiers will reside within the OSS Solar System Exploration Division (SSED) at NASA Headquarters.  A New Frontiers Program Director and a New Frontiers Program Scientist will be appointed.  The New Frontiers Program Director will have overall responsibility for program policy, budget, and program oversight.  The New Frontiers Program Scientist will develop and promulgate the periodic AOs for New Frontiers Missions, plan and organize scientific and technical review of proposals submitted in response to these AOs, and formulate recommendations for selections.  The New Frontiers Program Scientist also develops recommendations of selected Concept Studies for full implementation and is responsible for strategic planning activities as they relate to the New Frontiers Program.

Owing to the high cost and the greater complexity expected of New Frontiers missions, NASA intends to maintain a significant degree of insight into mission development through the assignment of a Program Manager in the NASA Management Office (NMO) located at JPL who will be responsible for mission implementation oversight; coordination of Government-furnished services, equipment, and facilities; and contract management of selected New Frontiers investigations. The New Frontiers Program Manager will be supported in these duties by contractor personnel (this support is currently provided by the Aerospace Corporation) who will need access to project information. The New Frontiers Program Manager will report to the New Frontiers Program Director.  In addition, a Program Executive and a Program Scientist will be appointed from SSED personnel for each active New Frontiers investigation. The Program Scientist will also be responsible for directly following the development of his or her New Frontiers Investigation to insure that the selected science objectives will be achieved, and to alert both the SSED Director and the OSS Associate Administrator immediately if he or she detects emerging issues.  The  Program Scientist will work with both the NASA Program Management team and the Project Management to fulfill this responsibility.

5.4.4 Risk Management
Every New Frontiers investigation must define the risk management approach it intends to use to ensure successful achievement of the investigation objectives within established resource and schedule constraints.  Included in this discussion of risk management must be risk mitigation plans for new technologies and the need for any long-lead items that need to be placed on contract before the start of Phase C to ensure timely delivery of flight hardware and software, as well as a discussion of the role of potential descopes in risk mitigation.  Proposals that include international participation must address the risk resulting from any international contributions to the proposed mission (Section 5.10).  In addition, any manufacturing, test, or other facilities needed to ensure successful completion of the proposed investigation must be identified in every New Frontiers proposal.

5.5 Co-Investigators

A Co-Investigator (Co-I) is defined as an investigator who plays a necessary role in the proposed investigation and whose services are either funded by NASA or are contributed by his/her employer.  If funded by NASA, costs must be accounted for in the NASA OSS Cost.  If contributed, the costs must be accounted for in the Total Mission Cost and an endorsement letter from the proposed Co-Is institution must be provided with the proposal.

The role of each Co-I must be described in the proposal (see Appendix B for additional details).  Note that the identification of an unjustified number of Co-Is may result in downgrading of an investigation and/or the offer of only a partial selection by NASA (see Section II of Appendix A).  In this regard, proposers might wish to consider proposing a PSP (see Section 5.2.5) in place of Co-Is whose only roles would be extensive data analyses during Phase E.

5.6 Education and Public Outreach (E/PO)

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration's (NASA) Vision Statement,

To improve life here, to extend life to there, and to find life beyond,
and Mission Statement,
To understand and protect our home planet,
To explore the Universe and search for life, and
To inspire the next generation of explorers
…as only NASA can,


provide context for the OSS E/PO Program.  As part of the OSS response "…to inspire the next generation of Explorers as only NASA can," the OSS is committed to fostering the broad involvement of the space science community in E/PO with the goal of enhancing the Nation's formal education system and contributing to the broad public understanding of science, mathematics, and technology.  Progress towards achieving this goal has become an important part of the broad justification for the public support of space science.  OSS's work is also a significant element of the overall NASA education program.  In response to education now being a core mission of NASA, an enhanced, coordinated Agency-level education program is being undertaken through the new NASA Office of Education, which constitutes the Agency's sixth enterprise.  NASA's E/PO objectives and focus areas are given in Table I below.

In accordance with established OSS policies, E/PO will be an integral element of the New Frontiers Program; 1 to 2 percent of the NASA OSS Cost (excluding launch vehicles) will be allocated to E/PO.   The key documents that establish the basic policies and guide all OSS E/PO activities are a strategic plan entitled Partners in Education: A Strategy for Integrating Education and Public Outreach Into NASA’s Space Science Programs (March 1995), an accompanying implementation plan entitled Implementing the Office of Space Science (OSS) Education/Public Outreach Strategy (October 1996), the Explanatory Guide to the NASA Office of Space Science Education and Public Outreach Evaluation Criteria (February 2002) and the recently published evaluation of the OSS E/PO Program by the Space Science Advisory Committee entitled Implementing the Office of  Space Science Education/Public Outreach Strategy: A Critical Evaluation of the Six-Year Mark (March 2003).  These documents are available through the NFPL, by selecting “Education” from the menu on the OSS homepage at http://spacescience.nasa.gov/,  or by request from Dr. Jeffrey Rosendhal, Office of Space Science, Code S, NASA Headquarters, Washington, DC  20546-0001 (E-mail at jeffrey.d.rosendhal@nasa.gov).  As a consequence of the policies adopted by OSS, a major, national space science E/PO outreach program is now underway.  Information on the activities already supported through the OSS E/PO program is available in the OSS FY 2000, FY 2001 and FY 2002 Education and Public Outreach Annual Reports, and the OSS E/PO Newsletters, all of which are also included in the NFPL.

Instructions for the E/PO component of the proposal are contained in Appendix B.  A detailed E/PO implementation plan will be developed by each investigation selected through this AO as part of its Phase A Concept Study.  As outlined in Section 7.3.3, plans for E/PO will play an explicit role in the evaluation of the Concept Studies leading to the confirmation of investigation(s) for implementation leading to flight.  See the document Guidelines and Criteria for the Phase A Concept Study in the NFPL for additional information.  Also note that significant elements of this AOs goal for involvement of SDBs and minority institutions (see Section 5.8) may be met through an appropriately planned E/PO program.

Questions and/or comments and suggestions about the OSS E/PO program are sincerely welcomed and may be directed to Dr. Larry P. Cooper, (202) 358-1531, (E-mail at larry.p.cooper@nasa.gov).
 
 

Table I. NASA Education and Public Outreach



NASA EDUCATION AND PUBLIC OUTREACH

 STRATEGIC GOALS, OBJECTIVES, AND FOCUS AREAS


•  Mission Statement: To Inspire the Next Generation of Explorers

Strategic Goal I:  Inspire and motivate students to pursue careers in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics.
 
NASA Objectives
OSS Focus Areas
1.  Improve student proficiency in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics by creating a culture of achievement, using educational programs, products, and services based on NASA’s unique missions, discoveries, and innovations.  Provide opportunities for students to work directly with NASA space science missions, facilities, and data.
2.  Motivate K–16+ students from diverse communities to pursue science and math courses and, ultimately, college degrees in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics.  Provide new opportunities for participation in the space science program by an increasingly diverse population, including opportunities for minorities and minority universities to compete for and participate in space science missions, research, and education programs.
3.  Enhance science, technology, engineering, and mathematics instruction with unique teaching tools and experiences that only NASA can provide, that are compelling to educators and students.  Provide high quality educational materials and teacher training based on space science content and focused on national, state, and local curriculum standards Provide exhibits, materials, workshops, and personnel at national and/or regional education and outreach conferences.
4.  Improve higher education capacity to provide for NASA’s and the Nation’s future science and technology workforce requirements.  Provide higher education opportunities offered through OSS research awards and other NASA research and education programs.

Table I. NASA Education and Public Outreach-Continued

Strategic Goal II:  Engage the public in shaping and sharing the experience of exploration and discovery.
 
 
NASA Objectives
OSS Focus Areas
1. Improve the capacity of science centers, museums, and other institutions, through the development of partnerships, to translate and deliver engaging NASA content.  (a) Through partnerships with major science museums or planetariums, put on display or on tour major exhibitions or planetarium shows based on space science content.
(b) Provide materials and technical expertise to support the development of exhibitions and programs at science museums and planetariums.
(c) Work with national, regional, or local community organizations such as libraries or girl scouts to develop programs directed towards enriching the participants’ understanding and involvement in science, technology, and mathematics.
2. Improve science literacy by engaging the public in NASA missions and discoveries, and their benefits, through such avenues as public programming, community outreach, mass media, and the Internet.  Seek out and capitalize on special events and particularly promising opportunities in the space science program to bring space science to and involve the public in the process of scientific discovery.

5.7 Advanced Technology

NASA seeks to infuse new technologies into its programs and to strengthen the mechanisms by which it transfers such technologies to the private sector, including the non-aerospace sector.  The means by which NASA's OSS plans to implement new technology is described in The Space Science Enterprise Integrated Technology Strategy (October 1998), which is included in the NFPL.  The New Frontiers Program represents an opportunity for NASA to develop and test new technologies and applications, as well as strengthen existing technology transfer mechanisms, and explore and implement new mechanisms and approaches to economic benefit.  This is especially true when such technology enhances the acquisition of an investigation’s science or reduces the costs for the mission.  It is important, however, that investigations that depend on new technology must have sound development/qualification plans for the new technology and/or adequate backup plans defined for use in the event that the planned new technology encounters development difficulties that will compromise its readiness for assembly and test of the flight hardware.  Investigations that depend on new technology will not be penalized for risk provided that adequate plans are described to mitigate the risk by providing reasonable back-up approaches, or if none exist, by providing for adequate development and qualification activities such that the success of the investigation is assured.

Instructions for the advanced technology component of the proposal are contained in Appendix B.  A detailed advanced technology infusion and transfer implementation plan will be developed by each selected investigation as part of its Phase A Concept Study.  As outlined in Section 7.3.3, plans for advanced technology will play an explicit role in the evaluation of the Concept Studies leading to the confirmation for flight (see the document Guidelines and Criteria for the Phase A Concept Study in the NFPL for additional information).

5.8 Small Disadvantaged Businesses and Minority Institutions

Proposers to this AO are expected to use their best efforts to assist NASA in achieving its goal for the participation of SDBs, WOSBs, HBCUs, and other MEIs in NASA procurements.  Investment in these organizations reflects NASA’s commitment to increase the participation of minority concerns in the aerospace community, and it is to be viewed as an investment in the nation’s future.  Therefore, offerors other than small business concerns are advised that contracts resulting from this AO will be required to contain a subcontracting plan that includes goals for subcontracting with small, small disadvantaged, women-owned, and Historically Underutilized Business (HUB) Zone small business concerns; see Appendix A, Section XIII.  Note that substantial involvement of minority colleges and universities in space science missions and research programs is also a key objective of the OSS E/PO program.

Instructions for the SDB and Minority Institutions component of the proposal are contained in Appendix B.  See the document Guidelines and Criteria for the Phase A Concept Study in the NFPL for additional information.

5.9 Costs

5.9.1 NASA OSS Cost and Total Mission Cost
A major goal of the New Frontiers program is to provide the highest science value for the cost.  Therefore, the NASA OSS Cost will be one factor in the selection of New Frontiers investigations and in the continuing assessment of ongoing New Frontiers investigations.  All proposals must provide an estimate of the NASA OSS Cost.

NASA OSS Cost is defined as the funding that NASA OSS would be expected to provide to complete the investigation, including the cost of the Phase A Concept Study and all costs in Phases B through E, including a reserve through the end of Phase B of at least 25 percent of all costs though the end of Phase D except the cost of the ELV and any RPS.  A cost reserve for Phase E should also be included as appropriate. Generally, all costs must be included as NASA OSS costs unless specifically excluded.  Examples of costs to be included in all proposals are: launch services (see Sections 5.11.2 and 5.11.3); RPSs (see Section 5.3.2); E/PO activities (see Section 5.6); new technology infusion and transfer (see Section 5.7); subcontracting costs (including fees); science Co-Is; all other personnel required to conduct the investigation, analyze and publish results, and deliver data in archival format to the PDS; insurance; NASA Deep Space Network (DSN), if required, and other Deep Space Mission System (DSMS) support, if required (see NASA’s Mission Operations and Communications Services document in the NFPL); Navigation and Ancillary Information Facility (NAIF) services; NASA curatorial support (if required; see Section 5.2.2); and all labor (including contractor and Civil Servant).

In addition, proposals must provide an estimate of Total Mission Cost, defined as the NASA OSS Cost plus any additional costs that are contributed or provided in any way other than through OSS.  The Total Mission Cost will define the total value of the Mission or MO investigation and must be included in a required cost table with the proposal (see Appendix B).

Sections 5.11.6 and 5.11.7 of this AO describe additional cost elements and caps on the NASA OSS Cost, Total Mission Cost, and major mission element costs for New Frontiers Mission investigations.

Section 5.12.7 describes additional cost elements specific to MO investigations and specifies the NASA OSS Cost cap for MO investigations.

As noted in Section 5.2, costs for Phase F, a PSP, and/or a DAP, if any of these are proposed, must be included in the estimate of NASA OSS Cost but will not count against the cost caps.

The specific cost information required for proposals is described in Appendix B.  Since the provision of cost details is not anticipated until the conclusion of the Phase A Concept Study, cost estimates in the proposal may be generated using models or cost estimating relationships from analogous missions.  However, for selected investigations, the proposed cost to NASA OSS shall not increase by more than 20 percent from that in the original proposal to that in the Concept Study Final Report, and in any case shall not exceed the New Frontiers Program cost constraints (see Appendix F).  Experience in NASA’s Discovery and Explorer Programs has shown that mission costs tend to grow in Phase A and beyond as costs and challenges are better understood; therefore, proposers are advised to allow for room for this cost growth, up to the New Frontiers cost cap.  And New Frontiers mission investigations must show a creditable reserve of at least 25 percent reserve through the end of Phase B. Since costs and obligation authority may well be different, it is incumbent on proposers to define any obligation requirement that exceeds planned costs.   Proposers should be advised that rephrasing of Phase E funds to Phase C/D after confirmation of an approved investigation is not permitted.

5.9.2 Full Cost Accounting for NASA Facilities and Personnel
Where NASA-provided services are used, NASA Civil Service labor and supporting NASA center infrastructure must be costed on a full cost accounting basis.  If NASA guidance for full cost accounting has not been fully developed by the closing date for proposal submission or for completion of the Concept Studies, NASA field centers may submit full cost proposals based on the instructions in the NASA Financial Management Manual, Section 9091-5, Cost Principles for Reimbursable Agreements (see Appendix D).  If any NASA costs are to be considered as contributed costs, the contributed item(s) must be separately funded by an effort complementary to the proposed investigation and the funding sources must be identified.  Any non-NASA 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.
5.9.3 Contributions
Contributions including services from non-OSS U.S. as well as non-U.S. sources are welcome. These may include contributions to the payload, to the spacecraft, and/or to the launch services, subject to the following exceptions and limitations: (i) non-U.S. launch services for payloads containing nuclear power sources of any kind are prohibited; (ii) non-U.S. nuclear power sources are prohibited; and in order to insure a preponderance of U.S. interest in the mission as well as to insure that missions of roughly comparable scope are proposed for purposes of equitable competition, (iii) the sum of contributions of any kind to the entirety of the flight hardware for a New Frontiers Mission investigation may not exceed one third (1/3) of the estimated total cost in U.S. dollars for that hardware.  Non-U.S. launch services for payloads that do not contain nuclear power sources of any kind are permitted.

Values for all contributions of property and services shall be established in accordance with applicable cost principles.  Such contributions may be applied to any part or parts of a mission, although it should be noted that a contributed item that is in the critical path of mission development may be identified as a risk factor, especially in the case of contribution(s) from non-U.S. source(s) (see provisions for international risk management is Section 5.10).  Such contributions will not be counted against the NASA OSS cost cap, but they must be included in the calculation and discussion of the Total Mission Costs (Section 5.9.1).  A Letter of Endorsement that contains a statement of financial commitment from each responsible organization contributing to the investigation must be submitted with the proposals, to assure NASA that all contributions will be provided as proposed.  Any proposal failing to provide Letters of Endorsement from U.S. and non-US partners with the submitted proposal will be judged non-compliant, and will be returned.

The cost of contributed hardware should be estimated as either: (1) the cost associated with the development and production of the item if this is the first time the item has been developed, and if the mission represents the primary application for which the item was developed; or (2) the cost associated with the reproduction and modification of the item (i.e., any recurring and mission-unique costs) if this is not a first-time development.  If an item is being developed primarily for an application other than the one in which it will be used in the proposed investigation, then it may be considered as falling into the second category (with the estimated cost calculated as that associated with the reproduction and modification alone).

The cost of contributed labor and services should be consistent with rates paid for similar work in the proposer's organization.  The cost of contributions does not need to include funding spent before the start of the investigation (i.e., before initiation of Phase B if confirmed for flight).  The value of materials and supplies shall be reasonable and shall not exceed the fair market value of the property at the time of the contribution.

5.10 International Participation

5.10.1 Overview
NASA uses AOs to solicit research proposals from both U.S. and non-U.S. sources (see Procurement Notice 97-34 in the NFPL and also at http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/procurement/regs/pn97-34.html).  Because of NASA's policy to conduct research with foreign Entities on a cooperative, no-exchange-of-funds basis, NASA does not normally fund foreign research proposals or foreign research efforts that are part of U.S. research proposals. Rather, cooperative research efforts are normally implemented via international agreements between NASA and the foreign entity involved. Thus, foreign proposers, whether as primary proposers or as participants in U.S. research efforts, are expected to arrange for financing for their portion of the research. Both proposals from non-U. S. Sources and proposals originating within the U. S. which include foreign participation must be responsive to NASA FAR Supplement Part 1852.235-72: “Instructions for Responding to NASA Research Announcements”
(http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/procurement/regs/nfstoc.htm)  also found in the NFPL.  Because of the importance of conforming to these instructions, they are repeated here.
5.10.2 Additional Guidelines Applicable to Foreign Proposals and Proposals Including Foreign Participation.
NASA welcomes proposals from outside the U.S. However, foreign Entities are generally not eligible for funding from NASA. Therefore, unless otherwise noted, proposals from foreign entities should not include a cost plan unless the proposal involves collaboration with a U.S. institution, in which case a cost plan for only the participation of the U.S. entity must be included. Proposals from foreign entities and proposals from U.S. entities that include foreign participation must be endorsed by the respective government agency or funding/sponsoring institution in the country from which the foreign entity is proposing. Such endorsement should indicate that the proposal merits careful consideration by NASA, and if the proposal is selected, sufficient funds will be made available to undertake the activity as proposed.

All foreign proposals must be typewritten in English and comply with all other submission requirements stated in the NRA. All foreign proposals will undergo the same evaluation and selection process as those originating in the U.S. All proposals must be received before the established closing date. Those received after the closing date will be treated in accordance with Appendix A, section VII, of this AO. Foreign sponsors may, in exceptional situations, forward a proposal without endorsement if the endorsement is not possible before the announced closing date. In such cases, the NASA sponsoring office should be advised when a decision on endorsement can be expected.

Successful and unsuccessful foreign entities will be contacted directly by the NASA sponsoring office. Copies of these letters will be sent to the foreign sponsor. Should a foreign proposal or a U.S. proposal with foreign participation be selected, NASA’s Office of External Relations will arrange with the foreign sponsor for the proposed participation on a no-exchange-of-funds basis, in which NASA and the foreign sponsor 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. An exchange of letters between NASA and the foreign sponsor; or
  2. A formal Agency-to-Agency Memorandum of Understanding (MOU).

  3.  

     

    5.10.3 Export Control Guidelines Applicable to Foreign Proposals and Proposals
    Including Foreign Participation.

Foreign proposals and proposals including foreign participation must include a section discussing compliance with U.S. export laws and regulations, e.g., 22 CFR Parts 120-130 and 15 CFR Parts 730-774, as applicable to the circumstances surrounding the particular foreign participation. The discussion must describe in detail the proposed foreign participation and is to include, but not be limited to, whether or not the foreign participation may require the prospective proposer to obtain the prior approval of the Department of State or the Department of Commerce via a technical assistance agreement or an export license, or whether a license exemption/exception may apply. If prior approvals via licenses are necessary, discuss whether the license has been applied for or if not, the projected timing of the application and any implications for the schedule.  Information regarding U.S. export regulations is available at http://www.pmdtc.org and http://www.bis.doc.gov. Proposers are advised that under U.S. law and regulations, spacecraft and their specifically designed, modified, or configured systems, components, and parts are generally considered "Defense Articles" on the United States Munitions List and subject to the provisions of the International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR), 22 CFR Parts 120-130.

5.11 Specific Requirements and Constraints for New Frontiers Mission Investigations

5.11.1 Overview
New Frontiers Mission Investigation proposals must be for complete, free-flying missions.  The PI is responsible to NASA not only for the scientific integrity of the investigation, but also for the management of the complete mission, including provision of the spacecraft, instrument, and ground system. Proposals submitted in response to this AO for New Frontiers Mission investigations must be for complete investigations from project initiation (Phase A) through mission operations (Phase E), which is to include analysis and publication of data in the peer reviewed scientific literature, delivery of the data to the PDS, and full implementation of the mission’s E/PO program.
5.11.2 Launch Services:  Expendable Launch Vehicle Option
New Frontiers Mission investigations must be launched as primary payloads on ELVs.  Although NASA will fund launch service costs directly, these costs must be included in the proposed NASA OSS cost (see Sections 5.9.1 and 5.11.6) and Total Mission Cost (see Section 5.11.7).  Detailed information on ELV launch options, including their nominal costs, is contained in the New Frontiers Launch Services Information Summary document listed in the NFPL.
5.11.3 Launch Services: Space Shuttle Free Flyer Option
New Frontiers Mission investigations may not be launched on the Space Shuttle.
5.11.4 Baseline Mission and Performance Floor
Every New Frontiers Mission investigation must specify a "Baseline" mission and a "Performance Floor" Mission defined as follows:  The Baseline mission is the mission that, if fully implemented, will accomplish the entire set of scientific objectives proposed for the investigation.  Any alteration that results in a reduction of the mission's ability to accomplish the Baseline set of scientific objectives as identified in the proposal will be considered a descope of the investigation.  The resulting reduced set of achievable scientific objectives will be reviewed to ensure that the investigation remains at or above the Performance Floor, which is defined as the minimum science return below which the investigation will not be considered justified for the proposed cost.  The Performance Floor must be identified and documented for a proposed New Frontiers Mission investigation along with a plan for the prioritized descoping of mission capability from the Baseline to the Performance Floor in the event of cost or schedule growth or for risk mitigation. The differences between the Baseline Mission and the Performance Floor will be assessed to determine the mission's resiliency in the event that development problems lead to reductions in scope.  In addition, each selected PI will be required to negotiate a set of performance metrics during the definition phase for program evaluation, including cost, schedule, and others as appropriate.  Failure to maintain a level of science return at or above the Performance Floor as determined by NASA will be cause for termination of the investigation.
5.11.5 Schedule
The New Frontiers Program is intended to accomplish important scientific investigations within a limited span of time.  Accordingly, every New Frontiers Mission investigation to be selected through this AO is expected to launch no later than June 30, 2010.  Proposers must specify the desired launch date and indicate any flexibility in their proposals.  Furthermore, schedules must be such that launch takes place within 47 months from the start of the mission design/development phase (Phase C).  Since this phase is defined as ending 30 days after launch, the maximum permissible length of any New Frontiers mission from the beginning of Phase C to the end of Phase D is 48 months.

Note that the OSS defines the Concept Study as Phase A and defines Phase B as a preliminary design phase ending approximately one month after Preliminary Design Review (PDR).  No constraint is placed on the length of Phase B or Phase E (operations).  Procurement of long lead materials is permitted during the Phase B timeframe but, if proposed, it must be accounted as an Implementation Task (Phases C and D) and, therefore, as an Implementation cost.  The Implementation Phase long-lead procurement overlap with Phase B will not be considered when determining the length of Phases C and D.  Options for extended missions (Phase F) must be proposed, if appropriate, with the understanding that NASA has no commitment to exercise them (see Section 5.2.1).

5.11.6 NASA OSS Cost Requirements and Cost Caps
The New Frontiers Program is intended to provide opportunities for planetary investigations of medium scope.  Accordingly, NASA OSS will cap its funding for New Frontiers Mission investigations, including all mission phases and launch services, at $700M (FY 2003 dollars). The NASA OSS yearly funding profile available for missions selected under this AO is given in Appendix F.

As noted in Section 5.9.1, NASA will provide for launch services, but the cost of these services must be included in the proposal and will count against the cap on the NASA OSS Cost.

NASA will provide for radioisotope power systems and/or heater units as GFE through the Department of Energy (see Section 5.3).  As with launch services, however, the cost of such devices must be included in the proposal and will count against the cap on the NASA OSS cost (their capabilities and costs, for proposal purposes, are described in the document Specifications for Space Radioisotope Power Systems (RPS) for New Frontiers in the NFPL).

The specific cost information required for New Frontiers mission proposals is contained in Appendix B.

5.11.7 Total Mission Cost
The Total Mission Cost is defined as all costs that are necessary to complete an investigation, from selection through Phase E or Phase F (if applicable), including NASA OSS costs, other NASA costs, non-NASA Civil Servant costs, and contributions from U.S. and non-U.S. entities.  In general, proposers should assume that all costs must be included unless they are specifically excluded.  Proposers must estimate the Total Mission Cost in the proposal as described in Appendix B, Table B-1.

The Total Mission Cost, including contributions, may exceed the cap on total cost to NASA OSS ($700M FY2003).  However, as noted in Section 5.9.3, the sum of contributions of any kind to the entirety of the flight hardware for a New Frontiers Mission investigation from non-U.S. sources may not exceed one third (1/3) of the estimated total cost in U.S. dollars for that hardware.

5.11.8 Concept Study
Each New Frontiers investigation selected through this AO will be awarded funding (up to $1.2M in RY dollars) to conduct a 7-month Phase A Concept Study, which must be budgeted as part of the initial proposal (see the Guidelines and Criteria for the Phase A Concept Study available in the NFPL).  At the conclusion of the Concept Studies, it is anticipated that one investigation will be confirmed to proceed into subsequent mission phases (see Section 1.2).  NASA will not continue funding for those investigations not selected to proceed.

During the Concept Study, the NASA OSS cost shall not increase by more than 20 percent from that offered in the original proposal and, in any event, must not exceed the cap on total cost to NASA OSS.  Thereafter, cost shall not increase from that offered in the Concept Study.  Each Concept Study must conclude with a commitment from the PI for the cost, schedule, and scientific performance of the investigation.  If at any time the cost, schedule, or scientific performance commitments appear to be in jeopardy, the investigation will be subject to cancellation.

5.11.9 International Participation
Any proposed international participation must be described at the same level of detail as that of U.S. partners, to the maximum extent practicable.  NASA will seek to validate contribution cost, schedule, and management data during evaluation of the proposal and in subsequent reviews.  Failure to provide such information about proposed contributions,  or failure to document the commitment of all team partners to those costs and schedules, may cause a proposal to be found unacceptable for selection through this AO.
 

5.12 Specific Requirements and Constraints for Mission of Opportunity Investigations

5.12.1 Overview
By supporting U.S. participation in MO investigations, NASA seeks to allow the U.S. scientific community to conduct a science investigation of interest to OSS as part of missions sponsored by non-OSS organizations and/or existing flight hardware for missions, which have completed their prime science missions.  Such “parent” non-OSS missions may be sponsored by non-U.S. governments, other U.S. agencies, NASA organizations other than OSS, the military (only if the satellite is not planned for weapons testing), or private sector organizations, and all are equally qualified.  Mission extensions and proposals for new science missions that utilize existing in-flight OSS spacecraft are also allowed in this opportunity.  The total cost to NASA for a New Frontiers MO investigation, including all costs for DSMS support and/or NAIF services, through this AO is limited to $35M (FY 2003 dollars).

New Frontiers MO investigations may take several forms, as detailed in Sections 5.12.2, 5.12.3, and 5.12.4 below.  In all cases, however, a New Frontiers MO investigation must address one of the science objectives of the OSS SSED (excluding Mars; see also Section 5.2 and the NFPL) and must include appropriate provisions for the analysis of data and publication of results in the peer-reviewed scientific literature and for the conduct of an E/PO program.  MO investigations will be evaluated against the criteria described in Section 7.2 of this AO.

Ordinarily, a selected MO investigation will be expected to submit a Concept Study report to NASA for detailed review that must conclude with a commitment by the PI for the cost, schedule, and scientific performance of the proposed MO investigation.  If, at any time, this commitment appears to be in jeopardy, the investigation will be subject to cancellation regardless of the impact this cancellation might have on its parent mission.  As with other missions proposed to this AO, NASA funding is subject to cancellation if a cost overrun is likely to be charged to NASA for any reason, including one resulting from a launch delay caused by a non-OSS mission sponsor.

As noted in Section 1.2, NASA may select an MO investigation for immediate implementation (that is, without need for a Concept Study) provided that  NASA is satisfied with its readiness for development and implementation as proposed.  For such a selection, an MO proposal must (1) conform to these New Frontiers AO guidelines for an MO investigation, and (2) contain a commitment by the PI for the cost, schedule, and scientific and technical performance of the investigation with detail equivalent to that expected at the end of a Concept Study.  The commitment must also be complete for the programmatic considerations included in Section 5 (e.g., E/PO).  Investigations selected in this manner will be subject to the same conditions for cancellation as described in the preceding paragraph.

A technical and programmatic review will be held prior to the start of Phase C.  Assuming a positive outcome, NASA will confirm the investigation to proceed to development.  As a condition for confirmation, the organization sponsoring the parent mission (for non-OSS missions) must commit to enter into an appropriate agreement with NASA that must include provisions for sharing of flight data necessary for the completion of the selected MO investigation.

5.12.2 Partner Missions
Proposals to conduct a science investigation of interest to OSS as part of missions sponsored by non-OSS organizations are welcome under this AO as MOs.  The “parent” non-OSS missions may be sponsored by non-U.S. governments, other U.S. agencies, NASA organizations other than OSS, the military (only if the satellite is not planned for weapons testing), or private sector organizations, and all are equally qualified.

New Frontiers MO investigations may take many forms, such as providing a complete science instrument, providing hardware components of a science instrument sponsored by some organization other than NASA OSS, providing expertise in critical areas of the mission, and/or purchasing of OSS-relevant data from the mission.

NASA will evaluate the proposed investigation, but not the sponsor’s entire mission.  While the investigator is not required to document the entire mission of the sponsor, the U.S. investigator must fully document the complete MO investigation in the proposal.

Note that selection by NASA through this AO does not constitute selection of the investigation as part of the parent mission, which necessarily is a decision made by the sponsor of that mission.  Instead, selection through this AO only indicates the commitment by NASA to fund the NASA OSS portion of the proposed investigation through the New Frontiers program; funding beyond a limited basic study phase does not begin until detailed design of the parent mission itself is underway by its sponsor.  If an investigation is selected both by NASA and by the mission sponsor, the U.S. MO PI is responsible to NASA for the scientific integrity and the management of his/her contribution to the mission.

5.12.3 Extended Science Missions
Approved NASA SSE missions nearing the end of their Prime or Extended Missions may propose a mission extension through this AO.  The extended science mission being proposed must commence no later than December 31, 2005.  A proposal for an extended science mission must include all costs to NASA for the extension of the mission including mission operations, DSN costs, any proposed data analysis, and adequate resources for archiving new results.
5.12.4 New Science Missions
Under this AO, a mission extension using an existing NASA space asset to conduct a new science mission may be proposed as an MO investigation if it meets several specific criteria:
  1. The proposal must make use of a NASA spacecraft or other space asset that has completed its prime mission;
  2. The proposed mission extension must constitute a new science investigation and not be an extension, supplement, redirection, or follow-up of the spacecraft’s original science mission, or any previously approved mission extensions;
  3. The new science mission must constitute a science investigation addressing the scientific objectives of the SSED (excluding Mars; see Appendix III of the NASA 2003 Strategic Plan and other documents in the NFPL);
  4. The proposal must be solely for mission operations and data analysis.
New science mission extensions are MOs in the sense that NASA may or may not select one or more new science mission extensions, and the cost cap for new science mission extensions is the MO investigation cost cap. Non-U.S. participation is allowed in proposals for new science mission extensions.

In addition to meeting other proposal requirements, an MO proposal for a new science mission extension must describe how the proposers will transition all aspects of mission operations and data analysis from the current spacecraft mission operations team to the proposed new science mission extension operations team.  It is not required that the current mission operations team be a part of the new science mission extension proposal.  However, in the case where the current mission operations team is not a part of the new science mission extension proposal, the proposer must show that operations can be transferred to the new science mission extension operations team with acceptable risk, and with adequate capture of engineering and operations knowledge and lessons learned.

All mission operations and data analysis costs must be included in the proposed budget.

5.12.5 Science Data Requirements
NASA recognizes that MO investigation teams may justifiably incur data analysis responsibilities defined by the policies of the sponsor of the parent mission.  Nevertheless, NASA expects that the mission sponsor will enter into an agreement with NASA to assure that scientific data returned from at least those aspects of the mission in which NASA support is involved, if not from the entire mission, as may be appropriate, will be made available to the U.S. scientific community in a timely way and deposited in the PDS as described in Section 5.2.4.  NASA will seek to conclude an agreement with the mission sponsor in advance of launch to ensure that this activity will be done.

In those cases where it is proposed to purchase data or to receive data from the parent mission in return for service as a Co-I, the proposal must provide evidence that such data, as delivered, will be suitable for successful completion of the proposed investigation.  These data must also be delivered to the PDS for use by the scientific community at large.  Such data-buy MO investigations need not specify a performance floor nor provide for a PSP.

5.12.6 Funding Policies
Selection of an MO investigation may result in a contract, a grant, or a cooperative agreement, depending on the nature of the proposal and the institutions involved.  Further information on grants and cooperative agreements is contained in NASA Handbook NPG 5800.1D, entitled Grants and Cooperative Agreements Handbook, available in the NFPL.

As a matter of NASA policy, its sponsorship of an MO investigation is always conducted on a no-exchange-of-funds basis with a non-U.S. mission sponsor, although depending on circumstances, NASA may agree to pay for some level of the integration costs for NASA sponsored experiment hardware.  Under no circumstances will NASA pay for non-U.S. launch costs.

For an MO investigation on a U.S. commercial mission or on a U.S. Government mission not sponsored by OSS, the PI may receive NASA funding for costs that include integration, as well as launch services, and will be responsible for payment of these costs through his/her proposed costs.

5.12.7  NASA OSS Cost Requirements and Cost Cap
The NASA OSS cost for an MO investigation, including any DSMS support or NAIF services, may not exceed $35M (FY 2003 dollars) for all phases of the investigation.  Specific cost information required for proposals is contained in Appendix B.  NASA's funding for a selected investigation's Concept Study (if required; see Section 5.12.1) will be limited to $250K (RY dollars) and must be budgeted as a part of the initial proposal.

It is important for proposers to this program to understand that the MO PI assumes all risk for delays in implementation of the parent mission and must, therefore, propose appropriate reserves for such contingencies.  Following the completion of any Concept Study, but prior to final selection by the parent mission's sponsoring organization, NASA funding for additional work will be limited to $100K (in RY dollars).  In any case, NASA funding for all studies prior to the initiation of mission’s detailed design (Phase C) will be limited to 25 percent of the total NASA commitment for the requested investigation.

Note that funding for MO investigations must include provisions for the planning and implementation of an appropriate E/PO program in accordance with OSS policies and guidelines.

Should a Concept Study be funded for an MO proposal, the NASA OSS cost shall not increase by more than 20 percent from that offered in the original proposal to this AO and, in any case, must not exceed the NASA OSS cost cap for New Frontiers MO investigations.  Thereafter, the cost shall not increase from that offered in the proposal resulting from the Concept Study.

5.12.8 Schedule
It is incumbent on the proposing investigator to provide evidence in his/her proposal that the sponsoring organization intends to fund the parent mission and that the endorsement of NASA for U.S. MO participation is required by the sponsoring organization prior to December 31, 2005.  The launch date should not be later than December 31, 2008, in order to allow NASA’s planning for the future New Frontiers Program to proceed in an orderly manner.  If a commitment from NASA is not needed by the organization sponsoring the parent mission before December 31, 2005, the proposal should be submitted in response to a future OSS SSE AO that allows for MO investigations.

6.0 Proposal Submission Information

6.1 Preproposal Activities

6.1.1 New Frontiers Program Library and Acquisition Home Page
The NFPL contents as listed in Appendix D provide additional background, technical and management information, and requirements, including information on the New Frontiers Program, SSE science goals, the NASA 2003 Strategic Plan, launch vehicles, DSN capabilities, NASA's technology transfer infrastructure, the OSS Integrated Technology Strategy, the OSS E/PO Strategy and its implementation, the PDS, and existing NASA test and mission operations facilities.  In many cases, information provided in these reference documents includes examples of those types of data that may assist evaluators in better evaluating proposals and, therefore, are in the proposer’s best interests to provide in their proposals to the best of their ability.  In any case of conflict between this AO and these documents, however, the AO takes precedence.  All documents in this library may be downloaded through the World Wide Web at the URL (http://newfrontiers.larc.nasa.gov/newfrontiers/NFPL.html).  Hard copies are not available and should not be requested.

A New Frontiers Acquisition Home Page  available on the World Wide Web at the URL (http://newfrontiers.larc.nasa.gov/newfrontiers/) will provide updates as may occur up to the date proposals are due to this AO.  This Web site will include information about the Preproposal Conference, a list of potential proposers subject to the conditions given in Section 6.1.3, responses to frequently asked questions, and a link to the NFPL.

6.1.2 Preproposal Conference
A Preproposal Conference will be held on the date shown in Section 8.0 at a hotel in the Washington area.  All interested parties may attend but may not use NASA funds provided through any type of research award to defray the costs of attendance and must make their own travel arrangements.  The purpose of this conference will be to address questions about the proposal process for this AO.  Questions should be sent to the New Frontiers Program Scientist at the address given in Section 6.2.  NASA personnel will address all questions received no later than five working days prior to the Conference.  Questions submitted after this date may be addressed at the Conference as time permits and as appropriate answers can be generated.  Anonymity of the authors of all questions will be preserved.  A summary of the New Frontiers AO Preproposal Conference, including answers to all questions addressed at the conference, will be posted as part of the NFPL (see Section 6.1.1) approximately two weeks after this event.
6.1.3 Notice of Intent to Propose
To assist the planning of the proposal evaluation process,  NASA encourages the submission of a Notice of Intent (NOI) to propose should be submitted by all prospective proposers in accordance with the schedule in Section 8.0.  Material in an NOI is confidential and will be used for NASA planning purposes only.  Those submitting an NOI will receive any New Frontiers program updates as may occur, up to the time of the proposal due date (all updates will also be posted on the Web site of this AO).

An NOI is submitted electronically by entering the requested information on the site at the URL http://proposals.hq.nasa.gov/.  Proposers who experience difficulty in using this site should contact the Help Desk by E-mail at proposals@hq.nasa.gov for assistance.  This Web site will request the following information (to the extent that it is known by the NOI due date):
 

  1. Name, address, telephone number, fax number, E-mail address, and institutional affiliation of the PI.
  2. Full names and institutional affiliations of each known Co-I.  If any Co-Is or other team members are from non-U.S. institutions, the mechanism by which these people expect to be funded should be identified in the comments box on the NOI form.
  3. Type of proposal (New Frontiers Mission investigation or New Frontiers MO investigation) and anticipated launch vehicle.
  4. A brief statement (150 words or less) for each of the following:
    1. (i) the scientific objectives of the proposed mission;
      (ii) identification of new technologies that may be employed as part of the
      mission; and
      (iii) the E/PO objectives in the proposed investigation.
  5. The name of the Lead Representative from each organization (industrial, academic, nonprofit, and/or Federal) included in the proposing team as may be known by the end of the NOI .


SPECIAL NOTICE:  As a result of recent AOs for complete mission investigations such as this one, commercial aerospace and technology organizations have requested access to the names and addresses of those who submit NOIs in order to facilitate informing potential proposers of their services and/or products.  Therefore, with the permission of the submitters of an NOI to this AO, NASA OSS is willing to make this information publicly available with the understanding that the Agency takes no responsibility for the subsequent use of such information.  The Web site that requests NOI information allows proposers to check a box that grants this permission.

6.2 Point of Contact for Further Information

Inquiries about this AO and/or the New Frontiers Program may be directed to the New Frontiers Program Scientist at the following address:

Dr. Thomas H. Morgan
Ref. New Frontiers 2003
Solar System Exploration Division
Code SE
Office of Space Science
National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Washington, DC  20546-0001
 Telephone:  (202) 358-0828
 Fax Number: (202) 358-3097
  E-mail:  thomas.h.morgan@nasa.gov   (Note:  Subject field should read “NFAO”)


6.3 Proposal Format

6.3.1 Structure of Proposal
General NASA guidance for proposals to this AO is given in Appendix A, which is considered binding unless specifically amended in this AO.  A uniform proposal format is required from all proposers to aid in proposal evaluation, which is summarized in Appendix B.  Failure to follow this outline may result in reduced ratings during the evaluation process and could lead to rejection of the proposal without review.
6.3.2 Requirement for PI and Authorizing Institutional Signatures
All proposals must have a Cover Page that includes a Proposal Summary that is to be submitted electronically through the designated Web site following the instructions given in Appendix B.  Once this form is submitted, it must be printed and signed by the PI and an official of the PIs institution who is authorized to certify institutional support and sponsorship of the investigation, including the management and the financial parts of the proposal.  Note that the authorizing institutional signature on the printout of the electronically submitted Cover Page also certifies that the proposing institution understands and complies with the three required certifications printed in Appendix E of this AO; therefore, it is not necessary to submit these certifications separately with the proposal.

The proposal must also include a letter of endorsement signed by an institutional official from every organization identified as providing no-exchange-of-funds contributions of hardware, software, facilities, and/or services (including those of Co-Is), that provides evidence that the institution and/or Government officials are aware of the proposed investigation, support the proposed investigation, and that sufficient funds will be made available to undertake the activity proposed investigation if selected by NASA.

Signatures of commitment are required for all science team members identified in the science section (including the PI and Co-Is) and for all key project personnel named elsewhere in the proposal including key individuals associated with the E/PO activities.  These signatures are to be included at the bottom of the resumes required for each of these individuals and/or included on commitment letters from their institutions (see Appendix B, Section J.2 and J.3). The original, signed documents are to be included in the original copy of the proposal.

Non-U.S. organizations involved in proposals must submit such endorsements to the address given in Section 6.3.4 by the due date given in Section 8.0.

6.3.3 Number of Copies of Proposal to be Submitted
Seventy (70) copies of each proposal, including the original signed proposal, and 70 clearly labeled copies of a CD-ROM containing a single, searchable PDF version of the proposal, must be delivered to the address given in Section 6.3.4 on or before the proposal deadline given in Section 8.0. The CR-ROM copies are not to be submitted separately, but each of the 70 paper copies is to have one of the seventy 70 CD-ROMS attached to it.
6.3.4 Address for Submittal of Proposal
All proposals must be received at the following address by the proposal due date given in Section 8.0.
New Frontiers 2003 AO
Office of Space Science
NASA Peer Review Services
Suite 200
500 E Street, SW
Washington, DC  20024-2760
Tel:  (202) 479-9030
NASA will notify the proposers that their proposals have been received.  Proposers who have not received this confirmation within two weeks after submittal of their proposals should contact the New Frontiers Program Scientist at the address given in Section 6.2.

6.4 Special Instructions for Proposals Involving non-U.S. Organizations

See Sections 5.9.3 and 8.0 for more information on and additional deadlines for proposals involving non-U.S. organizations.

7.0 Proposal, Evaluation, Selection, and Implementation

7.1 Evaluation and Selection Process

All proposals will be screened to determine their compliance to the requirements and constraints of this AO (see the Proposal Checklist in Appendix G).  Proposals that do not comply will be returned to the proposer without further review.  Compliant proposals will be assessed against the criteria specified in Section 7.2 by panels of individuals who are peers of the proposers.  Panelists will be instructed to evaluate all proposals independently without comparison.  These panels may be augmented through the solicitation of mail reviews, which the panels have the right to accept in whole or in part, or to reject.  Proposers should be aware that, during the evaluation and selection process, NASA may request clarification of specific points in a proposal; if so, such a request from NASA and the proposer’s response shall be in writing.

An ad hoc subcommittee of the Space Science Steering Committee (SSSC; see further below), composed wholly of Civil Servants (some of whom may be from Government agencies other than NASA) and appointed by the Associate Administrator for Space Science, will convene to consider the peer review results and categorize the proposals in accordance with procedures required by NASA FAR Supplement Part 1872.403-1.  The categories are defined as follows:

Category I.  Well conceived and scientifically and technically sound investigations pertinent to the goals of the program and the AOs objectives, and offered by a competent investigator from an institution capable of supplying the necessary support to ensure that any essential flight hardware or other support can be delivered on time, and that data can be properly reduced, analyzed, interpreted, and published in a reasonable time.  Investigations in Category I are recommended for acceptance and normally will be displaced only by other Category I investigations.

Category II.  Well-conceived and scientifically or technically sound investigations that are recommended for acceptance, but at a lower priority than Category I.

Category III.  Scientifically or technically sound investigations that require further development. (Note: in this context, “development” refers to the Technical Readiness Level (TRL) of key proposed hardware; see section 7.2.4).

Category IV.  Proposed investigations which are recommended for rejection for the particular opportunity under consideration, whatever the reason.

The results of the evaluations and categorizations will then be reviewed by  a sitting panel of the SSSC.  The SSSC will conduct an independent assessment of the evaluation and categorization processes regarding their compliance to established policies and practices, as well as the completeness, self-consistency, and adequacy of all materials related thereto.  After this review, the final evaluation results will be forwarded to the Associate Administrator, who will make the final selection(s).  As the Selection Official, the Associate Administrator may consult with senior members of the OSS concerning the selections.

Regarding the final selections, proposers should recognize that the Associate Administrator is free to use a wide range of planning and policy considerations when selecting among top-rated proposals.  While the OSS develops and evaluates its program strategy in close consultation with the scientific community through a wide variety of advisory groups, the OSS program is an evolving activity that ultimately depends upon the most current Administration policies and budgets, as well as the scientific priorities identified by the scientific community.

The overriding consideration for the final selection of proposals submitted in response to this AO will be to maximize scientific return within the available budget for this program.  Depending on the availability of proposals of appropriate merit, this objective may be achieved by the selection of investigation(s) at the cost ceiling for New Frontiers Mission investigations, or lower cost investigation(s) that would allow more rapid release of the next New Frontiers AO, or a combination of investigations of various costs, including any MO investigations.
 

7.2 Evaluation Criteria

7.2.1 Overview
The criteria below will be used to evaluate proposals as described in Section 7.1.  For a New Frontiers MO investigation, the proposed investigation is understood to encompass only the proposed contribution to the mission and not that of the entire parent mission.  The evaluation criteria with their approximate percentage weights (the first percentage is for New Frontiers Mission investigations and MO investigations with hardware; the second is for MO data-buy only investigations), are as follows:
 
· The scientific merit of the proposed investigation; 40 / 60
· The technical merit and feasibility of the proposed investigation; and  30 / 40
· The feasibility of the proposed approach for mission implementation, including cost risk (i.e., realism and reasonableness of cost), and subcontracting plans  30 / 0

These criteria are defined more fully in the following sections.  Evaluation findings for each criterion will be documented using narrative text in terms of specific Major and Minor Strengths and Weaknesses, as well as an adjectival summary score.

7.2.2 Scientific Merit of the Proposed Investigation
The description of the scientific investigation provided in the proposal will be used to evaluate its scientific merit.  For a New Frontiers mission investigation, the investigation’s goals and objectives will be compared with the scientific goals and objectives described in Section 2.1.  For an MO investigation, the investigation’s goals and objectives will be compared with the broad strategic goals of the NASA OSS SSED, as defined in the NASA 2003 Strategic Plan, Appendix III (in the NFPL).  This evaluation will also include consideration of how well the investigation promises fundamental progress in the scientific knowledge of the target, how well the investigation may support NASA’s other SSE missions, and whether it provides ancillary benefits to NASA’s space science program in general (e.g., through development of critical new technologies).  For New Frontiers Mission investigations, the scientific value of the Performance Floor (see Section 5.11.4) will also be assessed as part of the determination of the overall scientific merit of the investigation.  This evaluation will result in narrative text, as well as an appropriate adjectival rating.
7.2.3 Technical Merit and Feasibility of the Proposed Investigation
Each investigation will be evaluated for its technical merit, feasibility, resiliency, and the probability of success as expressed in terms of specific major and minor Strengths and Weaknesses.  Technical merit and feasibility will be evaluated by assessing the degree to which the investigation will address the proposed scientific goals and objectives, and the degree to which any proposed instruments can provide the necessary data.  Considerations in the evaluation of the data analysis (i.e., calibration/validation) and archiving plan will include an assessment of planning and budget adequacy and evidence of plans for well documented, high level products and software usable to the entire science community, and consideration of adequate resources for physical interpretation of data and reporting scientific results in refereed journals.  Consideration of whether the data gathered will be sufficient to complete the scientific investigation will be a major factor in this assessment, as will the proposed plan for the timely release of the data to the public domain for enlarging its science impact.  For New Frontiers Mission investigations, resiliency will be evaluated by assessing the approach to descoping the Baseline Mission to the Performance Floor in the event that development problems force reductions in scope.  The probability of success will be evaluated by assessing the experience, expertise, and organizational structure of the science team and the mission design in light of any proposed instruments.  The role of each Co-I will also be evaluated for necessary contributions to the proposed investigation and the inclusion of Co-Is who do not have a well-defined role may be cause for downgrading of the proposal.  This evaluation will result in narrative text, as well as an appropriate adjectival rating.

MO investigations that do not include hardware (e.g., data purchase or data exchange for services as a Co-I) will be evaluated against all the factors above except that the non-NASA provided flight instrument design(s) will not be evaluated for its (their) ability to provide the necessary data.  However, such proposals will be evaluated for the evidence that such data will be made available by way of signed commitments for their delivery in a format and timeframe suitable for the completion of the proposed investigation.  It is assumed that NASA will not pay for these data unless the data, as delivered, are suitable for successful completion of the proposed investigation.  In addition, data-buy MO investigations need not specify a performance floor, nor provide for a PSP and/or DAP (as defined in Section 5.2.5).

7.2.4 Feasibility of the Proposed Approach for Mission Implementation Including Cost Risk
The technical and management approaches of all submitted investigations will be evaluated to assess the likelihood that they can be implemented as proposed, including an assessment of the risk of their completion within the proposed costs.  The evaluation will consider implementation factors such as the proposed launch vehicle including reliability, overall mission design (i.e., “mission architecture”), spacecraft design and design margins, use of the DSN, and the proposers' understanding of the processes, products, and activities required to accomplish development and integration of all elements (flight systems, ground and data systems, etc.).  This assessment will also consider the adequacy of the proposed organizational structure, the roles and experience of the known partners, the management approach, the commitments of partners and contributors, and the team’s understanding of the scope of work (covering all elements of the mission, including contributions).  The relationship of the work to the project schedule, the project element interdependencies, and associated schedule margins will also be evaluated.   Investigations proposing new technology, i.e., technologies having a Technology Readiness Level (TRL) less than 7 (see TRL Definitions in NFPL), will be penalized for risk if adequate backup plans to ensure success of the mission are not described.  The proposal must discuss the methods and rationale (cost models, cost estimating relationships of analogous missions, etc.) used to develop the estimated cost, and must include a discussion of cost risks.  Innovative cost effective features, processes, or approaches will be considered a strength if proven sound.  However, even with innovative cost features, proposals that are unable to show an unencumbered reserve at confirmation (end of Phase B) of at least 25 percent of all development costs (less ELV and RPS costs) are likely to be judged a high cost risk and not selected. This evaluation will result in narrative text, as well as an appropriate adjectival rating.

Proposals must also define the risk management approach the project team intends to use to ensure successful achievement of the investigation objectives within established resource and schedule constraints.  Risk mitigation plans for new technologies, and the need for long-lead items that must be placed on contract before the beginning of Phase C to ensure timely delivery should be included in this discussion of risk management.  Additionally, any manufacturing, test, or other facilities needed to ensure successful completion of the proposed investigation should be identified in the proposal.

Proposals must also identify a PM who will oversee the technical and managerial implementation of the project.  The PM must work closely with the PI in order to ensure that the mission meets its objectives within the resources outlined in the proposal.  The role, qualifications, and experience of the PM must be adequate to ensure that the technical and managerial needs of the investigation will be met.  If project management and end-to-end systems engineering are to be implemented from a NASA field center, then these functions must be performed by either JPL or GSFC, as directed by OSS.

Proposed subcontracting plans and SDB participation targets for New Frontiers Investigations will be evaluated.

The commitment of every partner, U. S. or non-U. S., offering a contribution must be documented in letters of endorsement.  For proposals offering contributions that are critical to the success of the proposed investigation, the evaluated risk will increase if the proposals: 1) do not have clear and simple technical and management interfaces in the proposed cooperative arrangements, 2) do not provide evidence in the proposal that the contribution is within the scientific and technical capability of the partner, and 3) do not have the required endorsement on a firm commitment to provide the offered contribution.  Adequate contingency plans for coping with the failure of a proposed cooperative arrangement may help to reduce the evaluated risk.

Since MO investigations fly on non-OSS missions, factors involving spacecraft and launch vehicle capabilities will be considered in the evaluation only as appropriate.  MO investigations that do not provide hardware (e.g., data buys or exchange for Co-I services) will not be evaluated under this criterion.

For both Mission and MO investigations, technical, management, and cost evaluation will include an assessment of proposed planetary protection provisions to avoid potential biological contamination (forward and backward) that may be associated with the mission.

7.3 Plans for Implementation

7.3.1 Notification of Selection
Following selection, the PIs of the selected investigations will be notified immediately by telephone followed by formal written notification, which may include any special conditions or terms of the offer of selection (e.g., partial selections, see Section II of Appendix A).  The formal notification will also include instructions for scheduling a debriefing at which any issues noted during the evaluation that may require attention during the Phase A Concept Study will be discussed (see Section 7.3.3).  In addition, any other special instructions for the Concept Study will be communicated.
7.3.2 Contract Administration and Funding
Unique mission management approaches and organizational arrangements in the selected proposals may require different contract administration and funding arrangements.  Therefore, each PI should specify the proposed teaming arrangement in his/her proposal, including any special contracting mechanisms that are considered especially desirable for NASA’s award to the team.  In this regard, NASA strongly encourages cost-type contracts with incentives, particularly where performance incentives are measured based on delivery of calibrated/validated science data products.

It is anticipated that NASA will provide up to $1.2M to each selected New Frontiers Mission investigation and up to $250K for each MO investigation (if applicable; see Section 5.1) to perform a Phase A Concept Study to be initiated as soon as possible after notification.

7.3.3 Confirmation of Investigations for Implementation
The product of the Phase A studies will be Concept Study reports as specified in the document entitled Guidelines and Criteria for the Phase A Concept Study in the NFPL.  The scientific, technical, management, cost, and other aspects of the Concept Study will be assessed according to the criteria contained in this document by a panel composed of individuals who are experts in each of the areas to be evaluated.  Past performance of the partners in the implementation of previous or current space missions, particularly cost capped missions such as NASA’s Explorer or Discovery missions, will be one of the factors used in assessing cost risk, schedule risk and the risk of failure in technical performance.  This assessment of the Concept Study will be similar to the proposal evaluation, but will consider the additional detailed information provided.  However, in this case, NASA may request in-person presentations and/or site visits to review the Phase A Concept Study with the investigation teams. However, even if innovative cost features are included, selected investigations that are unable to show an unencumbered reserve at the time of their confirmation for development (i.e., at the end of Phase B) of at least 25 percent of all development costs in Phases C and D (excluding the ELV and RPS costs) are likely to be judged as having an unacceptably high cost risk and, therefore, not confirmed for further development.

If any change in scientific scope is introduced as a result of the Concept Study, this evaluation will include a reexamination of the scientific merit of the investigation.  In all cases, the total cost to NASA, the technical merit and feasibility of the science investigation, and the feasibility of implementing the mission will be evaluated.  A complete assessment of the technical approach, the management, the Phase B plans, and the cost risk will be integrated to evaluate the probability that the implementation approach will support the science objectives.  In addition, there will be a detailed evaluation of plans and provisions for E/PO, new technology, and Small Business and Minority Institutions developed as part of the Phase A Concept Study.

As a result of the evaluation of the Concept Studies, the Associate Administrator for Space Science expects to continue one New Frontiers mission investigation to proceed to Phase B through the exercise of an option under that team’s existing contract with NASA. NASA will not continue funding for investigations that are not selected to proceed; any such investigations are free to repropose to future suitable AOs.  Any MO investigations as may have been selected for Phase A study may or may not be confirmed for implementation.

MOs may or may not have a Phase A or Phase B based on their perceived readiness to proceed.

7.3.4 Confirmation of Investigations for Phases Subsequent to Phase A
At the completion of the Phase B study (i.e., after the PDR) for the selected and confirmed investigation, an independent review team, chartered by the Associate Administrator for Space Science, will conduct a Confirmation Assessment, the results of which will be presented to the Associate Administrator in a formal Confirmation Review in compliance with OSS policy application of NPG 7120.5B Approval process.  The organization designated by NASA to implement the investigation may also choose to hold a Confirmation Readiness Review prior to the Confirmation Review.  The PI, the independent review team Chairperson, and a representative of the implementing organization will present results of these reviews to the Associate Administrator for Space Science at the Confirmation Review, who will then decide whether or not to confirm the mission(s) for implementation (Phases C and D).  This decision will be based on the project’s readiness to proceed to design and development and programmatic considerations such as cost, schedule, the ability to achieve the scientific objectives delineated in the proposal, and the completeness of the project’s Level I requirements.  Missions not confirmed for implementation may be sent back for additional study or may be terminated.  NASA will not expend additional funds on nonconfirmed and terminated missions. Once the Associate Administrator for Space Science has confirmed a mission for implementation, no subsequent rephrasing of funds from Phase E into the Earlier Phase C/D will be permitted.

7.4 Opportunity for Debriefing of Nonselected Proposers

Proposers of investigations that are not selected will be notified in writing and offered oral debriefings for themselves and a representative from each of their main partners (if any).  Such debriefings may be in person at NASA Headquarters or, by telephone if the investigation team prefers.  In the former case, proposers may not use NASA funds to defray travel costs.  In either case, a senior representative from the key institution(s) involved in a proposal may participate in such debriefings in addition to the proposing PI.

8.0 Schedule of Solicitation

The following schedule describes the major milestones for this New Frontiers AO:
 
AO release October 10, 2003
Preproposal Conference November 13, 2003
Notice of Intent due December 12, 2003
Proposal deadline, 4:30 p.m. ET February 13, 2004
Non-U.S. Letter of Endorsement due (with proposal) February 13, 2004
Selections announced (target) July 30,  2004
Concept Study due (target) Selection +7 months
Confirmation for flight (target) Selection + 10 months

9.0 Conclusion

The New Frontiers Program represents a challenging new way for NASA to accomplish important scientific exploration of the Solar System.  It provides an opportunity to execute science investigations of medium scope at the forefront of planetary science, as well as to generate opportunities to enhance education and engage the public in the excitement of science discoveries.  NASA invites both the U.S. and international science communities to submit proposals for New Frontiers Mission investigations and MO investigations in response to this Announcement.
 
 
 

Colleen N. Hartman
Director
Solar System Exploration Division
 
 
 

Edward J. Weiler
Associate Administrator
 for Space Science