SBIR/STTR 2001-1 National Aeronautics and Space Administration SMALL BUSINESS INNOVATION RESEARCH (SBIR) & TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER (STTR) Program Solicitations Opening Date: March 28, 2001 Closing Date: June 6, 2001 An electronic version of this document is located at: http://sbir.nasa.gov Cover: The TransHab inflatable living quarters is shown under test at NASA’s Johnson Space Center for potential utilization by the International Space Station, as shown in the inset. Cover layout: Dr. James Kalshoven, Jay Friedlander and Vivek Dwivedi of the NASA Goddard Space Flight Center. TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. PROGRAM DESCRIPTION 1 1.1 Introduction 1 1.2 Program Authority 1 1.3 Program Management 2 1.4 Three-Phase Program 2 1.5 Eligibility Requirements 3 1.6 General Information 4 2. DEFINITIONS 4 2.1 Small Business Concern 4 2.2 Research Institution 5 2.3 Research or Research and Development (R/R&D) 5 2.4 Cooperative Research or Research and Development 5 2.5 Subcontract 5 2.6 Socially and Economically Disadvantaged Small Business Concern 5 2.7 Socially and Economically Disadvantaged Individual 5 2.8 Women-Owned Small Business 6 2.9 United States 6 2.10 Commercialization 6 3. PROPOSAL PREPARATION INSTRUCTIONS AND REQUIREMENTS 6 3.1 Fundamental Considerations 6 3.2 Phase I Proposal Requirements 6 3.3 Phase II Proposal Requirements 10 4. METHOD OF SELECTION AND EVALUATION CRITERIA 13 4.1 Phase I Proposals 13 4.2 Phase II Proposals 14 4.3 Debriefing of Unsuccessful Offerors 15 5. CONSIDERATIONS 16 5.1 Awards 16 5.2 Phase I Reporting 17 5.3 Payment Schedule for Phase I 17 5.4 Proprietary Information 17 5.5 Non-NASA Reviewers 17 5.6 Release of Proposal Information 17 5.7 Final Disposition of Proposals 18 5.8 Rights in Data Developed Under SBIR/STTR Contracts 18 5.9 Copyrights 18 5.10 Patents 18 5.11 Cost Sharing 18 5.12 Profit or Fee 19 5.13 Joint Ventures and Limited Partnerships 19 5.14 Similar Awards and Prior Work 19 5.15 Contractor Commitments 19 5.16 Additional Information 20 5.17 Property 20 6. SUBMISSION OF PROPOSALS 21 6.1 The Submission Process 21 6.2 Internet Submission 21 6.3 Postal Submission 22 6.4 Acknowledgment of Proposal Receipt 22 6.5 Withdrawal of Proposals 23 7. SCIENTIFIC AND TECHNICAL INFORMATION SOURCES 23 7.1 NASA SBIR/STTR Homepage 23 7.2 NASA Commercial Technology Network 23 7.3 NASA Technology Utilization Services 23 7.4 United States Small Business Administration 23 7.5 National Technical Information Service 24 8. RESEARCH TOPICS FOR SBIR AND STTR 25 8.1 SBIR Research Topics 25 8.1.1 Aerospace Technology 27 8.1.2 Biological and Physical Research 49 8.1.3 Earth Science 71 8.1.4 Human Exploration and Development of Space 97 8.1.5 Space Science 117 8.2 STTR Research Topics 141 8.2.1 Human Operations in Space: Intelligent Medical Systems 142 8.2.2 Turbomachinery: Ultra-Efficient Engine Technology 142 8.2.3 Materials and Structures: Materials Development 144 8.2.4 Launch and Payload Processing Systems 145 9. SUBMISSION FORMS AND CERTIFICATIONS 149 9.1 SBIR Forms and Certifications 150 9.1.1 FORM 9A – SBIR Proposal Cover 150 9.1.2 FORM 9B – SBIR Proposal Summary 153 9.1.3 FORM 9C – SBIR Summary Budget 155 9.1.4 SBIR Check List 158 9.2 STTR Forms and Certifications 159 9.2.1 FORM 9A – STTR Proposal Cover 159 9.2.2 FORM 9B – STTR Proposal Summary 162 9.2.3 FORM 9C – STTR Summary Budget 164 9.2.4 Model Cooperative Agreement 167 9.2.5 Model Allocation of Rights Agreement 168 9.2.6 STTR Check List 172 APPENDIX A: PHASE I SAMPLE TABLE OF CONTENTS 173 APPENDIX B: SAMPLE FORMAT FOR BRIEFING CHART 173 2001 NASA SBIR/STTR Program Solicitations 1. Program Description 1.1 Introduction This document includes two NASA program solicitations with separate research areas under which small business concerns (SBCs) are invited to submit proposals: the Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) program and the Small Business Technology Transfer (STTR) program. In the past, NASA has issued separate SBIR and STTR solicitations. Because of the similarities in the execution of these programs, this single document is being issued for FY 2001. The STTR Program is modeled on the SBIR program with the additional purpose to encourage the transfer of the intellectual concepts and ideas resident in our nation’s non-profit Research Institutes (RIs). The STTR program allows the principal investigator (PI) to be employed at the RI, while the SBIR program requires that the PI have primary employment at the SBC. In addition, STTR proposals must include a formal cooperative research agreement between the SBC and the RI. SBIR proposals may involve collaboration between the SBC and other organizations, including a RI. For the STTR program, not less than 40 percent of the work (amount requested including cost sharing, less fee, if any) is to be performed by the SBC as the prime contractor, and not less than 30 percent of the work is to be performed by the RI. For the SBIR Program, not less than 2/3 of the work is to be performed by the SBC as the prime contractor during Phase I, and not less than 50 percent of the work is to be performed by the SBC as the prime contractor during Phase II. This document contains program background information, outlines eligibility requirements for participants, describes the three program phases, and provides information for submitting responsive proposals. The 2001 Solicitation period for Phase I proposals begins March 28, 2001 and ends June 6, 2001. The purposes of the SBIR/STTR programs, as established by law, are to stimulate technological innovation in the private sector; to strengthen the role of SBCs in meeting federal research and development needs; to increase the commercial application of these research results; and to encourage participation of socially and economically disadvantaged persons and women-owned small businesses. To be eligible for selection, a proposal must be based on an innovation having high technical or scientific merit that is responsive to a NASA need described herein, and which offers potential commercial application. Proposals must be submitted via the internet (http://sbir.nasa.gov) and include all relevant documentation. Unsolicited proposals will not be accepted. A proposal directed towards system studies, market research, routine engineering development of existing products or proven concepts and modifications of existing products without innovative changes is considered non-responsive. Selection preference will be given to eligible proposals where the innovations are judged to have significant potential for commercial application. Subject to the availability of funds, NASA plans to select around 300 SBIR and 20 STTR Phase I proposals for negotiation of fixed-price contracts in September 2001. Historically, the ratio of the number of Phase I proposals to awards for SBIR is 7:1 and for STTR is 5:1. 1.2 Program Authority SBIR: This Solicitation is issued pursuant to the authority contained in P.L. 106-554. Government-wide SBIR policy is provided by the Small Business Administration (SBA) through its Policy Directive. The current law authorizes the program through September 30, 2008. STTR: This Solicitation is issued pursuant to the authority contained in P.L. 102-564. Government-wide STTR policy is provided by the SBA through its Policy Directive. The current law authorizes the program through September 30, 2001. 1.3 Program Management The Office of Aerospace Technology provides overall policy direction for the NASA SBIR/STTR programs. The Program Management Office is hosted at the Goddard Space Flight Center. The Procurement Management Office is hosted at Glenn Research Center. The SBIR Program Solicitation is aligned with NASA’s five Strategic Enterprises (http://www.nasa.gov). The needs of all Strategic Enterprises are reflected in the research areas identified in Section 8. The STTR Program Solicitation is aligned with the NASA Centers of Excellence. Each Center of Excellence par- ticipates every other year. JPL does not participate in the management of the STTR program. Information regarding the Strategic Enterprises and the NASA Centers can be obtained at the following websites: NASA Strategic Enterprises Aerospace Technology http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/aero Biological and Physical Research http://SpaceResearch.nasa.gov Earth Science http://earth.nasa.gov Human Exploration and Development of Space http://www.hq.nasa.gov/osf/heds/ Space Science http://spacescience.nasa.gov/ NASA Installations Ames Research Center (ARC) http://www.arc.nasa.gov Dryden Flight Research Center (DFRC) http://www.dfrc.nasa.gov Glenn Research Center (GRC) http://www.grc.nasa.gov Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC) http://www.gsfc.nasa.gov Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) http://www.jpl.nasa.gov Johnson Space Center (JSC) http://www.jsc.nasa.gov Kennedy Space Center (KSC) http://www.ksc.nasa.gov Langley Research Center (LaRC) http://www.larc.nasa.gov Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) http://www.msfc.nasa.gov Stennis Space Center (SSC) http://www.ssc.nasa.gov 1.4 Three-Phase Program 1.4.1 Phase I. The purpose of Phase I is to determine the scientific, technical, and commercial merit and feasibility of the proposed innovation, and the quality of the SBC’s performance with a relatively small NASA investment before consideration of further Federal support in Phase II. Successful completion of Phase I objectives is a prereq- uisite to Phase II consideration. Phase I must concentrate on establishing the scientific or technical merit and feasibility of the proposed innovation and on providing a basis for continued development in Phase II. Proposals must conform to the format described in Section 3.2. Evaluation and selection criteria are described in Section 4.1. NASA is solely responsible for deter- mining the relative merit of proposals, their selection for award, and judging the value of Phase I results. Maximum funding and period of performance for Phase I: SBIR STTR Maximum Contract Value $ 70,000 $ 100,000 Duration 6 months 12 months 1.4.2 Phase II. The objective of Phase II is to continue the Research or Research and Development (R/R&D) effort from Phase I. Only SBCs awarded Phase I contracts are eligible for Phase II funding agreements, and only at the Federal Agency, which awarded the Phase I project. The Government is not obligated to fund any specific Phase II proposal. Contractors have up to 24 months to complete the effort and submit their final report. Phase II projects are chosen as a result of competitive evaluations based on selection criteria provided in Section 4.2. Phase II proposals are more comprehensive than those required for Phase I and are to be prepared in accordance with instructions provided in the Phase I contract. Maximum funding and period of performance for Phase II: SBIR STTR Maximum Contract Value $ 600,000 $ 500,000 Duration 24 months 24 months 1.4.3 Phase III. NASA may award Phase III contracts for products or services with non-SBIR/STTR funds. Phase I and Phase II awards satisfy the requirements of the Competition in Contracting Act for subsequent NASA Phase III contracting. The small business is also expected to use non-Federal capital to pursue private sector applications of the R/R&D effort. 1.5 Eligibility Requirements 1.5.1 Small Business Concern. Only firms qualifying as SBCs, as defined in Section 2.1, are eligible to participate in these programs. Socially and economically disadvantaged and women-owned SBCs are particularly encouraged to propose. 1.5.2 Place of Performance. For both Phase I and Phase II, the R/R&D must be performed in the United States (Section 2.9). 1.5.3 Principal Investigator The primary employment of the PI must be with the SBC under the SBIR Program, while under the STTR Program the PI may be employed with the RI. REQUIREMENTS SBIR STTR Primary Employment PI must be with the SBC PI may be employed with the RI or SBC Employment Certification The offeror must certify in the proposal that the primary employment of the PI will be with the SBC at the time of award and during the con- duct of the project. Primary employment means that the PI will average a minimum of 20 hours per week with the SBC, and that more than half of the PI’s total employed time (in- cluding all concurrent employers, consulting, and self-employed time) is spent with the SBC. Primary employment with a small business concern precludes full-time employment at another organization. If the PI does not meet these primary employment requirements, the offeror must explain how these requirements will be met if the proposal is selected for con- tract negotiations that may lead to an award. If the PI is not an employee of the SBC, the offeror must describe the management process to ensure SBC control of the project. REQUIREMENTS SBIR STTR Co-Principal Investigators Not Acceptable Not Acceptable Misrepresentation of Qualifications Will result in rejection of the proposal or termi- nation of the contract Will result in rejection of the proposal or termination of the contract Substitution of PIs Must receive advanced written approval from NASA Must receive advanced written approval from NASA 1.6 General Information 1.6.1 Solicitation Distribution. This 2001 SBIR/STTR Program Solicitation is available via the NASA SBIR/STTR homepage (http://sbir.nasa.gov). SBCs are encouraged to check the SBIR/STTR homepage for program updates. Any updates or corrections to the Solicitation will be posted there. If the SBC has difficulty accessing the Solicitation, contact the Help Desk (Section 1.6.2). 1.6.2 Means of Contacting NASA SBIR/STTR Program (1) NASA SBIR/STTR Homepage: http://sbir.nasa.gov (2) Each of the NASA field installations has its own homepage including strategic planning and program informa- tion. Please consult these homepages as noted in Section 1.3 for more details on the technology requirements within the subtopic areas. (3) Help Desk. For inquiries, requests, and help-related questions, contact via: e-mail: sbir@reisys.com telephone: 301-937-0888 between 8:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m. (Mon.-Fri., Eastern Time) facsimile: 301-937-0204 The requestor must provide the name and telephone number of the person to contact, the organization name and address, and the specific questions or requests. (4) NASA SBIR/STTR Program Manager. Specific information requests that could not be answered by the Help Desk should be mailed to: Paul Mexcur, Program Manager NASA SBIR/STTR Program Management Office Code 712, Building 3, Room 108 Goddard Space Flight Center Greenbelt, MD 20771-0001 1.6.3 Questions About This Solicitation. To ensure fairness, questions relating to the intent and/or content of research topics in this Solicitation cannot be answered during the Phase I solicitation period. Only questions requesting clarification of proposal instructions and administrative matters will be answered. 2. Definitions 2.1 Small Business Concern An SBC is one that, at the time of award of Phase I and Phase II funding agreements, meets the following criteria: (1) Is independently owned and operated, is not dominant in the field of operation in which it is proposing, has its principal place of business located in the United States, and is organized for profit; (2) Is at least 51 percent owned, or in the case of a publicly-owned business, at least 51 percent of its voting stock is owned by United States citizens or lawfully admitted permanent resident aliens; and (3) Has, including its affiliates, a number of employees not exceeding 500 and meets the other regulatory requirements found in 13 CFR Part 121. Business concerns, other than investment companies licensed, or state development companies qualifying under the Small Business Investment Act of 1958, 15 U.S.C. 661, et seq., are affiliates of one another when, either directly or indirectly, (1) one concern controls or has the power to control the other or (2) a third party controls or has the power to control both. Control can be exercised through common ownership, common management, and contractual relationships. The terms "affiliates" and "number of employees" are defined in greater detail in 13 CFR 121. Small business concerns include sole proprietorships, partnerships, corporations, joint ventures, associations, or cooperatives. Eligible joint ventures are limited to no more than 49 percent participation by foreign business entities. 2.2 Research Institution A U.S. research institution is one that is: (1) a contractor-operated federally funded research and development cen- ter, as identified by the National Science Foundation in accordance with the government-wide Federal Acquisition Regulation issued in section 35(c)(1) of the Office of Federal Procurement Policy Act (or any successor legislation thereto), or (2) a non-profit research institution as defined in section 4(5) of the Stevenson-Wydler Technology Innovation Act of 1980, or (3) a non-profit college or university. 2.3 Research or Research and Development (R/R&D) Any activity that is (1) a systematic, intensive study directed toward greater knowledge or understanding of the subject studied, (2) a systematic study directed specifically toward applying new knowledge to meet a recognized need, or (3) a systematic application of knowledge toward the production of useful materials, devices, systems, or methods, including the design, development, and improvement of prototypes and new processes to meet specific requirements. 2.4 Cooperative Research or Research and Development For purposes of the NASA STTR Program, cooperative R/R&D is that which is to be conducted jointly by the SBC and the RI in which at least 40 percent of the work (amount requested, including cost sharing if any, less fee if any) is performed by the SBC and at least 30 percent of the work is performed by the RI. 2.5 Subcontract Any agreement, other than one involving an employer-employee relationship, entered into by a Federal Government contractor calling for supplies or services required solely for the performance of the original funding agreement. 2.6 Socially and Economically Disadvantaged Small Business Concern A socially and economically disadvantaged SBC is one that is: (1) at least 51 percent owned by (i) an Indian tribe or a native Hawaiian organization or (ii) one or more socially and economically disadvantaged individuals; and (2) whose management and daily business operations are controlled by one or more socially and economically disadvantaged individuals. 2.7 Socially and Economically Disadvantaged Individual A member of any of the following groups: Black Americans, Hispanic Americans, Native Americans, Asian-Pacific Americans, Subcontinent-Asian Americans, other groups designated from time to time by SBA to be socially disadvantaged, or any other individual found to be socially and economically disadvantaged by SBA pursuant to Section 8(a) of the Small Business Act, 15 U.S.C. 637(a). 2.8 Women-Owned Small Business A women-owned SBC is one that is at least 51 percent owned by a woman or women who also control and operate it. "Control" in this context means exercising the power to make policy decisions. "Operate" in this context means being actively involved in the day-to-day management. 2.9 United States Means the 50 states, the territories and possessions of the United States, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands, and the District of Columbia. 2.10 Commercialization Commercialization is a process of developing markets and producing and delivering products or services for sale (whether by the originating party or by others). As used here, commercialization includes both Government and non-government markets. 3. Proposal Preparation Instructions and Requirements 3.1 Fundamental Considerations Multiple Proposal Submissions. An offeror may submit different proposals in response to any number of subtopics, but every proposal must be based on an unique innovation, must be limited in scope to just one subtopic, and may be submitted only under that subtopic. Submitting substantially equivalent proposals to several subtopics is not permitted and may result in all such proposals being rejected without evaluation. End Deliverables. The deliverable item at the end of a Phase I contract shall be a comprehensive report that justifies, validates, and defends the experimental and theoretical work accomplished. Delivery of a product or service with the Phase I report may be desirable, but it is not a requirement. Deliverable items for Phase II contracts shall include products or services in addition to professional quality reports of further developments or applications of the Phase I results. These deliverables may include prototypes, models, software, or complete products or services. The reported results of Phase II must address and provide the basis for validating the innovation and the potential for implementation of commercial applications. 3.2 Phase I Proposal Requirements 3.2.1 General Requirements Page Limitation. A Phase I proposal shall not exceed a total of 25 standard 8 1/2 x 11 inch (21.6 x 27.9 cm) pages. A page is defined as a single side of a piece of paper. All four proposal items required in Section 3.2.2 will be included within this total. Each page shall be numbered consecutively at the bottom. Margins should be 1.0 inch (2.5 cm). Proposals exceeding the 25 page limitation will be rejected during administrative screening. Web site references, product samples, videotapes, slides, or other ancillary items will not be accepted. Offerors are requested not to use the entire 25-page allowance unless necessary. Type Size. No type size smaller than 10 point is to be used for text or tables, except as legends on reduced drawings. Proposals prepared with smaller font sizes will be rejected without consideration. Classified Information. NASA does not accept proposals that contain classified information. 3.2.2 Format Requirements. All required items of information must be covered in the proposal. The space allocated to each part of the technical proposal will depend on the project chosen and the offeror's approach. Each proposal submitted must contain the following four items in the order presented: (1) Proposal Cover (Form 9A), signed, as page 1 (2) Proposal Summary (Form 9B), as page 2 (3) Technical Proposal (11 Parts in order as specified in Section 3.2.4), including all graphics, and starting at page 3 with a table of contents (4) Summary Budget (Form 9C) 3.2.3 Proposal Cover and Proposal Summary Page 1: Proposal Cover (Form 9A). A sample copy of the Proposal Cover is provided in Section 9. The offeror shall provide complete information for each item and submit the form as required in Section 6. The proposal project title shall be concise and descriptive of the proposed effort. The title should not use acronyms or words like "Development of" or "Study of." The NASA research topic title must not be used as the proposal title. Page 2: Proposal Summary (Form 9B). A sample copy of the Proposal Summary is provided in Section 9. The offeror shall provide complete information for each item and submit Form 9B as required in Section 6. The technical abstract portion is limited to 200 words and shall summarize the implications of the approach and the anticipated results of both Phase I and Phase II. Potential commercial applications of the technology should also be presented. If the technical abstract is judged to be non-responsive to the subtopic, the proposal will be rejected without further evaluation. 3.2.4 Technical Proposal. This part of the submission shall not contain any budget data and must consist of all eleven parts listed below in the given order. All parts must be numbered and titled; parts that are not applicable must be noted as “Not Applicable.” Part 1: Table of Contents. Page 3 of the proposal shall begin with a brief table of contents indicating the page numbers of each of the parts of the proposal. A sample table of contents is included in Appendix A. Part 2: Identification and Significance of the Innovation. The first paragraph of Part 2 shall contain: (1) A clear and succinct statement of the specific innovation proposed, and why it is an innovation, and (2) A brief explanation of how the innovation is relevant and important to meeting the technology need described in the subtopic. The initial paragraph shall contain no more than 200 words. NASA will reject proposals that lack explanation of the innovation. In subsequent paragraphs, Part 2 may also include appropriate background and elaboration to explain the proposed innovation. Part 3: Technical Objectives. State the specific objectives of the Phase I R/R&D effort including the technical questions that must be answered to determine the feasibility of the proposed innovation. Part 4: Work Plan. Phase I R/R&D should address the objectives and questions cited in Part 3. The work plan should indicate what, where, and how it will be done. The methods planned to achieve each objective or task should be discussed in detail. Schedules, task descriptions and assignments, resource allocations, estimated task hours for each key personnel, and planned accomplishments including project milestones shall be included. Part 5: Related R/R&D. Describe significant current and/or previous R/R&D that is directly related to the proposal including any conducted by the PI or by the offeror. Describe how it relates to the proposed effort and any planned coordination with outside sources. The offeror must persuade reviewers of his or her awareness of key recent R/R&D conducted by others in the specific subject area. At the offeror's option, this section may include concise bibliographic references in support of the proposal if they are confined to activities directly related to the proposed work. Part 6: Key Personnel and Bibliography of Directly Related Work. Identify key personnel involved in Phase I activities whose expertise and functions are essential to the success of the project. Provide bibliographic information including directly related education and experience. The PI is considered key to the success of the effort and must make a substantial commitment to the project. The following requirements are applicable: Functions. The functions of the PI are: planning and directing the project; leading it technically and making substantial personal contributions during its implementation; serving as the primary contact with NASA on the project; and ensuring that the work proceeds according to contract agreements. Competent management of PI functions is essential to project success. The Phase I proposal shall describe the nature of the PI's activities and the amount of time that the PI will personally apply on the project. The amount of time the PI proposes to spend on the project must be acceptable to the NASA contracting officer. Qualifications. The qualifications and capabilities of the proposed PI and the basis for PI selection are to be clearly presented in the proposal. NASA has the sole right to accept or reject a substitute PI based on factors such as education, experience, demonstrated ability and competence, and any other evidence related to the specific assignment. Eligibility. This part shall also establish and confirm the eligibility of the PI (Section 1.5.3), and indicate the extent to which other proposals recently submitted or planned for submission in 2001 and existing projects commit the time of PI concurrently with this proposed activity. Any attempt to circumvent the restriction on PIs working more than half-time for an academic or a non-profit organization by substituting an ineligible PI will result in rejection of the proposal. Part 7: Relationship with Phase II or Future R/R&D. State the anticipated results of the proposed R/R&D effort if the project is successful (through Phase I and Phase II). Discuss the significance of the Phase I effort in providing a foundation for the Phase II R/R&D continuation. Part 8: Company Information and Facilities. Provide adequate information to allow the evaluators to assess the ability of the offeror to carry out the proposed Phase I and projected Phase II and Phase III activities. The offeror should describe the relevant facilities and equipment, their availability, and those to be acquired, to support the proposed activities. NASA will not fund the purchase of equipment, instrumentation, or facilities under Phase I contracts as a direct cost. Special tooling may be allowed. (Section 5.17) The capability of the offeror to perform the proposed activities and bring a resulting product or service to market must be indicated. Qualifications of the offeror in marketing related products or services or in raising capital should be presented. Part 9: Subcontracts and Consultants. The SBC may establish business arrangements with other entities or individuals to participate in performance of the proposed R/R&D effort. The offeror must describe all subcon- tracting or other business arrangements, and identify the relevant organizations and/or individuals with whom arrangements are planned. The expertise to be provided by the entities must be described in detail, as well as the functions, services, number of hours and labor rates, and their extent of the effort. The proposal must include a signed statement by each participating organization or individual that they will be available at the times required for the purposes and extent of effort described in the proposal. Failure to provide certification(s) may result in rejection of the proposal. Subcontractors’ and consultants’ work must be performed in the United States. SBIR STTR The proposed business arrangements must not exceed one-third of the research and/or analytical work (amount requested including cost sharing if any, less fee, if any). The proposed business arrangements with individuals or organizations other than the RI must not exceed 30 percent of the work (amount requested including cost sharing if any, less fee, if any). Part 10: Commercial Applications Potential. The Phase I proposal shall forecast the commercial potential of the project assuming success through Phase II. The proposer will be required to address the commercial, non- NASA applications in detail in the Phase II proposal (Sections 3.3 and 4.2.2). Part 11: Similar Proposals and Awards. A firm may elect to submit proposals for essentially equivalent work under other federal program solicitations. However, NASA will not fund duplicate proposals for essentially equivalent work under any Government program. The offeror will inform NASA of related proposals and awards and clearly state whether the SBC has submitted currently active proposals for similar work under other Federal Government program solicitations or intends to submit proposals for such work to other agencies. For all such cases, the following information is required: (1) The name and address of the agencies to which proposals have been or will be submitted, or from which awards have been received; (2) Dates of such proposal submissions or awards; (3) Title, number, and date of solicitations under which proposals have been or will be submitted or awards received; (4) The specific applicable research topic for each such proposal submitted or award received; (5) Titles of research projects; (6) Name and title of the PI/project manager for each proposal that has been or will be submitted, or from which awards have been received. 3.2.5 Proposed Budget Summary Budget (Form 9C). The offeror shall complete the Summary Budget, following the instructions pro- vided with the form (Section 9) and include it and any explanation sheets, if needed, as the last page(s) of the proposal. Information shall be submitted to explain the offeror’s plans for use of the requested funds to enable NASA to determine whether the proposed budget is fair and reasonable. Property. Proposed costs for materials may be included. "Materials" means property that may be incorporated or attached to a deliverable end item or that may be consumed or expended in performing the contract. It includes assemblies, components, parts, raw materials, and small tools that may be consumed in normal use. Any purchase of equipment or products under a SBIR/STTR contract using NASA funds should be American-made to the extent possible. NASA will not fund facility acquisition under Phase I as a direct cost (Section 5.17). Travel. Travel during Phase I is not normally allowed to prove technical merit and feasibility of the proposed innovation. However, where the offeror deems travel to be essential for these purposes, it is necessary to limit it to one person, one trip to the sponsoring NASA installation. Proposed travel must be described as to purpose and benefits in proving feasibility, and is subject to negotiation and approval by the contracting officer. Trips to conferences are not allowed under the Phase I contract. Profit. A profit or fee may be included in the proposed budget as noted in Section 5.12. Cost Sharing. See Section 5.11. 3.2.7 Addendum (Applicable for SBIR awards only) The Small Business Administration requires offerors, who have received more than 15 Phase II awards from all agencies in the prior 5 fiscal years, to report those awards and their progress toward commercialization. The listing of awards shall be included in a separate "Addendum: Phase II History" that will not be counted against the Phase I 25-page proposal limit. The Addendum should be concise. Information for each Phase II contract shall include: (1) Name of awarding agency (2) Date of award and date of completion (3) Funding agreement number and amount (4) Topic or subtopic name (5) Project title (6) Sources, dates and amounts of federal and/or private sector Phase III follow-on funding agreements (7) Post-Phase II commercialization activities, including development, marketing, sales, and projections 3.3 Phase II Proposal Requirements 3.3.1 General Requirements The Phase I contract will serve as a request for proposal (RFP) for the Phase II follow-on project. Phase II proposals are more comprehensive than those required for Phase I. Phase II proposals are required to be submitted electronically by utilizing the electronic handbook system hosted on the NASA SBIR homepage (http://sbir.nasa.gov). Submission of a Phase II proposal is strictly voluntary and NASA assumes no responsibility for any proposal preparation expenses. Page Limitation. A Phase II proposal shall not exceed a total of 50 standard 8 1/2 x 11 inch (21.6 x 27.9 cm) pages. A page is defined as a single side of a piece of paper. All parts required in Section 3.3.2 will be included within this total. Each page shall be numbered consecutively at the bottom. Margins should be 1.0 inch (2.5 cm). Proposals exceeding the 50-page limitation will be rejected during administrative screening. Type Size. No type size smaller than 10 point is to be used for text or tables, except as legends on reduced drawings. Proposals prepared with smaller font sizes will be rejected without consideration. Classified Information. NASA does not accept proposals that contain classified information. 3.3.2 Proposal Contents. Proposals shall be prepared in the following order. Failure to include any requested information in the proposal may make it non-responsive to the RFP. Budget data should be strictly limited to Part 13. A proposal omitting any part will be considered non-responsive to this Solicitation and may be rejected during administrative screening. The proposal must consist of all 13 parts numbered and in the following order: Part 1: Proposal Cover. Part 2: Proposal Summary. Part 3: Table of Contents. Part 4: Results of the Phase I Project. Briefly describe how Phase I has proven the feasibility of the innovation, provided a rationale for both NASA and commercial applications, and demonstrated the ability of the offeror to conduct R/R&D. Part 5: Technical Objectives, Approach and Work Plan. Define the specific objectives of the Phase II research and technical approach; and provide a work plan defining specific tasks, performance schedules, milestones, and deliverables. Part 6: Company Information. Describe the capability of the firm to carry out Phase II and Phase III activities including its organization, operations, number of employees, R/R&D capabilities, and experience relevant to the work proposed. Part 7: Facilities and Equipment. This section shall provide adequate information to allow the evaluators to assess the ability of the SBC to carry out the proposed Phase II activities. The offeror should describe the relevant facilities and equipment currently available, and those to be purchased, to support the proposed ac- tivities. NASA will not fund the acquisition of equipment, instrumentation, or facilities under Phase II contracts as a direct cost. Special tooling may be allowed. (Section 5.17) If an offeror proposes the use of unique or one-of-a-kind Government facilities, a statement describing the uniqueness of the facility and its availability to the offeror at specified times, signed by the appropriate Gov- ernment official must be included with the proposal. Proposals lacking this signed statement may be rejected without evaluation. Note: If the proposal does not require the use of Government facilities or equipment, the offeror shall so state in this part of the proposal. Part 8: Key Personnel. Identify the key personnel for the project, confirm their availability for Phase II, and discuss their qualifications in terms of education, work experience, and accomplishments relevant to the project. Part 9: Subcontracts and Consultants. Describe in detail any subcontract, consultant, or other business arrangements involving participation in performance of the proposed R/R&D effort and provide written evidence of their availability for the project. The proposal must include a commitment from each subcontractor and/or consultant that they will be available at the times required for the purposes and extent of effort described in the proposal. Subcontractors’ and consultants’ work must be performed in the United States. Failure to provide subcontractor/consultant commitments may result in rejection of proposal. SBIR Phase II Proposal STTR Phase II Proposal A minimum of one-half of the work (contract cost less profit) must be performed by the proposing SBC. A minimum of 40 percent of the work must be performed by the proposing SBC and 30 percent by the RI. Part 10: Commercialization and Phase III Plans. Describe plans for commercialization (Phase III) in terms of each of the following areas: (1) Product or Service Commercial Feasibility: Provide a description of the (a) contemplated commercial product and/or service, the corresponding commercial venture, and the unique competitive advantage of both; and (b) technical obstacles to commercial applications, as well as plans to address them. (2) Market Feasibility and Competition: Describe: (a) the target market niche including the distinction between U.S. Government and other markets; (b) estimated potential market size in terms of revenues to be realized by the offer from U.S. Government markets and, separately, from other markets; (c) competitive environment in terms of present and likely competing similar and alternative technologies, and corresponding competing domestic and foreign entities; (d) significant developments within the targeted business sector; and (e) offeror’s ability, if any, to protect relevant technology with patents or rights to exclusive access. (3) Strategic Relevance to the Offeror: Describe the relevance of the targeted commercial venture to the offeror's: (a) current business segments; (b) relative position with respect to its competitors; and (c) strategic planning for the next 5 years. (4) Key Management, Technical Personnel and Organizational Structure: Describe: (a) the skills and experience of key management and technical personnel relevant to bringing innovative technology to commercial application, (b) current organizational structure, and (c) plans and timeline for obtaining the balance of all necessary key business development expertise and other staffing requirements. (5) Production and Operations: Describe: (a) business development progress to date regarding the contemplated commercial venture; (b) obstacles, plans, and associated milestones regarding all key business development elements; and (c) sources and components of private physical resources committed to date and plans for obtaining the balance of the necessary physical resources. (6) Financial Planning: Describe: (a) the amounts and sources of private financial resources expended and committed to date with respect to the technology development project, and with respect to business development of the targeted commercial venture; (b) significant requirements of potential investors, creditors, and insurers of the venture; (c) proforma statement of cash flow with respect to the targeted commercial venture that includes best estimates of at least the following major components and timing thereof: capital investment, revenues, principal and interest payments, depreciation of relevant assets, other operating expenses; and (d) evidence of the offeror’s current financial strength (audited or unaudited financial statements may be appended to address this). Part 11: Capital Commitments Supporting Phase II and Phase III. Describe and document capital commitments from non-SBIR/STTR sources or from internal SBC funds for pursuit of Phase II and Phase III. Offerors for Phase II contracts are strongly urged to obtain non-SBIR/STTR funding support commitments for follow-on Phase III activities and additional support of Phase II from parties other than the proposing firm. Funding support commitments must provide that a specific, substantial amount will be made available to the firm to pursue the stated Phase II and/or Phase III objectives. They must indicate the source, date, and conditions or contingencies under which the funds will be made available. Alternatively, self-commitments of the same type and magnitude that are required from outside sources can be considered. If Phase III will be funded internally, offerors should describe their financial position. Evidence of funding support commitments from outside parties must be provided in writing and should accompany the Phase II proposal. Letters of commitment should specify available funding commitments, other resources to be provided, and any contingent conditions. Expressions of technical interest by such parties in the Phase II research or of potential future financial support are insufficient and will not be accepted as support commitments by NASA. Part 12: Related R/R&D. Describe R/R&D related to the proposed work and affirm that the stated objectives have not already been achieved and that the same development is not presently being pursued elsewhere under contract to the Federal Government. Part 13: Proposal Pricing. Special instructions for pricing the Phase II proposal will be presented in the Phase-I contract and may be provided by the contracting officer. 4. Method of Selection and Evaluation Criteria 4.1 Phase I Proposals Proposals judged to be responsive to the administrative requirements of this Solicitation and having a reasonable potential of meeting a NASA need, as evidenced by the technical abstract included in the Proposal Summary (Form 9B), will be evaluated on a competitive basis. 4.1.1 Evaluation Process. Proposals should provide all information needed for complete evaluation and evaluators are not expected to seek additional information. Evaluations will be performed by NASA scientists and engineers and by qualified experts outside of NASA (including industry, academia, and other Government agencies) as re- quired to determine or verify the merit of a proposal. Offerors should not assume that evaluators are acquainted with the firm, key individuals, or with any experiments or other information. Any pertinent references or publica- tions should be noted in Part 5 of the technical proposal. 4.1.2 Phase I Evaluation Criteria. NASA will give primary consideration to the scientific and technical merit and feasibility of the proposal and its benefit to NASA. Each proposal will be judged and scored on its own merits using the factors described below: Factor 1. Scientific/Technical Merit and Feasibility The proposed R/R&D effort will be evaluated on whether it offers a clearly innovative and feasible technical approach to the NASA problem area described in the subtopic. Specific objectives, approaches and plans for developing and verifying the innovation must demonstrate a clear understanding of the problem and the cur- rent state-of-the-art. The degree of understanding and significance of the risks involved in the proposed innovation must be presented. Factor 2. Experience, Qualifications and Facilities The technical capabilities and experience of the PI or project manager, key personnel, staff, consultants and subcontractors, if any, are evaluated for consistency with the research effort and their degree of commitment and availability. The necessary instrumentation or facilities required must be shown to be adequate and any reliance on external sources, such as Government Furnished Equipment or Facilities, addressed (Section 5.17). Factor 3. Effectiveness of the Proposed Work Plan The work plan will be reviewed for its comprehensiveness, effective use of available resources, cost manage- ment and proposed schedule for meeting the Phase I objectives. The methods planned to achieve each objective or task should be discussed in detail. Factor 4. Commercial Merit and Feasibility The proposal will be evaluated for any potential commercial applications in the private sector or for use by the Federal Government. Scoring of Factors and Weighting: Factors 1, 2, and 3 will be scored numerically with Factor 1 worth 50 percent and Factors 2 and 3 each worth 25 percent. The sum of the scores for Factors 1, 2, and 3 will comprise the Technical Merit score. The score for Commercial Merit will be in the form of an adjectival rating (Excellent, Very Good, Average, Below Average, Poor). For Phase 1 proposals, Technical Merit carries more weight than Commercial Merit. 4.1.3 Selection. After a proposal is reviewed based on the stated evaluation criteria, it will be ranked relative to all other proposals. Selection decisions will consider the recommendations from all Centers, Strategic Enterprises, overall NASA priorities, and program balance. The Source Selection Official has the final authority for choosing the specific proposals for contract negotiation. The list of selections will be posted on the NASA SBIR/STTR web site (http://sbir.nasa.gov). All firms will re- ceive a formal notification letter. Selected firms will be notified of the designated contracting officer at the NASA Center responsible for negotiating the Phase I contract. 4.2 Phase II Proposals 4.2.1 Evaluation Process. The Phase II evaluation process is similar to the Phase I process. Each proposal will be reviewed by NASA scientists and engineers and by qualified experts outside of NASA as needed. In addition, those proposals with high technical merit will be reviewed for commercial merit. NASA uses a peer review panel to evaluate commercial merit. Panel membership will include non-NASA personnel expert in business development and technol- ogy commercialization. 4.2.2 Evaluation Factors. The evaluation of Phase II proposals under this Solicitation will apply the following factors: Factor 1. Scientific/Technical Merit and Feasibility The proposed R/R&D effort will be evaluated on its innovativeness, originality, and technical payoff potential if successful, including the degree to which Phase I objectives were met, the feasibility of the innovation, and whether the Phase I results indicate a Phase II project is appropriate. Factor 2. Future Importance and Value to NASA The eventual value of the product, process, or technology results to the NASA mission will be assessed. Factor 3. Capability of the Small Business Concern NASA will assess the capability of the SBC to conduct Phase II based on (a) the validity of the project plans for achieving the stated goals; (b) the qualifications and ability of the project team (Principal Investigator/ Project Manager, company staff, consultants and subcontractors) relative to the proposed research; and (c) the availability of any required equipment and facilities. Factor 4. Commercial Potential. Consideration will be given to the following: (1) Commercial potential of the technology: This includes an assessment of the offeror’s ability to demonstrate: (a) a specific, well-defined commercial product or service based on the technology to be developed; (b) a realistic target market niche of sufficient size; (c) that the targeted commercial product or service has strong potential for uniquely meeting a well-defined need within the target market niche; and (d) a commitment of significant private financial, physical, and technical personnel resources. (2) Demonstrated commercial intent of the offeror: This includes an assessment of: (a) the importance of the targeted commercial venture to the offeror’s current business and strategic planning; (b) a targeted commercial venture that does not rely on continued U.S. Government markets; and (c) the adequacy of all resource commitments for Phase III development of the technology to a state of readiness for commercial application. (3) Capability of the offeror to bring successfully developed technology to commercial application: This includes assessment of the offeror's ability to demonstrate: (a) the offeror’s past success in bringing SBIR/STTR and other innovative technologies to commercial application; (b) well-thought-out business planning; (c) strong likelihood of the offeror’s bringing the remaining necessary private financial, physical, personnel and other resources to bear in a timely way to achieve commercial application of the technology in the not too distant term subsequent to Phase II; and (d) the strength of the current and continued financial viability of the offeror. In applying these commercial criteria, NASA will assess proposal information in terms of credibility, objectivity, reasonableness of key assumptions, independent corroborating evidence, internal consistency, demonstrated awareness of key risk areas and critical business vulnerabilities, and other indicators of sound business analysis and judgment. 4.2.3 Evaluation and Selection. Factors 1, 2, and 3 will be scored numerically with Factor 1 worth 50 percent and Factors 2 and 3 each worth 25 percent. The sum of the scores for Factors 1, 2, and 3 will comprise the Technical Merit score. Proposals receiving high numerical scores will be evaluated and rated for their commercial potential using the criteria listed in Factor 4 and by applying the same adjectival ratings as set forth for Phase I proposals. Each NASA Installation managing Phase I projects will use these factors to evaluate the Phase II proposals it re- ceives that are responsive to the Phase II RFP. Final selections will be based on recommendations from all Installations and Strategic Enterprises; assessments of project value to NASA’s overall programs and plans; and any other evaluations or assessments (particularly of commercial potential) that may become available to the Source Selection Official. 4.3 Debriefing of Unsuccessful Offerors After Phase I and Phase II selection decisions have been announced, debriefings for unsuccessful proposals will be available to the offeror's corporate official or designee via e-mail. Telephone requests for debriefings will not be accepted. Debriefings are not opportunities to reopen selection decisions. They are intended to acquaint the offeror with perceived strengths and weaknesses of the proposal and perhaps identify constructive future action by the offeror. Debriefings will not disclose the identity of the proposal evaluators nor provide proposal scores, rankings in the competition, or the content of, or comparisons with other proposals. 4.3.1 Phase I Debriefings. For Phase I proposals, any request for a debriefing must be made via e-mail to sbir@reisys.com, within 60 days after the selection announcement. Late requests will not be honored. 4.3.2 Phase II Debriefings. To request debriefings on Phase II proposals, offerors must request via e-mail to the Procurement Point of Contact at the appropriate NASA Center (not the SBIR/STTR Program Manager) within 60 days after selection announcement. Late requests will not be honored. 5. Considerations 5.1 Awards 5.1.1 Availability of Funds. Both Phase I and Phase II awards are subject to availability of funds. NASA has no obligation to make any specific number of Phase I or Phase II awards based on this Solicitation, and may elect to make several or no awards in any specific technical topic or subtopic. SBIR STTR ? NASA plans to announce the selection of approximately 300 proposals resulting from this Solicitation, for negotiation of Phase I contracts with values not ex- ceeding $70,000. Following contract negotiations and awards, Phase I contractors will have up to 6 months to carry out their programs, prepare their final reports, and submit Phase II pro- posals. ? NASA anticipates that approximately 40 percent of the successfully completed Phase I projects from the SBIR 2001 Solicitation will be selected for Phase II. Phase II agreements are fixed-price contracts with performance periods not exceeding 24 months and funding not exceeding $600,000. ? NASA plans to announce the selection of approximately 20 proposals resulting from this Solicitation, for negotiation of Phase I contracts with values not ex- ceeding $100,000. Following contract negotiations and awards, Phase I contractors will have up to 12 months to carry out their programs, prepare their final reports, and submit Phase II proposals. ? NASA anticipates that approximately 35 percent of the successfully completed Phase I projects from the STTR 2001 Solicitation will be selected for Phase II. Phase II agreements are fixed-price contracts with performance periods not exceeding 24 months and funding not exceeding $500,000. 5.1.2 Contracting. Fixed-price contracts will be issued for both Phase I and Phase II awards. Simplified contract documentation is employed; however, SBCs selected for award can reduce processing time by examining the pro- curement documents, submitting signed representations and certifications, and responding to the Contracting Officer in a timely manner. NASA will make Phase I model contract and other documents available to the public on the NASA SBIR/STTR homepage (http://sbir.nasa.gov) at the time of the selection announcement. From the time of proposal selection until the award of a contract, only the Contracting Officer is authorized to commit the Government, and all communications must be through the Contracting Officer. 5.2 Phase I Reporting An interim progress report is required when the invoice is submitted at project mid-point in accordance with the payment schedule (Section 5.3). This report shall document progress made on the project and activities required for completion to provide NASA the basis for determining whether the payment is warranted. A final report must be submitted to NASA upon completion of the Phase I R/R&D effort in accordance with con- tract provisions. It shall elaborate the project objectives, work carried out, results obtained, and assessments of technical merit and feasibility. The final report shall include a single page summary as the first page, in a format provided in the Phase I contract, identifying the purpose of the R/R&D effort and describing the findings and results, including the degree to which the Phase I objectives were achieved, and whether the results justify Phase II con- tinuation. The potential applications of the project results in Phase III either for NASA or commercial purposes shall also be described. The proposal summary is to be submitted without restriction for NASA publication. 5.3 Payment Schedule for Phase I Payments can be authorized as follows: one-third at the time of award, one-third at project mid-point after award, and the remainder upon acceptance of the final report by NASA. The first two payments will be made 30 days after receipt of valid invoices. The final payment will be made 30 days after acceptance of the final report, the New Technology Report, and other deliverables as required by the contract. Electronic funds transfer will be employed and offerors will be required to submit account data if selected for contract negotiations. 5.4 Proprietary Information It is NASA's policy to use information (data) included in proposals for evaluation purposes only. Public release of information in any proposal submitted will be subject to existing statutory and regulatory requirements. If informa- tion consisting of a trade secret, proprietary commercial or financial information, or private personal information is provided in a proposal, NASA will treat in confidence the proprietary information provided the following legend appears on the title page of the proposal: "For any purpose other than to evaluate the proposal, this data shall not be disclosed outside the Government and shall not be duplicated, used, or disclosed in whole or in part, provided that if a funding agreement is awarded to the offeror as a result of or in connection with the submission of this data, the Government shall have the right to duplicate, use or disclose the data to the extent provided in the funding agreement. This restriction does not limit the Government's right to use information contained in the data if it is obtained from another source without restriction. The data subject to this restriction are contained in pages _____ of this proposal." 5.5 Non-NASA Reviewers In addition to Government personnel, NASA, at its discretion and in accordance with 18-15.207-71 of the NASA FAR Supplement, may utilize qualified individuals from outside the Government in the proposal review process. Any decision to obtain an outside evaluation shall take into consideration requirements for the avoidance of organizational or personal conflicts of interest and the competitive relationship, if any, between the prospective contractor or subcontractor(s) and the prospective outside evaluator. Any such evaluation will be under agreement with the evaluator that the information (data) contained in the proposal will be used only for evaluation purposes and will not be further disclosed. 5.6 Release of Proposal Information In submitting a proposal, the offeror agrees to permit the Government to disclose publicly the information contained on the Proposal Cover (Form 9A) and the Proposal Summary (Form 9B). Other proposal information (data) is considered to be the property of the offeror, and NASA will protect it from public disclosure to the extent permitted by law. 5.7 Final Disposition of Proposals The Government retains ownership of proposals accepted for evaluation, and such proposals will not be returned to the offeror. Copies of all evaluated Phase I proposals will be retained for one year after the Phase I selections have been made, after which time unsuccessful proposals will be destroyed. Successful proposals will be retained in accordance with contract file regulations. 5.8 Rights in Data Developed Under SBIR/STTR Contracts Rights to data used in, or first produced under, any Phase I or Phase II contract are specified in the clause at FAR 52.227-20, Rights in Data--SBIR/STTR Program. The clause provides for rights consistent with the following: 5.8.1 Non-Proprietary Data. Some data of a general nature are to be furnished to NASA without restriction (i.e., with unlimited rights) and may be published by NASA. These data will normally be limited to the project summaries accompanying any periodic progress reports and the final reports required to be submitted. The requirement will be specifically set forth in any contract resulting from this Solicitation. 5.8.2 Proprietary Data. When data that is required to be delivered under a SBIR/STTR contract qualifies as “proprietary,” i.e., either data developed at private expense that embody trade secrets or are commercial or financial and confidential or privileged, or computer software developed at private expense that is a trade secret, the contractor, if the contractor desires to continue protection of such proprietary data, shall not deliver such data to the Government, but instead shall deliver form, fit, and function data. 5.8.3 Non-Disclosure Period. The Government, for a period of 4 years from acceptance of all items to be delivered under a SBIR/STTR contract, shall use the data, i.e., data first produced by the contractor in performance of the contract, where such data are not generally known, and which data without obligation as to its confidentiality have not been made available to others by the contractor or are not already available to the Government, agrees to use these data for Government purposes. These data shall not be disclosed outside the Government (including disclosure for procurement purposes) during the 4-year period without permission of the contractor, except that such data may be disclosed for use by support contractors under an obligation of confidentiality. After the 4-year period, the Government has a royalty-free license to use, and to authorize others to use on its behalf, these data for Government purposes, but the Government is relieved of all disclosure prohibitions and assumes no liability for unauthorized use by third parties. 5.9 Copyrights Subject to certain licenses granted by the contractor to the Government, the contractor receives copyright to any data first produced by the contractor in the performance of a SBIR/STTR contract. 5.10 Patents The contractor may normally elect title to any inventions made in the performance of a SBIR/STTR contract. The Government receives a nonexclusive license to practice or have practiced for or on behalf of the Government each such invention throughout the world. To the extent authorized by 35 U.S.C. 205, the Government will not make public any information disclosing such inventions for a reasonable time to allow the contractor to file a patent application. Costs associated with patent applications are not allowable. 5.11 Cost Sharing Cost sharing is permitted, but not required for proposals under this Solicitation. Cost sharing, if included, should be shown in the summary budget but not in items labeled "AMOUNT REQUESTED." No profit will be paid on the cost-sharing portion of the contract. 5.12 Profit or Fee Both Phase I and Phase II contracts may include a reasonable profit. The reasonableness of proposed profit is de- termined by the Contracting Officer during contract negotiations. 5.13 Joint Ventures and Limited Partnerships Both joint ventures and limited partnerships are permitted, provided the entity created qualifies as a SBC in accordance with the definition in Section 2.1. A statement of how the workload will be distributed, managed, and charged should be included in the proposal. A copy or comprehensive summary of the joint venture agreement or partnership agreement should be appended to the proposal. This will not count as part of the 25-page limit for the Phase I proposal. 5.14 Similar Awards and Prior Work If an award is made pursuant to a proposal submitted under either SBIR or STTR Solicitation, the firm will be required to certify that it has not previously been paid nor is currently being paid for essentially equivalent work by any agency of the Federal Government. Failure to acknowledge or report similar or duplicate efforts can lead to the termination of contracts or criminal or civil penalties. 5.15 Contractor Commitments Upon award of a contract, the contractor will be required to make certain legal commitments through acceptance of numerous clauses in the Phase I contract. The outline that follows illustrates the types of clauses that will be included. This is not a complete list of clauses to be included in Phase I contracts, nor does it contain specific wording of these clauses. Copies of complete provisions will be made available prior to contract negotiations. 5.15.1 Standards of Work. Work performed under the contract must conform to high professional standards. Analyses, equipment, and components for use by NASA will require special consideration to satisfy the stringent safety and reliability requirements imposed in aerospace applications. 5.15.2 Inspection. Work performed under the contract is subject to Government inspection and evaluation at all reasonable times. 5.15.3 Examination of Records. The Comptroller General (or a duly authorized representative) shall have the right to examine any directly pertinent records of the contractor involving transactions related to the contract. 5.15.4 Default. The Government may terminate the contract if the contractor fails to perform the contracted work. 5.15.5 Termination for Convenience. The contract may be terminated by the Government at any time if it deems termination to be in its best interest, in which case the contractor will be compensated for work performed and for reasonable termination costs. 5.15.6 Disputes. Any dispute concerning the contract that cannot be resolved by mutual agreement shall be decided by the contracting officer with right of appeal. 5.15.7 Contract Work Hours. The contractor may not require a non-exempt employee to work more than 40 hours in a workweek unless the employee is paid for overtime. 5.15.8 Equal Opportunity. The contractor will not discriminate against any employee or applicant for employment because of race, color, religion, age, sex, or national origin. 5.15.9 Affirmative Action for Veterans. The contractor will not discriminate against any employee or applicant for employment because he or she is a disabled veteran or veteran of the Vietnam era. 5.15.10 Affirmative Action for Handicapped. The contractor will not discriminate against any employee or applicant for employment because he or she is physically or mentally handicapped. 5.15.11 Officials Not to Benefit. No member of or delegate to Congress shall benefit from a SBIR or STTR contract. 5.15.12 Covenant Against Contingent Fees. No person or agency has been employed to solicit or to secure the contract upon an understanding for compensation except bona fide employees or commercial agencies maintained by the contractor for the purpose of securing business. 5.15.13 Gratuities. The contract may be terminated by the Government if any gratuities have been offered to any representative of the Government to secure the contract. 5.15.14 Patent Infringement. The contractor shall report to NASA each notice or claim of patent infringement based on the performance of the contract. 5.15.15 American-Made Equipment and Products. Equipment or products purchased under a SBIR or STTR contract must be American-made whenever possible. 5.16 Additional Information 5.16.1 Precedence of Contract Over Solicitation. This Program Solicitation reflects current planning. If there is any inconsistency between the information contained herein and the terms of any resulting SBIR/STTR contract, the terms of the contract are controlling. 5.16.2 Evidence of Contractor Responsibility. Before award of a SBIR or STTR contract, the Government may request the offeror to submit certain organizational, management, personnel, and financial information to establish responsibility of the offeror. Contractor responsibility includes all resources required for contractor performance, i.e., financial capability, work force, and facilities. 5.16.3 Central Contractor Registration: Offerors should be aware of the requirement to register in the Central Contractor Registration database prior to contract award. To avoid a potential delay in contract award, offerors are strongly encouraged to register prior to submitting a proposal. The Central Contractor Registration (CCR) database is the primary repository for contractor information required for the conduct of business with NASA. It is maintained by the Department of Defense. To be registered in the CCR database, all mandatory information, which includes the DUNS or DUNS+4 number, and a CAGE code, must be validated in the CCR system. The DUNS number or Data Universal Number System is a 9-digit number assigned by Dun and Bradstreet Information Services to identify unique business entities. The DUNS+4 is similar, but includes a 4-digit suffix that may be assigned by a parent (controlling) business concern. The CAGE code or Commercial Government and Entity Code is assigned by the Defense Logistics Information Service (DLIS) to identify a commercial or Government entity. The DoD has established a goal of registering an applicant in the CCR database within 48 hours after receipt of a complete and accurate application via the Internet. However, registration of an applicant submitting an application through a method other than the Internet may take up to 30 days. Therefore, offerors that are not registered should consider applying for registration immediately upon receipt of this solicitation. Offerors and contractors may obtain information on CCR registration and annual confirmation requirements via the Internet at http://www.ccr2000.com or by calling 888-CCR-2423 (888-227-2423). 5.17 Property In accordance with the Federal Acquisition Regulations (FAR) Part 45, it is NASA's policy not to provide facilities (capital equipment, tooling, test and computer facilities, etc.) for the performance of work under contract. An SBC will furnish its own facilities to perform the proposed work as an indirect cost to the contract. Special tooling required for a project may be allowed as a direct cost. When an SBC cannot furnish its own facilities to perform required tasks, an SBC may propose to acquire the use of commercially available facilities. Rental or lease costs may be considered as direct costs as part of the total funding for the project. If unique requirements force an offeror to acquire facilities under a NASA contract, they will be purchased as Government Furnished Equipment (GFE) and titled to the Government. An offeror may propose the use of unique or one-of-a-kind NASA facilities if essential for the research. Offerors requiring a NASA facility must clearly document and certify that there is no commercially available facility to perform the R&D. It may be difficult, however, to ensure availability, and non-availability may lead to non- selection. Should an offeror propose the use of unique or one-of-a-kind NASA facilities essential for the R/R&D, an agreement with the responsible installation is required and costs for their use will be determined by the installation. These costs may be chargeable in accordance with the Government property clause of the contract. Total contract costs must not exceed the Phase I and Phase II funding limits given in this Solicitation (Section 5.1). 6. Submission of Proposals 6.1 The Submission Process 6.1.1 Submission Requirements. NASA utilizes an electronic process for management of the SBIR/STTR pro- grams. This management approach requires that a proposing firm have Internet access and an e-mail address. 6.1.2 What Needs to Be Submitted. A proposal submission is comprised of two parts: (1) Internet Submission. The entire proposal including Forms 9A, 9B and 9C must be submitted via the Internet (http://sbir.nasa.gov). Firms may also submit an optional briefing chart, which is not included in the 25 page count. An example chart has been provided in Appendix B. (2) Postal Submission. Postal submission includes an original signed proposal with all required forms. Note: Other forms of submissions such as fax, diskette, or e-mail attachments are not acceptable. 6.2 Internet Submission 6.2.1 Electronic Technical Proposal Preparation. The term “Technical Proposal” refers to the part of the submis- sion as described in Section 3.2.4. Word Processor. NASA converts all technical proposal files to PDF format for evaluation purposes. Therefore, NASA requests that technical proposals be submitted in PDF format, and encourages companies to do so. Other acceptable formats for PC are AmiPro, ClarisWorks for Windows, MS Works, Text, MS Word, WordPerfect, and Postscript. For Macintosh, the acceptable formats are ClarisWorks, MS Works, MacWrite Pro, Text, MS Word, WordPerfect, and Postscript. Unix and TeX users please note that due to PDF difficulties with non-standard fonts, please output technical proposal files in DVI format. Graphics. For reasons of space conservation and simplicity the offeror is encouraged, but not required, to embed graphics within the document. For graphics submitted as separate files, the acceptable file formats (and their re- spective extensions) are: Bit-Mapped (.bmp), Graphics Interchange Format (.gif), JPEG (.jpg), PC Paintbrush (.pcx), WordPerfect Graphic (.wpg), and Tagged-Image Format (.tif). Limitations. While only the paper copy will be screened for administrative compliance, the various files compris- ing the electronic version are required to exactly reflect the paper version. Virus Check. The offeror is responsible for performing a virus check on each submitted technical proposal. As a standard part of entering the proposal into the processing system, NASA will scan each submitted electronic techni- cal proposal for viruses. The detection, by NASA, of a virus on any submitted electronic technical proposal, may cause rejection of the proposal. 6.2.2 Electronic Handbook. An Electronic Handbook for submitting proposals via the internet is hosted on the NASA SBIR/STTR Homepage (http://sbir.nasa.gov). The handbook will guide the firms through the various steps required for submitting a SBIR/STTR proposal and issue secure-user identification and passwords for each submis- sion. Communication between NASA and the firm will be via a combination of electronic handbooks and e-mail. 6.3 Postal Submission Postal Submissions are comprised of one original signed paper copy of the proposal, including paper copies of all original forms (as stated in Section 3.2.2) 6.3.1 Physical Packaging Requirements for Paper Copy of Proposal. Do not use bindings or special covers. Staple the pages of the proposal in the upper left-hand corner only. Secure packaging is mandatory. NASA cannot process proposals damaged in transit. All items for any proposal must be sent in the same envelope. If more than one proposal is being submitted, each proposal must be in its own envelope, but all proposals may be sent in the same package. Do not send duplicate packages of any proposal as "insurance" that at least one will be received. 6.3.2 Where to Send Proposals. All proposals that are mailed through the U.S. Postal Service first class, regis- tered, or certified mail; proposals sent by express mail or commercial delivery services; or hand-carried proposals must be delivered to the following address between 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. EDT: NASA SBIR/STTR Program Support Office REI Systems, Inc 4041 Powder Mill Road Suite 311 Calverton (Beltsville), MD 20705-3106 The telephone number 301-937-0888 may be used when required for reference by delivery services: 6.3.3 Deadline for Proposal Receipt. All proposal submissions (both internet and postal) must be received no later than 5:00 p.m. EDT on Wednesday, June 6, 2001 at the NASA SBIR/STTR Program Support Office. Any proposal received after that date and time shall be considered late and handled accordingly. 6.4 Acknowledgment of Proposal Receipt NASA will acknowledge receipt of proposals to the SBC Official’s e-mail address as provided on the proposal cover sheet. If a proposal acknowledgment is not received within 14 days following the closing date of this Solicitation, the offeror should call NASA SBIR/STTR Program Support Office at 301-937-0888. Information about proposal status will not be available until final selections are announced. 6.5 Withdrawal of Proposals Proposals may be withdrawn by written notice, signed by the designated SBC Official. Withdrawal notice must include proposal number and title. 7. Scientific and Technical Information Sources 7.1 NASA SBIR/STTR Homepage Detailed information on NASA's SBIR/STTR Programs is available at: http://sbir.nasa.gov. 7.2 NASA Commercial Technology Network The NASA Commercial Technology Network (NCTN) contains a significant amount of on-line information about the NASA Commercial Technology Program. The address for the NCTN homepage is: http://nctn.hq.nasa.gov/ 7.3 NASA Technology Utilization Services The National Technology Transfer Center (NTTC), sponsored by NASA in cooperation with other Federal agen- cies, serves as a national resource for technology transfer and commercialization. NTTC has a primary role to get Government research into the hands of U.S. businesses. Its gateway services make it easy to access databases and to contact experts in your area of research and development. For further information, call 800-678-6882. NASA's network of Regional Technology Transfer Centers (RTTCs) provides business planning and develop- ment services. However, NASA does not accept responsibility for any services these centers may offer in the preparation of proposals. RTTCs can be contacted directly as listed below to determine what services are available and to discuss fees charged. Alternatively, to contact any RTTC, call 800-472-6785. Northeast: Center for Technology Commercialization Massachusetts Technology Park 1400 Computer Drive Westboro, MA 01581-5054 Phone: 508-870-0042 URL: http://www.ctc.org Mid-Atlantic: Technology Commercialization Center, Inc. 12050 Jefferson Avenue Newport News, VA 23606 Phone: 757-269-0025 URL: http://www.teccenter.org Southeast: Georgia Institute of Technology 151 6th Street 216 O’Keefe Building Atlanta, GA 30332 Phone: 404-894-6786 URL: Currently Under Development Mid-West: Great Lakes Industrial Technology Center Battelle Memorial Institute 25000 Great Northern Corporate Center, Suite 450 Cleveland, OH 44070-5310 Phone: 440-734-0094 URL: http://www.battelle.org/glitec Mid-Continent: Mid-Continent Technology Transfer Center Texas Engineering Extension Service Technology & Economic Development Division College Station, TX 77843-8000 Phone: 409-845-2913 URL: http://www.mcttc.com/ Far-West: Far-West Technology Transfer Center University of Southern California 3716 South Hope Street, Suite 200 Los Angeles, CA 90007-4344 Phone: 800-642-2872 URL: http://www.usc.edu/dept/engineering/TTC/NASA 7.4 United States Small Business Administration The Policy Directives for the SBIR/STTR Programs, which also state the SBA policy for this Solicitation, may be obtained from the following source. SBA information can also be obtained at: http://www.sba.gov/. Office of Innovation, Research and Technology U.S. Small Business Administration 409 Third Street, S.W. Washington, D.C. 20416 Phone: 202-205-7701 7.5 National Technical Information Service The National Technical Information Service, an agency of the Department of Commerce, is the Federal Government's central clearinghouse for publicly funded scientific and technical information. For information about their various services and fees, call or write: National Technical Information Service 5285 Port Royal Road Springfield, VA 22161 Phone: 800-553-6847 URL: http://www.ntis.gov 8. Research Topics for SBIR and STTR 8.1 SBIR Research Topics Introduction The SBIR Program Solicitation is aligned with the established NASA management structure of the Strategic Enterprises (http://www.nasa.gov). The Enterprises identify, at the most fundamental level, what NASA does and for whom. Each Strategic Enterprise is analogous to a strategic business unit employed by private-sector companies to focus on and respond to their customers' needs. Each Strategic Enterprise has a unique set of goals, objectives, and strategies. Research topics and subtopics in this Solicitation are organized by the five NASA Strategic Enterprises: Aerospace Technology Biological and Physical Research Earth Science Human Exploration and Development of Space Space Science This page has intentionally been left blank. 8.1.1 AEROSPACE TECHNOLOGY NASA's Aerospace Technology Enterprise pioneers the identification, development, verification, transfer, applica- tion, and commercialization of high-payoff aeronautics technologies. It seeks to promote economic growth and security and to enhance U.S. competitiveness through safe, superior, and environmentally compatible U.S. civil and military aircraft and through a safe, efficient national aviation system. In addition, the Enterprise recognizes that the space transportation industry can benefit significantly from the transfer of aviation technologies and flight opera- tions to launch vehicles, the goal being reducing the cost of access to space. The Enterprise will work closely with its aeronautics customers, including U.S. industry, the Department of Defense, and the Federal Aviation Admini- stration, to ensure that its technology products and services add value, are timely, and have been developed to the level where the customer can confidently make decisions regarding the application of those technologies. http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/aero A1 AVIATION SAFETY 28 A1.01 Flight Deck Situation Awareness and Crew Systems Technologies 28 A1.02 Propulsion and Airframe Failure Data and Accident Mitigation 29 A1.03 Automated On-Line Health Management and Data Analysis 30 A1.04 Aircraft Icing Systems 30 A1.05 Non-destructive Evaluation and Health Monitoring of Structures and Materials 31 A2 AVIATION SYSTEM CAPACITY AND PRODUCTIVITY 32 A2.01 21st Century Air-Traffic Management 32 A2.02 Flight Technologies for Improved Aviation System Capacity 33 A2.03 Intelligent Aerospace Systems Management 33 A3 ENVIRONMENTAL COMPATIBILITY: NOISE AND EMISSIONS 34 A3.01 Airframe Systems Noise Prediction and Reduction 34 A3.02 Propulsion System Emissions and Noise Prediction and Reduction 35 A4 SMALL AIRCRAFT TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM 36 A4.01 Small Aircraft Transportation System Technologies 36 A4.02 Small Aircraft Transportation System Propulsion Technologies 37 A5 ACCESS TO SPACE 38 A5.01 Advanced Space Transportation System Technologies 38 A5.02 Reusable Launch Vehicle Airframe Technologies 39 A5.03 Space Transportation System Manufacturing Technologies 40 A5.04 Space Propulsion Systems Test Operations 41 A6 IN-SPACE TRANSPORTATION 41 A6.01 High Energy Propulsion Technologies 42 A6.02 Propellantless Propulsion 42 A7 DESIGN AND ANALYSIS FOR AEROSPACE VEHICLES 42 A7.01 Modeling and Control of Complex Flows Over Aerospace Vehicles and Propulsion Systems 43 A7.02 Modeling and Simulation of Aerospace Vehicles in a Flight Test Environment 44 A7.03 Flight Sensors, Sensor Arrays and Airborne Instruments for Flight Research 44 A8 REVOLUTIONARY CONCEPTS IN AERONAUTICS (REVCON) 45 A8.01 Revolutionary Aerospace Vehicle Systems Concepts 45 A8.02 Revolutionary Technologies and Components for Propulsion Systems 46 A8.03 Revolutionary Flight Concepts 46 A1 Aviation Safety NASA is responsible for conducting the research that, upon implementation, will contribute to an 80 percent reduc- tion in aviation accidents by 2007, and a 90 percent reduction in aviation accidents by 2017 relative to 1997. Accomplishment of these goals requires technical advances in the following areas: (1) Increased safety for all air- craft flying in an atmospheric icing environment; (2) Prevention and/or mitigation of hazardous conditions during or after an aviation accident; (3) Enhanced flight deck situational awareness for the National Airspace System opera- tors; (4) Automated on-line health management and data analysis for aircraft systems; (5) Innovative and commercially viable techniques for non-destructive evaluation and health monitoring of aircraft materials and structures. A1.01 Flight Deck Situation Awareness and Crew Systems Technologies Lead Center: LaRC Participating Center(s): None Information technology has and will continue to provide operational opportunities toward increasing the safe and efficient use of the Airspace System. Significant challenges associated with this evolving technology include main- taining or enhancing the situation awareness of system operators, developing user-centered technologies that facilitate human perception and interpretation and that counteract human information processing limitations and biases, and allowing for geographically and temporally distributed operators to work collaboratively. NASA seeks highly innovative crew systems technologies that will maintain or enhance situation awareness and aid operator decision-making for improved aerospace safety and efficiency. These technologies and methods may take the form of tools, models, techniques, procedures, substantiated guidelines, prototypes, and devices. In addition, we seek tools and methods for measuring and analyzing human and group performance in complex, dynamic systems. Innovative and economically attractive approaches are sought to advance the current state-of-the-art in the following areas: ? Systems monitoring with sensitive informing, advisements, alerts, and aids for Airspace System operators that enhance situation awareness and improve aviation safety. ? Crew-centered systems design methods and technologies. ? Innovative crew-system interface technologies. ? Human-error reduction in aircraft operations and systems monitoring. ? Error tolerant flight deck systems including advanced displays, crew-system interfaces, and monitoring tech- nologies. ? Human and group performance analysis methods and tools. ? Human performance measurement technologies for use in operational environments. ? Collaborative and distributive decision making among Airspace System operators. ? Integrated flight deck information systems and procedures. ? Decision support technologies and methods to assist Airspace System operators that enhance situation aware- ness and improve aviation safety. ? Artificial Intelligence technologies and concepts that monitor crew and aircraft performance to ensure appropri- ate levels of engagement, crew workload and situation awareness. ? Human-centered information technologies that enhance situation awareness and performance of less experi- enced Airspace System operators especially at critical times. ? Development of human-centered information technology for intuitive guidance queues in advanced concepts. ? Guidelines and measurement techniques that allow for successful assessment of the application of human- centered design principles to flight deck display concepts. A1.02 Propulsion and Airframe Failure Data and Accident Mitigation Lead Center: GRC Participating Center(s): LaRC NASA is concerned with the prevention of hazardous and accident conditions and the mitigation of their effects when they do occur. One particular emphasis is on fire. The prevention, detection, and suppression of fires are criti- cal goals of accident mitigation. Aircraft fires represent a small number of actual accidents, but the number of fatalities due to in-flight, post-crash and on-ground fires is large. A second emphasis is on crashworthiness. For all transport aircraft accidents, 45 percent of those which involve serious injuries or fatalities are survivable. Besides impact alone, survivability is often a function of the combined effects of subsequent fire and smoke. Technology is needed to further protect passengers from the effects of the crash or mitigate the after effects to allow the escape of passengers. A third emphasis is on mitigating the safety risk and collateral damage due to unexpected failures of rotating components. Although the FAA mandates a blade containment and rotor unbalance requirement (FAR Part 33, section 33.94) as part of the airworthiness standards for (turbine) aircraft engines, there are substantial potential (aircraft-engine) system benefits to be gained by enabling safety assured, lighter weight, lower cost, and more dam- age tolerant designs for engine case/containment systems and associated (primary load path) structures. A final emphasis for this Solicitation is on propulsion system health management in order to prevent or accom- modate safety-significant malfunctions. Past advances in this area have helped improve the reliability and safety of aircraft propulsion systems. However, propulsion system component failures are still a contributing factor in numer- ous aircraft accidents and incidents. Advances in instrumentation, health monitoring algorithms, and fault accommodating logic are sought which help to further reduce the occurrence of and/or mitigate the effects of safety- significant propulsion system malfunctions. With these four emphases in mind, products and technologies are sought to mitigate or prevent relevant accidents, to enhance human survivability in the event of an accident, and to monitor system health. Considerations should be made for affordability and retrofitability to the commercial transport, general aviation, and rotorcraft fleets. These include the following areas: ? Technology for fire prevention, detection, and suppression of potential in-flight fires in fuel tanks, insulation, cargo compartments, and other inaccessible locations. ? Technology to provide fuel tank vapor flammability reduction and on-board oxygen generation. ? Technology to minimize fire hazards in crashes and to prevent or delay fires. For example: fuel-system modifi- cations to eliminate spills, and on-demand suppression while not presenting a weight or performance penalty. ? Design and injury criteria and dynamic analyses to enhance crash safety. ? Systems approach to crashworthy designs, which may include validated occupant/seat/structural interaction analyses. ? Energy-absorbing seat and structural concepts and materials. ? Technology for occupant protection in a crash, including advanced restraints and supplemental restraints. ? Advanced material/structural configuration concepts to prevent catastrophic failures of engine components, or to ensure fragment containment. ? Computational tools for analyzing blade-loss events and designing structural components/systems accordingly. ? Health management technologies such as advanced instrumentation, health monitoring algorithms, and fault accommodating logic, to predict, diagnose, and prevent safety significant propulsion system malfunctions. ? Low cost methods for failure prediction and testing of any of the above aircraft failure-prevention and mitiga- tion technologies. ? Methods for integrating any of the above aircraft failure-prevention and mitigation technologies into existing or new aircraft. A1.03 Automated On-Line Health Management and Data Analysis Lead Center: DFRC Participating Center(s): None On-line health monitoring is a critical technology for improving transportation safety in the 21st century. Safe, affordable, and more efficient operation of aerospace vehicles requires advances in online health monitoring of vehicle subsystems and information monitoring from many sources over local/wide area networks. On-line health monitoring is a general concept involving signal-processing algorithms designed to support decisions related to safety, maintenance, or operating procedures. The concept of on-line emphasizes algorithms that minimize the time between data acquisition and decision-making. This subtopic seeks solutions for on-line aircraft subsystem health monitoring. Solutions should exploit multiple computers communicating over standard networks where applicable. Solutions can be designed to monitor a specific subsystem or a number of systems simultaneously. Resulting commercial products might be implemented in a distributed decision-making environment such as a vir- tual flight research center, a disciplinary-specific collaborative laboratory, an onboard diagnostics system, or a maintenance and inspection network of potentially global proportion. Proposers should discuss who the users of resulting products would be, e.g., research/test/ development; manufac- turing; maintenance depots; flight crew; airports; flight operations or mission control; air traffic management; or airlines. Proposers are encouraged to discuss data acquisition, processing, and presentation components in their proposal. Examples of desired solutions targeted by this subtopic include: ? Real-time autonomous sensor validity monitors ? Flight control system or flight path diagnostics for predicting loss of control ? Automated testing and diagnostics of mission-critical avionics ? Structural fatigue, life cycle, static, or dynamic load monitors ? Automated nondestructive evaluation for faulty structural components ? Electrical system monitoring and fire prevention ? Applications that exploit wireless communication technology to reduce costs ? Model-reference or model-updating schemes based on measured data that operate autonomously ? Proactive maintenance schedules for rocket or turbine engines, including engine life-cycle monitors ? Predicting or detecting any equipment malfunction ? Middleware or software toolkits to lower the cost of developing on-line health-monitoring applications ? Innovative solutions for harvesting, managing, archival, and retrieval of aerospace vehicle health data A1.04 Aircraft Icing Systems Lead Center: GRC Participating Center(s): None A major goal of the NASA Aircraft Icing Program is to increase the level of safety for all aircraft flying in the atmospheric icing environment. To maximize the level of safety, aircraft must be capable of handling all possible icing conditions by either avoiding or tolerating the conditions. Proposals are invited that lead to innovative new approaches or significant improvements in existing technologies for inflight icing condition avoidance (icing weather information systems) or tolerance (aircraft icing protection systems and design tools). Of particular interest are technologies that are compatible with emerging aircraft designs (i.e., sensitive electronic systems, digital flight decks, and advanced wing designs). Onboard systems must be aerodynamically non-intrusive , practical, and must consider weight, power, size, and cost for successful integration into aircraft. To receive consideration for funding, all proposals submitted under this subtopic must demonstrate significant advantages over existing technologies. The areas of greatest interest are: ? New practical, inflight and/or ground-based, real-time remote sensing technologies for the measurement of the supercooled water droplet and temperature environment. The technology must be capable of quantifying the en- vironment to allow for the prediction of the severity of airframe icing, and to identify potential avoidance and escape routes, and must have practical range (at least 20 km) and cloud penetration capability. The scanning update cycle rate needs to be on the order of 1 minute to account for rapid changes in the icing environment. Remote measurement systems must be capable of quantifying liquid water in both pure liquid clouds and those with ice crystals. ? Dual or multi-band radar analysis techniques that can function in the Mie scattering regime for the remote measurement of icing conditions. ? Radome technology for microwave wavelength radar and radiometers that remains completely clear of liquid water in all weather situations. ? In situ icing environment measurement systems that can provide practical, very low cost validation data for emerging icing weather information systems and atmospheric modeling. Measured information must include lo- cation, altitude, cloud liquid water content, temperature, and ideally cloud particle sizing and phase information. Possible solutions include multiple aircraft sampling and radiosonde based systems. ? Low power and low cost anti-icing systems, including technologies that protect composite structures. A system must be capable of operating under all potential environmental conditions and should be capable of operating automatically or with minimal cockpit crew interaction. ? Practical analysis tools for the integrated design and optimization of hot gas ice protection systems. The tool must model the entire heat path from source to protected surface, including the conduction path through the sur- face and the water loading on the external surface. A1.05 Non-destructive Evaluation and Health Monitoring of Structures and Materials Lead Center: LaRC Participating Center(s): ARC Innovative and commercially viable technologies are being solicited for the development of non-destructive evalua- tion (NDE) and health-monitoring sensors and instrumentation. Concepts in computational models for signal processing and data interpretation to establish quantitative characterization and event determination are also of interest. Evaluation technologies may incorporate ultrasonics, laser ultrasonics, optics and fiber optics, shearogra- phy, video optics and metrology, thermography, electromagnetics, acoustic emission, X-ray, management of digital NDE data, biomimetic, and nano-scale sensing approaches for structural health monitoring. There is additional specific interest in non-contacting, remote, rapid, and less geometry sensitive technologies that reduce acquisition costs or improve system sensitivity, stability, and operational costs. Advancements in integrated multi-functional sensor systems, autonomous inspection approaches, distributed/embedded sensors, roaming inspectors, and shape adaptive sensors are also specifically sought. Technologies may be applied to: ? Adhesives, sealants, bearings, coatings, glasses, alloys, laminates, monolithics, material blends, and weldments ? Thermal protection systems ? Complex composite and hybrid structural systems ? Low density and high temperature materials Technologies may be used for: ? Characterizing material properties ? Assessing effects of defects in materials and structures ? Evaluation of mass-loss in materials ? Detecting cracks, porosity, foreign material, inclusions, corrosion, disbonds ? Detecting cracks under bolts ? Real time and in situ monitoring, reporting, and accumulated damage characterization for structural durability and life prediction/determination ? Repair certification ? Environmental sensing ? Electronic system/wiring integrity assessment ? Characterization of load environment on a variety of structural materials and geometries including thermal protection systems and bonded configurations ? Identification of loads exceeding design ? Monitoring loads for fatigue and preventing overloads ? Suppression of acoustic loads ? Early detection of damage ? In situ monitoring and control of materials processing The anticipated structural applications to be considered for NDE and health monitoring development include a variety of high stress and hostile aero-thermo-chemical service environments projected for aerospace systems. A2 Aviation System Capacity and Productivity A major NASA goal in global civil aviation is to triple the aviation system throughput in all weather conditions while maintaining safety. An additional goal is to significantly reduce the cost of air travel. These increases in the capacity and productivity of the National Airspace System (NAS) can be achieved through development of revolu- tionary ground-based and airborne operations systems, new vehicle technologies and utilization of advanced computational approaches and information technology methodologies for aerospace system development. A2.01 21st Century Air-Traffic Management Lead Center: ARC Participating Center(s): None Innovations in Air-Traffic Management (ATM) are required to make current systems more efficient as well as im- prove the next generation National Airspace System (NAS). The challenge for the next generation ATM system is to accommodate growth in air traffic while reducing the aircraft accident rate by a factor of five within 10 years from 1997, and by a factor of ten within 20 years. This can only be achieved by the development of decision support tools for controllers, pilots and airline operations, and by the introduction of technical innovations in communication, navigation, and surveillance (CNS). It requires a new look at the way airspace is managed and the automation of some crew functions, thereby intensifying the need for a careful integration of machine and human performance. In addition, advances in technologies such as Differential GPS (DGPS) and Automatic Dependent Surveillance- Broadcasting (ADS-B) are revolutionizing aerospace operations. These and other advanced technologies will ad- vance the development of Runway Independent Aircraft that do not require conventional runways, as well as, improve operations at existing airport infrastructures. These technologies show promise in enhancing the efficiency and safety of airport traffic management. Innovative and economically attractive approaches are sought to advance technologies in the following areas: ? Decision support tools (DST) to assist pilots, controllers and dispatchers in all parts of the airspace (en route, terminal and surface) ? Integration of DST across different airspace. Simulation and modeling tools to assess benefits of new concepts technologies and concepts leading to greater airborne operational independence ? Methods of integrating air and ground roles and responsibilities ? Distributed decision-making and its impact on the stability of the airspace ? System robustness and safety: sensor failure, threat mitigation, health monitoring ? Weather modeling and improved trajectory estimation for traffic management applications ? New concepts in air space management and impact of Commercial Space Transportation on ATM ? Role of data exchange and data link in co-operative decision-making ? Modeling of the National Airspace System ? Human factors and workload concepts relating to safe control/integration of aircraft and other ground vehicles systems ? Distributed complex, real-time simulations ? Environmentally friendly ATM and aircraft operations ? Automation concepts for advanced ATM systems ? Intelligent software architecture ? Technologies and innovative methods to integrate simultaneous movement of the ground vehicles and the air- craft fleet ? Operational products for Simultaneous Non-Interfering (SNI) approaches, departure and runway traffic ? Intermodal Transportation technologies A2.02 Flight Technologies for Improved Aviation System Capacity Lead Center: ARC Participating Center(s): None To achieve the NASA objective of tripling the aviation system capacity within 25 years, revolutionary changes to the current civil operational environment are envisioned. These changes include new and improved vehicle tech- nologies to fully accomplish this objective. Runway-Independent Aircraft with a vertical or extremely-short takeoff and landing (ESTOL) flight capability will enable the mobility required to achieve door-to-door delivery of people, goods, and services within this new air transportation system. These vehicles must meet civil global aviation re- quirements for safer, quieter, more efficient, and affordable aircraft. These requirements directly influence the Aerospace Technology objectives identified by NASA to support the Agency's mission. Many aspects of the aeromechanics and flight control of rotorcraft and powered-lift aircraft are not thoroughly understood or predictable enough to enable efficient and accurate design processes for economically-viable civil aircraft with a vertical flight capability. NASA requires innovative methods, approaches, and technologies that describe phenomena involved in rotorcraft and powered-lift aerodynamics, dynamics, acoustics and autonomous control; provide greater knowledge of the detailed characteristics of these phenomena; and permit well-verified designs. Innovative developments with applications to advanced tilt rotors, revolutionary powered-lift aircraft, a spectrum of helicopter configurations, personal vertical flight transportation vehicles, and hover-capable unmanned aerial vehicles of all sizes are needed to refine the next generation of civil aircraft that will meet civil global aviation requirements for safer, quieter, more efficient, and lower direct operating cost aircraft. These requirements directly impact the Research and Technology Programs identified by NASA to support the agency's objective of increased aviation system capacity as well as improved mobility, reduced noise, increased safety, and innovation in technol- ogy and engineering. Examples of research topics currently of importance include: efficient design tools which reduce design cycle time; improved vehicle performance with reduction in ownership and operation costs; advanced active control strate- gies/methodologies for aeromechanics, flight control, and enhanced vehicle capability; innovative solutions for reduction of airframe vibration, vibratory loads, and radiated noise; and technologies for improved safety. Adapta- tion of emerging technologies such as biologically-inspired engineering, information technology, and nano- technologies is also encouraged. New analysis methodologies addressing the unique aspects of civil rotorcraft and powered-lift aircraft through CFD/CSM/CAA for individual and integrated vehicle systems are also sought. A2.03 Intelligent Aerospace Systems Management Lead Center: ARC Participating Center(s): GRC With the dramatic increase in computational capability and information technology, several alternative approaches to traditional vehicular guidance, navigation, and control have been offered. These approaches include neural net- works, annealing algorithms, biomimetics, and fuzzy logic. Many of these approaches have had specific applications in the aerospace industry, but less so than in other commercial industries. Safety is often cited as a contributing factor for this difference; however, that citation is becoming less defensible with the promulgation of these ideas into vehicles outside the aerospace domain. The objective of this subtopic is to both bolster and foster collaboration between the aerospace environs and these recent computational and informational approaches. Airborne vehicles of all types will be considered; however, emphasis on hovering and extremely short takeoff and landing powered-lift vehicles, both manned and unmanned, will be given. Technology innovations sought include: Unmanned aerial vehicle guidance and control ? Intelligent guidance for single or coordinated groups of vehicles with constraints ? Use of genetic, simulated annealing, tabu search, or great deluge algorithms ? Real-time optimal trajectory generation for aggressive maneuvering ? Interactions between autonomous control and operator control ? Fault tolerant methods (tradeoffs of parallel versus analytical redundancy) Flight control and integrated flight propulsion control ? Stability and performance sensitivities for practical neural networks or fuzzy logic applications ? Hybrid systems analysis ? Biomimetic applications Helicopter flight control ? Interactions between on-blade control for vibration and handling qualities ? Rotor state feedback applications ? Sensing and estimation tradeoffs of using rotor states versus using rigid mode lead filtering ? Integrated flight and propulsion control with rotor RPM Open architecture information sharing ? Platform independent, wireless flight test applications ? Self-contained, wireless, airborne information devices with head mounted displays A3 Environmental Compatibility: Noise and Emissions NASA has very aggressive goals for providing technologies that will ensure the noise and emissions environmental compatibility of future commercial aircraft. In particular, the noise goals are to reduce the perceived noise levels of future aircraft by a factor of two (10 EPNdB) within 10 years of 1997, and a factor of four (20 EPNdB) within 20 years. The emissions goals are to reduce aircraft emissions by a factor of three within 10 years and a factor of five within 20 years. These goals are necessary to meet increasingly stringent local, national, and international noise and emission regulations while enhancing operating safety and productivity and increasing aviation system throughput. Accomplishment of these goals will require revolutionary airframe and propulsion technologies to be developed and handed off to the aerospace community in a timely fashion. Particular areas of interest are: (1) Noise prediction and reduction technologies for propulsion source noise, nacelle aeroacoustics, airframe noise, and noise minimal flight procedures for future subsonic and supersonic commercial aircraft. (2) Aircraft interior noise reduction technologies to improve passenger and crew comfort. (3) Emissions reduction technologies for ultra low NOx emissions com- bustor concepts which also reduce the aerosol and particulates emissions. (4) Innovative airframe and propulsion concepts relative to these goals. A3.01 Airframe Systems Noise Prediction and Reduction Lead Center: LaRC Participating Center(s): None Innovative technologies and techniques are necessary for the introduction of efficient, environmentally acceptable airplanes, rotorcraft and advanced aerospace vehicles. Improvements in noise prediction and control technologies are needed for jet, propeller, rotor, fan, turbomachinery, and airframe noise sources to reduce the impact on commu- nity residents, aircraft passengers and crew, and launch vehicle payloads. Innovations in technologies and algorithms for the following specific areas are solicited: ? Fundamental and applied computational fluid-dynamics techniques for aeroacoustic analysis, particularly for use early in the design process. ? Simulation and prediction of aeroacoustic noise sources particularly for airframe noise sources and situations with significant interactions between airframe and propulsion systems. ? Innovative active and passive acoustic treatment concepts for engine nacelle liners. ? Technologies for active and passive control of aeroacoustic noise sources for Blended Wing Body and other advanced aircraft. ? Reduction technologies and prediction methods for rotorcraft and advanced propeller aerodynamic noise. ? Computational and analytical structural acoustics techniques for aircraft and advanced aerospace vehicle inte- rior noise prediction, particularly for use early in the airframe design process. ? Technologies and techniques for active and passive interior noise control for aircraft and advanced aerospace vehicle structures. ? Prediction and control of high-amplitude aeroacoustic loads on advanced aerospace structures and the resulting dynamic response and fatigue. ? Development and application of flight procedures for reducing community noise impact of rotorcraft and future subsonic and supersonic commercial aircraft while maintaining safety, capacity and fuel efficiency. A3.02 Propulsion System Emissions and Noise Prediction and Reduction Lead Center: GRC Participating Center(s): None Emissions: Current environmental concerns with subsonic and supersonic aircraft center around global warming and the impact on the Earth's climate and, if not addressed, may threaten future market growth. Carbon dioxide (CO2) and oxides of nitrogen (NOx) are the major emittants of concern coming from commercial aircraft engines. CO2 is a greenhouse gas which may impact the warming of the Earth's climate. NOx emissions can destroy ozone in the upper atmosphere which protects humans from harmful uv radiation from the Sun and NOx can produce ozone in the lower atmosphere. Around airports, it appears as smog and causes breathing and health problems. Current state- of-the-art engines and combustors in most subsonic aircraft are fuel efficient and meet the 1996 ICAO NOx limits. The Kyoto Agreement is applying pressure for additional CO2 reductions, and Europe and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency are applying pressure for additional NOx reductions at takeoff and possibly cruise conditions. Stringent CO2 and NOx limits could result in emissions' fees or limited access to some countries. Also, recent ob- servations of aircraft exhaust contrails (from both subsonic and supersonic flights) have resulted in growing concern over aerosol, particulate, and sulfur levels in the fuel. In particular, aerosols and particulates from aircraft are sus- pected of producing high altitude clouds which could adversely affect the Earth's climatology. NASA has set some very aggressive goals for reducing emissions of future aircraft by a factor of three within 10 years and by a factor of five within 20 years. Advanced concepts research for reducing CO2 and NOx, and analytical and experimental research in characterization (intrusive and non-intrusive) and control (through component design, controls, and/or fuel additives) of gaseous, liquid and particulates of aircraft exhaust emissions is sought. Specific aircraft operating conditions of interest include the landing-takeoff cycle as well as the in-flight portion of the mission. Areas of par- ticular interest are: ? New concepts for reducing carbon dioxide, oxides of nitrogen (NO, NO2, NOx), unburned hydrocarbons; carbon monoxide, particulate, and aerosols emittants (novel propulsion concepts, injector designs to improve fuel mixing, catalysts, additives, etc.); ? New fuels for commercial aircraft which minimize carbon dioxide emissions; ? Innovative active control concepts for emission minimization with an integrated systems focus including emis- sion modeling for control, sensing and actuation requirements, control logic development, and experimental validation are of interest; and ? New instrumentation techniques are needed for the measurement of engine emissions such as NOx, SOx, HOx, atomic oxygen and hydrocarbons in combustion facilities and engines. Size, size distributions, reactivity, and constituents of aerosols and particulates are needed, as are temperature, pressure, density, and velocity meas- urements. Optical techniques that provide 2-D and 3-D data; time history measurements; and thin film, fiber optic, and MEMS-based sensors are of interest. Noise: NASA intends to provide enabling technologies to reduce the perceived noise levels of future aircraft by a factor of two (10 EPNdB) from 1997 technology aircraft by 2007, and a factor of four (20 EPNdB) by 2022. These goals are necessary to meet increasingly stringent local, national and international community noise regulations while enhancing operating safety and productivity and increasing aviation system throughput. Engine noise reduc- tion technologies are required in the areas of propulsion source noise, nacelle aeroacoustics, and engine/airframe integration. These aggressive aircraft noise reduction goals will require revolutionary advances in propulsion tech- nologies. Some of the key technologies needed to achieve these goals are revolutionary propulsion systems for reduced noise without significant increases in cost and emissions. Noise reduction concepts need to be identified that provide economical alternatives to conventional propulsion systems. NASA is soliciting proposals in one or more of the following areas for Propulsion System Noise Reduction: ? Innovative acoustic source identification techniques for turbomachinery noise. The technique shall be described and demonstrated on a relevant source. A simple source may be used where the solution is known to demon- strate the technique. A clear explanation on how the technique can be applied to turbofan engines should be included. The technique should be capable of identifying sources contributing to dominant engine components, such as fan and jet noise. Fan Noise: The technique shall be capable of separating fan sources such as fan-alone versus fan/stator interaction for both tones and broadband noise. Sufficient resolution is needed to determine the location of the dominant sources on the aerodynamic surfaces. Jet Noise: The technique shall be capable of locating both internal and external mixing noise for dual-flow nozzles found in modern turbofans. ? Innovative turbofan source reduction techniques. Methods shall emphasize noise reduction methods for fan, jet and core components without compromising performance for turbofan engines. A resulting engine system that incorporates one or more of the proposed methods should be capable of reducing perceived noise levels any- where from 10 to 20 EPNdB relative to FAR 36, Stage 3 certification levels. Advanced Materials for Reduced Emissions: Proposals are also sought to address advanced materials, their devel- opment, and their application to primary propulsion systems such as aircraft gas turbines, rocket and turbine based combined cycle engines, and rocket engines as well as auxiliary power sources in aircraft and space vehicles. Mate- rials of interest include any especially used in propulsion systems such as high temperature polymers, nickel base alloys, ceramic matrix composites, coatings for these, and processes for their economical and reliable preparation. A4 Small Aircraft Transportation System Numerous factors combine to create opportunities for a small aircraft transportation system for business and personal travel in the 21st century. These include a rapid growth in the use of air travel (creating safety and afforda- bility issues and increasing pressure on National Airspace System (NAS) capacity for operations by the Government and private sector users), declining numbers of communities served by scheduled air carriers, increasingly stringent international environmental standards, an aging fleet of small aircraft, and aggressive foreign competition. NASA seeks innovative technologies supporting advances in flight systems, airspace and ground systems infrastructure, integrated design and manufacturing and aircraft configuration design concepts as well as general aviation propul- sion technologies. A4.01 Small Aircraft Transportation System Technologies Lead Center: LaRC Participating Center(s): None NASA seeks innovative technologies to support advances for small aircraft transportation systems that substantially increase the demand for retrofit of existing aircraft, new aircraft and airport and airspace utilization. Of specific interest are advanced, affordable, certifiable technologies for human-factors engineered display of flight information for total situational awareness and simplified integration of flight controls with displays and propulsion systems. In addition, innovations are desired in cost-effective, user-friendly improvements in the graphical display of weather, traffic, and NAS facilities’ information services in the cockpit. NASA also seeks innovations in manufacturing methods and materials that can radically reduce the unit cost of small aircraft. Specifically, proposals are sought for the following areas: Aircraft Configuration ? Advanced concepts that reduce the landing speed for FAR Part 23 aircraft under 6,000 pounds by half. Ad- vanced concepts for roadable aircraft are also desired. This category must include a sound business plan for production with a technical plan providing for compatibility with the emerging National Airspace System ar- chitecture and a certification plan to meet at least one of the following applicable FARs: Part 103 (Ultra-lite vehicle), Part 21.24 (Primary Category Aircraft), Part 23 (Certified Aircraft) or Part 27 (Rotorcraft), or Part 21.191 Advisory Circular AC No: 20-27 series (Experimental Homebuilt Aircraft). Flight System Technologies, Information Systems and Pilot Vehicle Interface ? Cost-effective advances in emerging navigation and graphical weather displays, graphical depiction methods, intuitive cockpit display systems with emphasis on pilot-display interface, flight controls, voice interface, port- able and wearable display technologies, communications and human factors engineering technologies to aid pilot decision-making and to reduce cockpit workload. Certifiable Off-the-Shelf System Hardware and Software ? Affordable cockpit systems including sensors, attitude-heading reference systems, terrain, obstacle, and hazard- ous weather avoidance systems, and applications for standardized data bus system architectures such as firmware, software, design and maintenance tools, and flight information and management products for airplane systems status and flight planning. Airspace Infrastructure ? Advances and innovations in digital high-speed, high-bandwidth communications, and intelligent system design for automated, collaborative decision making, and systems for collision avoidance. Integrated Design and Manufacturing ? Innovative manufacturing methods and materials providing significant advances in the cost, safety, weight, and cabin comfort for general aviation aircraft through materials technology, structural designs and assembly, and crash-worthiness. All proposals should include supportability plans (support infrastructure, maintenance re- quirements, operations, and training), certification plans (cite specific FARs), compatibility with current and future airspace architecture, and a clear path to commercialization. A4.02 Small Aircraft Transportation System Propulsion Technologies Lead Center: GRC Participating Center(s): None NASA seeks proposals that offer small aircraft dramatic improvements in acquisition and life-cycle costs, perform- ance, safety and reliability, environmental compatibility (noise, emissions and fuel), ease of operation and passenger comfort through innovative propulsion concepts and/or integration of innovative propulsion technologies. In all cases, the offeror must demonstrate acquisition and life-cycle costs that are at least comparable to current propulsion system costs. Anticipated benefits must be defined using appropriate theoretical and experimental data. An under- standing of the basis of the technology innovation and its application to aircraft engines must be demonstrated. Offerors must address commercialization potential. Paths to FAA certification must be described. Proposals are sought in the following areas: Propulsion Technologies NASA seeks propulsion technologies for small aircraft that will result in substantial improvements over those tar- geted in the NASA General Aviation Propulsion program. Any improvements in areas such as performance, safety, and environmental compatibility must be accomplished with affordability as a prime consideration. Substantially reduced costs, at least 75 percent less than 1997 systems, are highly preferred. Advanced technologies which could lead to advantageous alternate propulsion systems and fuels (e.g., electric propulsion, hydrogen fuel, etc.) are also sought. Offeror must provide strong rationale for the viability and affordability of the propulsion concept which would use the proposed technology, and show substantial benefits over conventional propulsion systems. It is recog- nized that unconventional propulsion systems will likely be long term developments, however, it is highly preferred that the specified technology development addressed by the offeror have an application which could be commer- cialized in the nearer term. Propulsion System Control and Health Monitoring Technology NASA seeks proposals for low cost electronic engine control and health monitoring system technologies which substantially reduce pilot workload, fuel consumption, and engine emissions, and increase safety, reliability, and time between overhaul (TBO). Engine diagnostics should focus on pilot notification of engine status and operability, post-flight diagnostic methods, trend analysis, maintenance aides, and automatic fault accommodation. Much of this technology already exists, but it is too costly and/or too costly to certify for light aircraft. In some cases, cost reduc- tions by orders of magnitude must be achieved. Development of methods for using commercially available high volume hardware and achieving low cost software production and validation is encouraged. A5 Access to Space Of paramount importance is the increase in safety and reliability of our space transportation systems and our goal is to increase flight safety by two orders of magnitude within 10 years from 1997 and by four orders of magnitude in 25 years. Goals also include reducing the payload cost to low earth orbit by an order of magnitude, from $10K to $1K per pound, within 10 years from 1997 and from $1K to $100's per pound by 2025. A5.01 Advanced Space Transportation System Technologies Lead Center: MSFC Participating Center(s): ARC Second and third generation reusable launch vehicle (RLV) systems will require high propellant mass fraction, high thrust to weight propulsion, reliable system performance, extended reusability, autonomous operation, and efficient pre-mission planning in order to achieve cost and crew safety goals. This subtopic emphasizes innovative hardware concepts, subsystems, and design and analysis tools to support development of next generation launch vehicles while lowering operations cost and improving crew safety. Methodology, design and analysis tools, and hardware developed under this subtopic should address technical issues related to propellant tanks, propulsion subsystems, thermal control subsystems, thermal protection systems, structures, guidance, navigation, and control (GN&C), fluid dynamics, supporting discipline analysis, and launch vehicle systems integration issues. Specific areas of interest for technology advancement and innovation include the following: ? Low-cost, lightweight design concepts for propellant tanks and vehicle structures to lower overall vehicle structural mass fraction. ? Control and health management of vehicle and propulsion structural systems by using sensors and effectors that have little influence on the structural system parameters with the exception of the structural damping parame- ters. This also includes real time health monitoring and control of propulsion systems, reliable lightweight sensors, real time data handling techniques, and associated recognition software. ? Systems to provide continuous estimation of center of mass and inertial properties along with real-time tuning of control algorithms to reflect known changes in vehicle response or sensor performance, and accurate, con- tinuous estimation of fuel remaining on board. ? Advanced concepts and techniques to meet thermal control requirements of various launch vehicle subsystems and payload thermal requirements. ? Innovative thermal protection system concepts such as advanced microencapsulated phase change materials to support RLV thermal protection system coating applications, instrumentation analysis tools, and testing tech- niques applicable to RLVs, cryo-tanks, and vehicle base heat shield regions. ? Innovative vehicle preliminary design tools that support the design, analysis, and integration of vehicle subsys- tems and propulsions systems into the vehicle (such as the ability to assess operability of the overall launch vehicle concept and to model the impacts of design changes on vehicle cost, operations, crew safety, vehicle aerodynamics, and controllability). These tools would significantly enhance the overall systems engineering evaluation of potential RLV concepts. ? Integrated CAD, solid-model, structural, dynamic, thermal, and fluid-flow, analysis methods for multi- disciplinary analysis and optimization of subsystems, components, and overall launch vehicles; and improved vehicle analysis tools in the areas of stress, thermal, structural, fluid dynamics, and acoustics. ? Manufacturing and testing techniques that will allow for significant reduction in the cost and schedule required to perform wind tunnel aerodynamic testing of candidate RLV configurations. ? Automated propellant management systems; and technologies and innovative engineering capabilities to pro- duce propulsion storage