Closed — responses were due 5 Feb 2026 · No Set aside used · National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) · Houston, TX · NAICS 481212 · Solicitation 80JSC026CLPS2
Following NAICS 481212? Get new solicitations in it by email as they post — no account needed.
A newer version of this notice has been posted. SAM.gov republished solicitation 80JSC026CLPS2 on 12 November 2026. This page is kept because it is a real record, but the current requirement, dates and attachments are on the latest version. Read the latest version →
What happened next
This solicitation has closed — responses were due 05 February 2026.
Awarded to Multiple Houston TX 77058 USA for $0, posted 12 November 2026. Read the award notice →
This one has closed. We'll email you when new NAICS 481212 (Nonscheduled Chartered Freight Air Transportation) solicitations post — the first email lists what is open right now, then at most once a week, only when something new posts. No account needed; unsubscribe in a click.
Description
The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA)/Johnson Space Center (JSC) is hereby soliciting information from potential sources for Commercial Lunar Payload Services (CLPS) 2.0 solicitation. JSC is issuing this Sources Sought Synopsis (SSS)/Request for Information (RFI) as a means of conducting market research to identify parties having an interest in, and the resources to, support this requirement. This acquisition will be a follow-on procurement to the current NASA CLPS contracts which limited the competition to domestic sources that provide domestically manufactured space vehicles including landers/transporters. The result of this market research will contribute to determining the type and method of procurement. The applicable North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code assigned to this procurement is 481212 Nonscheduled Chartered Freight Air Transportation with a size standard of 1,500 employees. NASA/JSC is seeking capability statements from all interested parties, including all socioeconomic categories of Small Businesses and Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCU)/Minority Institutions (MI) for the purposes of determining the appropriate level of competition and/or small business subcontracting goals for CLPS 2.0. The Government reserves the right to consider a Small, 8(a), Women-owned (WOSB), Service-Disabled Veteran (SD-VOSB), Economically Disadvantaged Women-owned Small Business (EDWOSB) or HUBZone business set-aside based on responses received. CLPS 2.0 Description: The primary objective of this contract is to provide all activities necessary to safely integrate, accommodate, transport, and operate NASA Sponsored Payloads using contractor-provided assets, including launch vehicles, lunar lander spacecraft, lunar surface systems, Earth re-entry vehicles and associated resources. Capability Statement: Interested firms having the required capabilities necessary to provide the end-to-end services as described above, should indicate their abilities to perform all aspects of the effort, and include the following information: 1. Technical - Describe your company's overall skills, experience, and capabilities to perform the work of the anticipated CLPS 2.0 procurement. If subcontracting or if a joint venture is anticipated, organizations should address the anticipated administrative and management structure of such arrangements (if this information is known at this time). Also address what elements of work would be performed by the prime or joint venture partners and which elements would be performed by subcontractors. 2. General a. What barriers or obstacles do you foresee to potentially bidding on this contract? Can you identify any Government acquisition approaches that would increase the competitiveness of this procurement? b. What innovations might you propose in the performance of this contract or contract structure? c. Provide feedback and rationale on any other topics, factors, and/or items of interest you would like to address regarding this potential procurement. 3. Company-Specific Information - Responses must include the following: a. Name and address of the firm’s Point of Contact information (include DUNS number, address, phone, and email) b. Size of business i. Average annual revenue for past three years ii. Number of employees iii. Whether the firm is Large, SB, Small Disadvantaged Business (SBD), HUBZone, WOSB, Veteran Owned Small Business (VOSB), SDVOSB, and/or HBCU/MI c. Number of years in business CLPS Specific Questions: These CLPS Specific Questions are organized into three sections, each tailored to a specific group of participants. We encourage all participants to respond to the sections that are most relevant to their expertise. 1. Current and Prospective CLPS Vendors This group includes companies that design, build, and operate the lunar landers. Their responses are the most critical for understanding the technical and operational feasibility of CLPS 2.0. A. NASA Insight Models i. Describe your ideal model for collaboration with NASA throughout the mission lifecycle, from award to post-mission data review. What types of collaborative activities, interactions, or technical assistance are most beneficial to ensure task order success? Where could NASA’s involvement be streamlined or adjusted to maximize mission success? ii. What level of NASA insight and oversight would your company recommend for missions where NASA has a lower risk tolerance due to high-value payloads? Please provide an example of a flexible insight model that balances mission success with CLPS cost-efficiency. B. Expanded Capabilities i. What progress has your company made in developing the capability and commercial processes for accommodating and launching radioactive sources, such as Radioisotope Heater Units or Radioisotope Power Systems, on your missions? Please describe your readiness, any specific challenges encountered, and proposed solutions for their safe integration and transport. Please discuss if the radioisotope systems you are considering would enable extended operations within a Permanently Shadowed Region (PSR). ii. What are the key technical and financial challenges associated with offering a sample return capability on a future CLPS mission? What size lander and ascent stage would be needed for 2 kg return mass and how could NASA best collaborate on this type of mission? C. Lander Providers & Market Development i. As a lander provider, what is your assessment of the viability of the commercial lunar payload market? What should NASA’s role be in the commercial lunar delivery market and how can NASA contribute to stimulating the lunar economy? ii. If NASA were to make ‘block buys’ of multiple missions in a single task order, what would be the major benefits and challenges of that approach? Please discuss if all payload requirements for each mission should be set at award or if NASA might obtain pre-negotiated prices for future un-specified payloads at award. D. Payload Accommodation & Interface Requirements i. From a lander developer perspective, what specific areas of payload interfaces offer the most significant potential for efficiency and cost gains through standardization (e.g., mechanical, electrical, data, thermal, or operational aspects)? Please identify these areas and suggest concrete types of standardization for CLPS 2.0. E. Artemis Logistics and Support i. What specific technical, operational, and financial challenges do CLPS vendors face when supporting future Artemis human missions that require more capability, higher reliability, and higher safety standards? How can NASA ensure high reliability for Artemis support missions while working under a commercial model like CLPS? ii. For larger (>2 mt payload) landers, please recommend ways in which landers could enable offloading of payloads, such as, lowering to the surface to be available for other mobility services to move? What would be the impacts to lander performance or other capabilities to make offloading available? How could a lander best interface with external systems for offloading if required? F. Additional Comments i. Provide any other information that you feel could help NASA shape the future of the CLPS initiative. 2. Payload Providers This group includes commercial customers, scientific and technology teams from NASA centers, and NASA-funded PIs from universities. Their feedback is essential for understanding the needs and challenges of all users of lunar services. A. Payload Characteristics & Needs i. As a payload provider, what is your assessment of the commercial lunar payload market? What are the biggest technical and financial challenges commercial payload providers face in getting to the Moon, and how can NASA best enable these deliveries on CLPS 2.0? ii. If you are planning to fly payloads on a future CLPS mission, what are the anticipated scope and objectives of your expected payload manifest and are they NASA related or commercial focused? What are the basic characteristics of your payload manifest (mass, volume, power, data volume/rates, operational duration, period of performance, landing site, stand-alone, lander-dependent, etc.)? • Which capabilities, accommodations, and interfaces are commonly requested? • Which future capabilities are highly sought after (e.g., high-power, long-duration ops, advanced thermal control, mobility deployment, night survivability, etc.) but are currently limited or unavailable? • Does your payload require co-manifesting space on the CLPS mission’s launch vehicle? If so, how can NASA best sustain this option? B. Payload Accommodation & Interface Requirements i. How should CLPS 2.0 balance the benefits of standardized interfaces with the flexibility required for diverse payload objectives? Please identify the specific areas (e.g., mechanical, electrical, data, thermal, operational) where and how standardization could most significantly constrain unique payload…
Version history
SAM.gov has posted 12 notices under solicitation 80JSC026CLPS2, oldest first.
FedSift reads the full solicitation package — every attachment — and pre-extracts the compliance matrix, evaluation factors, key risks, win themes and deal-breakers, each with a verbatim quote and the exact PDF page it came from. It scores the opportunity against your company profile, tells you whether to bid as prime or sub, and ranks teaming partners who could close your gaps.
Source: this notice on SAM.gov. FedSift republishes public federal procurement data and is not affiliated with the U.S. Government. Always confirm dates and requirements against SAM.gov before responding.
