Notice: This is to notify all vendors that the due date for the proposals is being extended from November 30, 2023 to December 12, 2023. Time of delivery shall be no later than 2:00PM EDT. GeoXO Spacecraft Final RFP Amendment #1 Due to an error in the links provided at L.12 of the GeoXO Space Craft Final RFP, the clause is updated as follows: FROM: L. 12) ELECTRONIC SUBMISSION OF PROPOSALS – PROPOSAL MARKING AND DELIVERY THROUGH NASA’S EFSS BOX (NOV 2021) (a) The offeror shall submit its proposal via NASA’s Enterprise File Sharing and Sync Box (EFSS Box), a FedRAMP Moderate certified platform. Electronic submissions shall not contain hidden formulas, tables, be locked, be password protected, or contain links to data not included in the electronic copy. All electronic submissions should be searchable and should not contain scanned documents, except those documents that must be provided in their native format (e.g., signature pages, prior award fee letters for past performance, DCAA/DCMA approval letters, as applicable). The offeror shall ensure documents are free from viruses and malware, as documents determined by NASA to contain a virus or malware will not be opened or evaluated. Subcontractors may submit their required proposal information separately using the instructions in this provision. The offeror shall ensure subcontractor submissions are made no later than the date and time specified for proposal submission and comply with all solicitation instructions. (b) Prior to the submission of proposal files, offerors interested in submitting a proposal in response to this solicitation should notify Lisa Mullen of their intent to submit a proposal at least 48 hours prior to the intended submission date, at the following email address:
[email protected]. The offeror shall courtesy copy (cc) Tammy Seidel at
[email protected] on this communication. Offerors, especially those that have not previously submitted a proposal utilizing NASA’s EFSS Box, are encouraged to coordinate the submission of a test file with Lisa Mullen several days in advance of the date and time specified for proposal submission in order to allow time to work through any submission issues. (c) The offeror shall submit all proposal files to: (https://nasagov.app.box.com/f/87649a2e23e44121b1c38a7a5cd4bc9b The Offeror shall follow instructions regarding proposal submission found at https://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/procurement/other/EFSS-Box-Offeror-Proposal-Submission-Instructions.pdf. (d) Offerors are encouraged to include all individual proposal files within a single .zip file. Electronic file names shall be limited to letters, numbers, and single spaces, with the exception of the period that is required before the file extension (e.g., .zip, .pdf), in order to successfully upload and download files from the EFSS Box system. The offeror shall not use special characters “/” or “\” in file names. The offeror shall sequentially number each file and clearly label the contents of the file and include the name of the offeror and subcontractor name (if applicable) in the individual file name. Examples of acceptable individual file names are as follows (not specific to this solicitation): For Prime Offeror Submissions: 1 - Prime Offeror name-solicitation number-MS Volume.doc 3. Prime Offeror name - solicitation number - PP Volume.pdf 7-Prime Offeror name - solicitation number Cost-Price Volume.xlsx For Subcontractor Submissions: 1 - Prime Offeror name-Subcontractor Name-solicitation number-MS Volume.doc 3. Prime Offeror name –Subcontractor Name - solicitation number - PP Volume.pdf 7-Prime Offeror name – Subcontractor Name - solicitation number Cost-Price Volume.xlsx Individual files cannot exceed 150GB per file. Submitted files shall not include password protection. Unless specifically authorized by the solicitation instructions, alternate proposal submissions shall not be submitted. (e) Immediately after all files have been uploaded and the proposal has been submitted in its entirety, the offeror shall notify Lisa Mullen at the following email address:
[email protected] with a listing of all documents by filename that were submitted via EFSS Box. The offeror shall courtesy copy (cc) Tammy Seidel at
[email protected] on this communication. If any problems are experienced with the EFSS Box system (e.g., login, file transfer), please contact Lisa Mullen and a cc copy to Tammy Seidel via e-mail as soon as possible. (f) The offeror is responsible for ensuring its proposal reaches the Government office designated in the solicitation by the date and time specified in the solicitation (see FAR 52.215-1(c)(3)). The Government is not responsible for any failure attributable to the transmission or receipt of documents submitted using electronic means, including the missing of any submission requirements and established deadlines. Please note that uploading documents via EFSS Box and the transmission of the files from the offeror to the Government may not be instantaneous. To ensure timely delivery, the offeror is encouraged to submit its proposal at least 24 hours prior to the due date specified in the solicitation. The electronic submission of the proposal shall contain all information required by the solicitation to be determined responsive. (End of provision) TO: L. 12) ELECTRONIC SUBMISSION OF PROPOSALS – PROPOSAL MARKING AND DELIVERY THROUGH NASA’S EFSS BOX (NOV 2021) (a) The offeror shall submit its proposal via NASA’s Enterprise File Sharing and Sync Box (EFSS Box), a FedRAMP Moderate certified platform. Electronic submissions shall not contain hidden formulas, tables, be locked, be password protected, or contain links to data not included in the electronic copy. All electronic submissions should be searchable and should not contain scanned documents, except those documents that must be provided in their native format (e.g., signature pages, prior award fee letters for past performance, DCAA/DCMA approval letters, as applicable). The offeror shall ensure documents are free from viruses and malware, as documents determined by NASA to contain a virus or malware will not be opened or evaluated. Subcontractors may submit their required proposal information separately using the instructions in this provision. The offeror shall ensure subcontractor submissions are made no later than the date and time specified for proposal submission and comply with all solicitation instructions. (b) Prior to the submission of proposal files, offerors interested in submitting a proposal in response to this solicitation should notify Lisa Mullen of their intent to submit a proposal at least 48 hours prior to the intended submission date, at the following email address:
[email protected]. The offeror shall courtesy copy (cc) Tammy Seidel at
[email protected] on this communication. Offerors, especially those that have not previously submitted a proposal utilizing NASA’s EFSS Box, are encouraged to coordinate the submission of a test file with Lisa Mullen several days in advance of the date and time specified for proposal submission in order to allow time to work through any submission issues. (c) The offeror shall submit all proposal files to: https://nasagov.app.box.com/f/a80c9d5bedba4b9299bb5b8dfd8c215a Enter N/A into the form that provides information about the proposer, IF the information asked for is NOT pertinent to the proposing company. The Offeror shall follow instructions regarding proposal submission found at https://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/procurement/other/EFSS-Box-Offeror-Proposal-Submission-Instructions.pdf (d) Offerors are encouraged to include all individual proposal files within a single .zip file. Electronic file names shall be limited to letters, numbers, and single spaces, with the exception of the period that is required before the file extension (e.g., .zip, .pdf), in order to successfully upload and download files from the EFSS Box system. The offeror shall not use special characters “/” or “\” in file names. The offeror shall sequentially number each file and clearly label the contents of the file and include the name of the offeror and subcontractor name (if applicable) in the individual file name. Examples of acceptable individual file names are as follows (not specific to this solicitation): For Prime Offeror Submissions: 1 - Prime Offeror name-solicitation number-MS Volume.doc 3. Prime Offeror name - solicitation number - PP Volume.pdf 7-Prime Offeror name - solicitation number Cost-Price Volume.xlsx For Subcontractor Submissions: 1 - Prime Offeror name-Subcontractor Name-solicitation number-MS Volume.doc 3. Prime Offeror name –Subcontractor Name - solicitation number - PP Volume.pdf 7-Prime Offeror name – Subcontractor Name - solicitation number Cost-Price Volume.xlsx Individual files cannot exceed 150GB per file. Submitted files shall not include password protection. Unless specifically authorized by the solicitation instructions, alternate proposal submissions shall not be submitted. (e) Immediately after all files have been uploaded and the proposal has been submitted in its entirety, the offeror shall notify Lisa Mullen at the following email address:
[email protected] with a listing of all documents by filename that were submitted via EFSS Box. The offeror shall courtesy copy (cc) Tammy Seidel at
[email protected] on this communication. If any problems are experienced with the EFSS Box system (e.g., login, file transfer), please contact Lisa Mullen and a cc copy to Tammy Seidel via e-mail as soon as possible. (f) The offeror is responsible for ensuring its proposal reaches the Government office designated in the solicitation by the date and time specified in the solicitation (see FAR 52.215-1(c)(3)). The Government is not responsible for any failure attributable to the transmission or receipt of documents submitted using electronic means, including the missing of any submission requirements and established deadlines. Please note that uploading documents via EFSS Box and the transmission of the files from the offeror to the Government may not be instantaneous. To ensure timely delivery, the offeror is encouraged to submit its proposal at least 24 hours prior to the due date specified in the solicitation. The electronic submission of the proposal shall contain all information required by the solicitation to be determined responsive. (End of provision) (End of Amendment 1) GeoXO Spacecraft Final RFP Questions and Answers #3 Question: In reference to Attachment A-418-XO-SCSOW-0122_V_1_0_final.pdf- The two requirements below (SCFPS846/852) mention "Instrument Low-Rate H&S (LRHS) packets" as different packets than instrument housekeeping packets. While housekeeping packets are defined in various instrument UUIDs and the GIRD, there is no definition of Instrument LRHS packets in any of the specifications provided as part of the Final RFP. Please provide a definition for Instrument LRHS packets. Are these packets generated by the instrument or perhaps critical telemetry and/or non-critical telemetry collected by the spacecraft as defined in GIRD 22 formulated into packets? SCFPS846 - The Spacecraft shall include Instrument Low-Rate H&S (LRHS) packets when configured in the high-rate ORTTC link. (CCR-X00220) SCFPS852 - The Spacecraft shall include Instrument Low-Rate H&S (LRHS) packets when configured in the low-rate CDAS link. (CCR-X00220) GIRD24 - Housekeeping telemetry - data required to monitor instrument operation, health, and safety. GIRD22 - Critical telemetry - telemetry points that are required to monitor the instrument in powered OFF state. Non-critical telemetry - telemetry points that are required to monitor the instrument in powered ON state. Answer: These packets are generated by the instruments. These requirements currently exist in the ACX, OCX and PTR Instrument UIIDs. The same requirements are in process of being added for GXI, GXS and LMX but will not be in the UIIDs until after Spacecraft contract award. Please see Attachment F-4 for OCX UIID, requirements OCXUIID131 and OCXUIID132. OCXUIID131: The OCX shall generate Instrument Low-Rate Health & Safety (LRHS) packets containing Non-critical Telemetry. (CCR-X00233) OCXUIID132: The data rate for the Instrument LRHS packets shall be less than or equal to 100 bits per second when averaged over 16 seconds. (CCR-X00233). Please see Attachment F-5 for ACX UIID, requirements ACXUIID137 and ACXUIID138. Please see Attachment F-6 for PTR UIID, requirements PTRUIID112 and PTRUIID113. End of Questions and Answers #3 Notice : The SF-33 is now posted. GeoXO Spacecraft Final RFP Questions and Answers #2 Question : In table of Section A (2), VOSB goals are set at 0.2% and SDVOSB goals are set at 1.5%. SDVOSB goals are a subset of VOSB goals, and therefore cannot be higher than VOSB. Can you confirm these socio-economic goals in FRFP are accurate? Answer : Section L.12 is Electronic Submission of Proposals and (C) is the submittal address. Assuming you are referring to L.13. The information provided is incorrect. The table at A.2 will be updated as follows: Small Businesses (SB) 15.4% Small Disadvantaged Business (SDB) Concerns 1.8% Women-Owned Small Business (WOSB) Concerns 1.2% HUBzone 0.2% Veteran-Owned Small Business (VOSB) Concerns 1.5% Service-Disabled Veteran-Owned Small Business (SDVOSB) Concerns 0.2%" Question : The Proposal Content and Page Limitations table in L.10(b) indicates that Appendix A for block diagrams for the Spacecraft Design is limited to 20 pages. Please confirm that the 20-page Appendix A is outside of the 150 pages for the Mission Suitability volume. Answer : The 20 pages for Appendix A for block diagrams for the Spacecraft Design are outside of the 150 pages for Mission Suitability. Question : The Proposal Content and Page Limitations table in L.10(b) requests an Acronym List in the Past Performance volume that is excluded from page limit/page count. 1) Would the government permit acronym lists to be included with the other volumes to support evaluation and context for the material? 2) Would the government permit these acronym lists for the other volumes to be similarly excluded from page limit/page count? Answer : Yes, the Government agrees with providing acronym lists in each volume and yes, the acronym lists are excluded from the page count. Question : SCSOW809 is showing 3 Dual Sided testbeds while also stating which SHS require decryption and intermediate frequency capabilities. This is in contrast to SCFPS500, SCFPS806, and SCFPS563 in the functional performance spec that intimate that only a single SHS requires these capabilities. Recommend removing SCFPS500, 806, and 563 as they are non-functional requirements that are in conflict with the SOW. Answer : The F&PS requirement state "an instantiation" which is equivalent to configuration. In this case, instantiation in the F&PS does not dictate the quantity. The quantity of each instantiation is dictated in the SOW. Question : In the latest MEL template, the % New Design Column is highlighted. Is the column to be removed? If it does remain, can additional guidance be provided on the expected content? Answer : No, this column should not be removed - this column should be filled out for the proposal. There is no significance to the highlight. The entry in this column should reflect the percentage of the hardware and software that is a "New" design. A "New" design requires Non-Recurring Engineering or has not been flown before. Please provide percentages for the amount of new hardware and new software (only if applicable) separately. Question : Within Appendix C Mission Assurance Compliance Matrix, directions state to “Indicate the method used to verify compliance (Inspection, Test, Analysis, Demonstration)”. Would it be possible to get definitions of those verification methods? Many Mission Assurance requirements are verified or setup through procedure documentation and it is not entirely clear which selection one would use for that option. Answer : Per the NASA Systems Engineering Handbook: 1. Inspection: The visual examination of a realized end product. Inspection is generally used to verify physical design features or specific manufacturer identification. For example, if there is a requirement that the safety arming pin has a red flag with the words “Remove Before Flight” stenciled on the flag in black letters, a visual inspection of the arming pin flag can be used to determine if this requirement was met. 2. Test: The use of a realized end product to obtain detailed data to verify or validate performance or to provide sufficient information to verify or validate performance through further analysis. 3. Analysis: Use of mathematical modeling and analytical techniques to predict the compliance of a design to its requirements based on calculated data or data derived from lower system structure end product validations. 4. Demonstration: Showing that the use of an end product achieves the individual specified requirement (verification) or stakeholder expectation (validation). It is generally a basic confirmation of performance capability, differentiated from testing by the lack of detailed data gathering. Demonstrations can involve the use of physical models or mock-ups; for example, a requirement that all controls shall be reachable by the pilot could be verified by having a pilot perform flight-related tasks in a cockpit mock-up or simulator. A demonstration could also be the actual operation of the end product by highly qualified personnel, such as test pilots, who perform a one-time event that demonstrates a capability to operate at extreme limits of system performance. For the example being questioned (procedure documentation), the verification method would be "inspection" of the completed documentation of the process. Question : The Cost Exhibits released with the Final RFP show DRFP in the heading. Please confirm these are the final version of the cost exhibits to be used by the Offerors. Answer : Yes, that was an oversight on the Government’s part. The posted cost exhibits are the final exhibits. Question : The Cost Volume instructions request completion of Exhibit 4 by the Offeror and any Significant Subcontractors. Please confirm that Exhibit 4a should also be completed by both Offerors and any Significant Subcontractors. Answer : Exhibit 4a should be completed by both Offerors and any Significant Subcontractors. Question : On Attachment R, Link Budget, tab ORTTC, row 102 has 29.0 and 20.5 The references clearly state 29.0 and 22.4. Which is correct – 20.5 or 22.4? The requirement and Excel do not match. Answer : The spreadsheet is correct as written. The correct number is 20.5 as sited in section 6.5.1 of the C3SIRD . The vendor may be looking at an old version of C3SIRD. SAM.gov has the correct version posted. (End Questions and Answers #2) GeoXO Spacecraft Final RFP Questions and Answers Question : FAR 52.219-9 (Sep 2023) is included in the solicitation. However, RFP, Part IV, Section L – Subfactor C – Small Business Utilization (A)(1) states that FAR 52.219-9 Alternate II is included in the solicitation. Please clarify which version to utilize? Answer : The correct clause is FAR 52.219-9 ALT ll. The final contract will contain the correct version in Section I. Question : Small Business Utilization (A)(7) states that offerors shall complete Exhibits 7A, 7B, and 7C. Can the offeror utilize their own format and only include within the small business subcontracting plan itself as FAR 52.219-9 already requires this information to be included within the plan? Answer : No, all Exhibits must be filled in and submitted with proposal. Question : The Offeror shall propose a Master Equipment List (MEL) in Excel format in accordance with Attachment Q summarizing all major subsystem components to support validation of proposed mass estimates, power estimates, TRL, design heritage, and cost . The MEL Attachment Q matrix indicates cost is not to be included in the Column. Please clarify. Answer: The MEL is not required to have the cost data. Please put material costs in Cost Exhibit 4. Question : MEL has this calculation (C46+C47) for propellant/pressurant. C46 is Instrument total mass and C47 is SC MEC dry-mass total. This calculation seems to be incorrect as the propellant mass is a calculation based on the mass and the performance of the thrusters used. Please Clarify Answer: There should be no calculation in that cell. What is currently in the cell is incorrect. The propellant / pressurant quantity should be entered by the Offeror. GeoXO Spacecraft Final RFP Questions and Answers Question : FAR 52.219-9 (Sep 2023) is included in the solicitation. However, RFP, Part IV, Section L – Subfactor C – Small Business Utilization (A)(1) states that FAR 52.219-9 Alternate II is included in the solicitation. Please clarify which version to utilize? Answer : The correct clause is FAR 52.219-9 ALT ll. The final contract will contain the correct version in Section I. Question : Small Business Utilization (A)(7) states that offerors shall complete Exhibits 7A, 7B, and 7C. Can the offeror utilize their own format and only include within the small business subcontracting plan itself as FAR 52.219-9 already requires this information to be included within the plan? Answer : No, all Exhibits must be filled in and submitted with proposal. Question : The Offeror shall propose a Master Equipment List (MEL) in Excel format in accordance with Attachment Q summarizing all major subsystem components to support validation of proposed mass estimates, power estimates, TRL, design heritage, and cost . The MEL Attachment Q matrix indicates cost is not to be included in the Column. Please clarify. Answer: The MEL is not required to have the cost data. Please put material costs in Cost Exhibit 4. Question : MEL has this calculation (C46+C47) for propellant/pressurant. C46 is Instrument total mass and C47 is SC MEC dry-mass total. This calculation seems to be incorrect as the propellant mass is a calculation based on the mass and the performance of the thrusters used. Please Clarify Answer: There should be no calculation in that cell. What is currently in the cell is incorrect. The propellant / pressurant quantity should be entered by the Offeror. You are invited to submit a proposal on the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Goddard Space Flight Center’s Geostationary Extended Observations (GeoXO) Spacecraft Implementation solicitation. The GeoXO Program is procuring spacecraft for the GeoXO series that includes an east, west, and center spacecraft. The GeoXO spacecrafts are three axis stabilized geostationary spacecrafts that will support three instruments each. The east and west spacecraft will also support an auxiliary communication payload for the NOAA Data Collection System (DCS) supporting relay, dissemination and commanding. The procurement with the base contract and all options will consist of a total of seven (7) spacecraft – with launches planned for the first six spacecraft and the seventh spacecraft having no current launch date. The contract scope includes the tasks necessary to design, analyze, develop, fabricate, integrate, test, evaluate, and support launch of the GeoXO spacecraft; provide Engineering Development Units (EDUs); supply and maintain the Ground Support Equipment (GSE) and simulators; and support the mission operations at the NOAA Satellite Operations Facility (NSOF). The spacecraft has a risk classification of Class B. NASA will conduct this acquisition as a full and open competition. The North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code for this acquisition is 336414 and the small business size standard is 1,300 employees. This competitive acquisition will result in a Cost-Plus-Award-Fee (CPAF) hardware contract, for the development of three spacecraft, and four options for additional spacecraft. The anticipated period of performance for this contract includes support for 10 years of on-orbit operations and 5 years of on-orbit storage, for a total of 15 years for each Flight Model (FM). Section H.13, Special Task Support Requirements of the RFP specifies that the Government may order special study tasks under the resultant hardware contract for risk reduction and mitigation activities. The clause includes a total dollar amount of $35,000,000 which is the maximum amount the Government may order for special task orders. This dollar value is also reflected in the cost exhibits for proposal purposes. Potential offerors should ensure its company is listed in the online database(s) for the following: System for award management: https://www.sam.gov/SAM/ U.S. Department of Labor Veterans’ Employment and Training Service, VETS-4212 Reports: https://vets4212.dol.gov/vets4212/ Date Universal Numbering System (and the transition to the US Government’s unique entity identifier (UEI)): https://www.gsa.gov/about-us/organization/federal-acquisition-service/office-of-systems-management/integrated-award-environment-iae/iae-information-kit/unique-entity-identifier-update The successful offeror must pass an Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) clearance before contract award (See FAR 22.805). The anticipated contract award date and effective date is on or about late May 2024. The contract will be performed offsite at the Contractor’s facilities, and Kennedy Space Center (KSC). Potential offerors should pay close attention to all solicitation instructions; however, the following requirements list is summarized to assist in proposal development. Please note that this list is not exhaustive, and the solicitation terms and conditions and provisions in sections L and M take precedence: Be advised, in accordance with provision L.14, Offerors need to encourage their references to submit their Past Performance Questionnaires directly to the Contracting Officer prior to proposal due date. Below is a list of the Source Selection Authority (SSA) and voting members along with their associated NASA GSFC organizational codes, for the Source Evaluation Board (SEB). The names provided are for informational purposes only and other than the Contracting Officer, Lisa Mullen, these individuals shall not be contacted regarding this acquisition. The Government may change personnel associated with this acquisition at its discretion. SSA Dave Pierce, Code 100 Voting Members Michelle Rizzo, Code 418 Chris Wheeler, Code 418 Steve Bidwell, Code 599 Alexander Krimchansky, Code 590 Gerd Fischer, Code 383 Tupper Hyde, Code 100 Offerors are required to have a Commercial and Government Entity (CAGE) code that matches the corporate address submitted with its proposal. Offerors are encouraged to refer to Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) provision 52.215-1, INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS–COMPETITIVE ACQUISITION, in particular paragraph (f)(4) which discusses the Government’s right to award a contract without discussions. In order to control and protect sensitive data owned by the Government and its Contractors, NASA policy required all acquisition-related documents be released in Adobe Portable Document Format (PDF). Potential Offeror’s may request an EXCEL version of Attachment Q, MEL, Attachment P, TAM and Attachment R, Link Budget, directly from the Contracting Officer through written request to
[email protected]. While the RFP’s Cost Volume exhibits are in PDF format, the Offeror’s Cost Volume proposal shall include completed Cost Volume exhibits in Microsoft Office Excel format with working cell formulas. Instructions for converting from PDF format to Excel format can be found in the Cost Volume Instructions. NASA FAR Supplement (NFS) clause 1852.215-84, OMBUDSMAN, is applicable. The Ombudsman for this acquisition is Raymond “Ray” Rubilotta, Associate Director,
[email protected], 301-286-5867. This RFP does not commit NASA GSFC to pay any proposal preparation costs, nor does it obligate NASA GSFC to procure or contract for these services. This request is not an authorization to proceed and does not authorize payment for any charges incurred by the offeror for performing any of the work called for in this solicitation. Proposals submitted in response to this solicitation shall be due no later than 2:00 PM ET, November 30, 2023 . Proposals for this solicitation are required to be submitted through NASA’s Enterprise File Sharing and Sync Box (EFSS Box), a FedRAMP Moderate certified platform. Potential offerors, especially those that have not previously submitted a proposal utilizing NASA’s EFSS Box, are encouraged to review the solicitation instruction entitled “Electronic Proposal Delivery - Proposal Marking and Delivery Through NASA’s EFSS Box” which provides instructions related to the submission of proposal via EFSS Box. Offerors are encouraged to check with their corporate IT staff to determine if there are firewall restrictions that would need to be addressed prior to the submission of proposal files through NASA’s EFSS Box. In accordance with NFS 1815.201(f), a “Blackout Notice” has been issued to NASA personnel. All inquiries/communications pertaining to this acquisition shall be directed only to the Contracting Officer listed below. All questions regarding this RFP should be submitted in writing, electronically to, Contracting Officer, at
[email protected] on or before October 13, 2023 . Offerors are encouraged to submit questions as soon as possible for consideration. Documents related to this acquisition, including this letter, the solicitation, attachments, exhibits, any amendments, and links to online reference/technical/bidders’ library (if applicable) will be attainable electronically from the World Wide Web through the Government-wide point of entry website at www.SAM.gov. Potential Offerors are requested to periodically monitor the websites for updates. Thank you for your support. We look forward to receiving your proposals.