Enclosure SASS RFP Document Change Log.pdf

Enclosure

SASS Request for Proposal (RFP) Document Change Log

Section Draft RFP Page #

From Final RFP Page #

To

Section C, Statement of Work 4.2, 1st Bullet

• High fidelity orbital dynamics and natural environment modeling

• High fidelity orbital dynamics and natural environment modeling

(e.g. JSC Engineering Orbital Dynamics (JEOD))

Section C, Statement of Work 4.2, 2nd paragraph

8 The contractor shall have responsibilities that include maintenance and upgrade of simulations to meet engineering analysis, operations, and training customer requirements, as well as the capability to resolve verification and validation issues related to supporting rendezvous, proximity operations, and docking simulation models.

8 The contractor shall provide maintenance and upgrade of simulations to meet engineering analysis, operations, and training customer requirements, as well as the capability to resolve verification and validation issues related to supporting rendezvous, proximity operations, and docking simulation models

Section C Statement of Work 4.2, After 2nd Paragraph Added Paragraphs 3 and

8 8 The contractor shall develop and maintain cockpit interfaces to computer-based simulations, including development of customized hand controllers to replicate the functionality of hand controllers on current and proposed NASA vehicles; control panels, both physical and virtual, that provide simulation users with the ability to interact with a simulation; and user interfaces to start, stop, and control the simulation.

The contractor shall develop and maintain data visualization tools for comparing simulation runs, analyzing data spikes, and creating reports. These tools must handle very large data sets (thousands of runs) and have the ability to run during sim execution and post processing.

Section C, Statement of Work 4.3, 2nd Paragraph

8 The contractor shall have responsibilities including maintenance and upgrade of simulations to meet engineering analysis, operations, and training customer requirements; as well as analysis of verification and validation issues related to supporting surface interaction simulation models.

8 The contractor shall provide maintenance and upgrade of simulations to meet engineering analysis, operations, and training customer requirements;

as well as analysis of verification and validation issues related to supporting surface interaction simulation models.

Section C, Statement of Work 4.5, 4th Bullet

9 • Pattern matching statistical classification systems, biological inspired optimization deep machine learning algorithms such as convolution and recurrent neural networks, genetic algorithms, particle swarm optimization

9 • Artificial Intelligent Machine Learning, pattern matching statistical classification systems, biological inspired optimization deep machine learning algorithms such as convolution and recurrent neural networks, genetic algorithms, particle swarm optimization

Section Draft RFP Page #

From Final RFP Page #

To

Section C, Statement of Work 4.5, 2nd Paragraph

9 The contractor shall utilize these tools to achieve software engineering process efficiencies by providing the functions of knowledge capture, management, and knowledge-based application development; software reusability; design content sharing/exchange; automatic generation of associated products such as but not limited to Failure Modes and Effects Analysis (FMEA), simulations, human computer interaction display software;

procedure authoring, verification and validation; coordinated testing across heterogeneous distributed system architectures, and support of software engineering process management.

9 The contractor shall utilize these tools to achieve software engineering process efficiencies by providing the functions of knowledge capture, management, and knowledge-based application development; software reusability; design content sharing/exchange; automatic generation of associated products such as but not limited to Failure Modes and Effects Analysis (FMEA), Fault Tree Analysis (FTA), Probability Risk Assessment (PRA) and Bayesian Network simulations, human computer interaction display software; procedure authoring, verification and validation; coordinated testing across heterogeneous distributed system architectures, and support of software engineering process management.

Section C, Statement of Work 4.7, Title

10 4.7 AVIONICS FLIGHT SOFTWARE 10 4.7 AVIONICS FLIGHT AND MISSION SUPPORT SOFTWARE

Section C, Statement of Work 4.7, 1st paragraph

10 Avionics FSW work involves developing and deploying human-rated flight software for the Vehicle Systems Management (VSM) and Onboard Vehicle functions and the associated System Engineering and Integration (SE&I) effort, as well as development and support services for avionics and embedded flight software systems.

10 Avionics FSW work involves developing and deploying human-rated flight software for the Vehicle Systems Management (VSM) and Onboard Vehicle functions and the associated System Engineering and Integration (SE&I) effort, as well as development and support services for avionics and embedded flight software systems and software process engineering services.

Section C, Statement of Work 4.7, 1ST Paragraph, after 1st

Bullet

10 The contractor shall provide:

• The development and deployment of flight software VSM and Onboard

Vehicle functions, including vehicle level Fault, Detection, Isolation, and Recovery (FDIR), electronic procedures system, operating mode management, resource management, onboard test and checkout support and autonomous operations functions (for when the vehicle must operate unattended),

• SE&I tasks involving the collaborative management of the flight software requirements analysis, architecture design trade studies, application integration and test, verification and validation analyses, and flight certification

10-11 The contractor shall provide:

• The development and deployment of flight software VSM and

Onboard Vehicle functions, including vehicle level Fault, Detection, Isolation, and Recovery (FDIR), electronic procedures system, operating mode management, resource management, onboard test and checkout support and autonomous operations functions (for when the vehicle must operate unattended),

• Simulation and FSW development, integration and test in ground flight avionics facilities and functional equivalent environments -ADDED

• Mission support software development, test and deployment of applications used to support onboard training, autonomous logistics management, machine learning, wireless sensing, and operation -ADDED

• SE&I tasks involving the collaborative management of the flight software requirements analysis, architecture design trade studies, application integration and test, verification and validation analyses, and flight certification

• Software process engineering services to include development and maintenance of software engineering processes and artifacts required for compliance with NASA software engineering standards (e.g., NPR 7150.2) and CMMI standards, including services to support CMMI certification appraisals and audits -ADDED

From Final RFP Page #

To

Section G, Contract Administration

Data, Added

Full Text Clause 1852.227-72

15 - 15-16 (Full Text) 1852.227-72 DESIGNATION OF NEW TECHNOLOGY

REPRESENTATIVE AND PATENT REPRESENTATIVE (APR 2015)

Section H, Special Contract Requirements, Added Supplement for

FAR 52.227-15

27 - 27-29 (ADDED) INDENTIFICATION AND REPRESENTATION OF

LIMITED RIGHTS DATA AND RESTRICTED COMPUTER

SOFTWARE

Section I, Contract Clauses, IBR

Added 52.222-53

30 52.222-50 COMBATING TRAFFICKING IN PERSONS (JAN 2019)

52.222-54 EMPLOYMENT ELIGIBILITY VERIFICATION (OCT 2015)

32 52.222-50 COMBATING TRAFFICKING IN PERSONS (JAN 2019)

52.222-53 EXEMPTION FROM APPLICATIONS OF THE SERVICE

CONTRACT LABOR STANDARDS TO CONTRACTS FOR

CERTAIN SERVICES REQUIREMENTS (MAY 2014)

52.222-54 EMPLOYMENT ELIGIBILITY VERIFICATION (OCT

2015)

Section I, Contract Clauses, Deleted 52.227-13, Remove from List, 52.227-14 Added 52.227-11

31 52.227-2 NOTICE AND ASSISTANCE REGARDING PATENT AND

COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT (DEC 2007)

52.227-13 PATENT RIGHTS--OWNERSHIP BY THE GOVERNMENT

(DEC 2007)

52.227-14 RIGHTS IN DATA--GENERAL (MAY 2014)

52.227-16 ADDITIONAL DATA REQUIREMENTS (JUN 1987)

33 52.227-2 NOTICE AND ASSISTANCE REGARDING PATENT AND

COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT (DEC 2007)

52.227-13 PATENT RIGHTS--OWNERSHIP BY THE

GOVERNMENT (DEC 2007)

52.227-14 RIGHTS IN DATA--GENERAL (MAY 2014)

52.227-11 PATENT RIGHTS- OWNERSHIP BY THE CONTRACTOR

52.227-16 ADDITIONAL DATA REQUIREMENTS (JUN 1987)

Section I, Contract Clauses, Added 1852.227-70, 1852.227-88

33 1852.223-74 DRUG- AND ALCOHOL-FREE WORKFORCE (NOV 2015)

1852.228-75 MINIMUM INSURANCE COVERAGE (OCT 1988)

35 1852.223-74 DRUG- AND ALCOHOL-FREE WORKFORCE (NOV

2015)

1852.227-70 NEW TECHNOLOGY- OTHER THAN SMALL

BUSINESS FIRM OR NONPROFIT ORGANIZATION (APR 2015)

1852.227-88 GOVERNMENT-FURNISHED COMPUTER

SOFTWARE AND RELATED TEHCNICAL DATA (APR 2015)

1852.228-75 MINIMUM INSURANCE COVERAGE (OCT 1988)

Section I, Contract Clauses Added 52.227-14

37 - 39-47 (FULL TEXT) 52.227-14 RIGHTS IN DATA—GENERAL (MAY

2014), ALTERNATE II (DEC 2007), AND ALTERNATE III (DEC

2007), AS MODIFIED BY NFS 1852.227-14 RIGHTS IN DATA—

GENERAL (APR 2015)

From Final RFP Page #

To

Section J, List of Attachments, Added DRD 12

41 DRD-10-NASA CONTRACTOR FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT REPORTS

(NF 533)

DRD-11-PHASE- IN PLAN

51 DRD-10-NASA CONTRACTOR FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT

REPORTS (NF 533)

DRD-11-PHASE- IN PLAN

DRD-12-THE NASA ADVISORY AND GIDEP PROBLEM DATA

SHARING AND UTILIZATION PROGRAM DOCUMENTATION

AND REPORTING PLAN

Section J, List of Attachments

Added Attachment J-15

41 ATTACHMENT J-13 GOVERNMENT PROPERTY MANAGEMENT

PLAN

ATTACHMENT J-14 TOTAL COMPENSATION PLAN

51 ATTACHMENT J-13 GOVERNMENT PROPERTY MANAGEMENT

PLAN

ATTACHMENT J-14 TOTAL COMPENSATION PLAN

ATTACHMENT J-15 THE NASA ADVISORY AND GIDEP

PROBLEM DATA SHARING AND UTILIZATION PROGRAM

DOCUMENTATION AND REPORTING PLAN

Section J, List of Attachments, J2 DRL & DRD’s

42-90 Attachment J-2, DRL & DRD’s – (Removed from body of RFP) Enclosure Attachment J-2 will accompany the Final RFP as an attachment - “80JSC020R0018 SASS DRL-DRD’s”

Section J, List of Attachments, Inserted Attachment J-1, List of Applicable

Documents

- - 52 Attachment J-1, Applicable Documents List

Section J, List of Attachments, Attachment J2- DRL and DRD’s

91 - 53 Reference separate PDF document "80JSC020R0018 SASS DRL- DRD's" (ADDED)

Section K, Reps, Certs, and Other, Statements of Offerors or Respondents, 52.204-8 (c)(2)

Selected 52.227-6, 52.227-15

[ ] (vi) 52.223-9, with its Alternate I, Estimate of Percentage of Recovered Material Content for EPA-Designated Products (Alternate I only).

[ ] (vii) 52.227-6, Royalty Information.

[ ] (A) Basic.

[ ] (B) Alternate I.

[ ] (viii) 52.227-15, Representation of Limited Rights Data and Restricted Computer Software.

[ ] (vi) 52.223-9, with its Alternate I, Estimate of Percentage of Recovered Material Content for EPA-Designated Products (Alternate I only).

[ X ] (vii) 52.227-6, Royalty Information.

[ ] (A) Basic.

[ ] (B) Alternate I.

[ X ] (viii) 52.227-15, Representation of Limited Rights Data and Restricted Computer Software.

From Final RFP Page #

To

Section L, Instructions, Conditions, and Notices to Offerors or Respondents

L.1 List of Provisions Incorporated by

Reference

1852.233-70 PROTESTS TO NASA (DEC 2015)

1852.227-84 PATENT RIGHTS CLAUSES (APR 2015)

L.2 52.216-1 TYPE OF CONTRACT (APR 1984)

80 52.250-2 SAFETY ACT COVERAGE NOT APPLICABLE (FEB 2009)

1852.227-71 REQUESTS FOR WAIVER OF RIGHTS TO

INVENTIONS (APR 2015) (ADDED)

1852.227-84 PATENT RIGHTS CLAUSES (APR 2015)

1852.233-70 PROTESTS TO NASA (DEC 2015) (Moved down in order of numbering)

Section L, Instructions, Conditions, and Notices to Offerors or Respondents, L.3 (a)

52.233-2 SERVICE OF

PROTEST (SEP 2006)

Solicitation Number has been updated

118 (a) Protests, as defined in section 33.101 of the Federal Acquisition Regulation, that are filed directly with an agency, and copies of any protests that are filed with the Government Accountability Office (GAO), shall be served on the Contracting Officer (addressed as follows) by obtaining written and dated acknowledgment of receipt from

NASA/Johnson Space Center Attn: Chrystal D. Wiseman 2101 NASA Parkway Houston, TX 77058 Phone: 281-792-7842 Email: chrystal.d.wiseman@nasa.gov Solicitation: 80JSC018SASS

81 (a) Protests, as defined in section 33.101 of the Federal Acquisition Regulation, that are filed directly with an agency, and copies of any protests that are filed with the Government Accountability Office (GAO), shall be served on the Contracting Officer (addressed as follows) by obtaining written and dated acknowledgment of receipt from

NASA/Johnson Space Center Attn: Chrystal D. Wiseman 2101 NASA Parkway Houston, TX 77058 Phone: 281-792-7842 Email: chrystal.d.wiseman@nasa.gov Solicitation: 80JSC020R0018

Section L, Instructions, Conditions, and Notices to Offerors or Respondents, L.10, PROPOSAL

MARKING AND

DELIVERY

122 JSC 52.215-08 PROPOSAL MARKING AND DELIVERY THROUGH

FEDERAL BUSINESS OPPORTUNITIES (FBO) (AUG 2018)

85 PROPOSAL MARKING AND DELIVERY THROUGH SYSTEM FOR

AWARD MANAGEMENT (BETA.SAM.GOV)

Throughout L.10 FBO.gov has been replaced with beta.sam.gov and the term “Vendor User Guide” has been replaced with “ Learning Center”

Section L, Instructions, Conditions, and Notices to Offerors or Respondents, L.11 AVAILABILTY

OF SPECIFICATIONS,

122 JSC 52.215-123 AVAILABILTY OF SPECIFICATIONS (NOV 2018) 86 AVAILABILTY OF SPECIFICATIONS

Throughout L.11 FBO.gov has been replaced with beta.sam.gov.

From Final RFP Page #

To

Section L, Instructions, Conditions, and Notices to Offerors or Respondents, L.12 (b)

JSC 52.215-124

COMMUNICATIONS

REGARDING THIS

SOLICITATION

123 “QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS SOLICITATION MUST BE

PRESENTED IN WRITING and shall be submitted electronically to the above e-mail address by TBD in order that…”

86 “QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS SOLICITATION MUST BE

PRESENTED IN WRITING and shall be submitted electronically to the above e-mail address by December 16, 2019 in order that…”

Section L, Instructions, Conditions, and Notices to Offerors or Respondents, L.17.2 (a)

PROPOSAL

ARRANGEMENT,

PAGE LIMITATIONS,

COPIES, AND DUE

DATES

The entire proposal is due by TBD at 3:00 p.m. Eastern Time. The delivery location is specified in 52.215-108 Proposal Marking and Delivery through Federal Business Opportunities (FBO). Late proposals will not be accepted in accordance with FAR52.215-1, “Instructions to Offerors – Competitive Acquisition.”

The entire proposal is due by January 13, 2020 at 3:00 p.m. Eastern Time/ 2:00 p.m. Central Time. The delivery location is specified in Proposal Marking and Delivery beta.sam.gov. Late proposals will not be accepted in accordance with FAR 52.215-1, “Instructions to Offerors – Competitive Acquisition.”

Section L, Instructions, Conditions, and Notices to Offerors or Respondents, Table L.2: Overview of Proposal Volumes, Page Limitations, Copies, and

Format

126 Volume II, Title: Past Performance Factor, Page Limit 25 90 Volume II, Title: Past Performance Factor, Page Limit 30

Section L, Instructions, Conditions, and Notices to Offerors or Respondents, L.17.4,Subfactor B:

Specific Technical Understanding And Resources Of The

Sample Task Orders, 1st Paragraph

129 Specific Technical Understanding and Resources of The Sample Task Orders

- The offerors are required to demonstrate their understanding of the requirements and the specific labor resources needed to successfully perform the requirements of this Contract as represented by the eight Sample Task Orders listed in Table L-3, from a technical and resource standpoint. Since the paragraphs and Tables described in these instructions are also intended to facilitate the technical evaluation of the offeror’s Cost/Price proposal, offerors should carefully follow these instructions.

93 Specific Technical Understanding and Resources of The Sample Task Orders - The offerors are required to demonstrate their understanding of the requirements and the specific labor resources needed to successfully perform the requirements of this Contract as represented by the eight Sample Task Orders listed in Table L-3, from a technical and resource standpoint. Since the paragraphs and Tables described in these instructions are also intended to facilitate the technical evaluation of the offeror’s Cost/Price proposal (Deleted). Offerors should carefully follow these instructions

Section L, Instructions, Conditions, and Notices to Offerors or Respondents, Section L.17.4,Table L-

4: Cumulative* Government Resource

Estimate, Sample TO #8

SAMPLE TO #8

6.5

SAMPLE TO #8

14.25

From Final RFP Page #

To

Section L, Instructions, Conditions, and Notices to Offerors or Respondents, Section L.17.5.1(i) Past

Performance Information

Last Sentence

133-134 The Offeror is responsible for ensuring that all references are directed to return one copy of each questionnaire directly to the Contracting Officer via e-mail or to the contact identified in Provision L.11 JSC 52.215-108 Proposal Marking and Delivery through Federal Business Opportunities (FBO).

98 The Offeror is responsible for ensuring that all references are directed to return one copy of each questionnaire directly to the Contracting Officer via e-mail or to the contact identified in Provision L.10 Proposal Marking and Delivery through beta.sam.gov.

Section L, Instructions, Conditions, and Notices to Offerors or Respondents, Section L.17.6 1(c) Cost/Price Factor-

Volume III

138 (c)PRICING METHODLOGY

For purposes of this solicitation, Offerors shall be required to provide their estimate of the required level of resources necessary to perform the SOW as discussed in the following applicable paragraphs: Pricing for RFP Specified Level of Resources.

103 (c)PRICING METHODLOGY

For purposes of this solicitation, Offerors shall be required to provide their estimate of the required level of resources necessary to perform the SOW as discussed in the following applicable paragraphs: Pricing for RFP Specified Level of Resources. (Deleted)

Section L, Instructions, Conditions, and Notices to Offerors or Respondents, Section L.17.6 (d)(1) (a)

Cost/Price Factor- Volume III, Second Paragraph, 1st Bullet

140 • Increasing (or decreasing) the number of FTEs of any SLC.

• Increasing (or decreasing) the indirect rates.

104 • Increasing (or decreasing) the number of WYEs of any SLC.

• Increasing (or decreasing) the indirect rates.

Section L, Instructions, Conditions, and Notices to Offerors or Respondents, Section L.17.8 Model Contract Volume V

146 Section A Complete blocks 12 through 18, provide an original signature on each copy, and date the SF 33

Offerors shall indicate, in Block 12 of the SF 33, a proposal validity period of 365 days.

110 Section A Complete blocks 12 through 18, provide an original signature on each copy, and date the SF 33

Offerors shall indicate, in Block 12 of the SF 33, a proposal validity period of at least 365 days.

Section L, Attachment L-1 Sample

Task Order #7, Deliverables &

Schedules:

1. Adaptive Augmented

Reality and Crew Assistance-

162 1.8 Deliver an AR maintenance app for ARED- Cable ARM Ropes Replacement, including all the data products required by JPR 7150.2B for Class A software development and testing (Sept 30, 2020).

128 1.8 Deliver an AR maintenance app for ARED- Cable ARM Ropes Replacement, including all the data products required by NPR 7150.2 for Class A software development and testing. (Sept 30, 2020)

From Final RFP Page #

To

Section L, Attachment L-1, Sample

Task Order #8 Technical Requirements

164-165 2. The Engineering Directorate is supporting numerous advanced exploration projects, including the development of avionics software for the Gateway spacecraft based on CFS.

2.1 CFS FSW Development – The contractor shall develop, test, and document Vehicle System Management Electronic Procedure Flight Software Executive for the Gateway avionics system. The contractor shall follow CMMI ML3 processes and be compliant with JPR 7150.2B requirements for development of class A software. Also, the contractor shall plan the work to support an integrated demonstration of the Gateway, and shall participate in the demonstration.

130-131 2. The Engineering Directorate is supporting numerous advanced exploration projects, including the development of avionics software for the Gateway spacecraft based on CFS and mission support avionic embedded software.

2.1. Software Process Engineering – The contractor shall develop software processes and template artifacts compliant with the most up to date NPR 7150.2 and CMMI V2.0 for ML3, and necessary for the development of flight software classifications A-E. The contractor shall be responsible for providing independent CMMI Certified Lead Appraisers as needed to support CMMI ML3 certifications of software engineering teams - (ADDED)

2.2. CFS FSW Development – The contractor shall develop, test, and document Vehicle System Management Electronic Procedure Flight Software Executive for the Gateway avionics system. The contractor shall follow CMMI ML3 processes and be compliant with NPR 7150.2 requirements for development of class A software. Also, the contractor shall plan the work to support an integrated demonstration of the Gateway, and shall participate in the demonstration

2.3. Mission Support Avionic Embedded Software - The

contractor shall develop, test, and document Radio Frequency Identification (RFID) Embedded Automated Logistics Management (REALM) system to manage Gateway logistics and inventory. The contractor shall follow processes compliant with CMMI ML3 and NPR 7150.2 requirements for development of class C software. Also, the contractor shall plan the work to support an integrated demonstration of the Gateway, and shall participate in the demonstration. (ADDED)

2.4. CFS FSW Certification – The contractor shall generate

artifacts as required for Human Rated Class A Safety Critical certification of Gateway UM avionics Flight Software. The contractor shall perform the work in compliance with CMMI ML3 standard (ADDED)

From Final RFP Page #

To

Section L, Attachment L-1 Sample

Task Order #8, Deliverables &

Schedules, 2 Subtask 2 deliverables:

2.1 CFS Vehicle System Management Electronic Procedure Flight

Software Executive release, CMMI-Dev ML3 compliant documentation, and demonstration (September 30, 2020)

2.1 CMMI V2.0 ML3-compliant process artifacts and templates

(September 30, 2020). (ADDED)

2.2 Certified Lead Appraiser on contract to support a Standard

CMMI Appraisal Method for Process Improvement (SCAMPI) C, B, and A (September 30, 2020)(ADDED)

2.3 CFS Vehicle System Management Electronic Procedure

Flight Software Executive release, CMMI-Dev ML3 compliant documentation, and demonstration (September 30, 2020).

2.4 REALM Mission Support Software, CMMI-Dev ML3

compliant documentation, and demonstration (September 30, 2020) (ADDED)

2.5 All artifacts required for Human Rated Class A Safety Critical certification of Gateway UM avionics software (September

30, 2020) (ADDED)

Section L, Attachment L-2, Past Performance

Questionnaire, A. Technical

Performance and Capabilities, #3

170 “…If the capabilities below are not exact but are similar in nature to those that were performed during the performance period, please check those as well and provide a brief explanation of their similarities.

□ High fidelity orbital dynamics and natural environment modeling

□ Guidance, Navigation, and Controls (GN&C) modeling

□ Flight controls, flight software, hardware sensors, and/or hardware effectors modeling

□ Docking contact dynamics and mechanism modeling”

137 “…If the capabilities below are not exact but are similar in nature to those that were performed during the performance period, please check those as well and provide a brief explanation of their similarities.

□ High fidelity orbital dynamics and natural environment modeling

□ Guidance, Navigation, and Controls (GN&C) modeling

□ Flight controls, flight software, hardware sensors, and/or hardware effectors modeling

□ Docking contact dynamics and mechanism modeling

□ Hand controller and control panel development

□ Simulation data visualization and analysis tools, comparing multiple simulation runs.”

Section L, Attachment L-2, Past Performance

Questionnaire, A. Technical

Performance and Capabilities, #6

172 “… If the capabilities below are not exact but are similar in nature to those that were performed during the performance period, please check those as well and provide a brief explanation of their similarities.

□ Embedded RT flight software development

□ Emulator development

□ Command and data handling software development

□ Vehicle System Management (VSM) software development (planning, execution and monitoring)

□ Hardware software (FSW & Sim) system integration”

139 “… If the capabilities below are not exact but are similar in nature to those that were performed during the performance period, please check those as well and provide a brief explanation of their similarities.

□ Embedded RT flight software development

□ Emulator development

□ Command and data handling software development

□ Vehicle System Management (VSM) software development (planning, execution and monitoring)

□ Radio Frequency Identification (RFID) Automated Inventory Logistics

Management Software

□ Hardware software (FSW & Sim) system integration”

From Final RFP Page #

To

Section L, Attachment L-2, Past Performance

Questionnaire, A. Technical

Performance and Capabilities #8

173 “… If the capabilities below are not exact but are similar in nature to those that were performed during the performance period, please check those as well and provide a brief explanation of their similarities.

□ Agile Development processes

□ Modeling and simulation verification, validation, and accreditation processes”

140 “... If the capabilities below are not exact but are similar in nature to those that were performed during the performance period, please check those as well and provide a brief explanation of their similarities.

□ Capability Maturity Model Integrated Maturity Level (CMMI ML3) certification processes to support Human spaceflight software development for safety critical systems

□ Agile Development processes

□ Modeling and simulation verification, validation, and accreditation processes”

Section M, Evaluation factors for award, M.1 (e)

JSC 52.215-122

Streamlined

Procurement Evaluation Factors for Award Performance Price

Tradeoff PPT (NOV 2018)

183-184 If discussions are held, offeror(s) will be provided an opportunity to submit a Final Proposal Revision (FPR) for the Government’s final evaluation. For the final evaluation, proposals will be rated as “Acceptable” or “Unacceptable”, and there will be no “Potentially Acceptable” ratings. A consistency evaluation will be performed as stated in paragraph (d) above. Therefore, it is possible to receive an “Unacceptable” rating for the Technical Acceptability factor if the Technical Acceptability volume is not consistent with the Cost volume of the proposal. If a proposal’s Technical Acceptability volume is determined to be “Acceptable”, then the proposal will be further evaluated against Past Performance, and Cost. The Technical Acceptability volume will be also be evaluated for consistency with other volumes of the proposal.

Therefore, it is possible to receive an “Unacceptable” rating for the Technical Acceptability factor if the Technical Acceptability volume is not consistent with other volumes of the proposal.

151-152 If discussions are held, offeror(s) will be provided an opportunity to submit a Final Proposal Revision (FPR) for the Government’s final evaluation. For the final evaluation, proposals will be rated as “Acceptable” or “Unacceptable”, and there will be no “Potentially Acceptable” ratings. A consistency evaluation will be performed as stated in paragraph (d) above. Therefore, it is possible to receive an “Unacceptable” rating for the Technical Acceptability factor if the Technical Acceptability volume is not consistent with the Cost volume of the proposal (DELETED). If a proposal’s Technical Acceptability volume is determined to be “Acceptable”, then the proposal will be further evaluated against Past Performance, and Cost. The Technical Acceptability volume will be also be evaluated for consistency with other volumes of the proposal. Therefore, it is possible to receive an “Unacceptable” rating for the Technical Acceptability factor if the Technical Acceptability volume is not consistent with other volumes of the proposal. (DELETED)

From Final RFP Page #

To

Section M, Evaluation factors for award, M.1(f)

JSC 52.215-122

Streamlined

Procurement Evaluation Factors for Award Performance Price

Tradeoff PPT (NOV 2018)

184 (f) The SLPT will carry out the evaluation activities and report to the Source Selection Authority (SSA), who is responsible for making the source selection decision. For those Offeror(s) who are determined to be “Acceptable” under the Technical Acceptability Factor, tradeoffs will be made between Past Performance, and Cost/Price.

152 (f) The SLPT will carry out the evaluation activities and report to the Source Selection Authority (SSA), who is responsible for making the source selection decision. For those Offeror(s) who are determined to be “Acceptable” under the Technical Acceptability Factor, tradeoffs will be made between Past Performance, and Cost/Price. Past Performance is more important than cost. (ADDED)

Section M, Evaluation factors for award, M 3.1 (c)

JSC 52.215-115 Past Performance Evaluation (NOV 2018), Last two sentences

185 “…The past performance effort of the Key Personnel will be weighted less heavily than that of the proposed prime offeror or its proposed major subcontractors. A description of each aspect is provided below.”

153 “…. The past performance effort of minor subcontractors will be weighted less heavily than that of the proposed prime offeror or its proposed major subcontractors.(ADDED) The past performance effort of the Key Personnel will be weighted less heavily than that of the proposed prime offeror or its proposed major subcontractors. A description of each aspect is provided below.”

Section M, Evaluation factors for award, M.5 Responsibility

Considerations (Volume IV). 1st Paragraph

189 An Offeror must be considered to be responsible for award in accordance with FAR 9.104 Organizational Conflict of Interest Information. The items listed below are important Responsibility Considerations; however, these items may not constitute all Responsibility Considerations that will be addressed by the SLPT pursuant to FAR 9.104.

157 An Offeror must be considered to be responsible for award in accordance with FAR 9.104, Standards. The items listed below are important Responsibility Considerations; however, these items may not constitute all Responsibility Considerations that will be addressed by the SLPT pursuant to FAR 9.104