2024 07 24 Draft Request for Proposal Acquisition Overview Presentation - Next Gen.pptx

July 24, 2024

Next Generation Scalable Data Engineering, Operations, and Informatics Support for Open Science (Next Gen)

Draft Request for Proposal (DRFP) # 80MSFC24R0005 Acquisition Overview Presentation

Purpose of the acquisition overview presentation:

Highlight acquisition requirements Highlight key/unique aspects of the solicitation Serve as an aid in preparation of proposals

Purpose of Presentation Next Generation Scalable Data Engineering, Operations, and Informatics Support for Open Science

Comments and questions regarding the DRFP shall be submitted in writing to the procurement point of contact designated in the provision entitled MSFC 52.205-90, Designated Point of Contact.

All questions/comments shall be submitted electronically no later than 5:00 p.m., Central Time July 30, 2024.

An assessment of all comments and questions will be made by the Government.

Incorporation of industry comments and questions in the Final RFP is at the discretion of the Government. Changes will be identified in the Final RFP change log.

Comments and Questions

Requirements & Functional Overview

The resulting contract will provide services to support NASA’s Interagency Implementation and Advanced Concepts Team (IMPACT).

Current services are provided by contract 80MSFC22CA004, Novel Technologies for Space Data Systems, with New Rights Group, Inc., dba Development Seed as prime and by contract 80MSFC23CA017, Scalable Science Data Exploration, with Element 84 as prime as summarized in Attachment L-3, Background and Historical Information of the solicitation.

Program Overview

Next Gen tasks will support IMPACT’s goal of overseeing the lifecycle of Earth science data to maximize the scientific return of NASA's missions and experiments.

IMPACT is comprised of approximately 22 projects and works in a seamless environment generally characterized by each project being composed of team members from the civil service, collaborative agreement partners, other contractors, and contractor employees from the resultant contract. IMPACT utilizes a modified Scaled Agile Framework (SAFe®) to implement the project and ensure the objectives of each project are aligned with NASA Headquarters’ customers.

Next Gen work will be conducted primarily virtually using Agency collaboration tools.

Section 1.0: Contract Scope

Section 2.0: Management Next Generation Scalable Data Engineering, Operations, and Informatics Support for Open Science Provide the planning, coordination, technical direction, and surveillance of all activities necessary to assure disciplined performance of work and efficient application of resources for the accomplishment of all tasks under the Next Gen contract.

Due to the dynamic and potential growth nature of IMPACT, include all management overhead (e.g., project manager, accounting) within respective indefinite-delivery, indefinite- quantity (IDIQ) tasks as an indirect component of the proposed fully burdened labor rates.

Due to the seamless teaming arrangement of IMPACT, ensure assigned personnel maintain daily communication, involvement, and participation with the relevant IMPACT projects and follow SAFe® processes utilized in said project for their respective assigned IDIQ tasks.

Section 2.0: Management (con't) Next Generation Scalable Data Engineering, Operations, and Informatics Support for Open Science Data Deliverables are outlined in Performance Work Statement (PWS) Section 2.2 and further described in Attachment J-2, Data Procurement Document (DPD) 1852.

Section 2.3 specifics the requirements associated with conduct of the 45-day phase-in period.

The PWS defines the technical requirements for the Next Gen contract as outlined on the following charts.

All effort under this contract will be performed through the issuance of firm-fixed-price (FFP) task orders in accordance with the task ordering procedures of the Next Gen contract.

FAR Clause 52.216-18, Ordering FAR Clause 52.216-19, Order Limitations NASA FAR Supplement (NFS) Clause 1852.216-80, Task Ordering Procedure - Alternate II

Notional IDIQ tasks are identified in L-3, Background and Historical, and offeror’s proposed prices will be based upon a predetermined notional staffing mix across these task orders.

Section 3.0: Technical Requirements

3.1 Provide resources to ensure IMPACT maintains cutting-edge leadership in: (1) Science informatics; (2) Artificial intelligence (in accordance with federal laws and regulations), including machine learning expertise with specialization in spatio-temporal algorithms; (3) Science data systems and domain science; and (4) Scientific data storage, archiving, and management.

3.2 All IMPACT projects are Open Source. The contractor shall adhere to NASA’s Science Mission Directorate Science Information Policy https://science.nasa.gov/spd-41 and deliver Open Source solutions to the NASA Open Source library unless an exception applies (see FAR 52.227-11).

3.3 Ensure that assigned personnel maintain close, effective communication and development involvement with the respective IMPACT teams to assure optimal synergy.

Section 3.0: Technical Requirements

3.4 To implement cutting-edge solutions for IMPACT’s world-class science, the contractor shall:

3.4.1 Provide system architecture expertise within IMPACT.

3.4.4 Explore and develop scalable novel tools, services, and platform solutions.

Section 3.0: Technical Requirements (con't)

This is a total IDIQ contract, and due to the collaborative nature of IMPACT’s projects, assigned IDIQ tasks may include discrete contractor deliverables or the contractor may be required to work jointly with other contractors for IMPACT project requirements.

Variable Deliverable Requirements

Procurement Overview

Contract information:

This acquisition is designated as a competitive, small business set-aside.

Contract Type: IDIQ with FFP task orders NAICS Code: 541715 - Research and Development in the Physical, Engineering, and Life Sciences (except Nanotechnology and Biotechnology) Size Standard: 1,000 Contracting Approach

CLIN Structure and Period of Performance

Next Generation Scalable Data Engineering, Operations, and Informatics Support for Open Science

*Unused IDIQ contract value may be rolled forward to any subsequent period, without change to the Maximum Potential NTE Value.

** In accordance with Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 52.217-8, Option to Extend Services, if this option is utilized by NASA, it may be exercised more than once, but the total extension of performance under this option shall not exceed six months. Minimum and Maximum Values for periods of less than six months will be prorated to reflect the reduced term, whereas the total potential value of this period will not exceed one-half of the prior option period's minimum and maximum ordering values.

Reference clause entitled MSFC 52.237-91, Place of Performance.

The services performed under the Next Gen contract will be performed at contractor’s facilities or other remote locations as specified in IDIQ task orders, and at such other locations as may be approved in writing by the contracting officer.

No Government facilities or equipment will be provided.

Contractor employees will be expected to virtually assimilate into the IMPACT SAFe® environment and maintain close, readily accessible contact with respective IMPACT projects being supported.

Place of Performance

FAR 52.217-8, Option To Extend Services Allows for the Government to extend the contract up to six months beyond completion of the last exercised option period. The option may be exercised more than once, but the total extension shall not exceed six months.

NFS 1852.204-76, Security Requirements For Unclassified Information Technology Resources (DEVIATION 21-01A) Revises NFS clause and requires submission of DRD 1852CD-002- Security Requirements for Unclassified IT Resources.

FAR 52.227-11 Patent Rights – Ownership by the Contractor (APR 2015) – As Modified by NASA FAR Supplement 1852.227-11 (APR 2015) All IMPACT projects are Open Source. However, there are exceptions granted in NASA’s Science Mission Directorate Science Information Policy https://science.nasa.gov/spd-41 (SPD-41A) and FAR 52.227-11.

Special Clauses

FAR 52.215-1, Instructions to Offerors- Competitive Acquisitions, indicates that the Government intends to evaluate proposals and award a contract without discussions with offerors (except clarifications as described in FAR 15.306(a)). Therefore, the offeror’s initial proposal should contain the offeror’s best terms from a cost or price and technical standpoint. The Government reserves the right to conduct discussions if the contracting officer later determines them to be necessary.

Special Provisions

This acquisition is a total small business set-aside. Offerors are reminded that at least 50% of the contract must be performed by the prime or subcontractors that are similarly situated entities.

A similarly situated subcontractor is a subcontractor that has the same required size and small business program status as the prime contractor.

SBA’s Ostensible Subcontracting Rule (see Section L provision Acquisition Approach (SEP 11 2019)) For purposes of this solicitation and compliance with the ostensible subcontract rule, the primary and vital aspects of this acquisition are PWS sections 2.0, 3.4.1, 3.4.2, 3.4.3, 3.4.4, 3.4.5, and 3.4.6 as contained within Attachment J-1, Performance Work Statement.

Small Business Objectives

There are no known Organizational Conflict of Interest that exist for this acquisition.

DRD 1852MA-001 Organizational Conflict of Interest (OCI) Plan is required to be submitted with the initial proposal and will be assessed as an eligibility requirement in accordance with Section M provision Prospective Contractor Responsibility and Eligibility Standards (OCT 2021).

Organizational Conflict of Interest

Some employees, presently about 50%, will require badge credentials to access certain data resources. As this contract provides remote work opportunity that can be performed at the contractor facility or telework by employees, the contractor shall include travel cost to acquire Personal Identity Verification or Agency Smart Badge credentials as part of the Overhead or G&A rate, in accordance with the offeror’s accounting practices.

Travel cost for badging is not allowable under the Travel task orders.

Badging Requirements

Required labor categories are defined for this solicitation due to unique capabilities required to perform this highly specialized work. Due to the unique requirements for the labor categories, an approximation to Economic Research Institute (ERI) labor categories is identified in Attachment J-3, Labor Category Descriptions. Note that some labor categories such as Senior Geospatial Engineer do not exist in the ERI database.

Labor Category Definitions

MSFC clause entitled MSFC 52.223-97, Mandatory and Required Training requires that personnel complete training courses (or approved equivalent) as well as any future training requirements mandated by MSFC. The clause provides a link to the required training courses. Note that only training required to acquire Personal Identification Verification or Agency Smart Badge have presently been identified.

Training for employees and subcontractors shall be the responsibility of the contractor.

MSFC is not obligated to provide training to contractor personnel as the required training is accessible in the SATERN training portal.

Required Training

Phase-in will be no longer than 45 days (as early as August 15, 2025), occurring prior to commencement of base year (October 1, 2025) and overlapping the incumbent contracts.

Phase-in activities will be via a FFP task order referencing the awarded contract. The phase-in price will be limited to no more than $150,000.

The phase-in TO will include a PWS and delineate all deliverables required during the phase-in period as specified in Attachment J-2, Data Procurement Document (DPD).

Contract Phase-in

Phase-In requirements include:

No disruption of service at hand over.

Date Requirements Document (DRDs) required during Phase-In:

Security Requirements for Unclassified IT Resources Management Plan Diversity, Equity, Inclusion, and Accessibility (DEIA) Plan Qualified and badged staff ready to assume performance.

Contract Phase-in (con’t)

Submittal no later than October 10, 2024, 2:00 p.m. Central Time.

Volumes to be submitted:

Volume IV - Contract Volume V - Mandatory Qualifications (Requested September 26, 2024)

Proposal Submission Guidelines

Page Limitations

The RFP should be carefully consulted regarding any exclusions from the page limitations.

Information that can be construed as belonging in a page-limited volume but is submitted in an unlimited page limit volume will be counted against the page-limited volume.

Pay close attention to page limitations and other instructions as failure to comply may impact proposal acceptability and evaluation.

Proposal Submission Guidelines (con’t)

Evaluation Factors Mission Suitability Price Past Performance Mandatory Qualifications The acquisition will be conducted utilizing a best value tradeoff between the factors of Mission Suitability, Price, and Past Performance in accordance with Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Part 15 and NASA FAR Supplement (NFS) Part 1815. Evaluation of offers will be conducted in accordance with NFS Subpart 1815.370, NASA source evaluation boards.

In accordance with FAR Subpart 15.304(e), the relative importance of these factors is: Mission Suitability and Past Performance are essentially equal to each other, both of which are more important than Price. Mission Suitability and Past Performance, when combined, are significantly more important than Price.

The Government intends to make one award to a small business as a result of this solicitation.

Evaluation Factors for Award

TA-1: Technical Approach - The offeror shall describe the approach and methods to be employed in performing PWS sections 3.1, 3.2 (i.e., approach to deliver Open Source solutions), and 3.4.1 through 3.4.6.

TA-2: IDIQ Technical Approach - The offeror shall describe the approach to perform each of the 12 notional task orders identified in Attachment L-3.

Mission Suitability – Subfactor 1, Technical Approach

TA-3: Technology, Innovations, and Process Improvements - The offeror shall describe the approach for ensuring the workforce maintains cognizance of and embraces advancements in technology, cultivating innovation to develop cutting-edge solutions for new data science solutions, and suggesting process improvements within the SAFe® environment for the IMPACT projects they support.

Mission Suitability – Subfactor 1, Technical Approach (con't)

TA-4: Risk Assessment Approach - The offeror shall submit a risk assessment for the entire Mission Suitability approach (i.e., Technical Approach subfactor and Management Approach subfactor). The analysis shall identify and describe risk factors within the offeror's control and proposed mitigation steps to manage the impact of the identified risks to include assessing the probability of occurrence, impact, and timeframe, as well as mitigation and management of risk. Additionally, the offeror shall identify any mitigation steps outside of their direct control that will be beneficial to mitigate risk.

Mission Suitability – Subfactor 1, Technical Approach (con't)

MA-1: Management Approach - The offeror shall describe the approach for managing a potentially geographically dispersed workforce while ensuring compliance with FAR Limitations on Subcontracting requirements to ensure elimination of duplicated effort, prompt response to customer priorities, and streamlining of process workflows.

Mission Suitability – Subfactor 2, Management Approach

MA-2: Compensation Approach* - The offeror shall submit a total compensation plan (TCP) in accordance with FAR 52.222-46, Evaluation of Compensation for Professional Employees (see FAR 22.1102, 29 CFR 541.702, and Attachment J-3, Labor Category Descriptions). This requirement also applies to each proposed major subcontractor as defined in Section L, Factor III - Past Performance Volume Instructions, paragraph (b). The proposed TCP information shall be included in the offeror’s Price volume and the subcontractor’s Price volume, if applicable. Offerors and subcontractors shall ensure the information provided in the TCP is consistent with the data provided in the respective Price volume (i.e., Excel Pricing Model [EPM]). Offerors shall also ensure the proposed TCP(s) is consistent with other information contained elsewhere in the offeror’s proposal.

*The Mission Suitability evaluation will include the TCP as part of MA-2 for its impact on recruiting and retention, its realism, and its consistency ensuring IMPACT maintains cutting-edge data science leadership.

Mission Suitability – Subfactor 2, Management Approach (con't)

MA-3: Organization and Teaming Structure - The offeror shall describe the proposed organizational and teaming structure, interfaces to the Government, how the structure promotes synergy, efficiency, and maintains flexibility necessary to perform contract requirements, and any proposed subcontractors, their associated roles and work assignments, and limitations or exclusions of work.

MA-4: Contract Phase-in Approach - The offeror shall describe the approach to assume full contractual responsibility which demonstrates a clear understanding of the issues and complexities associated with the phasing in of a potentially geographically dispersed workforce as well as the activities necessary to assume full contractual responsibility by the end of the phase-in period.

Mission Suitability – Subfactor 2, Management Approach (con't)

The past performance evaluation is an assessment of the Government’s confidence in the offeror’s ability to perform the solicitation requirements with consideration given to relevant past performance (i.e., size, content, and complexity).

Findings (e.g., strengths, weaknesses) may be assessed based on the information provided in the Past Performance volume as well as other sources.

A confidence level in the offeror’s past performance (e.g., relevancy, quality) will be assessed using the adjectival ratings at NFS 1815.305(a)(2)(A).

Past Performance Evaluation

Size – For offerors, a referenced contract will be determined relevant if it has an average annual value of $1,500,000 or greater, and for proposed subcontractors, an average annual value of $500,000 or greater.

Past Performance Evaluation – Size Relevancy

Content – For offerors, a referenced contract’s content relevancy will be determined based on how well the work performed aligns with the applicable elements of Attachment J-1, Performance Work Statement (PWS), and for subcontractors, how well the work performed aligns with the subcontractor’s proposed workshare, as indicated in the PWS WYE Percentage Assignment Table. For the offeror, referenced contract(s) shall demonstrate relevant experience in at least three of the seven PWS elements identified in the PWS WYE Percentage Assignment Table (i.e., PWS 2.0, 3.4.1, 3.4.2, 3.4.3, 3.4.4, 3.4.5, and 3.4.6) to be considered relevant in content. For proposed subcontractor(s), relevancy will be determined relative to the content element(s) assigned to that subcontractor.

Past Performance Evaluation – Content Relevancy

Complexity – A referenced contract’s relevancy (e.g., management of geographically dispersed workforce; delivery of open source products; development of software solutions utilizing Earth observation and geospatial data; producing and distributing data within a cloud data environment at the terabyte level and above; and/or development of tooling to support cloud-based data workflows at a scale of 1 million files and 500 terabytes of data) will be determined based on how well the complexity of the effort performed aligns with the effort delineated in Attachments J-1, L-3 Background and Historical, and other pertinent sections of the solicitation.

Past Performance Evaluation – Complexity Relevancy

Price Volume Next Generation Scalable Data Engineering, Operations, and Informatics Support for Open Science All offerors shall submit a comprehensive proposal which includes all subcontractor proposals exceeding the threshold established for this volume. For the purpose of this procurement, a major subcontractor is defined as performing 15% or more of the contract value.

If a labor category is to be filled by a minor subcontractor, the Offeror is responsible for proposing a rate for that category. All labor rates must be accounted for in evaluating the proposed TCP.

In accordance with sound business practices and applicable labor laws, the offeror and major subcontractors shall propose reasonable labor rate increases for labor rates not defined by Forward Pricing Rate Agreement (FPRA). The Government has provided mandatory uniform escalation rates of change for Calendar Years 2025 through 2030 as provided in Table L-2, Escalation Rates.

The reasonableness of the offeror’s proposed price will be evaluated.

The Government will perform a price analysis of all acceptable proposals received (see NFS 1815.305-70) in accordance with FAR 15.305(a)(1) and FAR 15.404-1, Proposal Analysis Techniques.

Consistency between the Mission Suitability factor and the Price factor volumes will be considered in determining if the offeror’s proposed price is fair and reasonable. Additionally, failure by an offeror to provide all required Excel Pricing Model data (e.g., IDIQ labor rates for all labor categories for all years of performance) could adversely impact the offeror’s Mission Suitability score or result in a determination that the proposal is unacceptable (see NFS 1815.305-70(a)(3)).

Price Evaluation

For evaluation purposes, the total price will be established as the sum of (1) the phase-in services price; (2) an indefinite-delivery, indefinite-quantity (IDIQ) price using the offeror-provided fully burdened rates applied to a pre-populated estimate of labor hours for each labor category for the contract period of performance, including all options; and (3) a calculated price using the offeror-provided Other Direct Cost Indirect Rates applied to a pre-populated estimate for travel for the contract period of performance, including all options. (See Excel Pricing Model (EPM) Tab A-1, Summary of Total Price).

For the purpose of evaluating the option to extend services (i.e., FAR 52.217-8), the Government will determine the six-month price by prorating the price proposed for the last year of estimated IDIQ performance The proposed Phase-in services performance period, established as a separate firm-fixed-price (FFP) contract line-item number, will be performed concurrent with the incumbent contract.

Price Evaluation (con't)

Price information provided in this volume will constitute the offeror's proposal submission for price comparison purposes. If inconsistencies are identified by the Government between Volume II – Price and Volume IV - Contract, the contract will be revised prior to execution by the contracting officer to reflect the values specified in this volume.

The offeror and all major subcontractors shall provide a pricing narrative BOE that explains in detail all pricing and estimating techniques.

The offeror and all major subcontractors shall submit one copy of their audited/unaudited financial statements and accompanying notes for the last three most recently completed fiscal years.

If a proposed subcontractor objects to providing their Price volume to the Offeror, they may submit it directly to the Government by the date and time provided in the RFP.

Price Evaluation (con't)

Management overhead (e.g., project manager, accounting) is to be included in the fully-burdened labor rate. (Tab C includes the build-up of the composite rate. There is a column to include the PMO cost per hour). This rate provides flexibility in addressing staffing fluctuations. Note that Project Manager and Senior Technical Project Manager rates are requested for the purpose of the project management overhead cost calculations.

An allocation base is required in order to determine how the cost will be allocated. This must be described in the Price Volume and applied to the proposal in accordance with the allocation base selected (i.e., fully burdened labor rate).

Program Management Overhead (PMO)

The contract contains Mandatory Qualifications (Section L, Factor V).

Each mandatory qualification shall be positively addressed. The offeror is permitted to utilize subcontractor team member(s) to fulfill up to two requirements from requirements 1-4 listed below, provided that all four elements are positively addressed by the offeror’s team.

1. Experience developing software solutions working with cloud-hosted large-scale (i.e., 500 terabyte or larger) data.

2. Experience producing and distributing data within a cloud environment.

3. Experience developing tooling to support cloud-based data workflows at scale (i.e., working with datasets of the scale of 1 million files and 500 terabytes of data).

4. Experience developing applications utilizing Earth observation and geospatial data (e.g., NASA/NOAA Earth Science Data).

Each demonstrated mandatory qualification must include verifiable work source (e.g., Government contract number, private contract information) and contact information of an independent customer source for which the work was performed (e.g., contracting officer’s representative, commercial customer). Failure to positively address each mandatory qualification will preclude further evaluation of the offeror’s proposal.

Mandatory Qualifications Criteria

Offerors will not be required to submit a Safety and Health Plan with their proposal.

Contractor will be required to comply with all Federal, State, local, and Agency environmental and safety laws/regulations (e.g., OSHA).

Contract will not require contractor to utilize hazardous chemicals on-site at MSFC.

Safety and Health

Note: All dates are subject to change and are to be used for planning purposes only. Please note time deadlines for submission of proposals as noted in the provision entitled Due Date for Receipt of Proposals.

Schedule

Assembling a Good Proposal Conduct adequate research. Have you:

Thoroughly read the entire solicitation?

Asked about any ambiguities?

Taken advantage of available on-line guidance to help assemble a quality proposal?

Performed adequate due diligence to understand the current operational environment?

Ensure compliance with solicitation requirements-

If the Government asked for it, provide it.

Abide by page count, font size limitations, and other restrictions. Do not have material unread for noncompliance.

Be on time for proposal delivery.

Submit your best offer as the Government intends to award without discussions.

Assembling a Good Proposal (con’t) Ensure compliance with solicitation requirements (continued)

Sign the SF33.

If requested, submit a complete RFP compliance matrix. Tell us where we can find your response to our requirement in your proposal.

Understand socioeconomic requirements relative to any set-aside and subcontracting limitation requirements.

Ensure System for Award Management (SAM) data is up-to-date.

Ensure all team members are Equal Employment Opportunity and VETS-4212 reporting requirement compliant, as applicable.

Assembling a Good Proposal (con’t) Ensure compliance with solicitation requirements (continued)

Acknowledge all RFP amendments, if any. Failure by the offeror to acknowledge receipt of all amendments, either on the Standard Form 30, Solicitation, Offer, and Award, SF33, Amendment of Solicitation/Modification of Contract, or transmittal letter by the due date for receipt of proposals may result in a determination that the proposal is unacceptable and therefore ineligible for award.

Acknowledge and accept, or take exception to, (if adequately explained) all terms and conditions.

Place requested information in the correct proposal volume.

Double check all proposal volumes for blank or missing pages.

Exercise caution when using former NASA employees for proposal preparation activities to ensure such participation does not result in the rejection of a proposal resulting from an unfair competitive advantage.

Price Forms Overview

This volume shall include all Government-provided price templates which are hereby defined as the Excel Pricing Model (EPM), consisting of tabs which are found in Attachment L-1. The EPM will be utilized as the Government evaluation tool.

The Excel Pricing Model (Attachment L-1) consists of:

Tab A - Summary of Total Price Tab B – Summary of Labor Build-Up Tab C – Composite IDIQ Rate Development & Price by Year Tab D – Productive Hours per WYE Conversion Table Tab E – Business Information and Cognizant Audit Agency Points of Contact Tab F – Program Management Overhead These Excel worksheets are linked to each other, and these links should not be broken The EPM workbook includes highlighted cells in yellow for manual input.

Price Forms Instructions

Electronic Submission of Proposals – Proposal Marking and Delivery Through NASA’s EFSS Box (OCT 2023) The offeror shall submit its proposal via NASA’s Enterprise File Sharing and Sync Box (EFSS Box), a FedRAMP Moderate certified platform.

Prior to the submission of proposal files, offerors interested in submitting a proposal in response to this solicitation should notify Bradley Vest of their intent to submit a proposal at least 48 hours prior to the intended submission date, at the following email address: Bradley.D.Vest@nasa.gov.

Offerors, especially those that have not previously submitted a proposal utilizing NASA’s EFSS Box, should coordinate the submission of a test file with Bradley Vest no less than five days in advance of the proposal due date specified in the solicitation to allow time to work through any submission issues.

The link in paragraph (c) of the above clause will be updated for the Final RFP.

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. The Government is not responsible for any failure attributable to the transmission or receipt of documents.

Proposal Submission Instructions

The solicitation number for the Final RFP will be 80MSFC24R0005 A pre-proposal conference after release of the Final RFP is not anticipated.

This information is preliminary and subject to change when the Final RFP is released.

Concluding Remarks

Written comments and questions shall be submitted to the Contracting Officer no later than 5:00 p.m. Central time on July 30, by electronic mail to: Bradley.D.Vest@nasa.gov

Responses to questions/clarifications will be provided as an attachment to the Final RFP or as changes in the Final RFP which will be posted in the same manner as the Draft RFP (SAM.gov).

Offerors should monitor the SAM.gov website for periodic updates.

Concluding Remarks (con’t)

The NASA Marshall Space Flight Center would like to thank you for your interest and participation in this important acquisition.

Thank You image2.png image3.png image4.png image5.png image6.png image7.png image8.png image1.png