80NSSC26920179Q-1 QA Template (Filled Out)-MA.pdf
PDF 328 KB Posted
- Solicitation number
- 80NSSC26920179Q-1
About this file
This is a Questions and Answers (Q&A) document for RFQ 80NSSC26920246Q-1, issued by NASA, concerning chamber services for decompression sickness (DCS) testing of exercise countermeasures. The document clarifies four key areas: eligibility requirements, acceptable proof of qualifications, teaming and subcontracting structure, and verification methodology.
According to the document, prior NASA-funded pilot/proficiency completion is an eligibility requirement for award. Acceptable proof must demonstrate organizational capability in five critical areas: performing a 6-hour prebreathe followed by a 6-hour EVA simulation at 100% oxygen with hardware integration (including Phantom mask); providing appropriate medical support for pre-chamber examinations, protocol monitoring, subject management, and follow-up care; monitoring and interpreting 2-D ultrasound and Doppler measurements; depressurizing the chamber to 4.3 psia to simulate suit environment; and executing EVA simulation capabilities with eight workstations (four per cycle, rotating every 5 minutes) that simulate ambulation, upper body tasks, load carrying, and ultrasound monitoring. NASA will not split this effort between contractors; the work requires integrated experience in prebreathe, hardware integration, and EVA execution and was designed for a single contractor (N of 6 efforts). Offerors should reference Answer 2 for detailed chamber and experience requirements when verifying eligibility, as NASA has not published a list of pre-qualified facilities.
View the file
Other files
On GovTribe
Work with this file
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
Q&A Document
80NSSC26920246Q-1 – Chamber Services for decompression sickness testing of exercise countermeasures.
1. Eligibility / pilot requirement
For RFQ 80NSSC26920179Q-1 and RFQ 80NSSC26920246Q-1, is prior NASA-funded pilot/pro�iciency completion an eligibility requirement for award?
Please see verbiage in the Statement of Work (SOW.) “Organizations conducting these chamber tests will have completed pilot chamber tests to demonstrate their capabilities to and have their test data reviewed by NASA. Chambers selected for the tests described in the current Statement of Work will have documented and verified resolution of any deficiencies identified in their execution of NASA-defined DCS pilot test protocols.”
2. Acceptable proof
If pilot/pro�iciency completion is required, what documentation will NASA accept as proof (e.g., pilot completion con�irmation, data review/acceptance, closure of de�iciencies, site visit acceptance, approval email/letter, etc.)?
Please provide data set or evidence on the following areas including hardware integration.
Being able to:
• Perform 6-hour prebreathe followed by a simulation of EVA lasting 6 hours (100% O2). This includes chamber hardware integration with Phantom + mask (if those NASA masks will be used).
• Appropriate medical support to perform pre-chamber physical examination before ingress, during the protocol, for treatment and management of subjects as needed, clearance of subjects after the protocol is completed, and follow-up in the days after the chamber run, as required.
• Experience monitoring and interpretation of 2-D ultrasound and Doppler as well as monitoring of the subject’s self-report and symptoms of DCS or intolerance.
• To simulate the suit environment, the chamber will depress to 4.3 psia before initiating the EVA simulation tasks described below. The start time of the EVA is defined by the arrival at the desired level of decompression, and the end time of the EVA is defined by the start of repressurization.
• EVA simulation capability including hardware which includes rotation of each subject through a repetitive series of tasks at predetermined intervals in a pre-determined order using a NASA-defined or provided workstations (Figure 1). The EVA is simulated using eight stations, nominally performed in 2 cycles of 4 stations, with subjects rotating between stations every 5 minutes. In one cycle, subjects will rotate through stations that simulate ambulation (low step), upper body technical tasks (standing board), and load carrying (weight transfer), and 2-D ultrasound while subjects are supine on a cot. In the other cycle, subjects will rotate through stations that simulate more vigorous ambulation (high step), upper body physical exertion (arm ergometry), technical tasks performed in a kneeling position (kneeling board), and Doppler ultrasound while supine. Thus, in each cycle subjects will perform 15 minutes of low- to moderate-intensity exercise followed by 5 minutes of monitoring and rest. Work rates during arm ergometry (cadence and resistance) and stepping (cadence) will be prescribed based upon the results of the VO2pk test and the pre-test EVA simulation familiarization with metabolic gas analysis. During ultrasound imaging and Doppler waveform acquisition, at least 10 cardiac cycles monitored and recorded in each of three conditions in sequential order: rest, flexing/bending of the arms and legs, and rest. Compliance of the subjects with the prescribed procedures should be documented, including the time at each station, work rates (cadence and load), symptoms reported by the subjects, and test operator observations.
Figure 1. Depiction of workstations in chamber.
3. Teaming/subcontracting structure
Is it acceptable for an offeror to meet any “pilot-completed/pro�iciency” requirement via a subcontractor (e.g., KBR), and if so, which requirements must be performed by the prime versus which may be performed by the pilot-completed subcontractor?
This work requires experience in prebreathe, hardware integration and EVA (as mentioned in the SOW and question 2). The effort is only N of 6 and was not designed to be split between two contractors.
4. Veri�ication method
If NASA does not publish a list of pilot-completed/eligible facilities, what is the recommended way for offerors to verify eligibility without ambiguity?
See Answer 2 for additional detail on chamber and experience needs.
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .