Justification for Other than Full and Open Competition (JOFOC) - AspenOne_Redacted.pdf

JOFOC-2024-005

NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION

NASA SHARED SERVICES CENTER (NSSC)

JUSTIFICATION FOR OTHER THAN FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

(JOFOC)

For the FY24 AspenOne Software Token Renewal

1. Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 6.303-2(b)(1) – Identification of the agency and the contracting activity, and specific identification of the document as a “Justification for other than full and open competition.”

This document is a justification for other than full and open competition prepared by National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Shared Services Center.

The procuring agency is the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), and the contracting activity is the NSSC Enterprise Software Purchasing (ESP).

2. FAR 6.303-2(b)(2) – The nature and/or description of the action being approved:

This justification provides the rationale for contracting by other than full and open competition to award a sole-source contract to ASPEN TECHNOLOGY, INC. for software licenses for AspenTech chemical process simulation software packages including Aspen Custom Modeler, Aspen Plus, Aspen Adsorption, Aspen Dynamics, Aspen Properties Database and more.

3. FAR 6.303-2(b)(3) – A description of the supplies or services required, to meet the

Agency’s needs (including the estimated value):

Simultaneous users of the Aspen Tech process simulation package include “Aspen Custom Modeler”, “Aspen Plus”, “Aspen Adsorption”, “Aspen Dynamics”, and “Aspen Properties” software tools with the Excel interface “Aspen Simulation Work”. This is implemented by the purchase of 126 license tokens for use with the Aspen Engineering Suite.

The licenses enable Johnson Space Center (JSC) or JSC Engineering, Technology, and Science (JETS) II contractor employees to be able to access to the Aspen Tech software suite running on JSC or JETS computer workstations.

This procurement will include the software updates as well as technical support for software utilization, model generation, and software maintenance assistance.

The estimated total value of this requirement is . The period of performance is 09/09/2024 to 09/08/2025.

Rev.:1/2023

4. FAR 6.303-2(b)(4) – An identification of the statutory authority permitting other than full and open competition:

The statutory authority permitting other than full and open competition for acquisitions using the procedures in FAR subpart 13.5 is 41 U.S.C. 1901.

5. FAR 6.303-2(b)(5) – A demonstration that the proposed contractor’s unique qualifications or the nature of the acquisition requires use of the authority cited:

The rationale supporting the use of 41 U.S.C. 1901, as implemented by FAR 13.5, Simplified Procedure for commercial items as described below.

NASA has historically and continues to utilize the Aspen Tech software to support projects and programs including the International Space Station (ISS), Constellation, Orion and Altair, Gateway, Extravehicular Activity and Human Surface Mobility Program (EHP), and multiple technology development projects (Advanced Life Support, ETDP Exploration Life Support, ETDD projects, and Advanced Exploration Systems.

(AES) / Mars Campaign Office (MCO) Life Support Systems (LSS)). NASA expects to continue to perform analysis, modeling, and simulation to support vehicle conceptual designs, technology development and demonstration activities, and vehicle performance investigation and verification activities for the ISS, Gateway, and Orion Programs as well as the Mars Campaign Office and for the Office of the Chief Technologist (OCT) with this software.

Aspen Tech is the being sought as a sole source because they do not license their product to outside vendors and are the only source on the market to provide the Aspen Custom Modeler, Aspen Plus, Aspen Adsorption, Aspen Dynamics, and the Aspen Properties (which is a chemical database that supports all of those).

Aspen Custom Modeler provides a flexible and customizable platform for producing process models of various vehicle ECLSS components, subsystems, and systems, which has been very useful in supporting project and program technology and ConOps development as well as performance requirements verification.

Due to the need to use existing Aspen Tech models (especially Aspen Custom Modeler) and existing personnel trained in Aspen Tech software, there are no practical alternative sources at this time. NASA has invested over 28 years in developing models that operate solely within the Aspen Tech simulation package. Therefore, any changes to the software now would lead to large gaps in being able to provide analysis support for current missions (e.g., ISS and Orion) and future vehicle and habitat development (e.g., Gateway and Mars

Rev.:1/2023

Campaign Office). Support for these projects and programs would remain at a halt until analogous models and model integration capabilities were developed and/or acquired from other software tools, which would require exorbitant effort in model development and personnel time for training and tool development. For example, the entire Gateway environmental control and life support system has been developed at the component level and integrated into a Gateway system level model that allows NASA to assess different ConOps, contingency operations, mission changes, and more effects on performance requirements.

Additionally, NASA has evaluated competitor's software periodically to make sure we still have the best and most relevant product for our work. Aspen Tech has acquired several competitors , and other options lack the extensive chemical database available in Aspen Properties and do not readily or easily allow model integration for performing system level analyses.

6. FAR 6.303-2(b)(6) – A description of the efforts made to ensure that offers are solicited from as many potential sources as practicable, including whether a notice was or will be publicized as required by Subpart 5.2 and, if not, which exception under 5.202 applies:

A notice to the Government Point of Entry (GPE) website (Sam.gov) was published on August 5, 2024, in accordance with FAR Subpart 5.2. This posting informed potential sources of NASA’s intent to award this sole-source contract to ASPEN TECHNOLOGY, INC. The results of this synopsis are summarized in Section 10 below.

7. FAR 6.303-2(b)(7) – A determination by the contracting officer that the anticipated cost to the Government will be fair and reasonable:

The Contracting Officer’s signature on this document indicates that the Contracting Officer has determined that the anticipated cost to the government will be fair and reasonable. The Contractor shall be required to submit a proposal to be evaluated and negotiated by the Government. Prior to execution of the contractual instrument, a proposal analysis will be performed. The proposal analysis will ensure that the final agreed-to price for the contract action is fair and reasonable.

The Government anticipates a fair and reasonable-priced offer from ASPEN TECHNOLOGY, INC. since this software is offered commercially and NASA has pricing history on the items being renewed. The contracting officer will compare the price offer to prices found reasonable on previous purchases and the IGE. The contract file will include a statement of price reasonableness based on the comparisons.

8. FAR 6.303-2(b)(8) – Description of the market research conducted, and the results, or a statement of the reasons market research was not conducted:

Rev.:1/2023

Market research determined that the requirement is a commercial item. A distribution network for the software does not exist, and the software is available only through a direct sell from the publisher, ASPEN TECHNOLOGY, INC. ASPEN TECHNOLOGY, INC.

confirmed via email to indicate ASPEN TECHNOLOGY, INC. is the sole provider of this requirement.

9. FAR 6.303-2(b)(9) – Any other facts supporting the use of other than full and open competition:

Aspen Tech is being acquired as a sole source because they do not license their product to outside vendors and provides a capability that houses many of our models that support multiple programs currently including Gateway, ISS, EHP, and Mars Campaign Office. The Aspen Tech simulation package provides a flexible platform for developing process models which is useful for vehicle ECLSS component and system level analysis.

We have periodically evaluated competitor’s software products to ensure that there are no gaps in our understanding of the general market for chemical process modeling. However, none of the other competitor products readily allow model integration for system level analyses nor have as extensive of a chemical properties database as Aspen’s. Their chemical properties database includes over 33,000 different chemical species which has been useful for our consideration of air and water systems that include trace contaminants and dissolved species.

We also carry licenses of to support high fidelity multi-physics models. It serves well as a component-level modeler but does not readily support model integration. For example, we have the entire Gateway ECLSS modeled in AspenTech, which is used to support performance requirements verification activities.

10. FAR 6.303-2(b)(10) – A listing of the sources, if any, that expressed an interest in writing in the acquisition:

A notice of NASA’s intent to award this sole-source action was synopsized on the GPE website (Sam.gov) per FAR Subpart 5.2 (See Section 6 above).

11. FAR 6.303-2(b)(11) – A statement of actions, if any, the agency may take to remove or overcome any barriers to competition before any subsequent acquisition for the supplies or services required:

The Agency will continue to examine the market in the future for alternative solutions or new sources before executing any subsequent acquisitions for the same requirements.

NASA Shared Services Center

JUSTIFICATION FOR OTHER THAN FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

For the FY24 AspenOne Software Token Renewal

SIGNATURE PAGE

I certify that the facts presented in this justification are accurate and complete.

I hereby certify that the above justification is complete and accurate to the best of my knowledge and belief.

Approved by: