USSA Questions_10.6.pdf

Updated October 6, 2026

United States Space Academy

Questions & Answers from Responding Entities

Updated daily as questions come into the hq-nasa-ussa@mail.nasa.gov inbox.

National Aeronautics and Space Administration

Q&A | United States Space Academy

Q1:

Can NASA-owned land at a NASA center be the proposed permanent campus?

Yes, the response can include NASA-owned land as part of the proposed permanent campus.

Q2: How should “site control” be demonstrated for federal land?

For “site control,” please provide any information you have about the property’s ownership, suitability, and how it could be made available. In your response, be sure to identify questions that remain unknown.

NASA centers can answer general questions about the land, facilities, footprint, and access. If the center agrees to the State’s plan to site USSA on federal property, the center will be able to provide a letter of support for the subject land. However, no land or property agreements, partnerships, Space Act Agreements, or other binding commitments will be executed as part of the RFI response process, nor will the centers provide any endorsement or promotion (i.e. social-media statements) in your state’s favor. A letter of support does not represent a binding legal commitment.

Q3: A NASA Center is offering land through Enhanced Use Lease, how would that apply to a NASA-led Academy?

If your response includes land listed for Enhanced Use Lease (EUL) opportunities at a

NASA Center, include that in your response and explain how it could support the

Academy.

As described above, centers may share information about the property and existing

EUL opportunities but cannot commit land or endorse a State’s proposal during the RFI process. You do not need to resolve the specific lease or ownership arrangement at this stage. During its review, NASA would work with the relevant Center to determine the appropriate arrangement and any approvals needed

Q4: May a single response present a primary site and a coordinated operations site, or must the second site go in the 20-page alternate document?

Yes, a primary site and a coordinated operations site can be included in a single response if they are part of one overall campus plan. Explain how the sites would work together to support the Academy.

The separate 20-page document is intended for alternative “Option B” locations within the State, rather than a supporting site within your primary campus.

Q5: How should NEPA and other federal reviews be treated in the schedule for a groundbreaking no later than 2027?

mailto:hq-nasa-ussa@mail.nasa.gov

NASA recognizes that NEPA and other federal reviews will need to be accounted for in the construction schedule. Please identify any reviews you anticipate, estimate how long they may take, and explain how they could affect the goal of breaking ground no later than 2027. Where timing is uncertain, provide your best estimate.

Q6: Regarding Section #6 - The "Response Content" and "Format" limits responses to 47 pages but allows additional information, such as “environmental assessments, maps and conceptual plans and architectural renderings,” to be prepared by independent/third parties as exempt from the page count. These

"assessments, maps, and renderings" are highly relevant to 'Section 5.A' requirements. As such, can you please confirm whether it is intended to exempt all independent third-party materials from the page count?

It is not the intent to exempt all third-party materials from the page count. The page count limits apply to the content the Responding Entity wishes to be considered for review by NASA. While the focus of the page limit is generally related to the narrative response, the narrative section may also include some graphics, pictures, conceptual renderings, etc. NASA is allowing for additional, supporting documents to be shared as part of the response as exhibits or attachments which can be referenced in the primary response. Exhibits, attachments, and other supplemental materials do not count toward the 47-page limit but are not guaranteed to be reviewed (see Q24).

Q7: Please clarify the definition of “independent third party.” (for example, are consultants hired by the State to produce such materials defined as “independent” from the respondent?

For the purpose of this RFI, an independent third party is defined as any entity other than the State or their Responding Entity as explicitly defined in the RFI.

Q8: Regarding Section #5 - The "Financial Capability" section asks to “describe resources the 'Responding Entity'...could provide to help establish and operate the

USSA.” Then, later in that Section, the RFI states “NASA is not soliciting or accepting a gift through this RFI.” So, can you provide clarity as these two sentences seem to contradict each other?

This section of the RFI is intended to be used for planning purposes and is not to be interpreted as a solicitation or acceptance of gifts from the State or Responding Entity.

NASA would like to understand the estimated total cost of the project in each response, and the estimated cost to the government. NASA would also like to understand what partnership opportunities may be available through the Responding Entity to facilitate establishment and operation of the USSA.

Q9: Can you confirm that the "Responding Entity" information (Page #6, Section #5) is excluded from the 47-page count?

Any information that pertains directly to the project, such as Responding Entity information and location, would also need to be included in the 47-page response.

Q10: Would NASA consider the use of 11 x 17 inch page size or larger in the

"Additional Information" section to allow us to fully share the details of renderings?

The 8.5 x 11 inch requirement applies to the narrative content of the response.

Additional information can be submitted in an appropriate size.

Q11: Can you confirm whether the "Additional Information" section should be submitted as a searchable, unlocked PDF with the 'edit' permission enabled?

All information should be provided as searchable. Additional information does not need to have edit permissions.

Q12: Can you confirm that there are no font restrictions in the "Additional

Information" section?

There are no font restrictions for additional information.

Q13: Regarding fonts: Can a smaller font be used in graphics? Can different fonts be used for graphics? Can a different font be used in headings as long as the content remains clear, legible, and professional in appearance?

Font in Times New Roman, size 12 is applicable to the narrative response. Graphics may use different/smaller fonts. Headings can use different fonts and size but will be part of the page count limitation.

Q14: Will submitted responses be released publicly?

NASA does not currently plan to publish all submitted responses. However, information about the selected location, including portions of its submission, may be shared publicly. Any requests for release of submitted responses will be handled in accordance with the requirements of the Freedom of Information Act.

Q15: Does NASA plan to hold a State Information Session?

NASA has not scheduled a State Information Session but may consider one based on interest from respondents.

Does the 300-acre minimum count gross acreage, including buffers and expansion areas, or only developable land?

The 300-acre minimum applies to developable land.

Q16: In a multi-parcel configuration, may the parcels be non-contiguous? Is there a maximum distance between them?

Yes, parcels may be non-contiguous. No maximum distance is specified, but respondents should explain how the parcels would function as a cohesive, accessible campus.

Q17: Will there be a decision made in November or December? First of the year?

The Executive Order requires the Commission to submit recommendations to the

President by December 26, 2026, including a proposed process for selecting the

Academy’s permanent location. A date for the final site selection has not been announced.

Q18: What counts as a "groundbreaking" by 2027? Would renovating or adapting existing buildings qualify, or does it require new vertical construction?

Qualifying work may include new construction, renovation, or adaptation of existing buildings, provided physical work begins by 2027 and advances the facilities’ readiness for Academy use.

Q19: Should respondents assume a particular method for making land available

(conveyance, long-term lease, or other), or is that entirely up to the respondent?

Respondents should propose how the land would be made available to USSA, whether through conveyance, a long-term lease, or another arrangement.

Q20: Will the USSA require accreditation before classes start, should respondents assume partner institutions will grant credit for the inaugural class, or will NASA define that pathway?

NASA will work with partner institutions to determine the accreditation and academic credit pathway. No specific approach has been established at this time.

Q21: Should the rough-order-of-magnitude cost estimate cover only establishing the permanent campus, or also interim operating costs from 2028 to 2031? Over what time horizon?

The estimate should address costs NASA would bear for initial construction and early operations, including interim operations. No specific time horizon is prescribed;

respondents should clearly state the period covered and key assumptions.

Q22: Should the curriculum be taking into consideration defense/leadership, commercial aerospace, NASA focused priorities, and government/public policy? Is there and opportunity for the academic program to co-exist on a campus where there can be Space Academy students and students that attend the universities undergrad, grad and PhD programs as usual?

The Commission is developing curriculum as part of their report to the President. You are welcome to include anything you feel may boost your "space relevance", including experiential training, etc. Proposed curricula should support the Academy’s broad aerospace and public service mission, including the specified areas of instruction.

Shared-campus arrangements may be proposed, provided they preserve the Academy’s distinct identity and governance.

Q23: Will faculty or instructors teaching USSA courses, including those employed by the selected state’s partner institutions during the first-year of instruction, be required to be U.S. citizens?

And if citizenship requirements will vary based on the instructor’s role, course content, access to Federal facilities, systems or controlled information, or security-clearance requirements, please clarify the applicable distinctions.

Citizenship and eligibility requirements for USSA faculty and instructors, including those employed by partner institutions, have not yet been announced. These requirements, including any distinctions based on teaching responsibilities, access, or security requirements, will be provided at a later date.

Q24: May Responding Entities submit white papers or other supplemental materials beyond the 47-page response? Will they count toward the page limit or be reviewed?

Yes. White papers and other supplemental materials may be submitted as additional information, separate from the 47-page response. These materials do not count toward the 47-page limit, and submitting them will not be held against a Responding Entity.

However, NASA's review is based on the 47-page response, and supplemental materials are not guaranteed to be reviewed. Any information a Responding Entity wants NASA to consider should be included within the 47-page response. Responding

Entities are encouraged to summarize key findings from supplemental materials in the

47-page response and reference the full documents as attachments.

Q25: Do letters of support or commitment from partner institutions, included as attachments, count toward the forty-seven page limit in Section 06, or are they treated as third-party materials excluded from the count?

Letters from third-party partner institutions may be included as supporting attachments outside the 47-page limit. Any substantive commitments or proposed support must be described within the 47-page response. General endorsement letters should not be included, consistent with Section 05.C.