NRA- MBSAE.pdf

NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE

ADMINISTRATION (NASA)

NASA Model-Based Systems Analysis and Engineering (MBSA&E) for the

Sustainable Flight National Partnership (SFNP)

NASA Glenn Research Center (GRC) NASA Research Announcement (NRA) for

Phase I: MBSA&E Framework Development and Assessment

ANNOUNCEMENT NUMBER: 80GRC023R0005

ISSUED: June 06, 2023

KEY DATES

Questions Due: 5:00 PM, June 14, 2023, EDT

Proposals Due: 5:00 PM, July 7, 2023, EDT*

*Subject to Change. Please monitor SAM.gov for the most updated deadlines.

NASA Model-Based Systems Analysis and Engineering (MBSA&E) for the Sustainable Flight National Partnership (SFNP) – 80GRC023R0005

Table of Contents

1 Overview

2 Introduction

3 Background

4 MBSA&E Approach and Goals

4.1 Phase I – MBSA&E Framework Development and Assessment

4.2 Phase II – MBSA&E Application to SFNP Vehicles and Technologies

4.3 NRA Approach

5 Technology Development Areas/Description of Solicited Topics

5.1 MBSA&E Framework Capability Development

5.1.1 Aircraft Data Hierarchy/Definition

5.1.2 Standard Interface Definition Between Disciplinary Models/Tools

5.1.3 Systems Analysis and Systems Engineering Integration

5.2 Industry/Government Model and Data Sharing

5.2.1 Comprehensive Model Sharing and Collaboration Approaches

5.2.2 Narrow Model Sharing and Collaboration Approaches

5.3 Disciplinary Tools and Subsystem Model Development

5.3.1 Aircraft and Component/Subsystem Models

5.3.2 Disciplinary Analysis Tool Integration with OpenMDAO

5.3.3 Disciplinary Analysis Tool Development using OpenMDAO

6 Expected Outcomes and Deliverables

7 Intellectual Property

8 Reviews and Reporting

9 Eligibility Information

9.1 Eligibility

9.2 Other Eligibility Limitations

9.3 Number of proposals, Teaming Arrangements and Partial Awards

9.4 Cost Proposal

9.5 Proposed Use of Unique NASA Capabilities

9.6 Programmatic Considerations

10 Proposal and Submission Information

10.1 Electronic Submission of Proposals – Proposal Marking and Delivery through NASA’s EFSS Box (NOV 2021)

10.2 Proposal Content and Format

11 Proposal Review Information

11.1 Administrative Review

11.2 Proposal Review Information

11.2.1 Evaluation Criteria

11.2.2 Overall Evaluation for Award

11.3 Partial Awards and Participation with Others

12 Provisions

13 Works Cited

14 List of Attachments

Appendix A. Technology Readiness Levels (TRL) Definitions

1 Overview

This Glenn Research Center (GRC) Center-Level NASA Research Announcement (NRA) is issued in accordance with NASA Federal Acquisitions Regulations (NFS) 1835.016-71. This NRA shall be used to announce Phase I of the MBSA&E effort that is focused on developing the overall framework and assessing its performance on a set of example aircraft, to ultimately accomplish the aviation community’s goal of net-zero carbon emissions by 2050.

Unlike a traditional Request for Proposal (RFP) containing a defined Statement of Work (SOW) or specification to which Offerors are to respond, this NRA provides for the submission of competitive project ideas, conceived by the Offerors, in one or more program areas of interest.

Specifically, this solicitation focuses on identifying and sponsoring innovative work, which is diversified across several topic areas, to support the ongoing development of an integrated, OpenMDAO-based MBSA&E framework in Phase I and prepare for the eventual modeling and analysis needs of Phase II (see Section 4). Additionally, whereas a traditional RFP provides the Government’s defined SOW within Section C of the RFP, this NRA is requesting that Offerors submit a Work Plan in the form of a Statement of Work (SOW) as part of their proposal that, if selected, is intended to become the SOW included in Section C on any awarded contract(s). In addition, this NRA includes a Model contract (see Attachment A) with all potential clauses that will be included in the final contract(s) to inform Offerors of NASA’s expectations to expedite contract award at the conclusion of this NRA.

Upon completion of the NRA proposal evaluations, NASA intends to award a Cost-Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) contract(s) to Offerors who best meet the goals set forth in this NRA. In accordance with NFS 1835.016-71(d)(4), a competitive range will not be established, and final proposal revisions shall not be requested/accepted. If an Offeror’s proposal is selected at the conclusion of the Final NRA evaluation period, NASA will advise the Offeror that the Government intends on entering in to negotiations and will follow up with a contract that includes (if necessary), modifications contemplated in the Offeror's Statement of Work, and request agreement or identification of any exceptions. NASA will request the Offeror to complete and return certifications and representations and Standard Form 33, Solicitation, Offer, and Award. If FAR 52.219-9, Small Business Subcontracting Plan, is required for the resultant contract, the Offeror shall provide a subcontracting plan. Any necessary negotiations will be conducted in accordance with FAR Subparts 15.3 and 15.4.

Issuing Office: NASA Glenn Research Center

Office of Procurement, MS 60-1 21000 Brookpark Road Cleveland, OH 44135-3127

Agency Contact: Ian C. Park, Contracting Officer, Phone – (216) 433-3130, Email – ian.park@nasa.gov

2 Introduction

NASA Aeronautics is engaging with industry, academic, and other agencies through the Sustainable Flight National Partnership (SFNP) to accomplish the aviation community’s goal of net-zero carbon emissions by 2050. The SFNP is a significant undertaking, involving numerous NASA Aeronautics Research Mission Directorate (ARMD) programs and projects with the unifying goal to identify, mature, and demonstrate technologies deemed enabling for a next-generation, subsonic, commercial aircraft. Current NASA research into advanced aerodynamic configurations, hybrid thermally efficient cores, electrified aircraft propulsion, and high-rate composite aircraft manufacturing technologies is currently underway, and within the SFNP.

NASA Aeronautics is targeting a flight demonstration involving these technologies no earlier than late 2026. Industry partnerships will be critical to achieving the goals set forth for the SFNP.

The Advanced Air Transport Technology (AATT) Project is a contributing member of the SFNP and is tasked with integrating simulation data, ground test data, and flight demonstration data for systems-level vision-vehicle performance and technology assessments. This effort toward collating and integrating technology and vehicle data across the SFNP has been dubbed Model- Based Systems Analysis & Engineering (MBSA&E) and is being led by the AATT Project.

With this NRA solicitation, NASA is seeking to stimulate innovation and develop industry partnerships supporting the MBSA&E effort for the SFNP. Specifically, this NRA aims to support the development of key architectural and system-of-systems models for the envisaged MBSA&E framework currently under development at NASA, as well as support for the development of critical advanced concept and technology-based model components for planned digital integrations and vision vehicle performance assessments in later years of the SFNP.

3 Background

NASA is committed to supporting the U.S. climate goal of achieving net-zero greenhouse gas emissions from the aviation sector by 2050, as outlined in the U.S. 2021 Aviation Climate Action Plan [1]. With the SFNP, NASA is leading federal agencies and industry partners to accelerate the development of technologies capable of supporting the nation’s aviation sustainability goals for products targeting an entry-into-service (EIS) of 2035. This work builds from a broad portfolio of prior NASA research, including AATT and Environmentally Responsible Aviation (ERA) project investments, as well as by efforts from other government agencies, such as the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Continuous Lower Energy, Emissions, and Noise (CLEEN) and the Aviation Sustainability Center (ASCENT) programs. With the SFNP, technologies deemed critical for 2035 EIS will be matured to a Technology Readiness Level (TRL) of 6 (as defined in Appendix A) through a combination of ground and flight demonstrations over the coming years.

The primary focus in SFNP is on the maturation of four technology areas, including advanced aerodynamic configurations, electrified aircraft propulsion (EAP), hybrid thermally efficient cores, and high-rate composite manufacturing. These technical areas are being led by corresponding NASA projects comprising the SFNP, including: AATT, Hybrid Thermally Efficient Core (HyTEC), Hi-rate Composite Aircraft Manufacturing (HiCAM), Electrified Flight Powertrain Demonstrator (EPFD), and the Sustainable Flight Demonstrator (SFD) projects. Each of these NASA Projects, along with anticipated ground and/or flight demonstrations are shown in

Figure 1. Also in this figure is an illustration of the MBSA&E effort targeted by this NRA solicitation, which will serve to digitally integrate the work across the listed projects and demonstrations to the systems-level for relevant vision vehicle concepts.

Figure 1. Nominal Sustainable Flight National Partnership Schedule.

The MBSA&E effort will encompass a broad collection of framework and model development, vision vehicle concept development, digital integration, and systems analysis studies. The term MBSA&E was chosen to emphasize the goal of leveraging elements of model-based systems analysis (MBSA) with those of model-based systems engineering (MBSE), noting that these two fields share some complementary characteristics but serve different purposes within a concept or product development program. The vision of MBSA&E as it relates to the SFNP is to enable a systems-level, digital integration across SFNP projects which will support the assessment, advancement, and adoption of sustainable technologies for 2030s EIS subsonic transport aircraft concepts. The illustration below shows the integration of MBSA&E tools, methods, and technical capabilities within and across the SFNP project areas.

Figure 2. Sustainable Flight National Partnership Focus Areas.

NASA considers MBSA a systems analysis (SA) process involving the development of an analytical or computational model, often involving multidisciplinary design, analysis, and optimization (MDAO), for assessing vehicle- or system-level performance to inform trade studies, technology assessments, and analysis of alternatives for decision-makers and stakeholders. This description follows from the International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA) definition [2]. NASA MBSA studies typically focus on understanding relevant vehicle and system-level performance metrics, often informed by sensitivity studies, trade studies, and multidisciplinary design optimization efforts. An MBSA study makes no assumption of a physical product, often targeting the analysis of advanced concept or vision vehicle systems.

In contrast, MBSE is a systems engineering (SE) process involving the formalized application of modeling to support system requirements, design, analysis, verification, and validation for the life cycle of a product. This description follows from the International Council on Systems Engineering (INCOSE) definition for MBSE [3], and the objective for an MBSE study is typically to model a complex system for the benefit of analyzing system to component-level performance and improving the life cycle management of the product. Unlike MBSA, MBSE studies typically leverage universal modeling languages, such as SysML, and benefit from published architectural and modeling standards.

In pursuit of a comprehensive framework for digitally integrating data and knowledge across the SFNP to relevant vision vehicle concepts, elements of both MBSA and MBSE are important to consider in the development of the SFNP MBSA&E framework. This NRA solicitation aims to sponsor work with one or more industry and academic partners that helps NASA to specifically bridge the gaps that exist between modern day MBSA and MBSE languages, tools, methods, and modeling approaches.

4 MBSA&E Approach and Goals

The NASA MBSA&E effort is anticipated to span the entire lifespan of the SFNP and is being planned as a two-phase effort. Phase I, which is primarily focused on the development and assessment of the overall MBSA&E framework, began in FY22 (10/1/2021) and is planned to conclude in mid or late FY24. Phase II will begin in FY24 as Phase I winds down and run for the remainder of the SFNP (FY28) with a focus on the application of the MBSA&E framework to the development of reference and vision vehicle models to support integrated systems-level assessments in support of the SFNP. The descriptions of Phase I and II efforts in the sections below summarize the overall objectives for each phase of NASA’s internal work. This NRA is intended to support NASA’s Phase I development activities by soliciting innovative solutions addressing key topic areas which will complement the efforts of the NASA team. The NRA topic areas are described in Section 5.

4.1 Phase I – MBSA&E Framework Development and Assessment

Phase I of the MBSA&E effort is focused on developing the overall framework and assessing its performance on a set of example aircraft. The approach being taken in this phase is to integrate the disciplinary analysis tools commonly used for NASA’s system-level assessments using the OpenMDAO software package [4] [5]. A depiction of the disciplinary models and data connections between them which are being developed is provided in Figure 3. The green boxes indicate the disciplinary analyses which are currently being integrated into OpenMDAO by the NASA team. For each box, one or more software tools are being considered to provide the disciplinary analysis capability (see Section 5.3 for list of tools). These disciplinary tools are being coupled in OpenMDAO through data connections indicated by the gray lines and small gray parallelograms. The form of this framework is derived from the requirements for model-based conceptual design, sizing, and optimization for advanced, subsonic, commercial vision vehicle concepts and will be adapted to include additional disciplinary analyses as needed. Therefore, to support development and assess the MBSA&E framework a set of example models will be evaluated in Phase I as described below.

projects are completing modeling, ground test, and flight demonstrations of a variety of technologies, and the results of those efforts will need to be integrated into the MBSA&E framework for assessment. This integration and assessment is currently planned to happen primarily in FY24-27, with the detailed plan for this integration still in formulation as the research activities in each project are evolving. As the technology portfolios and research plans within these projects are solidified, the specific studies and evaluations which need to be completed will be identified.

While the detailed plans for Phase II are still being developed, a general set of goals have been identified for this phase. The primary goals of Phase II are:

Work with SFNP projects, industry partners, and academic partners to develop a family of reference vehicles for baselining activities

Work with SFNP projects, industry partners, and academic partners to develop disciplinary or subsystem models which capture the performance characteristics of their technologies

Work with SFNP projects, industry partners, and academic partners to develop a family of vision vehicle concepts to facilitate technology integration and performance assessments informed by the SFNP ground and flight demonstrations

Complete trade studies and benefit assessments to assess the impact of the technologies being developed under the SFNP in relation to the aviation industry’s goals for sustainability

Complete safety and reliability analysis to meet regulatory requirements for certification of new generation of concept vehicles with novel technologies.

4.3 NRA Approach

The current NRA solicitation focuses on identifying and sponsoring innovative work, which is diversified across several topic areas, to support the ongoing development of an integrated, OpenMDAO-based MBSA&E framework in Phase I. The solicited research topics are not intended to completely address all Phase I objectives outlined in Section 4.1, but instead are intended to complement the NASA internal efforts by making advancements in select topic areas. The Phase I developments by NASA and under this NRA will prepare for the eventual modeling and analysis needs of Phase II. As the details of Phase II are refined, additional NRA opportunities may be made available. These opportunities will likely solicit collaborative model development for advanced configurations and targeted technologies of interest as well as vision-vehicle performance assessments corresponding to SFNP ground and flight demonstrations.

5 Technology Development Areas/Description of Solicited Topics

This solicitation seeks to accelerate and mature the development of model-based systems analysis and engineering capabilities which will support capabilities currently under development by NASA for the MBSA&E Phase I effort (described in Section 4.1). Development of these capabilities will enable and improve application of the framework for assessment of SFNP concepts and technologies in Phase II (described in Section 4.2).

Specifically, this solicitation is intended to identify and develop systems analysis and systems engineering capabilities in the following topic areas. The goal is to fully mature and implement these capabilities through FY23 and FY24 to enable MBSA&E applications to SFNP concepts and technologies in the FY24-FY27 timeframe. Proposed research activities must tie to one or more of the subtopics described below but are not required to tie to all subtopics.

5.1 MBSA&E Framework Capability Development

The MBSA&E framework capability development area seeks to address key challenges in development of the overall framework. The topics listed below will supplement and build upon the emerging NASA in-house capability being built using OpenMDAO and will provide consistency between NASA and industry best practices. As mentioned previously, NASA’s intention is to release a beta version of the MBSA&E OpenMDAO framework, the constituent tools (where possible), and relevant example aircraft analysis models to industry and academic partners during Phase I to support collaborations under the current NRA.

5.1.1 Aircraft Data Hierarchy/Definition

The MBSA&E framework is intended to provide a flexible and robust capability for conceptual/preliminary aircraft design and analysis, including both conventional and unconventional aircraft concepts. It is expected that successful development and implementation of this capability will be facilitated by having a standardized, yet adaptable approach for parameterizing or characterizing a broad set of aircraft designs. This topic seeks to develop and implement a logical, adaptable, and rigorous aircraft data definition or hierarchy within OpenMDAO to facilitate the overall MBSA&E development.

5.1.2 Standard Interface Definition Between Disciplinary Models/Tools

Analysis of different aircraft concepts within the MBSA&E framework will require integrating multiple disciplinary analysis tools, potentially of different fidelity levels. These couplings between disciplinary models and tools can be facilitated by developing standard data interfaces (both inputs and outputs) for each discipline. This topic therefore seeks to develop and implement a set of standard data interfaces for each discipline (aerodynamics, structures, propulsion, etc.)

required to perform integrated aircraft design, sizing, and performance analysis for SFNP vision vehicle concepts. These interface specifications must consider multi-fidelity disciplinary analyses and should emphasize consistency and commonality in the data interfaces between different disciplines, wherever possible.

5.1.3 Systems Analysis and Systems Engineering Integration

Ongoing framework development efforts at NASA are focused on coupling disciplinary analysis tools to support integrated systems analysis and MDAO capabilities. The NASA team recognizes the considerable complementary value offered by MBSE techniques and frameworks, as well as the challenges associated with bridging the gap between MBSA and MBSE models. This topic therefore seeks to identify value-added couplings between MBSE and the systems analysis models being developed by the team within the OpenMDAO framework, and the development of MBSA-to-MBSE meta model and framework integration schemes or approaches.

5.2 Industry/Government Model and Data Sharing

The technology development activities within the SFNP reside in numerous NASA and other government agency projects, many of which include significant industry partnerships. These government-industry partnerships produce significant technical advancements which are often documented in published reports and presentations. While these reports are valuable, a major impetus for the development of the MBSA&E framework is the need to digitally integrate these technologies across projects, programs, and partners to assess overall SFNP program progress and vehicle-level performance benefits. Therefore, NASA intends to identify challenges and devise solutions for efficiently and directly sharing digital models between industry partners involved with the SFNP and the government.

This topic seeks to develop approaches for sharing of industry models for aircraft components/subsystems by SFNP partners in a secure manner that respects the intellectual property (IP) rights of all parties. Sharing of these models and model components, whether in explicit or implicit form, will be important for performing the MBSA&E-based systems-level assessments planned in later years of the SFNP. The topics listed below highlight several approaches of interest for sharing models between industry and NASA.

5.2.1 Comprehensive Model Sharing and Collaboration Approaches

NASA is interesting in working closely with industry partners to develop and evaluate technologies being worked under the SFNP. In working closely together, NASA envisions the need for comprehensive model sharing between the government and appropriate industry partners to support MBSA&E technology assessments. In this context, “comprehensive” is intended to mean sharing and collaborating such that complete models (input files, output files, geometry files, run scripts, etc. in their native file formats) are available to both parties. As such, both parties should be able to access, perform analyses, and suggest changes to the models. However, it is also recognized that comprehensively sharing models will likely introduce industry concerns related to information security and intellectual property. This topic area seeks to develop, demonstrate, and evaluate comprehensive approaches for model sharing and collaboration. A variety of approaches are being sought, but one approach of interest to NASA is using version control software (e.g., Git) and associated cloud storage systems (e.g., Github or NASA hosted services running similar software) to maintain and share files between approved parties. Offerors are asked to develop and demonstrate their preferred approach for comprehensive sharing. They should then assess industry concerns related to using this type of approach and systems for model sharing and collaboration (security/access to the repositories, IP rights, version control, change propagation, etc.) and devise solutions which would mitigate these concerns. The proposed approach, prototype implementation, and security requirements should be documented such that they can be utilized by NASA with all industry partners.

5.2.2 Narrow Model Sharing and Collaboration Approaches

While the comprehensive model sharing and collaboration approaches being sought in Topic 5.2.1 seem to be the most desirable path, it is recognized that these approaches will likely necessitate sharing large amounts of potentially sensitive model information between industry and the government. To address this concern, this topic seeks alternatives which provide narrow (or more limited) approaches for sharing and collaborating on models. In these approaches, it is expected that the models will be provided in a means that obscures sensitive content (i.e. a black box) while still allowing for the model to be executed within the MBSA&E framework. The approaches would therefore need to enable access to input files (or portions of the input files) and output files.

A variety of approaches to narrow/limited sharing and collaborating on technology models are being sought but approaches of interest include the use of surrogate models and models as a service (industry partner hosts a model on their own server, but provides NASA an interface to modify a limited set of inputs and obtain model outputs). Offerors should develop, demonstrate, and assess industry concerns related to using these approaches and systems for model sharing and collaboration (security/access to the repositories, IP rights, version control, change propagation, etc.) and devise solutions for mitigating these concerns. The proposed approach, prototype implementation, and security requirements should be documented such that they can be utilized by NASA with all industry partners.

5.3 Disciplinary Tools and Subsystem Model Development

The disciplinary tool and subsystem model development topics listed below address initial need to build capabilities that will support the future analysis studies required to assess SFNP technologies.

To date, the NASA team is developing software integrations with OpenMDAO for tools including:

OpenVSP [6, 7], VSPaero [7], Cart3D [8, 9], FUN3D [10, 11], NPSS [12, 13], TACS [14], HCDstruct [15], Suitcase [16], LEAPS [17] (which is evolving into a new tool called Aviary), and UQPCE [18]. Along with these integrations, the NASA team is creating models using these tools for an advanced conventional tube and wing aircraft. Future models planned by the team include those related to the transonic truss braced wing and electrified aircraft propulsion concepts, among others of potential interest to SFNP partners. The topics listed below would expand on the available disciplinary tool and model suite to prepare for future evaluations of the SFNP technologies as part of an integrated system-level study.

5.3.1 Aircraft and Component/Subsystem Models

Develop relevant aircraft and component/subsystem models using any of the software tools which NASA is integrating into the framework, as described above. Models developed in this topic should be focused on enabling the system-level evaluation of the technologies being developed as part of the SFNP (see background section). It is preferred that models be open and shareable with NASA to the maximum extent possible for integration into MBSA&E assessments.

5.3.2 Disciplinary Analysis Tool Integration with OpenMDAO

Develop OpenMDAO integrations and example models for disciplinary analysis tools which will be relevant to the assessment of technologies which are being developed within the SFNP (see background section). This tool integration area could include development supporting any of the disciplines, and associated ongoing tool integration efforts, cited above, as well as other aircraft design and sizing disciplines, such as icing, emissions, acoustics, thermal management, and more.

Integrations using widely available or open-source software are preferred as these will be most broadly applicable. Additionally, integration of software tools which provide an efficient means for computing gradient information (derivatives of model outputs with respect to model inputs) are desirable as numeric solvers and optimizers will likely be required.

5.3.3 Disciplinary Analysis Tool Development using OpenMDAO

Develop and validate new disciplinary software tools as a library layer on top of OpenMDAO for disciplines which will be relevant to the assessment of technologies which are being developed within the SFNP (see background section). These new disciplinary tools should implement analytic derivatives using OpenMDAO’s internal capabilities to support use of numeric solvers and optimizers with the disciplinary tool. Code documentation and example models relevant to SFNP technology research areas should also be created.

6 Expected Outcomes and Deliverables

The desired outcomes and deliverables of a successfully awarded contract include both topic-specific and general items. Successfully awarded contracts will only need to produce topic-specific outcomes and deliverables for the topics/subtopics to which are being proposed. All contracts, regardless of subtopic, are expected to produce the general outcomes and deliverables.

Topic-specific outcomes and deliverables:

Framework Development (5.1)

a. Example implementation(s) and documentation detailing proposed Aircraft Data

Definition (Topic 5.1.1)

b. Example implementation(s) and documentation detailing Data/Model Component

Interface Definitions (Topic 5.1.2)

c. Example implementation(s) and documentation detailing proposed MBSA-MBSE integration and archetype demonstration using technology/concept(s) of interest to NASA (Topic 5.1.3), including:

i. Model management practices and hierarchy

ii. Descriptive, conceptual system model and views

iii. Executable, parametric model with simulation views Model Sharing Approaches (Topic 5.2)

a. Example implementation(s) and documentation describing proposed approaches for delivering explicit technology/concept disciplinary and system-level analysis models between NASA, Contractor, and SFNP partners (Topic 5.2.1)

b. Example implementation(s) and documentation describing proposed approaches for enabling access to standalone models from within the MBSA&E framework using surrogate and/or models-as-a-service based approaches (Topic 5.2.2)

Advanced Technology and Concept Models (Topic 5.3)

a. Model development for technologies and concepts of interest to the NASA SFNP

(Topic 5.3.1)

i. Model development approach and analysis plan

ii. Geometry models, where applicable

iii. Discipline-specific analysis models, where applicable

b. OpenMDAO framework integrations (Topic 5.3.2)

i. Development of integration approach, outlining targeted analysis tool and integration plan

ii. Example implementation(s) and initial integration planning document describing technical integration approach and including a prototype integration of the selected technical analysis tool

c. OpenMDAO analysis component development (Topic 5.3.3)

i. Description of analysis component development plan

ii. Example implementation(s) and initial component development planning document describing technical approach and including an initial prototype of the selected component

General outcomes and deliverables:

Schedule for development and key milestones Collaboration plan for working with NASA MBSA&E team to develop capabilities and integrate those capabilities with other parts of the MBSA&E framework Status update presentations and participation at Industry Days/Workshops (TBD) which will include all contract partners Final Contract presentation (unlimited release with a limited release supplement if needed) Final Contract reports (unlimited release with a limited release supplement if needed)

All outcomes and deliverables shall be delivered in the expected 18-month period of performance of the contract.

7 Intellectual Property

Data Rights. Normally, the Government has unlimited rights in technical data created under a NASA agreement. Delivery or third-party licensing of proprietary software or data developed solely at private expense will not normally be required except as specifically negotiated in a particular agreement to satisfy NASA's own needs or to ensure the commercialization of technology developed under a NASA agreement.

A clear statement is required of what intellectual property is expected to be available to the Government, U.S. Aeronautics Community, and Public at the conclusion of the work. It is NASA’s preference that all deliverables under the contract be provided to NASA with unrestricted/unlimited rights; thus, any restrictions must demonstrate a significant net benefit to the Government.

Patent Rights. The Government will have certain statutory rights in an invention that is conceived or first actually reduced to practice under a NASA award. 51 U.S.C. 20135 provides that title to such inventions vests in the United States, except where 35 U.S.C. 202 provides otherwise for nonprofit organizations or small business firms. However, NASA may waive all or any part of the rights of the United States subject to certain conditions.

8 Reviews and Reporting

The desired reviews and reporting of a successfully awarded contract include:

Project Coordination

Technical and schedule progress virtual meeting every two weeks (or as agreed upon) to assess progress

Participation and presentations at MBSA&E Industry Days/Workshops (TBD) which will include all contract partners

Reviews

Kick-off review Annual Contract review Peer Reviews and Tabletop Reviews may be considered if appropriate for the work and agreed to by NASA.

Regularly scheduled (e.g. quarterly or semi-annually) or event-driven (e.g. task completion) formal reviews Final Contract review

Reports

Monthly and Quarterly status reports documenting the technical, financial, and schedule progress (PowerPoint acceptable, limited only version)

Monthly and Quarterly 533 financial reports Final software and/or models, along with associated documentation Final report (limited and unlimited versions) documenting the results of the entire contract, recommendations, and conclusions o This report shall be prepared in accordance with NFS 1852.235-73 Final Scientific and Technical Reports (DEC 2006) Final oral report and presentation materials o The final contract review shall consist of a public and Government-only review NASA requests two versions of the presentation, one with non-proprietary content suitable for presenting in a public forum and one for NASA Government review only

Data Rights Identification

Material from the reviews and the report must identify all data with the appropriate limited and unlimited rights restrictions.

Any technical data or computer software developed, delivered, or used under this contract (including reviews and reports) for which the Offeror anticipates that the Government will receive less than Unlimited Rights must be identified on the Data Rights Assertion Table (See Model Contract, Section H.11 for instruction) and appropriately marked at the lowest segregable level. Limited Rights technical data must be identified and marked at the lowest segregable level pertaining to an item, component, or process and Restricted Computer Software data must be identified and marked at the lowest segregable level pertaining to computer software.

9 Eligibility Information

9.1 Eligibility

Participation in this program is open to all categories of U.S. organizations, including educational institutions, industry, and not-for-profit institutions. Historically black colleges and universities, other minority universities, small, disadvantaged businesses, veteran-owned small businesses, service-disabled veteran-owned small businesses, historically under-utilized business zone small businesses, and women-owned small businesses are encouraged to apply.

NASA funding through this NRA may not be used to support research and development efforts by non-U.S. organizations at any level. Participation by non-U.S. organizations is not permitted, except that (a) research may be conducted with foreign entities on a cooperative, no-exchange-of funds basis; or (b) U.S. award recipients may directly purchase supplies and/or services, which do not constitute research, from non-U.S. sources. Team members who are not U.S. citizens but are employed by or studying at a U.S. organization, may receive funding to support their research activities through this NRA. Each Offeror shall submit Attachment C – Eligibility Certification and Supplemental Information Form to determine its eligibility for this NRA.

9.2 Other Eligibility Limitations

Proposing to more than one technology area in Section 5 simultaneously or with overlapping timeframes is permitted, provided the proposed efforts are within scope of the NRA and the recipient can carry out all proposed efforts, if selected.

9.3 Number of proposals, Teaming Arrangements and Partial Awards

There is no restriction on the number of proposals that an organization may submit to this solicitation or on the teaming arrangements for any one proposal. However, each technical subtopic area being proposed from Section 5 must have a separate Statement of Work (SOW), schedule, and cost document for evaluation purposes. If multiple technology development activities are being proposed under one technical subtopic area, those activities must have a separate SOW, schedule, and cost document as well so each activity can be evaluated separately.

NASA recognizes and supports the benefits of having diverse and inclusive scientific, engineering, and technology communities and fully expects that such values will be reflected in the composition of all panels and teams, including peer review panels (science, engineering, and technology), proposal teams, science definition teams, and mission and instrument teams.

NASA reserves the right to select only a portion of a proposed activity, usually at a level of support reduced from that requested in the original proposal. Offerors should specify if a proposal is offered as a non-separable package of work. Additionally, NASA may decide to award an effort for less than the full period of the proposal. In these cases, the offeror will be given the opportunity to accept or decline such selection. If the offeror accepts such an offer, a revised budget and SOW may be required before funding action on the proposal can be initiated. If the offeror declines the offer of a partial selection, or participation in a joint investigation, the offer of selection may be withdrawn in its entirety by NASA. To assist determining costs for a partial award, the Cost Proposal shall be split into separate CLINs. This is described in more detail in Section 10.2.

NASA funding through this NRA may not be used to support research and development efforts by non-U.S. organizations at any level. Teaming Arrangements with non-U.S. organizations is permitted only to the extent that either (a) research is being conducted with foreign entities on a cooperative, no-exchange-of funds basis; or (b) U.S. award recipients are directly purchasing supplies and/or services, which do not constitute research, from non-U.S. sources. Team members who are not U.S. citizens but are employed by or studying at a U.S. organization, may receive funding to support their research activities through this NRA. Each Offeror shall submit Attachment C – Eligibility Certification and Supplemental Information Form to determine its eligibility for this NRA.

9.4 Cost Proposal

Each proposal shall provide a budget justification for each phase/year of the proposed effort and supported by appropriate details by category. Attachment B, Cost Proposal Template, shall be used for the cost proposal submittal and contains required cost proposal details.

Cost proposal shall identify the offeror’s estimated costs.

9.5 Proposed Use of Unique NASA Capabilities

NASA uses a variety of specialized computing software and equipment to achieve its mission. For this effort, most of the software for this project is available to offerors as open source or via requests submitted through software.nasa.gov. Any need for additional software packages and NASA computing equipment must be explicitly described in the proposal, including the asset, rationale and justification of the need, how it supports the investigation, and when during the proposed period the resource will be required.

9.6 Programmatic Considerations

Currently, the total Government estimate for the MBSA&E Phase 1 is anticipated to be $3.0M, dependent upon future NASA funding profiles. The actual number and value of the awards will depend on the quality and cost of the proposals received and the availability of Government funds.

10 Proposal and Submission Information

10.1 Electronic Submission of Proposals – Proposal Marking and Delivery through NASA’s

EFSS Box (NOV 2021)

(a) The offeror shall submit its proposal via NASA’s Enterprise File Sharing and Sync Box (EFSS Box), a FedRAMP Moderate certified platform. Electronic submissions shall not contain hidden formulas, tables, be locked, be password protected, or contain links to data not included in the electronic copy. All electronic submissions should be searchable and should not contain scanned documents, except those documents that must be provided in their native format (e.g., signature pages, prior award fee letters for past performance, DCAA/DCMA approval letters, as applicable).

The offeror shall ensure documents are free from viruses and malware, as documents determined by NASA to contain a virus or malware will not be opened or evaluated. Subcontractors may submit their required proposal information separately using the instructions in this provision. The offeror shall ensure subcontractor submissions are made no later than the date and time specified for proposal submission and comply with all solicitation instructions.

(b) Prior to the submission of proposal files, offerors interested in submitting a proposal in response to this solicitation should notify the Contracting Officer of their intent to submit a proposal at least 48 hours prior to the intended submission date, at the following email address:

ian.park@nasa.gov. The offeror shall courtesy copy (cc) Eric Hendricks at eric.hendricks@nasa.gov on this communication. Offerors, especially those that have not previously submitted a proposal utilizing NASA’s EFSS Box, are encouraged to coordinate the submission of a test file with Ian Park several days in advance of the date and time specified for proposal submission in order to allow time to work through any submission issues.

(c) The offeror shall submit all proposal files to:

https://nasagov.app.box.com/f/c2098eeae39b4baba2faff5d43748a75. The Offeror shall follow instructions regarding proposal submission found at https://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/procurement/other/EFSS-Box-Offeror-Proposal-Submission- Instructions.pdf.

(d) Offerors are encouraged to include all individual proposal files within a single .zip file.

Electronic file names shall be limited to letters, numbers, dashes, and single spaces, with the exception of the period that is required before the file extension (e.g., .zip, .pdf), in order to successfully upload and download files from the EFSS Box system. The offeror shall not use special characters “/” or “\” in file names. The offeror shall sequentially number each file and clearly label the contents of the file and include the name of the offeror and subcontractor name (if applicable) in the individual file name. Examples of acceptable individual file names are as follows (not specific to this solicitation):

For Prime Offeror Submissions:

1. Prime Offeror name - solicitation number - MS Volume.docx

2. Prime Offeror name - solicitation number - PP Volume.pdf

3. Prime Offeror name - solicitation number Cost-Price Volume.xlsx

For Subcontractor Submissions:

1. Prime Offeror name - Subcontractor Name - solicitation number - MS Volume.docx

2. Prime Offeror name - Subcontractor Name - solicitation number - PP Volume.pdf

3. Prime Offeror name - Subcontractor Name - solicitation number Cost-Price Volume.xlsx

Individual files cannot exceed 150GB per file. Submitted files shall not include password protection. Unless specifically authorized by the solicitation instructions, alternate proposal submissions shall not be submitted.

(e) Immediately after all files have been uploaded and the proposal has been submitted in its entirety, the offeror shall notify the Contracting Officer at the following email address:

ian.park@nasa.gov with a listing of all documents by filename that were submitted via EFSS Box.

The offeror shall courtesy copy (cc) Eric Hendricks at eric.hendricks@nasa.gov on this communication. If any problems are experienced with the EFSS Box system (e.g., login, file transfer), please contact Ian Park and a cc copy to Eric Hendricks via e-mail as soon as possible.

(f) 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 (see FAR 52.215-1(c)(3)). The Government is not responsible for any failure attributable to the transmission or receipt of documents submitted using electronic means, including the missing of any submission requirements and established deadlines. Please note that uploading documents via EFSS Box and the transmission of the files from the offeror to the Government may not be instantaneous. To ensure timely delivery, the offeror is encouraged to submit its proposal at least 24 hours prior to the due date specified in the solicitation. The electronic submission of the proposal shall contain all information required by the solicitation to be determined responsive.

(End of provision)

10.2 Proposal Content and Format

The proposal format and content requirements are outlined below in Table 1. Summary of Proposal Content. The below noted sections of the proposal must be submitted as one searchable, unlocked PDF file with edit permissions enabled as well as Attachment B Cost Proposal in an unlocked Microsoft Excel file. Offerors must comply with the format and page limit requirements as described below.

Table 1. Summary of Proposal Content

Section No Subsection No

Title Page Limit

Title Page 1 I Executive Summary 2 II Past Experience 3 III Technical Merit T1 Relevance, Potential for Implementation, and Impact

T2 Technical Approach and Capabilities 10 T3 Proposed Work Plan(s) 10 each*

IV Cost No Page Limit* Appendix 1 Signed Model Contract(s) and Reps and

Certs (NRA Section 13 Offerors Fill In) No Page Limit*

Eligibility Certification and Supplemental Information Form

* A separate Work Plan, Cost Proposal, and signed Model Contract shall be provided in the proposal for each technical sub-topic area from Section 5. If multiple technology development activities are being proposed under one technical subtopic area, those activities shall have a separate Work Plan, Cost Proposal, and signed Model Contract as well. The offeror’s Proposed Work Plan is intended to become the Statement of Work (SOW) on any awarded contract(s).

Documents exceeding page limits for each section shall not be evaluated. A page is defined as one side of a sheet, 8 1/2" x 11" with at least one-inch margins on all sides, using not smaller than 12-point font, with the exception of tables and figures, which may use 8-point font. It is recommended that expository text necessary for the proposal not be located solely in figures or tables, or in their captions. Offerors may submit foldout pages (11” x 17” or smaller) however the fold out will be considered as two (2) 8 1∕2” x 11” pages. Any font that the Government determines smaller than this amount shall not be evaluated. Proposals may not include references to materials outside the proposal (e.g. published articles and sites on the internet) for information or material needed to either complete or understand the proposal.

Pages submitted in excess of the limitations specified in this section will not be evaluated by the Government.

Title Page This section shall include the following:

Include any notice of restriction on use and disclosure of proposal information.

An optional graphic image may be included.

The offeror’s name of the proposal or proposed project Date of the proposal The title and solicitation number Organization name and address and CAGE code Offeror’s point of contact’s name, title, e-mail address, and phone number Type of organization (e.g. other than small, educational, small business, minority, women-owned, etc.)

Proposal validity period (minimum of 90 days from proposal submission)

Section I - Executive Summary The offeror shall describe the proposal’s prominent and distinguishing features. The executive summary shall provide an overview of the proposed effort that is suitable for release through a publicly accessible archive should the proposal be selected.

Section II - Past Experience

The offeror shall describe experience providing services performed in the past three (3) years that are of a similar size, scope, and complexity to the technology development proposed. Include any work related to the proposed technology area such as current and pending support.

Section III – Technical Merit

Technical Merit is divided into three (3) sub-factors, T1, T2, and T3, as follows:

T1 - Relevance, Potential for Implementation, and Impact

a. Relevance to NASA Goals:

The offeror shall describe how the proposed contribution or development is relevant to the MBSA&E Phase I goals in Section 4.1.

b. Potential for Implementation:

The offeror shall discuss the current maturity and anticipated final state of the proposed contribution or development. The discussion shall include the key technical challenges, risks, and potential for successful implementation associated with the proposed contribution or development.

c. Impact and Benefit:

The offeror shall describe the projected benefits of the proposed contribution or development to both the MBSA&E Phase I & II goals (see Sections 4.1 and 4.2). The discussion shall clearly explain how NASA’s investment in the proposed development will enhance the MBSA&E framework’s capabilities and better enable system-level assessments of vehicles, concepts, and technologies being developed in the SFNP.

T2 - Technical Approach and Capabilities

a. Overall Approach:

The offeror shall describe the technical approach which will be used to advance…