Question and Responses 8_25_21.pdf

AST Questions & Responses - as of August 25, 2021 Disclaimer: In the event of any inconsistency between data provided herein and the RSES RFP, the language in the Final RFP, including any amendments, will govern.

Topic/Referenc e

Question/Comment Response

1 NAICS Code Will the Acquisition Strategy Team consider using the Aircraft exception (1,500 employee small business size standard) under NAICS 541715 for the upcoming TEAMS follow-on solicitation?

The final NAICS code and corresponding size standard will be recommended by the Source Evaluation Board (SEB) in coordination with the Small Business advisor and determined by the Contracting Officer. However, the AST will leverage its market research and provide inputs to the SEB for their consideration.

The services within the AST’s scope have historically been competed pursuant to the 2017 NAICS 541712 Research and Development Engineering, and Life Sciences (except Nanotechnology and Biotechnology).

In some cases, the Guided Missiles and Space Vehicles exception has been used.

The Aircraft exception has not been used on previous procurements, as it was not determined to be the most appropriate for the requirements.

2 Page Count for RFI Response

In a typical font size with reasonable spacing for readability, we are finding that the questions themselves take up a page and a half. Since this is about gathering information as an RFI and is not a strict RFP, we would strongly recommend increasing it to about 12 pages, including the questions.

The AST was trying to limit the burden on industry. However, the limit is increased from 8 pages to 10 pages.

3 Technical Scope

– Climate and Carbon Neutrality

NASA. Layered upon this is the Biden administration’s national focus on climate and carbon neutrality. LaRC brings exceptional demonstrated competencies in atmospheric and Earth-system data management, collection, and observations. If we consider AST today, the “as-is” state, and look to the future, the visionary “to-be” state, my question is this…

The scope of several of these technical service categories may support research associated with climate and carbon neutrality in the future if aligned with the Agency’s mission.

“Specifically with respect to the evolving state of science and technology maturation, including miniaturization, what are the primary (e.g., top-five gap areas) that AST wishes to close to be able to best help our nation transform to, monitor, and manage a carbon-neutral future?”

4 AST Milestone Schedule

Does NASA intend to provide a schedule of anticipated procurement milestones (e.g.;

dates for issuance of: RFP, proposal submittals, start date of period of performance of new contract mechanisms) at the May 5 Forum?

Yes, a notional schedule is provided within the presentation which is now posted on beta.sam.

5 RFI Response Date

Would NASA consider extending the due date for RFI responses past the currently identified May 7 date? (The time between the May 5 Forum and May 7 response date, just 2 days, seems to be too short to allow industry to respond adequately to any improved understanding of NASA’s intent/desire for the content of industry feedback regarding the 13 questions contained in the RFI.)

Yes, we will extend the response date to End of Business EST on May 12, 2021. NASA will attempt to provide answers to questions provided during the forum by May 7, 2021.

6 # of Contracts How many contracts does NASA anticipate letting for these requirements?

The number of contracts has not been determined. We are awaiting industry input to the RFI questions, and plan to make our recommendation to stakeholders in July, and communicate to industry shortly thereafter via an update to our existing announcement on beta.sam.

7 Small Business Do you anticipate these contracts will be small business set asides or other set asides?

We are awaiting industry input to the RFI questions so we can assess the capability of small business to meet the research, science, and engineering needs. The AST will provide the results of our market research to the source selection teams/boards in the summer.

The goal of LaRC is aligned with the mission of the NASA Office of Small Business Programs to ensure that the Agency is compliant with all Federal laws, regulations, and policies regarding small and disadvantaged business utilization.”

8 Student/visiting faculty

Perhaps this is upcoming, but if NIA is no longer to support student/visiting faculty programs;

how will such important, enlivening functions be supported?

This need will be met through a variety of means. First, requirements identified by LaRC in this area will be accommodated within the scope of at least one procurement arising out of the AST. Additionally, NASA is increasingly accommodating student programs via its Pathways program. Last, the AST will explore opportunities to accommodate such activities/programs in Phase II, which will focus on Partnerships and other non-procurement tools to engage industry and academia.

9 Technical Service Categories

Are the Technical Service Categories equivalent to the "disciplines" in the contracts under review?

The Technical Services Categories will replace the “disciplines” approach used in several of our current contracts.

10 AST Scope Will you be absorbing work from contracts at other Centers?

At this time, the AST is focusing on the requirements at LaRC including requirements arising from HQ functions located at Langley (e.g. the NASA Engineering and Safety Center).

However, NASA is currently undergoing a major initiative pursuant to Procurement’s Transformation Initiative to transform how it will strategically procure research, science, and engineering services to meet the Agency’s evolving mission needs in the decades to come.

Critical elements of the initiative are to: (1) establish clearly defined enterprise requirements/deliverables; (2) streamline acquisition practices and business processes;

(3) reduce redundant and duplicative contracts and other instruments across the Agency. As these efforts unfold, it is possible work from other Centers that align to our Technical Services Categories could be absorbed later.

11 Off-site work Based on offsite work due to COVID being proven out, due you anticipate most of this work for these contracts will be able to be performed offsite?

The Agency and LaRC are both working on Future of Work (FoW) initiatives with the goal of finding a sustainable model for on-site and off-site work. The AST is working with the LaRC FoW team to ensure we are aligned. The AST certainly anticipates the level of off-site work will increase as compared to LaRC’s pre-pandemic status. This will include recommendations to the following-on source evaluation boards/teams to ensure the contracts provide flexibility to adapt to future changes. We anticipate that some level of on-site presence will always be necessary to accommodate “hands-on” research and activities. Some of this on-site work is sustained and full-time, some on-site support may only be required short-term (e.g. for a few weeks to months while building hardware), and some may only be required a day or two a week. As the FoW activities progress, the AST hopes to provide more information regarding the types of work that can be performed predominantly off-site or remotely, and the types of work requiring various level of on-site presence, recognizing that it will also depend on the capabilities of industry and academia.

12 Agency contracts

Can you provide the link to the RFI that is soliciting feedback on PP&C and Communications? You mentioned GSFC but it would be helpful to have the link.

Information on the Program Analysis and Control (PAAC) Contract at Goddard Space Flight Center can be found at:

https://beta.sam.gov/opp/d41d5b3d15357348 dfb30ce461cf5725/view or by searching

“PAAC.”

The information on the Communication and Outreach RFI can be found at:

https://beta.sam.gov/opp/f4fc463a5e884620a 3f6e0592ed0ac01/view or by searching “NASA Communication Services (NCS)” https://beta.sam.gov/opp/d41d5b3d15357348dfb30ce461cf5725/view https://beta.sam.gov/opp/d41d5b3d15357348dfb30ce461cf5725/view https://beta.sam.gov/opp/f4fc463a5e884620a3f6e0592ed0ac01/view https://beta.sam.gov/opp/f4fc463a5e884620a3f6e0592ed0ac01/view

13 Level of Effort Aside from the work being moved to other contracts/initiatives, do you expect the labor level-of-effort to stay the same?

While the level of contractor support has remained relatively stable over the past few years, the level of future support will depend greatly on the President’s agenda, corresponding budgets, and the unique approaches proposed by industry and/or academia. If significant increases or decreases are included in appropriations budgeted for research disciplines that Langley supports, we could see corresponding changes in the level of support required by our contractors. Note that decreases will occur in the technical service categories moving to other Agency contracts.

14 Future of Work Will feedback from this RFI related to the future of work feed into the center's return to work strategy and when will the return to work strategy be socialized?

Feedback from the RFI will be considered in Future of Work (FoW) activities. While there is no set timeline for communicating the strategy, relevant information that is available will be provided with the Draft RFP.

15 NAICS Code Will the AST consider using the Aircraft exception (1,500 employee small business size standard) under NAICS 541715 for the upcoming TEAMS follow-on solicitation?

Please see the response to question 1 above.

16 Technical Service Categories

What is the path to provide feedback on areas that are "likely not to be" included in future contracts? Is it through the GSFC RFI or this RFI or both?

Feedback can be provided through either channel.

17 Bidders List If we would like to get put on the bidders list who should we sent our contact information to?

LaRC-AST@mail.nasa.gov

18 Teaming Do you encourage small business to team up to solve the requirements in the contracts, which could allow contracts set asides

NASA relies on industry to derive the approach it determines will best meet our research needs and address set-aside and subcontracting requirements/criteria that may be defined in resulting solicitations. See also the response to question 7.

19 Technical Services Categories

How do the Technical Service Categories align with Langley's organization?

The Technical Service Categories are intended to provide a uniform approach to categorize technical disciples. Hence, the categories are aligned to disciplines rather than organizations.

20 Technical Service Categories

Do you see an optimal number of Technical Service Categories or WYE for each contract?

We do not, but would appreciate any input related to this topic.

21 NAICS Code Will the AST consider using the Space Vehicles exception (1,250 employee small business size standard) under NAICS 541715 for the upcoming TEAMS follow-on solicitation?

Please see the response to question 1 above.

22 Budget Do you have a target budget for all the TSCs?

We do not.

23 Stakeholders For comm and outreach, are you considering 'stakeholders' as those researchers/engineers who volunteer for such activities? They are a source of requirements.

Yes, the preceding Procurement Development Team (PDT) and AST have engaged numerous stakeholders throughout the enterprise/agency.

24 Sourcing Question: You mentioned BAART contracts moving to OASIS...because of multiple awards? Are you looking at other potential uses of OASIS for any of these other contracts?

OASIS will now be the primary mechanism to fulfill the needs the BAART contracts previously supported. However, the scope of BAART is separate and distinct from the RSES scope.

NASA explores strategic sourcing opportunities such as OASIS as part of its market research for all requirements.

25 Acquisition Schedule

Is NASA on track with the schedule for procurement planning that was previously briefed?

“Key acquisition milestones are as follows: Procurement Strategy Meeting in December of 2021, Draft RFP in January of 2022, Final Request for Proposal in March of 2022, Award in January of 2023, and Contract Start in April of 2023, after an approximately 80-day phase-in period.”

Yes, we are still on track. The presentation provides schedule details. See slide entitled “Acquisition Schedule (Subject to Change)”

26 Procurement’s Transformation Initiative

What else can you share about the following statement?

“Hence, while this notice focuses on Langley initiatives as described below, NASA will issue additional

This statement is referring back to information provided earlier in the RFI which stated “NASA is currently undergoing a major initiative pursuant to Procurement’s Transformation Initiative to transform how it will strategically notices to address engineering services needs more broadly across the NASA enterprise.”

procure research, science, and engineering services to meet the Agency’s evolving mission needs in the decades to come.” Langley’s initiative is just one piece of the NASA’s transformation efforts for such services throughout the Agency.

27 Number of Awards

Is the government anticipating allowing offerors to propose to a single CLIN to increase possible competition or requiring offerors propose to both CLINS?

At this time, we anticipate Offerors will be able to propose on a single CLIN or both CLINs. We anticipate the RFP may also include language indicating a preference to award one contract encompassing both Core CLINs, but have the ability to award two contracts aligned with the two core CLINs. The language in the Final RFP, including any amendments, will govern.

28 Evaluation Factors

What specific factors is the government considering for use in determining whether to award a single contract or two contracts?

These factors are under development and will be included in the Draft Request for Proposal (DRFP) and Final RFP. The language in the Final RFP, including any amendments, will govern.

29 Advisory Multi- Step Process

What criteria is the government considering for use in the Advisory Multi-Step Process to assess offerors “potential to be viable competitors”?

Information to be “invited” could include:

Past Performance – performed contracts of similar size, scope, and complexity Technical and Management Capability Organizational Conflicts of Interest (OCI) Avoidance Further details will be provided with the formal request.

30 Small Business Set-Aside

Given the cumulative size of a potential single combined contract and the complexity of other factors of interest to NASA, what drove the AST recommendation for total small business set-aside? In light of the potential scale and other complexities, will the government consider making RSES full and open?

Market research supports the recommended small business set-aside.

31 Industry Day Will there be an on-site industry day?

Due to the ongoing pandemic, an on-site industry day is not likely to occur.

32 Acquisition Strategy

Please clarify Slide 1. Is the idea that one company may receive a single award with both CLINs or that two companies may receive awards, each with a different CLIN (with the decision to be made by the SEB during evaluation)?

Yes, however the final RFP will govern. The criteria for making the decision between one and two awards will be included in the RFP. See response to question 27.

33 Acquisition Strategy

Would companies be expected to submit a single proposal that covers both CLINs? If so, should they assume that they may be awarded both CLINs or either CLIN(engineering)/CLIN(science)?

The DRFP and final RFP will provide the necessary instructions regarding proposal submission.

34 Acquisition Strategy

Do they need to structure their management and cost proposals to cover all of these options?

See response to question 33.

35 Acquisition Strategy

Given that the nature of science and engineering CLINs are different and that there are a few areas that are common to both and will be included in both CLINs, what is gained by combining the two areas into one single RFP?

Can Langley provide some concrete measures of what will be saved by combination versus the risk and additional effort to evaluate the combined requirement?

Why is Research included with Engineering in one CLIN versus being included with Science in the other CLIN?

The acquisition strategy is aligned with Langley’s needs, Agency procurement transformation initiatives, and demonstrated as realistic through market research.

Technical Service Category Taxonomy were the key driver for the CLIN structure. Additionally, research is inherent in all work that NASA Langley does.

36 Acquisition

What are the quantitative criteria for deciding on a single award versus two awards? The statement is made that “NASA’s decision on whether to award one or two CLINs will be based on the merit of proposals assessed”.

How is “merit” evaluated in terms

See responses to question 27, 32, and 35. We understand the importance of this information.

We are still relatively early in the process and will post additional information when available.

of measures? The details of award (one versus two) are critical for industry to develop effective and competitive bidding strategy and teaming arrangements, so we urge LaRC to finalize its decision criteria and publish that as soon as possible.

37 Acquisition

Are bidders expected to be qualified for and respond to both areas of Research/ Engineering and Science or can they select one or the other CLIN to respond to?

See responses to question 27, 32, and 35. We understand the importance of this information.

We are still relatively early in the process and will post additional information when available.

38 Evaluation Criteria

Will there be a point scoring for depth and breadth of capabilities?

How will depth and breadth of capabilities coverage be evaluated?

The RFP will likely include mission suitability (e.g. technical and management), Past Performance (Quality of Performance and Relevance), and Cost/Price as the evaluation factors. The Mission Suitability factor is the only factor that has a “point scoring” associated with the evaluation. Reference NFS 1815.305-70(b), Mission Suitability Factor for more information. The language in the Final RFP, including any amendments, will govern

39 Past Performance

We agree that this is the best solution for LaRC to meet its small business goals and assist in inclusion of under-represented entities. What level of past performance will the Government require of the Prime contractor?

Given that the Total Contract Value is about $700M, will small businesses be allowed to use contracts of lesser total contract value as past performance, especially if they can show that they are simultaneously managing contract adding up to that total contract value?

The RFP will include information regarding relevance of past performance, which may include minimum size requirements at a lesser value than the estimated total contract value.

The language in the Final RFP, including any amendments, will govern.

We invite industry and academia to provide suggestions and recommendations that allows Langley to balance the need to assess relevant past performance information, not unnecessarily restricting competition, and to have the ability to discriminate among offerors’ past performance records.

40 Past Performance

Will the Government allow the period of validity of past performances to be extended from 5 years to 10 years so that small businesses can demonstrate their maturity in managing large contracts?

The NASA FAR supplement states that “Normally, the requested contracts are limited to those awarded in the last three years.”

However the Source Evaluation Board will determine if longer periods are required to demonstrate performance quality. This information will be included in the Request for Proposal. Note that it is highly unlikely this would exceed 5-years. The language in the Final RFP, including any amendments, will govern

41 Evaluation Criteria

We feel that cost-type contract is most appropriate. Furthermore, will LaRC consider making this contract a best value procurement where the technical and cost combined will be evaluated?

Yes, NASA will conduct the procurement in accordance with NASA FAR Supplement 1815.3, Source Selection, and as defined in the final RFP.

42 Advisory Multi- Step Process

Advisory Multi-Step Process: the procurement will be conducted in accordance with FAR 15.202, Will you please explain the details of how you will use this Process? Will you please share an example, even for a hypothetical case of how you will apply this process to the LaRC Research, Science, and Engineering Services procurement?

The industry forum slides includes information to address this question.

43 University Capabilities

In your latest RFI, you ask about mechanisms or opportunities to allow NASA to leverage unique university capabilities, adopt emerging technologies, and incorporate leading-edge basic research into our missions. Are you also interested in approaches to bring world class subject matter expertise (not necessarily affiliated with universities) as a

NASA updated the RFI to include the following additional information regarding this subject:

“NASA Langley conducts cutting-edge, basic and applied research in aeronautics, space exploration, science, and related areas. This research invents and enables the future of Aeronautics and Space, leveraging emerging technologies to create solution spaces for existing and future major Agency mission issues. This research requires worldwide knowledgeability, and a culture of ideating and resource to support LaRC missions?

triaging multiple potential solutions while leveraging traditional aerospace technologies as well as novel, rapidly developing/emerging technologies. Notable elements of this research requires the ability to engage expertise from academia including university faculty and graduate researchers with collectively unique experience and skills, on site and at University campuses, and leveraging their unique university equipment, labs, and capabilities.”

44 Off-Site Capabilities

Do you anticipate that LaRC will have a need for off-site facilities, laboratories, or R&D infrastructure in order to support a move towards an off-site or hybrid workforce? If so, what specific infrastructure would best support upcoming LaRC missions and projects?

While not related to “a move towards an off-site or hybrid workforce”, the response to question 43 addresses existing and future anticipated needs with regards to “leveraging their unique university equipment, labs, and capabilities.”

To the extent the RFP allows off-site work, it will be up to the offeror to determine facility needs for its workforce. At this time, no laboratories or R&D infrastructure needs are anticipated other than those addressed in response to question 43.

45 Technical Scope The National Institute of Aerospace conducts academic research under a cooperative agreement from NASA Langley Research Center. What is the relationship between the anticipated solicitation and NIA?

NASA Langley intends to leverage RSES to meet requirements currently within the scope of TEAMS 3, STARSS III, and the NIA Contract and Cooperative Agreement; with the exception of the requirements specifically highlighted as “will not be included in RSES” in the 8/25/21 forum presentation.

46 Technical Scope Will NASA permit joint appointments for its employees at Langley Research Center and universities (and vice versa)?

Not within the RSES framework.

47 Classified Work Will any of the work to be classified, and if so, at what level?

At this time, Langley anticipates that RSES will require the Contractor shall maintain a Facility Clearance at the Top Secret level with no safeguarding required. The Contractor will be required to access classified information at NASA Langley and/or a Government facility to be identified on the Department of Defense Contract Security Classification Specification, DD Form 254.

48 Foreign National, Lawful Permanent Resident, Export Control

Is there any restriction to engaging researchers who are US persons but not US citizens (e.g., green card holders)? If so, what are the restrictions?

The Contractor will be required to comply with all U.S. export control laws and regulations including, but not limited to, International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR), 22 CFR 120 through 130, and the Export Administrator Regulations (EAR), 15 CFR Parts 730 through 799.

Langley’s current contracts include additional requirements likely to be incorporated into RSES including, but not limited to:

“Foreign National: Any person who is not a U.S. citizen and who is not a lawful permanent resident as defined by 8 U.S.C. 1101(a) (20) or any person who is not a protected individual as defined by 8 U.S.C. 1324b(a) (3). This also means any foreign corporation, business association, partnership, trust, society or any other entity or group that is not incorporated or organized to do business in the U.S., as well as any international organizations, any foreign government, and any agency or subdivision of foreign governments (e.g., diplomatic missions).

Lawful Permanent Resident (LPR): A non-U.S.

citizen legally permitted to reside and work within the U.S. and issued a Resident Alien Identification (also known as a Green Card).

LPRs are to be afforded all the rights and privileges of a U.S. citizen with the exception of voting, holding public office, access to classified national security information, and employment in the federal sector (except for specific needs or under temporary appointment per 5 CFR, Part 7, Section 7.4). LPRs are not prohibited from accessing export controlled commodities, but must have a work-related "need-to-know" for access. LPRs are considered foreign nationals under immigration laws. LPR, as defined herein, is to replace the term “Permanent Resident Alien” (PRA) in all NASA guidance that has not yet been updated to the use of LPR.” The terms in the final RFP will govern.

49 Facilities The announcement anticipates use of unique university facilities.

Is there a requirement for secure facilities for collaborating universities?

Not anticipated at this time

50 Technical Scope NASA often has different funding organizations for applied and basic research. Given the scope for both basic and applied research, variations in goals and success criteria, and variations in research program schedules, can the percentage of overall research scope be estimated for applied versus basic?

Not at this time, however we will attempt to provide this information in the future.

RFI On April 22, 2021 NASA and LaRC published an RFI "Request for Information Supporting Acquisition Strategy Development for Specialized Research, Scientific, and Engineering Professional Services." What is the relationship between that RFI and the current RFI? Will any or all of the tasks described in the April RFI be incorporated into the program that follows the current RFI?

The current RFI is a follow-on to the April 21, 2021 RFI. Both RFIs address the same NASA requirements. The current RFI provides additional information regarding the selected Acquisition Strategy, requests additional information from industry, and invites industry to the 8/25/21 forum.

52 HBCU and

MSI/MI

Under FAR 48 CFR 52.219- 9(d)(10(iv), NASA includes Historically Black Colleges and Universities and Minority Institutions under the Small Business requirement. Will this continue under this award? Can

A small business set-aside is anticipated.

Additionally, the solicitation will likely include separate goals for HBCUs and MSIs/MIs. The prime offeror will need to propose their approach to meeting these goals.

See RFI for more information on NASA’s efforts to advance equity or remove barriers for

HBCUs and MIs alone satisfy the small business goals?

members of underserved communities to access procurement opportunities pursuant to Executive Order 13985, Advancing Racial Equity and Support for Underserved Communities Through the Federal Government.

53 Technical Scope Is there any consideration of using a Space Act Agreement to fund this activity? If so, what are the advantages to commercial firms and academic institutions over cooperative agreements or procurement contracts?

NASA Langley intends to leverage RSES to meet requirements currently within the scope of TEAMS 3, STARSS III, and the NIA Contract and Cooperative Agreement; with the exception of the requirements specifically highlighted as “will not be included in RSES” in the 8/25/21 forum presentation.

54 Technical Scope The announcement anticipates CLINs that range from fundamental to applied research.

What program management metrics or milestones do you anticipate, particularly when the research is more of a fundamental nature?

Fundamental research reporting requirements and any metrics and milestones, if applicable, will be established at the task level.

55 Technical Scope The announcement anticipates engagement with academia, including university faculty and graduate researchers. Academic research is most commonly funded by federal agencies, including NASA (e.g., CRESST II at GSFC, NIA at LaRC), with grants and cooperative agreements subject to the 'Uniform Guidance' (2 CFR Part 200). Is there any consideration that academic research aspects may be funded under the Uniform Guidance and not the FARs? If funding is to be provided under the Uniform Guidance, will there be a separate award or a mechanism to convert the flow down requirements of Title 48 (FARs) to Title 2 (Uniform Guidance)? Langley Research Center funds the National

NASA Langley does and will continue to leverage grants and cooperative agreements, as appropriate, to meet our needs. Those agreements are processed through the NASA Shared Services Center (NSSC).

In addition, NASA Langley anticipates that certain aspects of the work performed through universities may appropriately fall under the RSES contract. This includes work currently performed under the NIA Contract and Cooperative Agreement. As indicated in the 8/25/21 industry forum presentation, NASA Langley intends to leverage RSES to meet requirements currently within the scope of TEAMS 3, STARSS III, and the NIA Contract and Cooperative Agreement; with the exception of the requirements specifically highlighted as “will not be included in RSES”.

Institute of Aerospace under parallel awards through a cooperative agreement and a procurement contract. Is there any consideration to using a cooperative agreement for all tasks of the program where the principal purpose is NOT for the direct benefit or use of the United States Government and a parallel procurement contract to the same recipient for the tasks that are for the direct benefit or use of the United States Government?

56 Small Business Fundamental to industry and its ability to team, bid, and submit a compelling proposal is the contact type – Small Business Set-Aside (SBSA) or Full & Open (F&O).

Given that both STARSS and TEAMS have been SBSA’s, are we to assume the hybrid contract will also be SBSA?

Yes

57 Small Business If the resulting contract(s) are small business set asides, will there be a strict adherence to the 50% Limitation on Subcontracting rule for the prime, or will the 50% apply to “similarly situated entities?”

We anticipate the 50% will apply to “similarly situated entities”; however, the final RFP will govern.

58 Current Contract Data

What are the current number of contracted employees and annual revenues for each of the current contracts (TEAMS, STARSS, NIA)?

Data was uploaded with our original RFI dated 4/22/21 and last updated 7/6/21 under the title “Request for Information Supporting Acquisition Strategy Development for Specialized Research, Scientific, and Engineering Professional Services” https://sam.gov/opp/0d50cc5e78ff4add81950f b7d1de70e3/view

The following estimates* of annual spending were provided at the 8/25/21 forum:

https://sam.gov/opp/0d50cc5e78ff4add81950fb7d1de70e3/view

TEAMS 3: $71M annually; 300 - 310 on or near-site WYE (does not include off-site WYE under subcontracts) STARSS III: $42-$46M annually; 260 - 272 on or near site WYE (plus approximately 140 under subcontract) NIA Cooperative Agreement: $22M annually;

90-92 on or near-site WYE NIA IDIQ Contract: $6M annually; 4 on or near-site WYE (plus 25-35 subcontractor WYE mostly with academia)

*The Work Year Equivalent (WYE) numbers generally include on or near-site contracts only.

*Estimates have not been adjusted to account for work that will not be included in RSES (e.g.

PP&C, Communication and Outreach, Risk Management) See also slides 15, 17, and 20.

59 DE&I Given the goal of Diversity, Equity and Inclusion. Has NASA assessed the impact of the push for consolidation on small business?

NASA Langley anticipates its approach will further advance opportunities for small business and underserved communities/groups, including further advancing Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion under NASA’s contracts.

60 Current Contract Data

Does Langley have a breakdown (general percentages) of services provided between industry, academia and research institutions

Data was uploaded with our original RFI dated 4/22/21 and last updated 7/6/21 under the title “Request for Information Supporting Acquisition Strategy Development for Specialized Research, Scientific, and Engineering Professional Services” https://sam.gov/opp/0d50cc5e78ff4add81950f b7d1de70e3/view

The largest share of services performed by academia and research institutions fall under the NIA instruments. See the May 5, 2021 Industry and Academia Forum presentation for more information

Services performed by academia under TEAMS 3 and STARSS III is relatively small. The bulk of the remaining work is performed by industry.

We will try to provide additional information as it becomes available.

61 Small Business How did NASA assess the viability of total SBSA and potential level of competition in light of the RSES complexities (e.g. breadth of content, D&I goals, academia involvement)?

The acquisition strategy is aligned with Langley’s needs, Agency procurement transformation initiatives, and was demonstrated as realistic through market research.

62 Number of Awards

Regarding the potential for two awards under the new solicitation

- is it Langley's intent to award one contract under each CLIN, or would both awardees be eligible for work under both CLINS?

At this time, we anticipate Offerors will be able to propose on a single CLIN or both CLINs. We anticipate the RFP may also include language indicating a preference to award one contract encompassing both Core CLINs, but have the ability to award two contracts aligned with the two core CLINs. The language in the Final RFP, including any amendments, will govern.

If two awards are made, awardees would only be eligible to perform work aligned to the single CLIN that they are awarded.

63 Number of Awards

Are all proposers required to propose to both CLINs?

See responses to question 27, 32, and 35. We understand the importance of this information.

We are still relatively early in the process and will post additional information when available.

64 ASDC Value We understand that NASA Langley is considering, putting the requirements for Atmospheric Science services into a separate CLIN. If this were done, can you provide an estimated annual contract value for that particular

CLIN?

Approximately $10M

65 Acquisition Strategy

Dr. Zurbuchen has stated that he opposes mixing engineering and science contracts. How will that play into the proposed acquisition strategy?

The acquisition strategy has been coordinated with and approved by appropriate stakeholders.

66 Current Contract Data

Will LaRC provide added info. to clarify degree each Directorate uses affected contracts? Briefs

Data was uploaded with our original RFI dated 4/22/21 and last updated 7/6/21 under the title “Request for Information Supporting Acquisition Strategy Development for appear to be full overview

Specialized Research, Scientific, and Engineering Professional Services” https://sam.gov/opp/0d50cc5e78ff4add81950f b7d1de70e3/view

67 Number of Awards

We understand that the solicitation will be broken out into two separate CLINS. May an offeror propose on One CLIN ? Or are we required to bid on both CLINs ?

See responses to question 27, 32, and 35. We understand the importance of this information.

We are still relatively early in the process and will post additional information when available.

68 Current Contract Data

Asked offerors to "explore and consider teaming / partnerships to...". Teaming is typically worked months in advance when content, etc is fully clear. Might timeline be adjusted to allow for sufficient planning on such points when content and approach (how propose separate CLINS) etc. is fully articulated?

Data including the current contract SOWs/PWSs and additional information on our current contracts were uploaded with our original RFI dated 4/22/21 and last updated 7/6/21 under the title “Request for Information Supporting Acquisition Strategy Development for Specialized Research, Scientific, and Engineering Professional Services” https://sam.gov/opp/0d50cc5e78ff4add81950f b7d1de70e3/view.

NASA LaRC believes this information, as well as the information provided in both industry forums, is adequate for industry to make informed decisions about teaming.

At this time, we intend to maintain our current schedule.

69 Number of Awards

In regards to the procurement strategy, we understand that the government's preference is to award one contract encompassing both CLINs. However offerors, may propose one CLIN. I am struggling to understand why any company would propose to a single CLIN, when NASA has clearly voiced their preference to award a single contract for both CLINs. Can you remove the preference to award a single contract ?

See responses to question 27, 32, and 35. We understand the importance of this information.

We are still relatively early in the process and will post additional information when available.

At this time, NASA LaRC intends to maintain the option to award a single contract for both Core CLINs. We encourage industry feedback and recommendations on this issue.

https://sam.gov/opp/0d50cc5e78ff4add81950fb7d1de70e3/view https://sam.gov/opp/0d50cc5e78ff4add81950fb7d1de70e3/view

70 Current Contract Data

For industry teaming, recommend releasing a SOW ASAP with proportions of contract in each element, along with estimated

TCV.

See response to question 68.

71 Small Business;

Underserved Communities

How are you assuring access to the minority/underserved communities with a >5 year contract to a single "larger" small business. How do they access the work on a continuous bases?

See response to question 52. Additionally, LaRC intends to include evaluation criteria related to the offeror’s approach to small business participation and commitment to maximize opportunities for small businesses throughout the life of the contract.

Additionally, we anticipate including evaluation criteria related to the offeror’s approach to advance fair and improved inclusion and equity in the contractors/subcontractors workforce that are performing on NASA’s contracts. Last, we anticipate the contract will also include associated reporting requirements.

72 Number of Awards

Given the large amount of work that goes into developing a proposal is NASA expecting offerors to develop a proposal encompassing both CLINs and a separate one at the individual CLIN level since we won’t know ahead of time if this will be a single award or separate awards at the CLIN level?

See responses to question 27, 32, and 35. We understand the importance of this information.

We are still relatively early in the process and will post additional information when available.

We encourage industry feedback and recommendations on this issue.

73 In light of your answer related to potential need for housing contractor staff off-site. Will the RFP specify a maximum number of contractor employees that could be housed onsite at LaRC. This information would be key for offerors to determine how much, if any, offsite space would be required.

We do anticipate providing this information in the RFP.

74 NAS What is the intent for the NAS contract work?

We are unable to answer at this time as “NAS” is not defined within the question.

75 Number of Awards

Please state your preference for awarding one contract (both

See responses to question 27, 32, and 35. We understand the importance of this information.

CLINs) over two? Is it a strong preference?

We are still relatively early in the process and will post additional information when available.

76 Procurement Strategy

What is meant by Procurement Strategy Meeting?

The Procurement Strategy Meeting is a formal meeting where key aspects of the procurement strategy are approved as required by the NASA FAR Supplement and FAR Part 7.

77 Organizational Conflicts of Interest (OCI)

Will the government specify precisely what OCIs they see from the Multi-Step Process if an OCI is identified?

The RFP will identify the anticipated OCIs in the Limitation of Future Contracting clause. The information contained below is a representative term and condition from LaRC’s TEAMS 3 contract. The RSES solicitation terms and conditions may be different. The TEAMS 3 contract cites the following restrictions:

“If the Contractor, under the terms of this contract, or through the performance of tasks pursuant to this contract, is required to: 1) develop requirements, specifications or statements of work that are to be incorporated into a solicitation; 2) participate in new business development including, but not limited to, information regarding current and future research, business opportunities, cost estimation and proposal development for new research opportunities, and strategic planning;

or 3) manage the evaluation of BAA’s and assessments, the Contractor shall be ineligible to perform the work described in that solicitation as a prime or first-tier subcontractor under an ensuing NASA contract.

This restriction shall remain in effect for a reasonable time, as agreed to by the Contracting Officer and the Contractor, sufficient to avoid unfair competitive advantage or potential bias (this time shall in no case be less than the duration of the initial production contract). NASA shall not unilaterally require the Contractor to prepare such specifications or statements of work under this contract.”

We will provide additional details on OCIs with the Multi-Step Process request if available at that time. The language in the Final RFP, including any amendments, will govern.

78 ISO-9001,

CMMI

Can you comment on the type of independent certifications that might be required to demonstrate offerors capabilities related to quality and process maturity. For example, ISO-9001, AS-9100, CMMI?

Regarding anticipated CMMI requirements, see response to question 79.

Regarding ISO requirements, we anticipate requiring the Contractor's quality system be compliant with the requirements of the current International Standard ISO 9001, Quality Management Systems Requirements.

The language in the Final RFP, including any amendments, will govern.

79 CMMI Does LaRC consider CMMC LEVEL 1, 2, or 3 certification to be relevant to RSES?

We anticipate the RFP will require CMMI-DEV Level 3 and compliance with NASA Workmanship Standards for all Software Engineering, Development and Maintenance activities and comply with NPR 7150.2 NASA Software Engineering Requirements.

Current contract language from TEAMS 3 is as follows:

The Offeror shall also be rated at the required Capability Maturity Model Integration for Development (CMMI– DEV) Capability Level required to meet the software engineering requirements for Class A and B software. If the prime contractor does not possess the required CMMI-DEV Level 3 required for Class A software under PWS section 4.13 at proposal submission, then the subcontractor providing the software engineering for the Class A software…shall be CMMI-DEV Level 3 certified at proposal submission.

The Contractor shall comply with NASA Workmanship Standards for all Software Engineering, Development and Maintenance activities and comply with NPR 7150.2 NASA

Software Engineering Requirements augmented by Langley Management System Center Procedures: Located at http://standards.nasa.gov/documents/nasa;

Title Number Software Engineering Requirements NPR 7150.2 Software Safety Standard NASA-STD- 8719.13 Software Assurance Standard NASA-STD-8739.8

The language in the Final RFP, including any amendments, will govern.

80 Number of Awards

If a potential provider has unique expertise in only one CLIN, can that organization propose to only that CLIN?

See responses to question 27, 32, and 35. We understand the importance of this information.

We are still relatively early in the process and will post additional information when available.