97-1864. Rewrite of the NASA FAR Supplement (NFS)  

  • [Federal Register Volume 62, Number 20 (Thursday, January 30, 1997)]
    [Rules and Regulations]
    [Pages 4466-4492]
    From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
    [FR Doc No: 97-1864]
    
    
    =======================================================================
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION
    
    48 CFR Parts 1805, 1815, 1831, 1834, 1835, 1836, 1837, 1839, 1841, 
    1852, 1870, 1871, and 1872
    
    
    Rewrite of the NASA FAR Supplement (NFS)
    
    AGENCY: Office of Procurement, National Aeronautics and Space 
    Administration (NASA).
    
    ACTION: Final rule.
    
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    SUMMARY: As part of the National Performance Review initiative to 
    streamline and clarify regulations, NASA is revising its regulations in 
    48 CFR part 1834, Major System Acquisitions; part 1835, Research and 
    Development Contracting; part 1836, Construction and Architect-Engineer 
    Contracts; part 1837, Service Contracting; part 1839, Acquisition of 
    Information Technology; and part 1841, Acquisition of Utility Services. 
    This rule also adds a new part 1872 on Acquisitions of Investigations 
    and amends part 1815, Contracting by Negotiation, to reflect these 
    other regulatory changes.
        This rule restores some sections in part 1831, Contract Cost 
    Principles and Procedures, and in part 1852, Solicitation Provisions 
    and Contract Clauses, that were inadvertently removed in a final rule 
    published October 28, 1996 (61 FR 55753).
        This rule amends part 1871, Midrange Procurement Procedures, in 
    order to conform its provisions to those of recently established FAR 
    regulations on a test program for certain commercial items. Also in 
    this rule, the numbering of regulatory sections has been changed to 
    indicate the exact section of the FAR being implemented or 
    supplemented.
    
    EFFECTIVE DATE: January 30, 1997.
    
    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
    Mr. Thomas O'Toole, (202) 358-0478; Mr. Bruce King, (202) 358-0461.
    
    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    
    Background
    
        The National Performance Review urged agencies to streamline and 
    clarify their regulations. The NFS rewrite initiative was established 
    to pursue these goals by conducting a section by section review of the 
    NFS to verify its accuracy, relevancy, and validity. The NFS will be 
    rewritten in blocks of parts and issued through Procurement Notices 
    (PNs). Upon completion of all parts, the NFS will be reissued in a new 
    edition.
    
    Impact
    
        NASA certifies that this regulation will not have a significant 
    economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the 
    Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). This rule does not 
    impose any reporting or record keeping requirements subject to the 
    Paperwork Reduction Act.
    
    List of Subjects in 48 CFR Parts 1805, 1815, 1831, 1834, 1835, 1836, 
    1837, 1839, 1841, 1852, 1870, 1871, and 1872
    
        Government Procurement.
    Tom Luedtke,
    Deputy Associate Administrator for Procurement.
    
        Accordingly, 48 CFR Parts 1805, 1815, 1831, 1834, 1835, 1836, 1837, 
    1839, 1841, 1852, 1870, 1871 and 1872 are amended as follows:
        1. The authority citation for 48 CFR Part 1805 continues to read as 
    follows:
    
        Authority: 42 U.S.C. 2473(c)(1).
    
    PART 1805--PUBLICIZING CONTRACT ACTIONS
    
    
    1805.303-71  [Amended]
    
        2. In section 1805.303-71, the section heading and paragraphs (a) 
    introductory text and (a)(3) are revised to read as follows:
    
    
    1805.303-71  Administrator's notice of significant contract actions 
    (ANOSCAs).
    
        (a) In addition to the public announcement requirements described 
    in 1805.303-70, contracting officers shall notify the Administrator of 
    the following significant actions at least five (5) workdays prior to 
    planned public announcement of the actions:
    * * * * *
        (3) Planned award of other actions, to include cooperative 
    agreements resulting from a Cooperative Agreement Notice (CAN), at any 
    dollar value
    
    [[Page 4467]]
    
    thought to be of significant interest to Headquarters.
    * * * * *
    
    PART 1815--CONTRACTING BY NEGOTIATION
    
    
    1815.807  [Amended]
    
        3.-6. In section 1815.807, paragraph (b)(ii) is revised to read as 
    follows:
    
    
    1815.807  Prenegotiation objectives.
    
        (b)(i) * * *
        (ii) A prenegotiation position memorandum is not required for 
    contracts awarded under the competitive negotiated procedures of FAR 
    15.6 and 1815.6.
    
    PART 1831--CONTRACT COST PRINCIPLES AND PROCEDURES
    
    
    1831.205-670, 1831.205-671  [Added]
    
        7. Sections 1831.205-670 and 1831.205-671 are added to read as 
    follows:
    
    
    1831.205-670  Evaluation of contractor and subcontractor compensation 
    for service contracts.
    
        (a) The contracting officer shall evaluate the reasonableness of 
    compensation for service contracts:
        (1) Prior to the award of a cost reimbursement or non-competitive 
    fixed-price type contract which has a total potential value in excess 
    of $500,000, and
        (2) Periodically after award for cost reimbursement contracts, but 
    at least every three years.
        (b) The contracting officer shall ensure the reasonableness of 
    compensation is evaluated for cost reimbursement or non-competitive 
    fixed-price type service subcontracts under a prime contract meeting 
    the criteria in paragraph (a)(1) of this section where:
        (1) The subcontract has a total potential value in excess of 
    $500,000; and
        (2) The cumulative value of all of a subcontractor's service 
    subcontracts under the prime contract is in excess of 10 percent of the 
    prime contract's total potential value.
        (c)(1) Offerors shall be required to submit as part of their 
    proposals a compensation plan addressing all proposed labor categories. 
    Offerors also shall demonstrate in writing that their proposed 
    compensation is reasonable.
        (2) Subcontractors meeting the criteria in paragraph (b) of this 
    section shall be required to comply with paragraph (c)(1).
        (d) The contracting officer's preaward evaluation of each offeror's 
    and their subcontractors' compensation should be done as part of, or in 
    addition to DCAA audits, price analyses, or any other means deemed to 
    be necessary.
        (e) The results of the contracting officer's evaluation, including 
    any excessive compensation found and its planned resolution, shall be 
    addressed in the prenegotiation position memorandum, with the final 
    resolution discussed in the price negotiation memorandum.
        (f) The contracting officer shall ensure that the reasonableness of 
    compensation for cost reimbursement subcontracts meeting the criteria 
    in paragraphs (b) (1) and (2) of this section is periodically reviewed 
    after award, but at least every three years.
        (g) The results of the periodic evaluations of contractor and 
    subcontractor compensation after contract award shall be documented in 
    the contract file.
    
    
    1831.205-671  Solicitation provision.
    
        The contracting officer shall insert a provision substantially the 
    same as the provision at 1852.231-71, Determination of Compensation, in 
    solicitations for services which contemplate the award of a cost 
    reimbursement or non-competitive fixed-price type service contract 
    having a total potential value in excess of $500,000.
        8. Part 1834 is revised to read as follows:
    
    PART 1834--MAJOR SYSTEM ACQUISITION
    
    Subpart 1834.0--General
    
    Sec.
    1834.003  Responsibilities.
    
    Subpart 1834.70--Acquisition of Major Systems
    
    1834.7001  Definitions.
    1834.7002  Phased acquisitions
    1834.7003  Down selections in phased acquisitions.
    1834.7003-1  Pre-solicitation planning.
    1834.7003-2  Evaluation factors.
    1834.7003-3  Down selection milestones.
    1834.7003-4  Synopsis.
    1834.7003-5  Progressive competition.
    1834.7004  Contract clauses.
    
        Authority: 42 U.S.C. 2473(c)(1).
    
    Subpart 1834.0--General
    
    
    1834.003  Responsibilities. (NASA supplements paragraph (a))
    
        (a) NASA's implementation of OMB Circular No. A-109, Major Systems 
    Acquisitions, and FAR part 34 is contained in this part and in NASA 
    Policy Directive (NPD) 7120.4, ``Program/Project Management,'' and NASA 
    Procedures and Guidance (NPG) 7120.5, ``Program/Project Management 
    Guide''.
    
    Subpart 1834.70--Acquisition of Major Systems
    
    
    1834.7001  Definitions.
    
        (a) Down-selection. In a phased acquisition, the process of 
    selecting contractors for phases subsequent to the initial phase from 
    among the preceding phase contractors.
        (b) Major system. For NASA, ``major system'' is a program fitting 
    the criteria of FAR 34.003(c) in lieu of the definition provided in FAR 
    2.101.
        (c) Phased acquisition. A program comprised of several distinct 
    steps or phases where the realization of program objectives requires a 
    planned, sequential acquisition of each step or phase. The phases may 
    be acquired separately, in combination, or through a down-selection 
    strategy.
        (d) Progressive competition. A type of down-selection strategy for 
    a phased acquisition. In this method, a single solicitation is issued 
    for all phases of this program. The initial phase contracts are 
    awarded, and the contractors for subsequent phases are expected to be 
    chosen through a down-selection from among the preceding phase 
    contractors. In each phase, progressively fewer contracts are awarded 
    until a single contractor is chosen for the final phase. Normally, all 
    down-selections are accomplished without issuance of a new, formal 
    solicitation.
    
    
    1834.7002  Phased acquisitions.
    
        (a) In acquisitions subject to the provisions of OMB Circular No. 
    A-109 and NPD 7120.4 and NPG 7120.5, or other similar phased 
    acquisitions, it is NASA policy to ensure competition in the selection 
    of contractors for award in each phase of the process not performed in-
    house.
        (b) There are five phases in the life cycle of a NASA major system 
    acquisition:
        (1) Phase A, Preliminary Analysis, involves the analysis of 
    alternate overall project concepts for accomplishing a proposed agency 
    technical objective or mission.
        (2) Phase 3, Definition, involves the detailed study, comparative 
    analysis, and preliminary system design of selected Phase A concepts.
        (3) Phase C, Design, involves the detailed system design (with 
    mock-ups and test articles of critical systems and
    
    [[Page 4468]]
    
    subsystems) of the systems design concept determined to provide the 
    best overall system for the Government.
        (4) Phase D, Development, involves final detailed design, 
    fabrication, delivery of an operational system that meets program 
    requirements.
        (5) Phase E, Operations, involves operation and use of the system 
    in its intended environment, continuing until the system leaves the 
    agency inventory. This phase includes any system modifications and 
    upgrades.
        (c) The preferred approach in NASA for the acquisition of the 
    phases of a Major System is the following:
        (1) Phase A is accomplished primarily through in-house studies.
        (2) Phases B, C, and D are acquired through a phased acquisition 
    process in which two or more Phase B contracts are awarded 
    competitively and then a down-selection is made among these contractors 
    to determine the single combined Phase C/D awardee.
        (3) Phase E is normally acquired separately.
        (d) Each phase of a major system acquisition not performed in-house 
    must be synopsized in accordance with FAR 5.201 and must include all 
    the information required by FAR 5.207.
        (e) Whether or not down-selection procedures are used, contracts 
    awarded in phased acquisitions shall not include requirements for 
    submission of subsequent phase proposals. Instead, proposals shall be 
    requested through a solicitation or other appropriate mechanism (e.g., 
    by letter when using the progressive competition technique). Priced 
    options for preparation of subsequent phase proposals are prohibited.
        (f) Time gaps between phases should be minimized in all major 
    system phased acquisitions. Accordingly, early synopsis of subsequent 
    phase competition is encouraged. Also, when sufficient programmatic and 
    technical information is available to all potential offerors, proposal 
    evaluation and source selection activities need not be delayed until 
    completion of a given phase. When appropriate, these activities should 
    commence as early as practicable during the period of performance of a 
    phase to ensure the expeditious award of the succeeding phase.
    
    
    1834.7003  Down-selections in phased acquisitions.
    
    
    1834.7003-1  Pre-solicitation planning.
    
        (a) The rationale for the use of the down-selection technique shall 
    be thoroughly justified in the acquisition planning requirement. 
    Because the Phase B solicitation will also lead to Phase C/D award, the 
    decision to use a down-selection strategy must be made prior to 
    initiation of the Phase B acquisition. Accordingly, both phases must be 
    addressed in the initial acquisition strategy planning and documented 
    in the acquisition plan or ASM minutes.
        (b) If there is no direct link between successful performance in 
    the preceding phase and successful performance in the subsequent phase, 
    down-selection is inappropriate. In this case, the major system 
    acquisition phases should be contracted for separately without a down-
    selection between phases.
        (c) With one exception, both the initial and subsequent phase(s) of 
    a major system acquisition down-selection process are considered to be 
    full and open competition if the procedures in 1834.7003-4 and 
    1834.7003-5 (if using the progressive competition technique) are 
    followed. If only one contractor successfully completed a given phase 
    and no other offers are solicited for the subsequent phase, award of 
    the subsequent phase may be made only if justified by one of the 
    exceptions in FAR 6.302 or one of the exclusions in FAR 6.2, and only 
    after compliance with the synopsis requirements of FAR 5.202 and 5.205, 
    when appropriate.
    
    
    1834.7003-2  Evaluation factors.
    
        A separate set of evaluation factors must be developed for each 
    phase in a down-selection competition. Since these competitive down-
    selection strategies anticipate that one of the Phase B contractors 
    will also be the Phase C/D contractor, the Phase B offerors must 
    clearly demonstrate the ability to perform the subsequent phases. The 
    evaluation factors for Phase B award must specifically include the 
    evaluation of the Phase B offerors' abilities to perform Phase C/D as 
    well as Phase B.
    
    
    1834.7003-3  Down-selection milestones.
    
        The Phase B contracts should be structured to allow for down-
    selection at a discrete performance milestone such as a significant 
    design review or at contract completion. This will avoid time gaps 
    between phases and eliminate unnecessary duplication of effort and the 
    need to terminate the remaining Phase B efforts of an unsuccessful 
    Phase C/D offeror. However, the appropriate contract structure must 
    reflect program technical objectives as well as schedule 
    considerations. For example, if the acquisition strategy calls for 
    formal completion of Phase B effort at Preliminary Design Review (PDR), 
    but it is not financially practical or technically necessary for Phase 
    C/D award and performance to carry all Phase B contractors through PDR, 
    the Phase B contracts should be structured with a basic period of 
    performance through a significant, discrete milestone before PDR with a 
    priced option for effort from that milestone to PDR. The down-selection 
    would occur at the earlier milestone, the PDR option exercised only for 
    the down-selection winner, and Phase C/D performance begun at the 
    completion of the PDR option. Any down-selection milestone must ensure 
    that sufficient design maturity exists to allow for an informed 
    selection decision leading to a successful completion of Phase C/D.
    
    
    1834.7003-4  Synopsis.
    
        (a) When the phased acquisition process identified in 
    1834.7002(c)(2) is used, the synopsis for the initial competitive 
    phase, normally Phase B, should also state the following:
        (1) The Government plans to conduct a phased acquisition involving 
    a competitive down-selection process. (Include a description of the 
    process and the phases involved).
        (2) Subsequent competitions for identified follow-on phases will 
    build on the results of previous phases.
        (3) The award criteria for subsequent phases will include 
    demonstrated completion of specified previous phase requirements.
        (4) The Government expects that only the initial phase contractors 
    will be capable of successfully competing for the subsequent phase(s). 
    Proposals for the subsequent phase(s) will be automatically requested 
    from these contractors.
        (5) The Government intends to issue (or not issue) a new, formal 
    solicitation(s) for subsequent phase(s). If new solicitations are not 
    planned, the acquisition must be identified as a ``progressive 
    competition'' (see 1834.7003-5), and the mechanism for providing 
    pertinent subsequent phase proposal information (e.g., statements of 
    work, specifications, proposal preparation instructions, and evaluation 
    factors for award) must be described.
        (6) Each subsequent phase of the acquisition will be synopsized.
        (7) Notwithstanding the expectation that only the initial phase 
    contractors will be capable of successfully competing for the 
    subsequent phase(s), proposals from all responsible sources submitted 
    by the specified due date will be considered by the agency. In order to 
    contend for subsequent phase awards, however, such prospective offerors 
    must demonstrate a design maturity equivalent to that of the prior 
    phase contractors. Failure to fully and
    
    [[Page 4469]]
    
    completely demonstrate the appropriate level of design maturity may 
    render the proposal unacceptable with no further consideration for 
    contract award.
        (b) In addition to the information in paragraph (a) of this 
    section, the synopsis for the subsequent phases, normally a combined C/
    D, must identify the current phase contractors.
    
    
    1834.7003-5  Progressive competition.
    
        (a) To streamline the major system acquisition process, the 
    preferred approach for NASA phased acquisitions is the ``progressive 
    competition'' down-selection technique in which new, formal 
    solicitations are not issued for phases subsequent to the initial 
    phase. Subsequent phase proposals are requested by less formal means, 
    normally by a letter accompanied by the appropriate proposal 
    preparation and evaluation information.
        (b) When using the progressive competition technique, if a 
    prospective offeror other than one of the preceding phase contractors 
    responds to the synopsis for a subsequent phase and indicates an 
    intention to submit a proposal, the contracting officer shall provide 
    to that offeror all the material furnished to the preceding phase 
    contractors necessary to submit a proposal. This information includes 
    the preceding phase solicitation, contracts, and system performance and 
    design requirements, as well as all proposal preparation instructions 
    and evaluation factors. In addition, the prospective offerors must be 
    advised of all requirements necessary for demonstration of a design 
    maturity equivalent to that to the preceding phase contractors.
        (c) Although a key feature of the progressive competition technique 
    is that a formal solicitation is issued for the initial phase only, a 
    new, formal solicitation may nonetheless be required for subsequent 
    phases. When the Government requirements or evaluation procedures 
    change so significantly after release of the initial phase solicitation 
    that a substantial portion of the information provided in the initial 
    phase synopsis, solicitation, or contract is invalidated, a new 
    solicitation shall be issued for the next phase.
        (d) Phase C/D proposals should be requested by a letter including 
    the following:
        (1) A specified due date for the proposals along with a statement 
    that FAR 52.215-10, Late Submissions, Modifications, and Withdrawals of 
    Proposals, applies to this proposal due date.
        (2) Complete instructions for proposal preparation, including page 
    limitations, if any.
        (3) Final evaluation factors.
        (4) Any statement of work, specifications, or other contract 
    requirements that have changed since the Phase B solicitation.
        (5) All required clause changes applicable to new work effective 
    since Phase B contract award.
        (6) Any representations or certifications, if required.
        (7) Any other required contract updates (e.g., Phase C/D small and 
    small disadvantaged business goals).
        (e) Certain factors may clearly dictate that the progressive 
    competition techniques should not be used. For example, if it is likely 
    that NASA may introduce a design concept independent of those explored 
    by the Phase B contractors, it is also likely that a new, formal 
    solicitation is necessary for Phase C/D and all potential offerors 
    should be solicited. In this circumstance, progressive competition is 
    inappropriate.
    
    
    1834.7004  Contract clauses.
    
        (a) The contracting officer shall insert the clause at 1852.234-70, 
    Phased Acquisition Using Down-Selection Procedures, in solicitations 
    and contracts for phased acquisitions using down-selection procedures 
    other than the progressive competition technique described in 
    1834.7003-5. The clause shall be included in the solicitation for each 
    phase and in all contracts except that for the final phase.
        (b) The contracting officer shall insert the clause at 1852.234-71, 
    Phased Acquisition Using Progressive Competition Down-Selection 
    Procedures, in solicitations and contracts for phased acquisitions 
    using the progressive competition technique described in 1834.7003-5. 
    The clause shall be included in the initial phase solicitation and all 
    contracts except that for the final phase.
        9. Part 1835 is revised to read as follows:
    
    PART 1835--RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT CONTRACTING
    
    1835.003  Policy.
    1835.015  Contracts for research with educational institutions and 
    nonprofit organizations.
    1835.016  Broad agency announcements.
    1835.016-70  NASA Research Announcements.
    1835.070  NASA contract clauses and solicitation provision.
    
        Authority: 42 U.S.C. 2473(c)(1).
    
    
    1835.003  Policy.
    
        See NPG 5800.1, Grant and Cooperative Agreement Handbook, for 
    policy regarding the use of grants and cooperative agreements.
    
    
    1835.015  Contracts for research with educational institutions and 
    nonprofit organizations. (NASA supplements paragraph (a))
    
        (a)(1)(iv) The research contract shall include a requirement that 
    the contractor obtain the contracting officer's approval when it plans 
    to continue the research work during a continuous period in excess of 3 
    months without the participation of an approved principal investigator 
    or project leader.
    
    
    1835.016  Broad agency announcements. (NASA supplements paragraphs (a) 
    and (c))
    
        (a)(i) The following forms of broad agency announcements (BAAs) are 
    authorized for use:
        (A) Announcements of Opportunity (see 1872).
        (B) NASA Research Announcements (see 1835.016-70).
        (C) Other forms of announcements approved by the Associate 
    Administrator for Procurement (Code HS).
        (ii) Other program announcements, notices, and letters not 
    authorized by paragraph (a)(i) of this section shall not be used to 
    solicit proposals that may result in contracts.
        (c) BAAs may not preclude the participation of any offeror capable 
    of satisfying the Government's needs unless a justification for other 
    than full and open competition is approved under FAR 6.304.
    
    
    1835.016-70  NASA Research Announcements
    
        (a) Scope. An NRA is used to announce research interests in support 
    of NASA's programs, and, after peer or scientific review using factors 
    in the NRA, select proposals for funding. Unlike an RFP containing a 
    statement of work or specification to which offerors are to respond, an 
    NRA provides for the submission of competitive project ideas, conceived 
    by the offerors, in one or more program areas of interest. An NRA shall 
    not be used when the requirement is sufficiently defined to specify an 
    end product or service.
        (b) Issuance. (1) Before issuance, each field-generated NRA shall 
    be approved by the installation director or designee, with the 
    concurrence of the
    
    [[Page 4470]]
    
    procurement officer, and each Headquarters-generated NRA shall be 
    approved by the cognizant Program Associate Administrator or designee, 
    with the concurrence of the Headquarters Offices of General Counsel 
    (Code GK) and Procurement (Code HS). The NRA approval authority shall 
    designate the selection official.
        (2) The selecting official shall assure that the NRA is synopsized 
    prior to issuance in accordance with FAR 5.201 and 1815.201. The 
    synopsis shall be brief, and the technical section describing the area 
    of interest should not exceed 50 words.
        (3) If a Headquarters-generated NRA may result in awards by a NASA 
    field installation, the issuing office shall notify the installation 
    procurement officer and provide a copy of the NRA.
        (4) The selecting official is responsible for the preparation and 
    distribution of the NRA.
        (5) NRAs normally shall remain open for at least 90 days.
        (c) Content. The NRA shall consist of the following sections and 
    items. The entire package shall be provided in response to requests.
        (1) Cover. The cover shall display:
        (i) ``OMB Approval Number 2700-0087'' in the upper right corner.
        (ii) Title.
        (iii) ``NASA Research Announcement Soliciting Research Proposals 
    for the Period Ending
    ________''.
        (iv) NRA number.
        (v) Official address for the office issuing the NRA.
        (2) Summary and Supplemental Information. (i) The Summary and 
    Supplemental Information should not exceed two pages and shall include:
        (A) Title and NRA number.
        (B) Introductory paragraphs describing the purpose of the NRA and 
    the period for receipt of proposals.
        (C) Address for submitting proposals.
        (D) Number of copies required.
        (E) Selecting official's title.
        (F) Names, addresses, and telephone numbers for the technical and 
    contracting points of contact.
        (G) The following statement when the NRA is to be issued before 
    funds are available:
    
        Funds are not currently available for awards under this NRA. The 
    Government's obligation to make award(s) is contingent upon the 
    availability of appropriated funds from which payment can be made 
    and the receipt of proposals that NASA determines are acceptable for 
    award under this NRA.
    
        (ii) The Summary and Supplemental Information may include estimates 
    of the amount of funds that will be available and the number of 
    anticipated awards. A breakdown of the estimates by research area may 
    also be shown.
        (3) Technical Description. The first page shall contain the NRA 
    number and title at the top. A brief description not exceeding two 
    pages is preferable, but it should be detailed enough to enable ready 
    comprehension of the research areas of interest. Specifications 
    containing detailed statements of work should be avoided. Any program 
    management information included must be limited to matters that are 
    essential for proposal preparation.
        (4) Instructions for Responding to NASA Research Announcements. The 
    NRA shall contain instructions as stated in 1852.235-72 (see 
    1835.070(c)).
        (d) Receipt of proposals, evaluation, and selection. (1) Proposals 
    shall be protected as provided in 1815.508-70 and 1815.509-70.
        (2) Late proposals and modifications shall be treated in accordance 
    with 1815.412-70.
        (3) The selection decision shall be made following peer or 
    scientific review of a proposal. Peer or scientific review shall 
    involve evaluation by an in-house specialist, a specialist outside 
    NASA, or both. Evaluation by specialists outside NASA shall be 
    conducted subject to the conditions in FAR 15.413-2(f) and 1815.413-2. 
    After receipt of a proposal and before selection, scientific or 
    engineering personnel shall communicate with an offeror only for the 
    purpose of clarification (as defined in FAR 15.601), or to understand 
    the meaning of some aspect of the proposal that is not clear, or to 
    obtain confirmation or substantiation of a proposed approach, solution, 
    or cost estimate.
        (4) Competitive range determinations shall not be made, and best 
    and final offers shall not be requested.
        (5) Part of a proposal may be selected unless the offeror requests 
    otherwise. In addition, changes to a selected proposal may be sought if 
    (i) the ideas or other aspects of the proposal on which selection is 
    based are contained in the proposal as originally submitted, and are 
    not introduced by the changes; and (ii) the changes sought would not 
    involve a material alteration to the requirements stated in the NRA. 
    Changes that would affect a proposal's selection shall not be sought. 
    When changes are desired, the selecting official may request revisions 
    from the offeror or request the contracting officer to implement them 
    during negotiations with the successful offeror(s). The changes shall 
    not transfer information from one offeror's proposal to another offeror 
    (see FAR 15.610(e)(1)). When collaboration between offerors would 
    improve proposed research programs, collaboration may be suggested to 
    the offerors.
        (6) The basis for selection of a proposal shall be documented in a 
    selection statement applying the evaluation factors in the NRA. The 
    selection statement represents the conclusions of the selecting 
    official and must be self-contained. It shall not incorporate by 
    reference the evaluations of the reviewers.
        (7) The selecting official shall notify each offeror whose proposal 
    was not selected for award and explain generally why the proposal was 
    not selected. If requested, the selecting official shall arrange a 
    debriefing under FAR 15.1004, with the participation of a contracting 
    officer.
        (8) The selecting official shall forward to the contracting officer 
    the following information:
        (i) A copy of the NRA;
        (ii) The results of the technical evaluation, including the total 
    number of proposals received, the selection statement, and the 
    proposal(s) selected for funding;
        (iii) A description of any changes desired in any offeror's 
    statement of work, including the reasons for the changes and any effect 
    on level of funding;
        (iv) If a contract will be used to fund the proposal, a description 
    of deliverables, including technical reports, and delivery dates, 
    consistent with the requirements of the NRA;
        (v) A procurement request;
        (vi) Comments on the offeror's cost proposal (either the selecting 
    official's comments, which may be based on the reviewer's comments, or 
    copies of the reviewers' comments with any different conclusions of the 
    selecting official); these comments shall address the need for and 
    reasonableness of travel, computer time, materials, equipment, 
    subcontracted items, publication costs, labor hours, labor mix, and 
    other costs; and
        (vii) A copy of the selected proposal as originally submitted, any 
    revisions, and any correspondence from the successful offeror.
        (9) The selecting official may provide to the contracting officer 
    copies of the reviewers' evaluations. Reviewers' names and institutions 
    may be omitted.
        (10) The selecting official may provide each offeror whose proposal 
    was selected for negotiation a notification stating:
        (i) The proposal has been selected for negotiation;
        (ii) The offeror's business office will be contacted by a 
    contracting officer,
    
    [[Page 4471]]
    
    who is the only official authorized to obligate the Government; and
        (iii) Any costs incurred by the offeror in anticipation of an award 
    are at the offeror's risk.
        (e) Award. The contracting officer shall choose the appropriate 
    award instrument. If a contract is selected, the contracting officer 
    shall----
        (1) Advise the offeror that the Government contemplates entering 
    into negotiations; the type of contract contemplated; and the estimated 
    award date, anticipated effort, and delivery schedule;
        (2) Send the offeror a model contract, if necessary, including 
    modifications contemplated in the offeror's statement of work, and 
    request agreement or identification of any exceptions (the contract 
    statement of work may summarize the proposed research, state that the 
    research shall be conducted in accordance with certain technical 
    sections of the proposal (which shall be identified by incorporating 
    them into the contract by reference), and identify any changes to the 
    proposed research);
        (3) Request the offeror to complete and return certifications and 
    representations and Standard Form 33, Solicitation, Offer, and Award, 
    or other appropriate forms;
        (4) Conduct negotiations in accordance with FAR subparts 15.8 and 
    15.9, as applicable;
        (5) Award a contract; and
        (6) Comply with FAR subparts 4.6 and 5.3 on contract reporting and 
    synopses of contract awards.
        (f) Cancellation of an NRA. when program changes, program funding, 
    or any other reasons require cancellation of an NRA, the office issuing 
    the NRA shall notify potential offerors by using the mailing list of 
    the NRA.
    
    
    1835.070  NASA contract clauses and solicitation provision.
    
        (a) The contracting officer shall insert the clause at 1852.235-70, 
    Center for AeroSpace Information, in all research and development 
    contracts and in cost-reimbursement supply contracts involving research 
    and development work.
        (b) The contracting officer shall insert the clause at 1852.235-71, 
    Key Personnel and Facilities, in contracts when source selection has 
    been substantially predicated upon the possession by a given offer or 
    of special capabilities, as represented by key personnel or facilities.
        (c) The contracting officer shall ensure that the provision at 
    1852.235-72, Instructions for Responding to NASA Research 
    Announcements, is inserted in all NRAs. The instructions may be 
    supplemented, but only to the minimum extent necessary.
        10. Part 1836 is revised to read as follows:
    
    PART 1836--CONSTRUCTION AND ARCHITECT-ENGINEER CONTRACTS
    
    Subpart 1836.2--Special Aspects of Contracting for construction
    
    Sec.
    1836.203  Government estimate of construction costs.
    1836.209  Construction contracts with architect-engineer firms.
    
    Subpart 1836.3--Special Aspects Sealed Bidding in Construction 
    Contracts
    
    1836.303  Invitations for bids.
    1836.303-70  Additive and deductive items.
    1836.304  Notice of Award.
    
    Subpart 1836.5--Contract Clauses
    
    1836.570  NASA solicitation provisions and contract clause.
    
    Subpart 1836.6--Architect-Engineer Services
    
    1836.602  Selection of firms for architect-engineer contracts.
    1836.602-1  Selection criteria.
    1836.602-2  Evaluation boards.
    1836.602-4  Selection authority.
    1836.602-5  Short selection process for contracts not to exceed the 
    simplified acquisition threshold.
    1836.602-70  Selection of architect-engineers for master planning.
    1836.603  Collecting data on and appraising firms' qualifications.
    1836.605  Government cost estimate for architect-engineer work.
    
    Subpart 1836.7--Standard and Optional Forms for Contracting for 
    Construction, Architect-Engineer Services, and Dismantling, 
    Demolition, or Removal of Improvements
    
    1836.702  Forms for use in contracting for architect-engineer 
    services.
    
        Authority: 42 U.S.C. 2473(c)(1)
    
    Subpart 1836.2--Special Aspects of Contracting for Construction
    
    
    1836.203  Government estimate of construction costs. (NASA supplements 
    paragraph (c))
    
        (c)(i) If the acquisition is by sealed bidding, the contracting 
    officer shall file a sealed copy of the detailed Government estimate 
    with the bids until bid opening. After the bids are read and recorded, 
    the contracting officer shall read the estimate, and record it in the 
    same detail as the bids.
        (ii) If the acquisition is by negotiation, the contracting officer 
    may disclose the overall amount of the Government estimate after award 
    upon request of offerors.
    
    
    1836.209  Construction contracts with architect-engineer firms.
    
        (1) Except as indicated in paragraph (2) of this section, the 
    Associate Administrator for Procurement (Code HS) is the approval 
    authority.
        (2) A construction contract may be awarded to the firm that 
    designed the project (or its subsidiaries or affiliates) if the 
    contract is awarded on the basis of performance specifications for the 
    construction of a facility, and it requires the contractor to furnish 
    construction drawings, specifications, or site adaptation drawings of 
    the facility.
        (3) In no case shall the firm that prepared the drawings and 
    specifications supervise and inspect, on behalf of the Government, the 
    construction of the facility involved.
    
    Subpart 1836.3--Special Aspects of Sealed Bidding in Construction 
    Contracts
    
    
    1836.303  Invitations for bids.
    
    
    1836.303-70  Additive and deductive items.
    
        When it appears that funds available for a project may be 
    insufficient for all the desired features of construction, the 
    contracting officer may provide in the invitation for bids for a first 
    or base bid item covering the work generally as specified and one or 
    more additive or deductive bid items progressively adding or omitting 
    specified features of the work in a stated order of priority. In such 
    case, the contracting officer, before the opening of bids, shall record 
    in the contract file the amount of funds available for the project and 
    determine the low bidder and the items to be awarded in accordance with 
    the provision at 1852.236-71, Additive or Deductive Items.
    
    
    1836.304  Notice of Award (NASA supplements paragraph (e))
    
        (e) Contract delivery or performance schedules, commencement of 
    work, or notices to proceed shall not be expressed in terms of a notice 
    of award (See 1814.408-1).
    
    Subpart 1836.5--Contract Clauses
    
    
    1836.570  NASA solicitation provisions and contract clause.
    
        (a) The contracting officer shall insert the provision at 1852.236-
    71, Additive or Deductive Items, in invitations for bids for 
    construction when it is desired to add or deduct bid items to meet 
    available funding.
    
    [[Page 4472]]
    
        (b) The contracting officer shall insert the provision at 1852.236-
    72, Bids with Unit Prices, in invitations for bids for construction 
    when the invitation contemplates unit prices of items.
        (c) The contracting officer shall insert the clause at 1852.236-73, 
    Hurricane Plan, in solicitations and contracts for construction at 
    sites that experience hurricanes.
        (d) The contracting officer shall insert the provision at 1852.236-
    74, Magnitude of Requirement, in solicitations for construction. Insert 
    the appropriate estimated dollar range in accordance with FAR 36.204.
    
    Subpart 1836.6--Architect-Engineer Services
    
    
    1836.602  Selection of firms for architect-engineer contracts.
    
    
    1836.602-1  Selection criteria. (NASA supplements paragraph (a))
    
        (a)(2) The evaluation of specialized experience and technical 
    competence shall be limited to the immediately preceding ten years.
        (4) The evaluation of past performance shall be limited to the 
    immediately preceding ten years.
        (7) The architect-engineer selection board may also establish 
    evaluation criteria regarding the volume of work previously awarded to 
    the firm by NASA, with the object of effecting an equitable 
    distribution of contracts among qualified architect-engineer firms, 
    including minority-owned firms and firms that have not had prior NASA 
    contracts.
    
    
    1836.602-2  Evaluation boards. (NASA supplements paragraph (a))
    
        (a) Installations shall establish an architect-engineer selection 
    board to be composed of the selection authority and at least three 
    voting members. Membership shall at least include: one currently 
    registered architect or professional engineer, who shall serve as the 
    board chairperson; an official from the requiring office; if 
    appropriate, a technical official familiar with any unique subject 
    matter critical to the requirement; and a procurement official (a 
    contracting officer, if feasible) as an ad hoc advisor to the board. 
    Where appropriate, the procurement official may serve as a voting 
    member. Non-Government employees shall not be appointed as voting 
    members.
    
    
    1836.602-4  Selection authority. (NASA supplements paragraph (a))
    
        (a) The selection authority shall be appointed in accordance with 
    installation procedures.
    
    
    1836.602-5  Short selection process for contracts not to exceed the 
    simplified acquisition threshold.
    
        The procedures at FAR 36.602-5 (a) or (b) may be used at the 
    discretion of the selection authority.
    
    
    1836.602-70  Selection of architect-engineers for master planning. 
    (NASA supplements paragraphs (a) and (b))
    
        (a) Definition of master plan. A master plan is an integrated 
    series of documents presenting in graphic, narrative, and tabular form 
    the present composition of the installation and the plan for its 
    orderly and comprehensive development to perform its various missions 
    in the most efficient and economical manner.
        (b) Selection.
        (1) Selection of an Architect-Engineer for the development of a 
    master plan in connection with the establishment of a new NASA activity 
    or installation shall be made by the Associate Administrator having 
    institutional responsibility. The report of the architect-engineer 
    selection board will be concurred in at NASA Headquarters by the 
    Associate Administrator for Management Systems and Facilities, the 
    Associate Administrator for Procurement, the Chief Financial Officer, 
    and the General Counsel.
        (2) The Associate Administrator for Management Systems and 
    Facilities shall be responsible for the architect-engineer selection 
    board report required by FAR 36.602-3(d) before presentation to the 
    Associate Administrator having institutional responsibility.
    
    
    1836.603  Collecting data on and appraising firms' qualifications.
    
        The architect-engineer selection boards (see 1836.602-2) are 
    designated as NASA's evaluation boards for the purposes of FAR 36.603.
    
    
    1836.605  Government cost estimate for architect-engineer work. (NASA 
    supplements paragraph (b))
    
        (b) The contracting officer may disclose the overall amount of the 
    Government estimate after award upon request of offerors.
    
    Subpart 1836.7--Standard and Optional Forms for Contracting for 
    Construction, Architect-Engineer Services, and Dismantling, 
    Demolition, or Removal of Improvements
    
    
    1836.702  Forms for use in contracting for architect-engineer services. 
    (NASA supplements paragraph (a))
    
        (a)(i) Instructions for completing Standard Form 252, Architect-
    Engineer Contract, are as follows:
        (a) Block 5-Project Title and Location. Include a short description 
    of the construction project and the estimated cost of constructing the 
    facilities for the project. If the space provided is insufficient, 
    include a more detailed description in the contract's specification/
    work statement and identify the location of the more detailed 
    description in Block 10.
        (b) Block 6-Contract For (General description of services to be 
    provided). Include a brief description of the services and state that 
    the are fully set out in the specification/work statement. Clearly 
    specify the date by which design services must be completed. If 
    supervision and inspection services during construction are to be 
    acquired, clearly specify the date by which they must be completed and 
    add a statement that the Government may extend the period for their 
    performance as provided in the Changes clause of the contract.
        (c) Block 7-Contract Amount. If the contract is for both design and 
    supervision and inspection services, set out the amounts for each 
    effort separately.
        (ii) The services to be furnished by an architect-engineer should 
    be carefully defined during negotiation of the contract and a statement 
    of them inserted in the contract's specification/work statement. The 
    statement should clearly and concisely set forth the nature and extent 
    of the services and include any special services, such as the nature 
    and extent of subsurface exploration prior to designing foundations. A 
    similar statement of supervision and inspection services should be 
    inserted in the specification/work statement if supervision and 
    inspection services are to be acquired.
        11. Part 1837 is revised to read as follows:
    
    PART 1837--SERVICE CONTRACTING
    
    Subpart 1837.1--Service Contracts--General
    
    Sec.
    1837.101  Definitions.
    1837.102  Policy.
    1837.102-70  NASA policy.
    1837.104  Personal services contracts.
    1837.110  Solicitation provisions and contract clauses.
    1837.110-70  NASA solicitation provision and contract clauses.
    1837.170  Pension portability.
    
    Subpart  1837.2--Advisory and Assistance Services
    
    1837.203  Policy.
    1837.204  Guidelines for determining availability of personnel.
    
    [[Page 4473]]
    
    Subpart 1837.70--Acquisition of Training
    
    1837.7000  Acquisition of off-the-shelf training courses.
    1837.7001  Acquisition of new training courses.
    
        Authority: 42 U.S.C. 2473(c)(1).
    
    Subpart 1837.1--Service Contracts--General
    
    
    1837.101  Definitions.
    
        Pension portability means the recognition and continuation in a 
    successor service contract of the predecessor service contract 
    employees' pension rights and benefits.
    
    
    1837.102  Policy.
    
    
    1837.102-70   NASA Policy.
    
        To the maximum extent practicable, contracting officers shall 
    acquire services on a performance based contracting basis.
    
    
    1837.104  Personal services contracts. (NASA supplements paragraph (b))
    
        (b) Section 203(c)(9) of the National Aeronautics and Space Act of 
    1958 (42 U.S.C. 2473(c)(9)) authorizes NASA ``to obtain services as 
    authorized by Section 3109 of Title 5, United States Code.'' It is NASA 
    policy to obtain the personal services of experts and consultants by 
    appointment rather than by contract. The policies, responsibilities, 
    and procedures pertaining to the appointment of experts and consultants 
    are in NMI 3304.1G.
    
    
    1837.110  Solicitation provisions and contract clauses.
    
    
    1837.110-70  NASA solicitation provision and contract clauses.
    
        (a) The contracting officer shall insert the clause at 1852.237-70, 
    Emergency Evacuation Procedures, in solicitations and contracts for on-
    site support services where emergency evacuations of the NASA 
    installation may occur, e.g., snow, hurricanes, tornadoes, earthquakes, 
    or other emergencies.
        (b) The contracting officer shall insert the clause at 1852.237-71, 
    Pension Portability, in solicitations, contracts or negotiated contract 
    modifications for additional work when the procurement officer makes 
    the determination in 1837.170(a)(2).
        (c) The contracting officer shall insert the provision at 1852.237-
    72, Identification of Uncompensated Overtime, in cost reimbursement 
    level-of-effort contracts expected to exceed $1,000,000.
    
    
    1837.170  Pension portability.
    
        (a) It is NASA's policy not to require pension portability in 
    service contracts. However, pension portability requirements may be 
    included in solicitations, contracts, or contract modifications for 
    additional work under the following conditions:
        (1)(i) There is a continuing need for the same or similar services 
    for a minimum of five years (inclusive of options), and, if the 
    contractor changes, a high percentage of the predecessor contractor's 
    employees are expected to remain with the program; or
        (ii) The employees under a predecessor contract were covered by a 
    portable pension plan, a follow-on contract or a contract consolidating 
    existing services is awarded, and the total contract period covered by 
    the plan covers a minimum of five years (including both the predecessor 
    and successor contracts); and
        (2) The procurement officer determines in writing, with full 
    supporting rationale, that such a requirement is in the Government's 
    best interest. The procurement officer shall maintain a record of all 
    such determinations.
        (b) When pension portability is required, the plan shall comply 
    with the requirements of the clause at 1852.237-71, Pension 
    Portability, (see 1837.110-70(b)), and the contract shall also include 
    a clear description of the plan, including service, pay, liabilities, 
    vesting, termination, and benefits from prior contracts.
    
    Subpart 1837.2--Advisory and Assistance Services
    
    
    1837.203  Policy. (NASA supplements paragraph (c))
    
        (c) Advisory and assistance services of individual experts and 
    consultants shall normally be obtained by appointment rather than by 
    contract (see NMI 3304.1, Employment of Experts and Consultants).
    
    
    1837.204  Guidelines for determining availability of personnel. (NASA 
    supplements paragraphs (a), (b), (c), and (e))
    
        (a)(i) Outside peer review evaluators may be used to evaluate SBIR, 
    STTR, NRA, AO, and unsolicited proposals without making the 
    determination of non-availability.
        (ii) For all other actions, the NASA official one level above the 
    NASA program official responsible for the evaluation shall make the 
    determination, with the concurrence of the legal office. The 
    contracting officer shall ensure that a copy of the determination is in 
    the contract file prior to issuance of a solicitation.
        (b) The official designated in paragraph (a)(ii) of this section is 
    responsible for the actions required in FAR 37.204(b).
        (c) The agreement shall be made by the program official responsible 
    for the evaluation and the contracting officer.
        (e) The Associate Administrator for Procurement (Code HS) is the 
    approval authority for class determinations. The class determination 
    request shall include the assessment required by FAR 37.204(b).
    
    Subpart 1837.70--Acquisition of Training
    
    
    1837.7000  Acquisition of off-the-shelf training courses.
    
        The Training Act of 1958 (5 U.S.C. 4101 et seq.) may be used as the 
    authority for training of NASA employees by, in, or through non-
    Government off-the-shelf training courses which are available to the 
    public. These include established university catalog courses or 
    commercial course offerings that are offered to the general public at 
    catalog or market prices.
    
    
    1837.7001  Acquisition of new training courses.
    
        The acquisition of a new training course that must be developed to 
    fulfill a specific NASA need shall be conducted in accordance with the 
    FAR and the NFS.
        12. Part 1839 is revised to read as follows:
    
    PART 1839--ACQUISITION OF INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY
    
    Subpart 1829.1--General
    
    Sec.
    1839.105  Privacy.
    1839.106  Contract clause.
    1839.106-70  NASA contract clause.
    
        Authority: 42 U.S.C. 2473(c)(1)
    
    Subpart 1839.1--General.
    
    
    1839.105  Privacy.
    
        See 1804.470.
    
    
    1839.106  Contract clause.
    
    
    1839.106-70  NASA contract clause.
    
        (a)(1) The contracting officer shall insert the clause 
    substantially as stated at 1852.239-70, Alternate Delivery Points, in 
    solicitations and contracts for information technology when:
    
    [[Page 4474]]
    
        (i) An indefinite delivery/indefinite quantity contract will be 
    used or when the contract will include options for additional 
    quantities; and
        (ii) Delivery is F.O.B. destination to the contracting activity.
        (2) When delivery is F.O.B. origin and Government bills of lading 
    (GBL) are used, the contracting officer shall use the clause with its 
    Alternate I.
        13. Part 1841 is revised to read as follows:
    
    PART 1841--ACQUISITION OF UTILITY SERVICES
    
    Subpart 1841.2--Acquiring Utility Services
    
    Sec.
    1841.203  GSA assistance.
    1841.205  Separate contracts.
    1841.205-70  Authorization for acquisition of wellhead natural gas.
    
    Subpart 1841.3--Requests for Assistance
    
    1841.301  Requirements.
    
    Subpart 1841.4--Administration
    
    1841.402  Rate changes and regulatory intervention.
    
    Subpart 1841.5--Solicitation Provision and Contract Clauses
    
    1841.501  Solicitation provision and contract clauses.
    1841.501-70  NASA contract clause.
        Authority: 42 U.S.C. 2473(c)(1).
    
    Subpart 1841.2--Acquiring Utility Services
    
    
    1841.203  GSA assistance. (NASA supplements paragraph (a))
    
        (a) Before soliciting technical assistance, technical personnel 
    shall contact the Headquarters Environmental Management Division (Code 
    JE).
    
    
    1841.205   Separate contracts.
    
    
    1841.205-70  Authorization for acquisition of wellhead natural gas.
    
        (a) Acquisition of wellhead natural gas and interstate 
    transportation of the natural gas to locally franchised distribution 
    utility companies' receipt points (city gate) is considered the 
    acquisition of supplies rather than the acquisition of public utility 
    services described in FAR Part 41. Therefore, wellhead natural gas and 
    interstate transportation of such gas should be obtained directly by 
    NASA under applicable authorities and FAR procedures governing the 
    acquisition of supplies. Redelivery of the gas from the city gate to 
    the NASA facility is considered a utility service since it is provided 
    only by the locally franchised utility. GSA is responsible for 
    obtaining an appropriate contract for the redelivery service in 
    accordance with FAR 41.204.
        (b) GSA provides assistance to Federal agencies in the acquisition 
    of natural gas wellhead supplies. Contracting officers may obtain 
    assistance from GSA in the acquisition of wellhead natural gas by 
    contacting GSA at the address specified in FAR 41.301(a).
    
    Subpart 1841.3--Requests for Assistance
    
    
    1841.301   Requirements. (NASA supplements paragraph (a))
    
        (a) Procurement officers shall submit requests for delegation of 
    contracting authority directly to the cognizant GSA regional office 
    after coordinating with the cognizant center technical office.
    
    Subpart 1841.4--Administration
    
    
    1841.402  Rate changes and regulatory intervention. (NASA supplements 
    paragraph (b))
    
        (b) A copy of all correspondence with GSA shall be provided to the 
    Headquarters Office of Procurement (Code HS) at the time of its 
    submittal to the GSA regional office.
    
    Subpart 1841.5--Solicitation Provision and Contract Clauses
    
    
    1841.501  Solicitation provision and contract clauses.
    
    
    1841.501-70  NASA contract clause.
    
        The contracting officer shall insert the clause at 1852.241-70, 
    Renewal of Contract, in solicitations and contracts for utility 
    services if it is desirable that the utility service be provided under 
    the same terms and conditions for more than 1 year.
    
    PART 1852--SOLICITATION PROVISIONS AND CONTRACT CLAUSES
    
    
    1852.231-71   [Added]
    
        14.-15. Section 1852.231-71 is added to read as follows:
    
    
    1852.231-71   Determination of Compensation Reasonableness.
    
        As prescribed at 1831.205-671, insert the following provision.
    
    Determination of Compensation Reasonableness (March 1994)
    
        (a) The proposal shall include a total compensation plan. This plan 
    shall address all proposed labor categories, including those personnel 
    subject to union agreements, the Service Contract Act, and those exempt 
    from both of the above. The total compsensation plan shall include the 
    salaries/wages, fringe benefits and leave programs proposed for each of 
    these categories of labor. The plan also shall include a discussion of 
    the consistency of the plan among the categories of labor being 
    proposed. Differences between benefits offered professional and non-
    professional employees shall be highlighted. The requirements of this 
    plan may be combined with that required by the clause at FAR 52.222-46, 
    ``Evaluation of Compensation for Professional Employees.''
        (b) The offeror shall provide written support to demonstrate that 
    its proposed compensation is reasonable.
        (c) The offeror shall include the rationale for any conformance 
    procedures used or those Service Contract Act employees proposed that 
    do not fail within the scope of any classification listed in the 
    applicable wage determination.
        (d) The offeror shall require all service subcontractors (1) with 
    proposed cost reimbursement or non-competitive fixed-price type 
    subcontracts having a total potential value in excess of $500,000 and 
    (2) the cumulative value of all their service subcontracts under the 
    proposed prime contract in excess of 10 percent of the prime contract's 
    total potential value, provide as part of their proposals the 
    information identified in (a) through (c) of this provision.
    (End of provision)
    
    
    1852.234-70   [Amended]
    
        16. In section 1852.234-70, the section heading and clause title 
    ``Phased Procurement Using Down-Selection Procedures'' is revised to 
    read ``Phased Acquisition Using Down-Selection Procedures''.
        17. In the introductory text to section 1852.234-70, the citation 
    ``1834.005-170 (a)'' is revised to read ``1834.7004(a)'' and the word 
    ``procurements'' is revised to read ``acquisitions''.
    
    
    1852.234-71   [Amended]
    
        18. In section 1852.234-71, the section heading and clause title 
    ``Phased Procurement Using Progressive Competition Down-Selection 
    Procedures'' is revised to read ``Phased Acquisition Using Progressive 
    Competition Down-Selection Procedures''.
        19. In the introductory text to section 1852.234-71, the citation 
    ``1834.005-170 (b)'' is revised to read ``1834.7004(b)'' and the word 
    ``procurements'' is revised to read ``acquisitions''.
    
    [[Page 4475]]
    
    1852.235-72   [Amended]
    
        20. Section 1852.235-72 is revised to read as follow:
    
    
    1852.235-72   Instructions for responding to NASA Research 
    Announcements.
    
        As prescribed in 1835.070(c), insert the following provision:
    
    Instructions for Responding to NASA Research Announcements (January 
    1997)
    
        (a) General.
        (1) Proposals received in response to a NASA Research 
    Announcement (NRA) will be used only for evaluation purposes. NASA 
    does not allow a proposal, the contents of which are not available 
    without restriction from another source, or any unique ideas 
    submitted in response to an NRA to be used as the basis of a 
    solicitation or in negotiation with other organizations, nor is a 
    pre-award synopsis published for individual proposals.
        (2) A solicited proposal that results in a NASA award becomes 
    part of the record of that transaction and may be available to the 
    public on specific request; however, information or material that 
    NASA and the awardee mutually agree to be of a privileged nature 
    will be held in confidence to the extent permitted by law, including 
    the Freedom of Information Act.
        (3) NRAs contain programmatic information and certain 
    requirements which apply only to proposals prepared in response to 
    that particular announcement. These instructions contain the general 
    proposal preparation information which applies to responses to all 
    NRAs.
        (4) A contract, grant, cooperative agreement, or other agreement 
    may be used to accomplish an effort funded in response to an NRA. 
    NASA will determine the appropriate instrument. Contracts resulting 
    from NRAs are subject to the Federal Acquisition Regulation and the 
    NASA FAR Supplement. Any resultant grants or cooperative agreements 
    will be awarded and administered in accordance with the NASA Grant 
    and Cooperative Agreement Handbook (NPG 5800.1).
        (5) NASA does not have mandatory forms or formats for responses 
    to NRAs; however, it is requested that proposals conform to the 
    guidelines in these instructions. NASA may accept proposals without 
    discussion; hence, proposals should initially be as complete as 
    possible and be submitted on the proposers' most favorable terms.
        (6) To be considered for award, a submission must, at a minimum, 
    present a specific project within the areas delineated by the NRA; 
    contain sufficient technical and cost information to permit a 
    meaningful evaluation; be signed by an official authorized to 
    legally bind the submitting organization; not merely offer to 
    perform standard services or to just provide computer facilities or 
    services; and not significantly duplicate a more specific current or 
    pending NASA solicitation.
        (b) NRA-Specific Items. Several proposal submission items appear 
    in the NRA itself: the unique NRA identifier; when to submit 
    proposals; where to send proposals; number of copies required; and 
    sources for more information. Items included in these instructions 
    may be supplemented by the NRA.
        (c) The following information is needed to permit consideration 
    in an objective manner. NRAs will generally specify topics for which 
    additional information or greater detail is desirable. Each proposal 
    copy shall contain all submitted material, including a copy of the 
    transmittal letter if it contains substantive information.
        (1) Transmittal Letter or Prefatory Material.
        (i) The legal name and address of the organization and specific 
    division or campus identification if part of a larger organization;
        (ii) A brief, scientifically valid project title intelligible to 
    a scientifically literate reader and suitable for use in the public 
    press;
        (iii) Type of organization: e.g., profit, nonprofit, 
    educational, small business, minority, women-owned, etc;
        (iv) Name and telephone number of the principal investigator and 
    business personnel who may be contacted during evaluation or 
    negotiation;
        (v) Identification of other organizations that are currently 
    evaluating a proposal for the same efforts;
        (vi) Identification of the NRA, by number and title, to which 
    the proposal is responding;
        (vii) Dollar amount requested, desired starting date, and 
    duration of project;
        (viii) Date of submission; and
        (ix) Signature of a responsible official or authorized 
    representative of the organization, or any other person authorized 
    to legally bind the organization (unless the signature appears on 
    the proposal itself).
        (2) Restriction on Use and Disclosure of Proposal Information. 
    Information contained in proposals is used for evaluation purposes 
    only. Offerors or quoters should, in order to maximize protection of 
    trade secrets or other information that is confidential or 
    privileged, place the following notice on the title page of the 
    proposal and specify the information subject to the notice by 
    inserting an appropriate identification in the notice. In any event, 
    information contained in proposals will be protected to the extent 
    permitted by law, but NASA assumes no liability for use and 
    disclosure of information not made subject to the notice.
    
    Notice--Restriction on Use and Disclosure of Proposal Information
    
        The information (data) contained in [insert page numbers or 
    other identification] of this proposal constitutes a trade secret 
    and/or information that is commercial or financial and confidential 
    or privileged. It is furnished to the Government in confidence with 
    the understanding that it will not, without permission of the 
    offeror, be used or disclosed other than for evaluation purposes; 
    provided, however, that in the event a contract (or other agreement) 
    is awarded on the basis of this proposal the Government shall have 
    the right to use and disclose this information (data) to the extent 
    provided in the contract (or other agreement). This restriction does 
    not limit the Government's right to use or disclose this information 
    (data0 if obtained from another source without restriction.
        (3) Abstract. Include a concise (200-300 word if not otherwise 
    specified in the NRA) abstract describing the objective and the 
    method of approach.
        (4) Project Description.
        (i) The main body of the proposal shall be a detailed statement 
    of the work to be undertaken and should include objectives and 
    expected significance; relation to the present state of knowledge; 
    and relation to previous work done on the project and to related 
    work in progress elsewhere. The statement should outline the plan of 
    work, including the broad design of experiments to be undertaken and 
    a description of experimental methods and procedures. The project 
    description should address the evaluation factors in these 
    instructions and any specific factors in the NRA. Any substantial 
    collaboration with individuals not referred to in the budget or use 
    of consultants should be described. Subcontracting significant 
    portions of a research project is discouraged.
        (ii) When it is expected that the effort will require more than 
    one year, the proposal should cover the complete project to the 
    extent that it can be reasonably anticipated. Principal emphasis 
    should be on the first year of work, and the description should 
    distinguish clearly between the first year's work and work planned 
    for subsequent years.
        (5) Management Approach. For large or complex efforts involving 
    interactions among numerous individuals or other organizations, 
    plans for distribution of responsibilities and arrangements for 
    ensuring a coordinated effort should be described.
        (6) Personnel. The principal investigator is responsible for 
    supervision of the work and participates in the conduct of the 
    research regardless of whether or not compensated under the award. A 
    short biographical sketch of the principal investigator, a list of 
    principal publications and any exceptional qualifications should be 
    included. Omit social security number and other personal items which 
    do not merit consideration in evaluation of the proposal. Give 
    similar biographical information on other senior professional 
    personnel who will be directly associated with the project. Give the 
    names and titles of any other scientists and technical personnel 
    associated substantially with the project in an advisory capacity. 
    Universities should list the approximate number of students or other 
    assistants, together with information as to their level of academic 
    attainment. Any special industry-university cooperative arrangements 
    should be described.
        (7) Facilities and Equipment.
        (i) Describe available facilities and major items of equipment 
    especially adapted or suited to the proposed project, and any 
    additional major equipment that will be required. Identify any 
    Government-owned facilities, industrial plant equipment, or special 
    tooling that are proposed for use. Include evidence of its 
    availability and the cognizant Government points of contact.
        (ii) Before requesting a major item of capital equipment, the 
    proposer should determine if sharing or loan of equipment already 
    within the organization is a feasible alternative. Where such 
    arrangements cannot be made, the proposal should so state. The need 
    for items that typically can be used for
    
    [[Page 4476]]
    
    research and non-research purposes should be explained.
        (8) Proposed Costs
        (i) Proposals should contain cost and technical parts in one 
    volume: do not use separate ``confidential'' salary pages. As 
    applicable, include separate cost estimates for salaries and wages; 
    fringe benefits; equipment; expendable materials and supplies; 
    services; domestic and foreign travel; ADP expenses; publication or 
    page charges; consultants; subcontracts; other miscellaneous 
    identifiable direct costs; and indirect costs. List salaries and 
    wages in appropriate organizational categories (e.g., principal 
    investigator, other scientific and engineering professionals, 
    graduate students, research assistants, and technicians and other 
    non-professional personnel). Estimate all staffing data in terms of 
    staff-months or fractions of full-time.
        (ii) Explanatory notes should accompany the cost proposal to 
    provide identification and estimated cost of major capital equipment 
    items to be acquired; purpose and estimated number and lengths of 
    trips planned; basis for indirect cost computation (including date 
    of most recent negotiation and cognizant agency); and clarification 
    of other items in the cost proposal that are not self-evident. List 
    estimated expenses as yearly requirements by major work phases.
        (iii) Allowable costs are governed by FAR Part 31 and the NASA 
    FAR Supplement Part 1831 (and OMB Circulars A-21 for educational 
    institutions and A-122 for nonprofit organizations).
        (9) Security. Proposals should not contain security classified 
    material. If the research requires access to or may generate 
    security classified information, the submitter will be required to 
    comply with Government security regulations.
        (10) Current Support. For other current projects being conducted 
    by the principal investigator, provide title of project, sponsoring 
    agency, and ending date.
        (11) Special Matters.
        (i) Include any required statements of environmental impact of 
    the research, human subject or animal care provisions, conflict of 
    interest, or on such other topics as may be required by the nature 
    of the effort and current statutes, executive orders, or other 
    current Government-wide guidelines.
        (ii) Proposers should include a brief description of the 
    organization, its facilities, and previous work experience in the 
    field of the proposal. Identify the cognizant Government audit 
    agency, inspection agency, and administrative contracting officer, 
    when applicable.
        (d) Renewal Proposals.
        (1) Renewal proposals for existing awards will be considered in 
    the same manner as proposals for new endeavors. A renewal proposal 
    should not repeat all of the information that was in the original 
    proposal. The renewal proposal should refer to its predecessor, 
    update the parts that are no longer current, and indicate what 
    elements of the research are expected to be covered during the 
    period for which support is desired. A description of any 
    significant findings since the most recent progress report should be 
    included. The renewal proposal should treat, in reasonable detail, 
    the plans for the next period, contain a cost estimate, and 
    otherwise adhere to these instructions.
        (2) NASA may renew an effort either through amendment of an 
    existing contract or by a new award.
        (e) Length. Unless otherwise specified in the NRA, effort should 
    be made to keep proposals as brief as possible, concentrating on 
    substantive material. Few proposals need exceed 15-20 pages. 
    Necessary detailed information, such as reprints, should be included 
    as attachments. A complete set of attachments is necessary for each 
    copy of the proposal. As proposals are not returned, avoid use of 
    ``one-of-a-kind'' attachments.
        (f) Joint Proposals.
        (1) Where multiple organizations are involved, the proposal may 
    be submitted by only one of them. It should clearly describe the 
    role to be played by the other organizations and indicate the legal 
    and managerial arrangements contemplated. In other instances, 
    simultaneous submission of related proposals from each organization 
    might be appropriate, in which case parallel awards would be made.
        (2) Where a project of a cooperative nature with NASA is 
    contemplated, describe the contributions expected from any 
    participating NASA investigator and agency facilities or equipment 
    which may be required. The proposal must be confined only to that 
    which the proposing organization can commit itself. ``Joint'' 
    proposals which specify the internal arrangements NASA will actually 
    make are not acceptable as a means of establishing an agency 
    commitment.
        (g) Late Proposals. A proposal or modification received after 
    the date or dates specified in an NRA may be considered if doing so 
    is in the best interests of the Government.
        (h) Withdrawal. Proposals may be withdrawn by the proposer at 
    any time before award. Offerors are requested to notify NASA if the 
    proposal is funded by another organization or of other changed 
    circumstances which dictate termination of evaluation.
        (i) Evaluation Factors
        (1) Unless otherwise specified in the NRA, the principal 
    elements (of approximately equal weight) considered in evaluating a 
    proposal are its relevance to NASA's objectives, intrinsic merit, 
    and cost.
        (2) Evaluation of a proposal's relevance to NASA's objectives 
    includes the consideration of the potential contribution of the 
    effort to NASA's mission.
        (3) Evaluation of its intrinsic merit includes the consideration 
    of the following factors of equal importance:
        (i) Overall scientific or technical merit of the proposal or 
    unique and innovative methods, approaches, or concepts demonstrated 
    by the proposal.
        (ii) Offeror's capabilities, related experience, facilities, 
    techniques, or unique combinations of these which are integral 
    factors for achieving the proposal objectives.
        (iii) The qualifications, capabilities, and experience of the 
    proposed principal investigator, team leader, or key personnel 
    critical in achieving the proposal objectives.
        (iv) Overall standing among similar proposals and/or evaluation 
    against the state-of-the-art.
        (4) Evaluation of the cost of a proposed effort may include the 
    realism and reasonableness of the proposed cost and available funds.
        (j) Evaluation Techniques. Selection decisions will be made 
    following peer and/or scientific review of the proposals. Several 
    evaluation techniques are regularly used within NASA. In all cases 
    proposals are subject to scientific review by discipline specialists 
    in the area of the proposal. Some proposals are reviewed entirely 
    in-house, others are evaluated by a combination of in-house and 
    selected external reviewers, while yet others are subject to the 
    full external peer review technique (with due regard for conflict-
    of-interest and protection of proposal information), such as by mail 
    or through assembled panels. The final decisions are made by a NASA 
    selecting official. A proposal which is scientifically and 
    programmatically meritorious, but not selected for award during its 
    initial review, may be included in subsequent reviews unless the 
    proposer requests otherwise.
        (k) Selection for Award.
        (1) When a proposal is not selected for award, the proposer will 
    be notified. NASA will explain generally why the proposal was not 
    selected. Proposers desiring additional information may contact the 
    selecting official who will arrange a debriefing.
        (2) When a proposal is selected for award, negotiation and award 
    will be handled by the procurement office in the funding 
    installation. The proposal is used as the basis for negotiation. The 
    contracting officer may request certain business data and may 
    forward a model award instrument and other information pertinent to 
    negotiation.
        (l) Cancellation of NRA. NASA reserves the right to make no 
    awards under this NRA and to cancel this NRA. NASA assumes no 
    liability for canceling the NRA or for anyone's failure to receive 
    actual notice of cancellation.
    
    
    1852.236-71  [Amended]
    
        21. In the introductory text to section 1852.236-71, the citation 
    ``1836.370(a)'' is revised to read ``1836.570(a)''.
    
    
    1852.236-72  [Amended]
    
        22. In the introductory text to section 1852.236-72, the citation 
    ``1836.370(b)'' is revised to read ``1836.570(b)''.
    
    
    1852.236-73  [Amended]
    
        23. In the introductory text to section 1852.236-73, the citation 
    ``1836.570-1'' is revised to read ``1836.570(c)''.
    
    
    1852.236-74  [Amended]
    
        24. In the introductory text to section 1852.236-74, the citation 
    ``1836.570-2'' is revised to read ``1836.570(d)''.
    
    
    1852.237-70  [Amended]
    
        25. In the introductory text to section 1852.237-70, the citation 
    ``1837.110-70'' is revised to read ``1837.110-70(a)''.
    
    [[Page 4477]]
    
    1852.237-71, 1852.237-72  [Amended]
    
        26. Sections 1852.237-71 and 1852.237-72 are revised to read as 
    follows:
    
    
    1852.237-71  Pension Portability.
    
        As prescribed at 1837.110-70(b), insert the following clause:
    
    Pension Portability, January 1997
    
        (a) In order for pension costs attributable to employees 
    assigned to this contract to be allowable costs under this contract, 
    the plans covering such employees must:
        (1) Comply with all applicable Government laws and regulations;
        (2) Be a defined contribution plan, or a multiparty defined 
    benefit plan operated under a collective bargaining agreement. In 
    either case, the plan must be portable, i.e., the plan follows the 
    employee, not the employer;
        (3) Provide for 100 percent employee vesting at the earlier of 
    one year of continuous employee service or contract termination; and
        (4) Not be modified, terminated, or a new plan adopted without 
    the prior written approval of the cognizant NASA Contracting 
    Officer.
        (b) The Contractor shall include paragraph (a) of this clause in 
    subcontracts for continuing services under a service contract if:
        (1) The prime contract requires pension portability;
        (2) The subcontracted labor dollars (excluding any burdens or 
    profit/fee) exceed $2,500,000 and ten percent of the total prime 
    contract labor dollars (excluding any burdens or profit/fee); and
        (3) Either of the following conditions exists:
        (i) There is a continuing need for the same or similar 
    subcontract services for a minimum of five years (inclusive of 
    options), and if the subcontractor changes, a high percentage of the 
    predecessor subcontractor's employees are expected to remain with 
    the program; or
        (ii) The employees under a predecessor subcontract were covered 
    by a portable pension plan, a follow-on subcontract or a subcontract 
    consolidating existing services is awarded, and the total 
    subcontract period covered by the plan covers a minimum of five 
    years (including both the predecessor and successor subcontracts).
    
    (End of clause)
    
    
    1852.237-72  Identification of Uncompensated Overtime.
    
        As prescribed in 1837.110-70(c), insert the following provision:
    
    Identification of Uncompensated Overtime, January 1997
    
        The use of uncompensated overtime is neither encouraged nor 
    discouraged. When the proposed uncompensated overtime is consistent 
    with an officer's written policies and practices, NASA will consider 
    it in proposal evaluation, including the evaluation of cost and of 
    professional compensation.
        (a) Definitions. As used in this provision:
        ``Uncompensated overtime'' means the hours worked in excess of 
    an average of 40 hours per week, by direct charge employees who are 
    exempt from the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) without additional 
    compensation. Compensated personal absences, such as holidays, 
    vacations, and sick leave shall be included in the normal work week 
    for purposes of computing uncompensated overtime hours.
        ``Effective hourly rate'' is the rate that results from 
    multiplying the hourly rate for a 40-hour work week by 40, and then 
    dividing by the proposed hours per week. For example, 45 hours 
    proposed on a 40-hour work seek basis at $20.00 per hour would be 
    converted to an effective hourly rate of $17.78 per hour 
    [($20.00 x 40) divided by 45=$17.78].
        (b) For any hours proposed against which an effective hourly 
    rate is applied, the Offeror shall identify in its proposal the 
    hours in excess of an average of 40 hours per week, at the same 
    level of detail as compensated hours, and the effective hourly rate, 
    whether at the prime or subcontract level. This includes 
    uncompensated overtime hours that are in indirect cost pools for 
    personnel whose regular hours are normally charged direct. The 
    proposal shall include the rationale and methodology used to 
    estimate the proposed amount of uncompensated overtime.
        (c) The Offeror's accounting practices used to estimate 
    uncompensated overtime must be consistent with its cost accounting 
    practices used to accumulate and report uncompensated overtime 
    hours.
        (d) The Offeror shall include with its proposal a copy of its 
    policy addressing uncompensated overtime, a description of the 
    timekeeping and accounting systems used to record all hours worked 
    by FLSA-exempt employees, and the historical basis for the 
    uncompensated overtime hours proposed.
    
    (End of provision)
    
    
    1852.239-70  [Amended]
    
        27. In the introductory text to section 1852.239-70, the citation 
    ``1839.7008(a)'' is revised to read ``1836.106(a)(1)''.
        28. In the introductory text to Alternate I of section 1852.239-70, 
    the citation ``1839.7008(b)'' is revised to read ``1839.106-70(a)(2)''.
    
    
    1852.241-70  [Amended]
    
        29. In the introductory text to section 1852.241-70, the citation 
    ``1841.501(b)'' is revised to read ``1841.501-70''.
    
    PART 1870--NASA SUPPLEMENTARY REGULATIONS
    
    Subpart 1870.2--[Removed]
    
        30. Subpart 1870.2 is removed.
    
    Subpart 1870.5--[Removed]
    
        31. Subpart 1870.5 is removed.
    
    PART 1871--MIDDRANGE PROCUREMENT PROCEDURES
    
    
    1871.406-1  [Amended]
    
        32. In section 1871.401-6, paragraph (a)(2) is revised and a new 
    paragraph (a)(3) is added to read as follows:
    
    
    1871.401-6  Commercial Items.
    
        (a) * * *
        (2) MidRange procedures shall also be used, to the extent 
    applicable, for commercial item acquisitions accomplished under FAR 
    subpart 13.6, Test Program for Certain Commercial Items.
        (3) Contract type shall be in accordance with FAR 12.207.
    
    PART 1872--[ADDED]
    
        33. Part 1872 is added to read as follows:
    
    PART 1872--ACQUISITIONS OF INVESTIGATIONS
    
    Sec.
    1872.000  Scope of part.
    
    Subpart 1872.1--The Investigation Acquisition System
    
    1872.101  General.
    1872.102  Key features of the system.
    1872.103  Management responsibilities.
    
    Subpart 1872.2--Applicability of the Process
    
    1872.201  General.
    1872.202  Criteria for determining applicability.
    1872.203  Applicable programs and activities.
    1872.204  Approval.
    
    Subpart 1872.3--The Announcement of Opportunity
    
    1872.301  General.
    1872.302  Preparatory effort.
    1872.303  Responsibilities.
    1872.304  Proposal opportunity period.
    1872.305  Guidelines for announcement of opportunity.
    1872.306  Announcement of opportunity soliciting foreign 
    participation.
    1872.307  Guidelines for proposal preparation.
    
    Subpart 1872.4--Evaluation of Proposals
    
    1872.401  General.
    1872.402  Criteria for evaluation.
    1872.403  Methods of evaluation.
    1872.403-1  Advisory subcommittee evaluation process.
    1872.403-2  Contractor evaluation process.
    1872.403-3  Government evaluation process.
    1872.404  Engineering, integration, and management evaluation.
    1872.405  Program office evaluation.
    1872.406  Steering committee review.
    1872.407  Principles to apply.
    
    [[Page 4478]]
    
    Subpart 1872.5--The Selection Process
    
    1872.501  General.
    1872.502  Decisions to be made.
    1872.503  The selection statement.
    1872.504  Notification of proposers.
    1872.505  Debriefing.
    
    Subpart 1872.6--Payload Formulation
    
    1872.601  Payload formulation.
    
    Subpart 1872.7--Acquisition and Other Considerations
    
    1872.701  Early involvement essential.
    1872.702  Negotiation, discussions and contract award.
    1872.703  Applications of the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 
    and the NASA FAR Supplement.
    1872.704  Other administrative and functional requirements.
    1872.705  Format of announcement of opportunity.
    1872.705-1  Appendix A: General instructions and provisions.
    1872.705-2  Appendix B: Guidelines for proposal preparation.
    1872.705-3  Appendix C: Glossary of terms and abbreviations 
    associated with investigations.
    
        Authority: 42 U.S.C. 2473(c)(1).
    
    
    1872.000  Scope of part.
    
        This part prescribes policies and procedures for the acquisition of 
    investigations.
    
    Subpart 1872.1--The Investigation Acquisition System
    
    
    1872.101  General.
    
        The investigation acquisition system encourages the participation 
    of investigators and the selection of investigations which contribute 
    most effectively to the advancement of NASA's scientific and 
    technological objectives. It is a system separate from the acquisition 
    process, but requiring the same management and discipline to assure 
    compliance with statutory requirements and considerations of equity.
    
    
    1872.102  Key features of the system.
    
        (a)(1) Use of the system commences with a Program Associate 
    Administrator's determination that the investigation acquisition 
    process is appropriate for a program. An Announcement of Opportunity 
    (AO) is disseminated to the interested scientific and technical 
    communities. This solicitation does not specify the investigations to 
    be proposed but solicits investigative ideas which contribute to broad 
    objectives. In order to determine which of the proposals should be 
    selected, a formal competitive evaluation process is utilized. The 
    evaluation for merit is normally made by experts in the fields 
    represented by the proposals. Care should be taken to avoid conflicts 
    of interest. These evaluators may be from NASA, other Government 
    agencies, universities, or the commercial sector. Along with or 
    subsequent to the evaluation for merit, the other factors of the 
    proposals, such as engineering, cost, and integration aspects, are 
    reviewed by specialists in those areas. The evaluation conclusions as 
    well as considerations of budget and other factors are used to 
    formulate a complement of recommended investigations. A steering 
    committee serving as staff to the Program Associate Administrator 
    (Program AA), or designee when source selection authority is delegated, 
    reviews the proposed payload or program of investigation, the iterative 
    process, and the selection recommendations. The steering committee 
    serves as a forum where different interests, such as flight program, 
    discipline management, and administration, can be weighed.
        (2) The Program AA, or designee, selects the proposals that will 
    participate in the program. Once selected, an investigator is assigned 
    appropriate responsibilities relating to the investigation through a 
    contract with the institution. For foreign investigators, these 
    responsibilities will usually be outlined in an agreement between NASA 
    and the sponsoring governmental agency in the investigator's country.
        (b) The AO process provides a disciplined approach to investigation 
    acquisition. The following major steps must be followed in each case:
        (1) The AO shall be signed by the Program AA and shall be widely 
    distributed to the scientific, technological, and applications user 
    communities, as appropriate.
        (2) An evaluation team shall be formed including recognized peers 
    of the investigators.
        (3) A project office will be assigned to assess the engineering, 
    cost, integration, and management aspects of the proposals.
        (4) A program office will be responsible to formulate a complement 
    of investigations consistent with the objectives stated in the AO, 
    cost, and schedule constraints.
        (5) A steering committee appointed by the appropriate Program AA 
    shall review the proposed investigations for relevance and merit, will 
    assure compliance with the system as described in this Handbook, and 
    make selection recommendations.
        (6) The Source Selection Official shall be the Program AA or the 
    Program AA's designee.
        (c) Payloads will be formulated consisting of investigations 
    selected through the AO process and/or other authorized methods.
    
    
    1872.103  Management responsibilities.
    
        (a) Program AAs are responsible for overseeing the process and for 
    making key decisions essential to the process including:
        (1) Determination to use the investigation acquisition system.
        (2) Appointment of the steering committee members.
        (3) Designation of a staff to assure uniformity in the issuance of 
    the AO and conformity with the required procedures in the evaluation 
    and selection.
        (4) Reuse, to the maximum extent practicable, of space hardware and 
    support equipment.
        (5) Determination to use advisory subcommittees, contractor, or 
    full-time Government employees only in the evaluation process.
        (6) Issuance of the AO.
        (7) Selection of investigations and investigators, determination of 
    need of a definition phase, determination of the role of the 
    investigator with regard to providing essential investigation hardware 
    and services, and determination of the need for payload specialists.
        (8) Assure consideration is given to minorities in the 
    establishment of peer groups, distribution of the AO and in the 
    selection of investigations.
        (9) Provide a framework for cooperative foreign participation in 
    Space Shuttle, Spacelab, and Space Station missions.
        (b) The Program AA should call upon any required experts throughout 
    the process.
    
    Subpart 1872.2--Applicability of the Process
    
    
    1872.201  General.
    
        The system used for acquisition of investigations is separate from 
    the agency procedures for acquisition of known requirements. A decision 
    to use this special acquisition process will be based on a 
    determination that it is the most suitable to meet program needs. The 
    decision-making official will consider the criteria for use of the 
    system. The project plan or other documentation should discuss the 
    proposed mode of investigations selection.
    
    [[Page 4479]]
    
    1872.202  Criteria for determining applicability.
    
        (a) The decision to use the investigations acquisition process as 
    an alternative to the normal planning and acquisition process can only 
    be made after consideration of the conditions which require its use. 
    All of the following conditions should exist before deciding that the 
    system is applicable:
        (1) NASA has a general objective which can be furthered through 
    novel experimental approaches. To develop such approaches, NASA wishes 
    to draw upon the broadest possible reservoir of ideas.
        (2) Choices must be made among competing ideas in expanding 
    knowledge.
        (3) Individual participation of an investigator is essential to 
    exploitation of the opportunity.
        (b) The investigations acquisition process shall not be used when 
    any of the following characteristics are present:
        (1) The requiring office can define a requirement sufficiently to 
    allow for normal acquisition.
        (2) The program is extremely complex, requiring specialized 
    integration, coordination, or other special handling, or extending over 
    a lengthy period wherein individual participation is not essential.
    
    
    1872.203  Applicable programs and activities.
    
        The investigation acquisition process is most suitable for 
    investigations aimed at exploration requiring several unique sensors or 
    instruments, but it has been used successfully in the following types 
    of activities:
        (a) Exploration and space research flights. (1) Examples include 
    Space Transportation System (STS) flights with attached payloads, 
    generally Spacelab payloads; and free-flying spacecraft, such as 
    Explorers, Pioneers, Space Telescope, Landsats, and Long Duration 
    Exposure Facilities.
        (2) Types of opportunity include:
        (i) Participation as a Principal Investigator (PI) responsible for 
    conceiving and conducting a space investigation (This may involve a 
    major piece of instrumentation. In the case of a ``facility'' or 
    ``multiuser'' payload, each PI's responsibilities would ordinarily 
    involve a relatively minor portion of the total instrument.);
        (ii) An opportunity to serve on a PI's team as a member or Co-
    Investigator;
        (iii) An opportunity that generally involves the use of data from 
    another investigator's instrument as a guest investigator or guest 
    observer (Guest investigators usually participate after the primary 
    objectives have been satisfied for the investigations involved.); and
        (iv) A team formed from selected investigators to assist in 
    defining planned mission objectives and/or to determine, in a general 
    manner, the most meaningful instruments to accomplish the mission 
    objectives.
        (3) The investigation acquisition process may be applicable to all 
    types of opportunities. The supposition common in these opportunities 
    is that the best ideas and approaches are likely to result from the 
    broadest possible involvement of the scientific, technological or 
    applications user communities.
        (b) Minor missions. (1) Examples include research aircraft, 
    sounding rockets, balloons, and minor missions that are generally of 
    short duration, small in size, often single purpose, and subject to 
    repetition. Many investigations are follow-on to past-flight 
    investigations.
        (2) Types of opportunity include:
        (i) PIs responsible for investigation; and
        (ii) Data use or analysis.
        (3) Opportunities for participation on minor missions are generally 
    suitable for normal acquisition procedures. The use of an announcement 
    describing the general nature and schedule of flights may be 
    appropriate when considered necessary to broaden participation by 
    requesting investigator-initiated research proposals. Normal 
    acquisition procedures shall be used for follow-on repeat flights. 
    Although NASA seeks unique, innovative ideas for these missions, the 
    prospect of reflight and the latitude in determining number and 
    schedule of flights argue against the need for the use of the 
    investigations acquisition process to force dissimilar proposals into 
    an annual or periodic competitive structure. On the other hand, there 
    are some minor missions addressed to specific limited opportunities; 
    for example, a solar eclipse. When such limitations indicate that the 
    special competitive structure is needed, it should be authorized.
        (c) Operational and operational prototype spacecraft. (1) Examples 
    include spacecraft built for NASA and other agencys' missions.
        (2) The user agency can be expected to specify performance 
    parameters. Payload definition will be the responsibility of the user 
    agency and NASA. Specifications sufficient for normal acquisition 
    procedures can be produced. Use of data from the mission is the 
    responsibility of the user agency. Thus, the investigation acquisition 
    process is not required.
        (d) Supporting Research and Technology (SR&T). (1) Examples include 
    studies, minor developments, instrument conceptualization, ground-based 
    observations, laboratory and theoretical supporting research, and data 
    reduction and analysis which is unconstrained by a specific 
    opportunity.
        (2) Programs in these areas tend to go forward on a continuing 
    basis, rather than exploiting unique opportunities. Normal acquisition 
    procedures should be used. A general announcement of area of interest 
    could be made when greater participation is deemed advisable.
    
    
    1872.204  Approval.
    
        The Program AA is responsible for determining whether or not to use 
    the investigations acquisition process. Normally on major projects, or 
    when a project plan is required, use of the investigation acquisition 
    system will be justified and recommended in the project planning 
    documentation and will be coordinated with staff offices and discussed 
    in the planning presentation to the Deputy Administrator or designee.
    
    Subpart 1872.3--The Announcement of Opportunity
    
    
    1872.301  General.
    
        An announcement of opportunity (AO) is characterized by its 
    generality. However, it is essential that the AO contains sufficient 
    data in order to obtain meaningful proposals. To a considerable extent, 
    the detail and depth of the AO will depend on the objective. The 
    purpose is to get adequate information to assess the relevance, merit, 
    cost, and management requirements without overburdening the proposer.
    
    
    1872.302  Preparatory effort.
    
        (a) Headquarters offices and the responsible project installation 
    must consult prior to release of the AO.
        (b) The program office shall:
        (1) Synopsize the AO in the Commerce Business Daily prior to the 
    time of release;
        (2) Determine if there is instrumentation or support equipment 
    available which may be appropriate to the AO with all necessary 
    background data considered essential for use by a proposer;
        (3) Determine mailing lists, including the mailing list maintained 
    by the International Affairs Division, Office of External Relations, 
    for broad dissemination of the AO; and
        (4) Assure mandatory provisions are contained in the AO.
    
    [[Page 4480]]
    
        (c) Other methods of dissemination of the AO may also be used, such 
    as the use of press releases, etc. When possible, the AO should be 
    widely publicized through publications of appropriate professional 
    societies; however, NASA policy does not allow payment for the 
    placement of advertisements.
    
    
    1872.303  Responsibilities.
    
        (a) The program office originator is responsible for the content of 
    the AO and coordination with concerned Headquarters offices and field 
    installations. All personnel involved in the evaluation of proposals 
    are responsible for familiarizing themselves and complying with this 
    part and other applicable regulations. To this end, they are expected 
    to seek the advice and guidance of appropriate Headquarters program and 
    staff offices, and Project Installation management.
        (b) The Program Office is also responsible for coordinating the AO 
    with the International Affairs, Educational Affairs, Management Support 
    Divisions, Office of External Relations, Office of General Counsel, and 
    Office of Acquisition prior to issuance (see NMI 1362.1, Initiation and 
    Development of International Cooperation in Space and Aeronautical 
    Programs).
        (c) Concurrence of the Office of Acquisition is required before 
    issuance of an AO.
    
    
    1872.304  Proposal opportunity period.
    
        (a) The AO must accommodate to the maximum extent practicable 
    opportunities afforded by the Shuttle/Spacelab flights. The following 
    methods may be used to enable an AO to be open for an extended period 
    of time and/or to cover a series or range of flight possibilities or 
    disciplines:
        (1) The AO may be issued establishing a number of proposal 
    submission dates. Normally, no more than three proposal submission 
    dates should be established. The submittal dates may be spread over the 
    number of months most compatible with the possible flight opportunities 
    and the availability of resources necessary to evaluate and fund the 
    proposals.
        (2) The AO may be issued establishing a single proposal submission 
    date. However, the AO could provide that NASA amend the AO to provide 
    for subsequent dates for submission of proposals, if additional 
    investigations are desired within the AO objectives.
        (3) The AO may provide for an initial submission date with the AO 
    to remain open for submission of additional proposals up to a final 
    cutoff date. This final date should be related to the availability of 
    resources necessary to evaluate the continuous flow of proposals, the 
    time remaining prior to the flight opportunity(s) contemplated by the 
    AO, and payload funding and availability.
        (b) Generally, a core payload of investigations would be selected 
    from the initial submission of proposals under the above methods of 
    open-ended AOs. These selections could be final or tentative 
    recognizing the need for further definition. Proposals received by 
    subsequent submission dates would be considered in the scope of the 
    original AO but would be subject to the opportunities and resources 
    remaining available or the progress being made by prior selected 
    investigations.
        (c) Any proposal, whether received on the initial submission or 
    subsequent submission, requires notification to the investigator and 
    the investigator's institution of the proposal disposition. Some of the 
    proposals will be rejected completely and the investigators immediately 
    notified. The remaining unselected proposals may, if agreeable with the 
    proposers, be held for later consideration and funding and the 
    investigator so notified. However, if an investigator's proposal is 
    considered at a later date, the investigator must be given an 
    opportunity to validate the proposal with the investigator's 
    institution and for updating the cost and other data contained in the 
    original submission prior to a final selection. In summary, NASA may 
    retain proposals, receiving Category I, II, or III classifications (see 
    1872.403-1(e)), for possible later sponsorship until no longer feasible 
    to consider the proposal. When this final stage is reached, the 
    investigator must be promptly notified. Proposing investigators not 
    desiring their proposals be held for later consideration should be 
    given the opportunity to so indicate in their original submissions.
    
    
    1872.305  Guidelines for Announcement of Opportunity.
    
        (a) The AO should be tailored to the particular needs of the 
    contemplated investigations and be complete in itself. Each AO will 
    identify the originating program office and be numbered consecutively 
    by calendar year, e.g., OA-1-95, OA-2-95; OLMSA-1-95; OSS-1-95; etc. 
    The required format and detailed instructions regarding the contents of 
    the AO are contained in 1872.705.
        (b) The General Instructions and Provisions, Appendix A (see 
    1872.705-1) are necessary to accommodate the unique aspects of the AO 
    process. Therefore, they must be appended to each AO.
        (c) At the time of issuance, copies of the AO must be furnished to 
    Headquarters, Office of Acquisition (Code HS) and Office of General 
    Counsel (Code GK).
        (d) Proposers should be informed of significant departures from 
    scheduled dates for activities related in the AO.
    
    
    1872.306  Announcement of Opportunity soliciting foreign participation.
    
        Proposals for participation by individuals outside the U.S. shall 
    be submitted in the same format (excluding cost plans) as U.S. 
    proposals, typewritten in English, and reviewed and endorsed by the 
    appropriate foreign governmental agency. If letters of ``Notice of 
    Intent'' are required, the AO should indicate that they be sent to 
    Headquarters, Office of External Relations, International Relations 
    Division (Code IR). Should a foreign proposal be selected, NASA will 
    arrange with the sponsoring foreign agency for the proposed 
    participation on a no-exchange-of-funds basis, in which NASA and the 
    sponsoring agency will each bear the cost of discharging its respective 
    responsibilities. Note that additional guidelines applicable to foreign 
    proposers are contained in the Management Plan Section of Appendix B 
    (see 1872.705-2) and must be included in any Guidelines for Proposal 
    Preparation or otherwise furnished to foreign proposers.
    
    
    1872.307  Guidelines for proposal preparation.
    
        While not all of the guidelines outlined in Appendix B will be 
    applicable in response to every AO, the investigator should be informed 
    of the relevant information required. The proposal may be submitted on 
    a form supplied by the Program Office. However, the proposal should be 
    submitted in at least two sections:
        (a) Investigation and Technical Section; and (b) Management and 
    Cost Section as described in Appendix B.
    
    Subpart 1872.4--Evaluation of Proposals
    
    
    1872.401  General.
    
        (a) The evaluation process considers the aspects of each proposal 
    by the following progressive sorting:
        (1) A review resulting in a categorization is performed by using 
    one of the methods or combination of the methods outlined in 1872.403. 
    The purpose of this initial review is to determine the scientific and/
    or technological merit of the proposals in the context of the AO 
    objectives.
    
    [[Page 4481]]
    
        (2) Those proposals which are considered to have the greatest 
    scientific or technological merit are then reviewed in detail for the 
    engineering, management, and cost aspects, usually by the project 
    office at the installation responsible for the project.
        (3) Final reviews are performed by the program office and the 
    steering committee and are aimed at developing a group of 
    investigations which represent an integrated payload or a well-balanced 
    program of investigation which has the best possibility for meeting the 
    AO's objectives within programmatic constraints.
        (b) The importance of considering the interrelationship of the 
    several aspects of the proposals to be reviewed in the process and the 
    need for carefully planning their treatment should not be overlooked. 
    An evaluation plan should be developed before issuance of the AO. It 
    should cover the recommended staffing for any subcommittee or 
    contractor support, review guidelines as well as the procedural flow 
    and schedule of the evaluation. While not mandatory, such a plan should 
    be considered for each AO. A fuller discussion of the evaluation and 
    selection process is included in the following sections of this 
    subpart.
    
    
    1872.402  Criteria for evaluation.
    
        (a) Each AO must indicate those criteria which the evaluators will 
    apply in evaluating a proposal. The relative importance of each 
    criterion must also be stated. This information will allow 
    investigators to make informed judgments in formulating proposals that 
    best meet the stated objectives.
        (b) Following is a list of general evaluation criteria appropriate 
    for inclusion in most AOs:
        (1) The scientific, applications, and/or technological merit of the 
    investigation.
        (2) The relevance of the proposed investigation to the AO's stated 
    scientific, applications, and/or technological objectives.
        (3) The competence and experience of the investigator and any 
    investigative team.
        (4) Adequacy of whatever apparatus may be proposed with particular 
    regard to its ability to supply the data needed for the investigation.
        (5) The reputation and interest of the investigator's institution, 
    as measured by the willingness of the institution to provide the 
    support necessary to ensure that the investigation can be completed 
    satisfactorily.
        (6) Cost and management aspects will be considered in all 
    selections.
        (7) Other or additional criteria may be used, but the evaluation 
    criteria must be germane to the accomplishment of the stated 
    objectives.
        (c) Once the AO is issued, it is essential that the evaluation 
    criteria be applied in a uniform manner. If it becomes apparent, before 
    the date set for receipt of proposals, that the criteria or their 
    relative importance should be changed, the AO will be amended, and all 
    known recipients will be informed of the change and given an adequate 
    opportunity to consider it in submission of their proposals. Evaluation 
    criteria and/or their relative importance will not be changed after the 
    date set for receipt of proposals.
    
    
    1872.403  Methods of evaluation.
    
        Alternative methods are available to initiate the evaluation of 
    proposals received in response to an AO. These are referred to as the 
    Advisory Subcommittee Evaluation Process, the Contractor Evaluation 
    Process, and the Government Evaluation Process. In all processes, a 
    subcommittee of the appropriate Program Office Steering Committee will 
    be formed to categorize the proposals. Following categorization, those 
    proposals still in consideration will be processed to the selection 
    official.
    
    
    1872.403-1  Advisory subcommittee evaluation process.
    
        (a) Evaluation of scientific and/or technological merit of proposed 
    investigations is the responsibility of an advisory subcommittee of the 
    Steering Committee. The subcommittee constitutes a peer group qualified 
    to judge the scientific and technological aspects of all investigation 
    proposals. One or more subcommittees may be established depending on 
    the breadth of the technical or scientific disciplines inherent in the 
    AO's objectives. Each subcommittee represents a discipline or grouping 
    of closely related disciplines. To maximize the quality of the 
    subcommittee evaluation and categorization, the following conditions of 
    selection and appointment should be considered.
        (1) The subcommittee normally should be established on an ad hoc 
    basis.
        (2) Qualifications and acknowledgment of the professional abilities 
    of the subcommittee members are of primary importance. Institutional 
    affiliations are not sufficient qualifications.
        (3) The executive secretary of the subcommittee must be a full-time 
    NASA employee.
        (4) Subcommittee members should normally be appointed as early as 
    possible and prior to receipt of proposals.
        (5) Care must be taken to avoid conflicts of interest. These 
    include financial interests, institutional affiliations, professional 
    biases and associations, as well as familiar relationships. Conflicts 
    could further occur as a result of imbalance between Government and 
    non-Government appointees or membership from institutions representing 
    a singular school of thought in discipline areas involving competitive 
    theories in approach to an investigation.
        (6) The subcommittee should convene as a group in closed sessions 
    for proposal evaluation to protect the proposer's proprietary ideas and 
    to allow frank discussion of the proposer's qualifications and the 
    merit of the proposer's ideas. Lead review responsibility for each 
    proposal may be assigned to members most qualified in the involved 
    discipline. It is important that each proposal be considered by the 
    entire subcommittee.
        (b) It may not be possible to select a subcommittee fully 
    satisfying all of the conditions described in paragraph (a) of this 
    section. It is the responsibility of the nominating and appointing 
    officials to make trade-offs, where necessary, among the criteria in 
    paragraph (a) of this section. This latitude permits flexibility in 
    making decisions in accord with circumstances of each application. In 
    so doing, however, it is emphasized that recognized expertise in 
    evaluating dissimilar proposals is essential to the continued 
    workability of the investigation acquisition process.
        (c) Candidate subcommittee members should be nominated by the 
    office having responsibility for the evaluation. Nominations should be 
    approved in accordance with NMI 1150.2, ``Establishment, Operation, and 
    Duration of NASA Advisory Committees.'' The notification of appointment 
    should specify the duration of assignment on the subcommittee, 
    provisions concerning conflicts of interest, and arrangements regarding 
    honoraria, per diem, and travel when actually employed.
        (d) It is important that members of the subcommittee be formally 
    instructed as to their responsibilities with respect to the 
    investigation acquisition process, even where several or all of the 
    members have served previously. This briefing of subcommittee members 
    should include:
        (1) Instruction of subcommittee members on agency policies and 
    procedures pertinent to acquisition of investigations.
    
    [[Page 4482]]
    
        (2) Review of the program goals, AO objectives, and evaluation 
    criteria, including relative importance, which provide the basis for 
    evaluation.
        (3) Instruction on the use of preliminary proposal evaluation data 
    furnished by the Installation Project Office. The subcommittee should 
    examine these data to gain a better understanding of the proposed 
    investigations, any associated problems, and to consider cost in 
    relation to the value of the investigations' objectives.
        (4) Definition of responsibility of the subcommittee for evaluation 
    and categorization with respect to scientific and/or technical merit in 
    accordance with the evaluation criteria.
        (5) Instruction for documentation of deliberations and 
    categorizations of the subcommittee.
        (6) Inform the chairperson of the subcommittee and all members that 
    they should familiarize themselves with the provisions of the Standards 
    of Ethical Conduct for Employees of the Executive Branch, 5 CFR part 
    2635, and the Supplemental Standards of Ethical Conduct for employees 
    of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, 5 CFR part 6901, 
    regarding conflicts of interest. Members should inform the appointing 
    authority if their participation presents a real or apparent conflict 
    of interest situation. In addition, all participants should inform the 
    selection official in the event they are subjected to pressure or 
    improper contacts.
        (7) Inform members that prior to the selection and announcement of 
    the successful investigators and investigations, subcommittee members 
    and NASA personnel shall not reveal any information concerning the 
    evaluation to anyone who is not also participating in the same 
    evaluation proceedings, and then only to the extent that such 
    information is required in connection with such proceedings. Also, 
    inform members that subsequent to selection of an investigation and 
    announcement of negotiations with the investigator's institution, 
    information concerning the proceedings of the subcommittee and data 
    developed by the subcommittee will be made available to others within 
    NASA only when the requestor demonstrates a need to know for a NASA 
    purpose. Such information will be made available to persons outside 
    NASA including other Government agencies, only when such disclosure is 
    concurred in by the Office of General Counsel. In this connection, 
    reference is made to 18 U.S.C. 1905 which provides criminal sanctions 
    if any officer or employee (including special employees) of the United 
    States discloses or divulges certain kinds of business confidential and 
    trade secret information unless authorized by law.
        (e) The product of an advisory subcommittee is the classification 
    of proposals into four categories. The categories are:
        (1) Category I--Well conceived and scientifically and technically 
    sound investigations pertinent to the goals of the program and the AO's 
    objectives and offered by a competent investigator from an institution 
    capable of supplying the necessary support to ensure that any essential 
    flight hardware or other support can be delivered on time and that data 
    can be properly reduced, analyzed, interpreted, and published in a 
    reasonable time. Investigations in Category I are recommended for 
    acceptance and normally will be displaced only by other Category I 
    investigations.
        (2) Category II--Well conceived and scientifically or technically 
    sound investigations which are recommended for acceptance, but at a 
    lower priority than Category I.
        (3) Category III--Scientifically and technically sound 
    investigations which require further development. Category III 
    investigations may be funded for development and may be reconsidered at 
    a later time for the same or other opportunities.
        (4) Category IV--Proposed investigations which are recommended for 
    rejection for the particular opportunity under consideration, whatever 
    the reason.
        (f) A record of the deliberations of the subcommittee shall be 
    prepared by the assigned executive secretary and shall be signed by the 
    Chairperson. The minutes shall contain the categorizations with basic 
    rationale for such ratings and the significant strengths and weaknesses 
    of the proposals evaluated.
    
    
    1872.403-2  Contractor evaluation process.
    
        (a) The use of the contractor method for obtaining support for 
    evaluation purposes of proposals received in response to an AO requires 
    the approval of the Program AA. Prior to the use of this method, 
    discussion should be held with the Office of Acquisition.
        (b) It is NASA policy to avoid situations in the acquisition 
    process where, by virtue of the work or services performed for NASA, or 
    as a result of data acquired from NASA or from other entities, a 
    particular company:
        (1) Is given an unfair competitive advantage over other companies 
    with respect to future NASA business;
        (2) Is placed in position to affect Government actions under 
    circumstances in which there is potential that the company's judgment 
    may be biased; or
        (3) Otherwise finds that a conflict exists between the performance 
    of work or services for the Government in an impartial manner and the 
    company's own self-interest.
        (c) To reduce the possibility of an organizational conflict of 
    interest problem arising, the following minimum restrictions will be 
    incorporated into the contract:
        (1) No employee of the contractor will be permitted to propose in 
    response to the AO;
        (2) The ``Limitation on Future Contracting'' clause contained in 
    1852.209-71 and the conditions set forth in 1815.413-2 Alternate II 
    will be included in all such contracts; and
        (3) Unless authorized by the NASA contracting officer, the 
    contractor shall not contact the originator of any proposal concerning 
    its contents.
        (d) The scope of work for the selected contractor will provide for 
    an identification of strengths and weaknesses and a summary of the 
    proposals. The contractor will not make selections nor recommend 
    investigations.
        (e) The steps to be taken in establishing evaluation panels and the 
    responsibilities of NASA and the contractor in relation to the panels 
    will be as follows:
        (1) The contractor will be required to establish and provide 
    support to panels of experts for review of proposals to evaluate their 
    scientific and technical merit;
        (2) These panels will be composed of scientists and specialists 
    qualified to evaluate the proposals;
        (3) The agency may provide to the contractor lists of scientist(s) 
    and specialist(s) in the various disciplines it believes are qualified 
    to serve on the panels;
        (4) The contractor will report each panel's membership to NASA for 
    approval; and
        (5) The contractor must make all the necessary arrangements with 
    the panel members.
        (f) The evaluation support by the contractor's panels of experts 
    will be accomplished as follows:
        (1) The panels will review the scientific and technical merit of 
    the proposals in accordance with the evaluation criteria in the AO and 
    will record their strengths and weaknesses;
        (2) The contractor will make records of each panel's deliberations 
    which will form the basis for a report summarizing the results of the 
    evaluations. Upon
    
    [[Page 4483]]
    
    request, the contractor shall provide all such records to NASA;
        (3) The chairperson of each panel shall certify that the evaluation 
    report correctly represents the findings of the review panel; and
        (4) A final report will be submitted as provided in the contract.
        (g) A subcommittee of the Program Office Steering Committee will be 
    established on an ad hoc basis. Utilizing furnished data, the 
    subcommittee will classify the proposals into the four categories 
    enumerated in 1872.403-1(e)(1), Advisory Subcommittee Evaluation 
    Process. A record of the deliberations of the subcommittee should be 
    prepared by an assigned executive secretary and signed by the 
    chairperson. The minutes should contain the categorizations with the 
    basic rationale for such ratings and the significant strengths and 
    weaknesses of the proposals evaluated.
    
    
    1872.403-3  Government evaluation process.
    
        (a) The Program AA may, in accordance with NMI 1150.2, appoint one 
    or more full-time Government employees as subcommittee members of the 
    Program Office Steering Committee to evaluate and categorize the 
    proposals.
        (b) Each subcommittee member should be qualified and competent to 
    evaluate the proposals in accordance with the AO evaluation criteria. 
    It is important that a subcommittee's evaluation not be influenced by 
    others either within or outside of NASA.
        (c) The subcommittee members will not contact the proposers for 
    additional information.
        (d) The subcommittee members will classify the proposals in 
    accordance with the four categories indicated in 1872.403-1(e)(1). Each 
    categorization will be supported by an appropriate rationale including 
    a narrative of each proposal's strengths and weaknesses.
    
    
    1872.404  Engineering, integration, and management evaluation.
    
        (a) The subcommittee responsible for categorization of each 
    proposal in terms of its scientific applications, or technical merit 
    should receive information on probable cost, technical status, 
    developmental risk, integration and safety problems, and management 
    arrangements in time for their deliberations.
        (b) This information should be provided at the discretion of the 
    Headquarters Program Office by the Project Office at the installation. 
    This information can be in general terms and should reflect what 
    insights the Project Office can provide without requesting additional 
    details from the proposers. This limited Project Office review will not 
    normally give the subcommittees information of significant precision. 
    The purpose is to give the subcommittee sufficient information so it 
    can review the proposals in conjunction with available cost, 
    integration, and management considerations to gain an impression of 
    each investigator's understanding of the problems of the experiment and 
    to permit gross trade-offs of cost versus value of the investigation 
    objective.
        (c) Following categorization, the Project Office shall evaluate 
    proposals in contention, in depth, including a thorough review of each 
    proposal's engineering, integration, management, and cost aspects. This 
    review should be accomplished by qualified engineering, cost, and 
    business analysts at the project center.
        (d) In assessing proposed costs, the evaluation must consider:
        (1) The investigation objective.
        (2) Comparable, similar or related investigations.
        (3) Whether NASA or the investigator should procure the necessary 
    supporting instrumentation or services and the relative cost of each 
    mode.
        (4) Total overall or probable costs to the Government including 
    integration and data reduction and analysis. In the case of 
    investigations proposed by Government investigators, this includes all 
    associated direct and indirect cost. With respect to cooperative 
    investigations, integration, and other applicable costs should be 
    considered.
        (e) The Project Office, as part of the in-depth evaluation of 
    proposals that require instrumentation or support equipment, will 
    survey all potential sources for Government-owned instrumentation or 
    support equipment that may be made available, with or without 
    modifications, to the potential investigator. Such items contributed by 
    foreign cooperating groups which are still available under cooperative 
    project agreements will also be considered for use under the terms and 
    conditions specified in the agreements. As part of the evaluation 
    report to the Program Office, the availability or nonavailability of 
    instrumentation or support equipment will be indicated.
        (f) Proposals which require instrumentation should be evaluated by 
    project personnel. This evaluation should cover the inter-faces and the 
    assessment of development risks. This evaluation should furnish the 
    selection official with sufficient data to contribute to the instrument 
    determinations. Important among these are:
        (1) Whether the instrument requires further definition;
        (2) Whether studies and designs are necessary to provide a 
    reasonably accurate appreciation of the cost;
        (3) Whether the investigation can be carried out without incurring 
    undue cost, schedule, or risk of failure penalties; and
        (4) Whether integration of the instrument is feasible.
        (g) In reviewing an investigator's management plan, the Project 
    Office should evaluate the investigator's approach for efficiently 
    managing the work, the recognition of essential management functions, 
    and the effective overall integration of these functions. Evaluation of 
    the proposals under final consideration should include, but not be 
    limited to: workload--present and future related to capacity and 
    capability; past experience; management approach and organization; 
    e.g.:
        (1) With respect to workload and its relationship to capacity and 
    capability, it is important to ascertain the extent to which the 
    investigator is capable of providing facilities and personnel skills 
    necessary to perform the required effort on a timely basis. This review 
    should reveal the need for additional facilities or people, and provide 
    some indication of the Government support the investigator will 
    require.
        (2) A review should be made of the investigator, the investigator's 
    institution, and any supporting contractor's performance on prior 
    investigations. This should assist in arriving at an assessment of the 
    investigator and the institution's ability to perform the effort within 
    the proposed cost and time constraints.
        (3) The proposed investigator's management arrangements should be 
    reviewed, including make or buy choices, support of any co-
    investigator, and preselected subcontractors or other instrument 
    fabricators to determine whether such arrangements are justified. The 
    review should determine if the proposed management arrangements enhance 
    the investigator's ability to devote more time to the proposed 
    experiment objectives and still effectively employ the technical and 
    administrative support required for a successful investigation. In 
    making these evaluations, the Project Office should draw on the 
    installation's engineering, business, legal, and other staff resources, 
    as necessary, as well as its scientific resources. If further 
    information is needed from the proposers, it should be obtained through 
    the proper contacts.
    
    [[Page 4484]]
    
    1872.405  Program office evaluation.
    
        (a) A Program Office responsible for the project or program at 
    Headquarters will receive the evaluation of the proposals, and weigh 
    the evaluative data to determine an optimum payload or program of 
    investigation. This determination will involve recommendations 
    concerning individual investigations; but, more importantly, should 
    result in a payload or program which is judged to optimize total 
    mission return within schedule, engineering, and budgetary constraints. 
    The recommendations should facilitate sound selection decisions by the 
    Program AA. Three sets of recommendations result from the Program 
    Office evaluation:
        (1) Optimum payload or program of investigations, or options for 
    alternative payloads or programs.
        (2) Recommendation for final or tentative selection based on a 
    determination of the degree of uncertainty associated with individual 
    investigations. A tentative selection may be considered step one of a 
    two-step selection technique.
        (3) Upon consideration of the guidelines contained in 
    1872.502(a)(3), recommending responsibility for instrument development.
        (b) The Installation Project Office evaluation is principally 
    concerned with ensuring that the proposed investigation can be managed, 
    developed, integrated, and executed with an appropriate probability of 
    technical success within the estimated probable cost. The Headquarters 
    Program Director, drawing upon these inputs, should be mainly concerned 
    with determining a payload or program from the point of view of 
    programmatic goals and budgetary constraints. Discipline and cost 
    trade-offs are considered at this level. The Headquarters Program 
    Office should focus on the potential contribution to program objectives 
    that can be achieved under alternative feasible payload integration 
    options.
        (c) It may be to NASA's advantage to consider certain 
    investigations for tentative selection pending resolution of 
    uncertainties in their development. Tentative selections should be 
    reconsidered after a period of time for final selection in a payload or 
    program of investigations. This two-step selection process should be 
    considered when:
        (1) The potential return from the investigation is sufficient, 
    relative to that of the other investigations under consideration, and 
    that its further development appears to be warranted before final 
    selection.
        (2) The investigation potential is of such high priority to the 
    program that the investigation should be developed for flight if at all 
    possible.
        (3) The investigative area is critical to the program and 
    competitive approaches need to be developed further to allow selection 
    of the optimum course.
        (d) Based on evaluation of these considerations associated with the 
    investigations requiring further development of hardware, the following 
    information should be provided to the Steering Committee and the 
    Program AA responsible for selection:
        (1) The expected gain in potential return associated with the 
    eventual incorporation of tentatively recommended investigations in the 
    payload(s) or program.
        (2) The expected costs required to develop instrumentation to the 
    point of ``demonstrated capability.''
        (3) The risk involved in added cost, probability of successfully 
    developing the required instrument capability, and the possibility of 
    schedule impact.
        (4) Identification of opportunities, if any, for inclusion of such 
    investigations in later missions.
        (e) In those cases where investigations are tentatively selected, 
    an explicit statement should be made of the process to be followed in 
    determining the final payload or program of investigations and the 
    proposers so informed. The two-phase selection approach provides the 
    opportunity for additional assurance of development potential and 
    probable cost prior to a final commitment to the investigation.
        (f) As instruments used in investigations become increasingly 
    complex and costly, the need for greater control of their development 
    by the responsible Headquarters Program Office also grows. Accordingly, 
    as an integral part of the evaluation process, a deliberate decision 
    should be made regarding the role of the Principal Investigator with 
    respect to the provision of the major hardware associated with that 
    person's investigation. The guidelines for the hardware acquisition 
    determination are discussed in 1872.502(a)(3).
        (g) The range of options for responsibility for the instrumentation 
    consists of:
        (1) Assignment of full responsibility to the Principal 
    Investigator. The responsibility includes all in-house or contracted 
    activity to provide the instrumentation for integration.
        (2) Retention of developmental responsibility by the Government 
    with participation by the Principal Investigator in key events defined 
    for the program. In all cases the right of the Principal Investigator 
    to counsel and recommend is paramount. Such involvement of the 
    Principal Investigator may include:
        (i) Provision of instrument specifications.
        (ii) Approval of specifications.
        (iii) Independent monitorship of the development and advice to the 
    Government on optimization of the instrumentation for the 
    investigation.
        (iv) Participation in design reviews and other appropriate reviews.
        (v) Review and concurrence in changes resulting from design 
    reviews.
        (vi) Participation in configuration control board actions.
        (vii) Advice in definition of test program.
        (viii) Review and approval of test program and changes thereto.
        (ix) Participation in conduct of the test program.
        (x) Participation in calibration of instrument.
        (xi) Participation in final inspection and acceptance of the 
    instrument.
        (xii) Participation in subsequent test and evaluation processes 
    incident to integration and flight preparation.
        (xiii) Participation in the development and support of the 
    operations plan.
        (xiv) Analysis and interpretation of data.
        (h) The Principal Investigator should as a minimum:
        (1) Approve the instrument specification.
        (2) Advise the project manager in development and fabrication.
        (3) Participate in final calibration.
        (4) Develop and support the operations plan.
        (5) Analyze and interpret the data.
        (i) The Project Installation is responsible for implementing the 
    program or project and should make recommendations concerning the role 
    for the Principal Investigators. The Program AA will determine the 
    role, acting upon the advice of the Headquarters Program Office and the 
    Steering Committee. The Principal Investigator's desires will be 
    respected in the negotiation of the person's role allowing an appeal to 
    the Program AA and the right to withdraw from participation.
        (j) The Program Office should make a presentation to the Steering 
    Committee with supporting documentation on the decisions to be made by 
    the responsible Program AA.
    
    
    1872.406  Steering committee review.
    
        (a) The most important role of the Steering Committee is to provide 
    a substantive review of a potential
    
    [[Page 4485]]
    
    payload or program of investigations and to recommend a selection to 
    the Program AA. The Steering Committee applies the collective 
    experience of representatives from the program and discipline 
    communities and offers a forum for discussing the selection from those 
    points of view. In addition to this mission-specific evaluation 
    function, the Steering Committee provides guidance to subcommittee 
    chairpersons and serves as a clearinghouse for problems and complaints 
    regarding the process. The Steering Committee is responsible for 
    assuring adherence to required procedures. Lastly, it is the forum 
    where discipline objectives are weighed against program objectives and 
    constraints.
        (b) The Steering Committee represents the means for exercising 
    three responsibilities in the process of selecting investigations to:
        (1) Review compliance with procedures governing application of the 
    AO process.
        (2) Ensure that adequate documentation has been made of the steps 
    in the evaluation process.
        (3) Review the results of the evaluation by the subcommittee, 
    Project, and Program Offices and prepare an assessment or endorsement 
    of a recommended payload or program of investigations to the Program 
    AA.
        (c) The Purpose in exercising the first of the responsibilities in 
    paragraph (b) of this section is to ensure equity and consistency in 
    the application of the process. The Steering Committee is intended to 
    provide the necessary reviews and coordination inherent in conventional 
    acquisition practices.
        (d) The second and third responsibilities of the Steering Committee 
    in paragraph (b) are technical. They require that the Steering 
    Committee review the evaluations by subcommittee, the Project Office, 
    and the Program Office for completeness and appropriateness before 
    forwarding to the Program AA. Most important in this review are:
        (1) Degree to which results of evaluations and recommendations 
    follow logically from the criteria in the AO.
        (2) Consistency with objectives and policies generally beyond the 
    scope of Project/Program Offices.
        (3) Sufficiency of reasons stated for tentative recommendations of 
    those investigations requiring further instrument research and 
    development.
        (4) Sufficiency of reasons stated for determining responsibilities 
    for instrument development.
        (5) Sufficiency of consideration of reusable space flight hardware 
    and support equipment for the recommended investigations.
        (6) Sufficiency of reasons for classifying proposed investigations 
    in their respective categories.
        (7) Fair treatment of all proposals.
        (e) The Steering Committee makes recommendations to the selection 
    official on the payload or program of investigations and notes caveats 
    or provisions important for consideration of the selection official.
    
    
    1872.407  Principles to apply.
    
        (a) 1872.406 contains a description of the evaluation function 
    appropriate for a major payload or very significant program of 
    investigation. The levels of review, evaluation, and refinement 
    described should be applied in those selections where warranted but 
    could be varied for less significant selection situations. It is 
    essential to consider the principles of the several evaluative steps, 
    but it may not be essential to consider the principles of the several 
    evaluative steps, but it may not be essential to maintain strict 
    adherence to the sequence and structure of the evaluation system 
    described. The selection official is responsible for determining the 
    evaluation process most appropriate for the selection situation using 
    this subpart 1872.4 as a guide.
        (b) Significant deviations from the provisions of this part 1872 
    must be fully documented and be approved by the Program AA after 
    concurrence by the Office of General Counsel and Office of Acquisition.
    
    Subpart 1872.5--The Selection Process
    
    
    1872.501  General.
    
        The Program AA is responsible for selecting investigations for 
    contract negotiation. This decision culminates the evaluations and 
    processes that can be summarized as follows:
    
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
               Evaluation stage                 Principal emphasis                        Results                   
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Contractor (when authorized)..........  Summary evaluation         Report to Subcommittee.                      
                                             (strengths and                                                         
                                             weaknesses).                                                           
    Subcommittee individual...............  Science and technological  Categorization of proposals.                 
                                             relevance, value, and                                                  
                                             feasibility.                                                           
    Project Office........................  Engineering/cost/          Reports to Subcommittee and Program Office.  
                                             integration/management                                                 
                                             assessment.                                                            
    Program Office........................  Consistency with           Recommendations to Steering Committee of     
                                             Announcement and program   payload or program of investigations.       
                                             objectives, and cost and                                               
                                             schedule constraints.                                                  
    Steering Committee....................  Logic of proposed          Recommendations to Program Associate         
                                             selections and             Administrator.                              
                                             compliance with proper                                                 
                                             procedures.                                                            
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    1872.502  Decisions to be made.
    
        (a) The selection decisions by the Program AA constitute management 
    judgments balancing individual and aggregate scientific or 
    technological merit, the contribution of the recommended investigations 
    to the AO's objectives, and their consonance with budget constraints to 
    make the following decisions:
        (1) Determination of the adequacy of scientific/technical analysis 
    supporting the recommended selections. This supporting rationale should 
    involve considerations including:
        (i) Assurance that the expected return contributes substantially to 
    program objectives and is likely to be realized.
        (ii) Assurance that the evaluation criteria were applied 
    consistently to all proposed investigations.
        (iii) Assurance that the set of recommended investigations 
    constitutes the optimum program or payload considering potential value 
    and constraints.
        (iv) Assurance that only one investigator is assigned as the 
    Principal Investigator to each investigation and that the Principal 
    Investigator will assume the associated responsibilities and be the 
    single point of contact and leader of any other investigators selected 
    for the same investigation.
        (2) Determination as to whether available returned space hardware 
    or support equipment, with or without modification, would be adequate 
    to meet or support investigation objectives.
        (3) Determination as to whether the proposed instrument fabricator 
    qualifies and should be accepted as a sole source
    
    [[Page 4486]]
    
    or whether the requirement should be competitively procured. The 
    following guidelines apply:
        (i) The hardware required should be subjected to competitive 
    solicitation where it is clear that the capability is not sufficiently 
    unique to justify sole source acquisition.
        (ii) The hardware requirement should be purchased from the 
    fabricator proposed by the investigator, which may be the 
    investigator's own institution,
        (A) When the fabricator's proposal contains technical data that are 
    not available from another source, and it is not feasible or 
    practicable to define the fabrication requirement in such a way as to 
    avoid the necessity of using the technical data contained in the 
    proposal;
        (B) When the fabricator offers unique capabilities that are not 
    available from another source;
        (C) When the selection official determines that the proposed 
    hardware contributes so significantly to the value of the 
    investigator's proposal as to be an integral part of it.
        (iii) If a producer other than the one proposed by the investigator 
    offers unique capabilities to produce the hardware requirement, NASA 
    may buy the hardware from the qualified fabricator.
        (iv) If a NASA employee submits a proposal as a principal 
    investigator, any requirement for hardware necessary to perform the 
    investigation must either be competed by the installation acquisition 
    office or a justification must be written, synopsized, and approved in 
    accordance with the requirements of FAR and the NASA FAR Supplement.
        (4) Determination of the desirability for tentative selection of 
    investigations. This determination involves considerations including:
        (i) Assessment of the state of development of the investigative 
    hardware, the cost and schedule for development in relation to the gain 
    in potential benefits at the time of final selection.
        (ii) Assurance that there is adequate definition of investigation 
    hardware to allow parallel design of other project hardware.
        (iii) Assurance that appropriate management procedures are 
    contained in the project plan for reevaluation and final selection (or 
    rejection) on an appropriate time scale.
        (5) Determination of the acceptability of the proposer's management 
    plan, including the proposed hardware development plan, and the 
    necessity, if any, of negotiating modifications to that plan.
        (b) In the process of making the determinations described in 
    paragraph (a) (1) of this section, the Program AA may request 
    additional information or evaluations. In most instances, this 
    information can be provided by the Program Office responsible for the 
    mission, project, or program. However, the Program AA may reconvene the 
    subcommittee or poll the members individually or provide for additional 
    analysis or require additional data from evaluators or proposers as 
    considered necessary to facilitate the Program AA's decision.
    
    
    1872.503  The selection statement.
    
        Upon completion of deliberations, the responsible Program AA shall 
    issue a selection statement. Ordinarily this statement will, upon 
    request, be releasable to the public. As a minimum, the selection 
    statement should include:
        (a) The general and specific evaluation criteria and relative 
    importance used for the selection.
        (b) The categorizations provided by the subcommittee and the 
    rationale for accepting or not accepting each Category I proposal and a 
    succinct statement concerning the nonacceptance of all other proposals.
        (c) A concise description of each investigation accepted including 
    an indication as to whether the selection is a partial acceptance of a 
    proposal and/or a combination with other investigators.
        (d) The role of the Principal Investigator with regard to hardware 
    essential to the investigation and whether the Principal Investigator 
    will be responsible for hardware acquisition and the basis therefor.
        (e) An indication of the plan and acquisition using the regular 
    acquisition processes, if the Principal Investigator is not to acquire 
    the hardware.
        (f) A statement indicating whether the selection is final or 
    tentative, recognizing the need for better definition of the 
    investigation and its cost.
        (g) A statement indicating use of Government-owned space flight 
    hardware and/or support equipment.
    
    
    1872.504  Notification of proposers.
    
        (a) It is essential that investigators whose proposals have no 
    reasonable chance for selection be so apprised as soon as practicable. 
    The responsible Program Office will, upon such determination, notify 
    investigators of that fact with the major reason(s) why the proposals 
    were so considered. The notification letter should also inform such 
    investigators that they may obtain a detailed oral debriefing provided 
    they request it in writing.
        (b) Letters of notification will be sent to those Principal 
    Investigators selected to participate. This letter should not commit 
    the agency to more than negotiations for the selected investigation, 
    but it should indicate the decision made and contain:
        (1) A concise description of the Principal Investigator's 
    investigation as selected, noting substantive changes, if any, from the 
    investigation originally proposed by the Principal Investigator.
        (2) The nature of the selection, i.e., whether it should be 
    considered final or tentative requiring additional hardware or cost 
    definition.
        (3) A description of the role of the Principal Investigator 
    including the responsibility for the provision of instruments for 
    flight experiments.
        (3) Identification of the principal technical and management points 
    to be treated in subsequent negotiations.
        (5) Any rights to be granted on use of data, publishing of data, 
    and duration of use of the data.
        (6) Where applicable, indication that a foreign selectee's 
    participation in the program will be arranged between the International 
    Affairs Division, Office of External Relations, and the foreign 
    government agency which endorsed the proposal.
        (c) In conjunction with the notification of successful foreign 
    proposers, the Program Office shall forward a letter to the responsible 
    International Affairs Division, Office of External Relations, 
    addressing the following:
        (1) The scientific technological objective of the effort.
        (2) The period of time for the effort.
        (3) The responsibilities of NASA and of the sponsoring governmental 
    agency; these may include:
        (i) Provision and disposition of hardware and software.
        (ii) Responsibilities for reporting, reduction and dissemination of 
    data.
        (iii) Responsibilities for transportation of hardware.
        (4) Any additional information pertinent to the conduct of the 
    experiment.
        (d) Using the information provided above, the International Affairs 
    Division, Office of External Relations will negotiate an agreement with 
    the sponsoring foreign agency.
        (e) Notices shall also be sent to those proposers not notified 
    pursuant to paragraphs (a) through (d) of this section, and, as 
    applicable, a copy to the sponsoring foreign government agency. It is 
    important that these remaining proposers be informed at the same time
    
    [[Page 4487]]
    
    as those selected. Other agency notifications and press release 
    procedures will apply, as appropriate.
    
    
    1872.505  Debriefing.
    
        It is the policy to debrief, if requested, unsuccessful proposers 
    of investigations in accordance with FAR 15.1004. The following shall 
    be considered in arranging and conducting debriefings:
        (a) Debriefing shall be done by an official designated by the 
    responsible Program AA. Any other personnel receiving requests for 
    information concerning the rejection of a proposal shall refer to the 
    designated official.
        (b) Debriefing of unsuccessful offerors shall be made at the 
    earliest possible time; debriefing will generally be scheduled 
    subsequent to selection but prior to award of contracts to the 
    successful proposers.
        (c) Material discussed in debriefing shall be factual and consonant 
    with the documented findings of several stages of the evaluation 
    process and the selection statement.
        (d) The debriefing official shall advise of weak or deficient areas 
    in the proposal, indicate whether those weaknesses were factors in the 
    selection, and advise of the major considerations in selecting the 
    competing successful proposer where appropriate.
        (e) The debriefing official shall not discuss other unsuccessful 
    proposals, rankings, votes of members, or attempt to make a point-by-
    point comparison with successful proposals.
        (f) A memorandum of record of the debriefing shall be provided the 
    Chairperson of the Steering Committee.
    
    Subpart 1872.6--Payload Formulation
    
    
    1872.601  Payroll formulation.
    
        (a) Payload elements for Space Transportation System (STS) missions 
    can come from many sources. These include those selected through AOs, 
    those generated by in-house research, unsolicited proposals and those 
    derived from agreements between NASA and external entities. However, it 
    is anticipated that the primary source of NASA payload elements will be 
    the AO process. Generally, proposals for payload elements submitted 
    outside the AO process will not be selected if they would have been 
    responsive to an AO objective.
        (b) Payload elements for STS flights fall into two major 
    categories. ``NASA or NASA-related'' payload elements are those which 
    are developed by a NASA Program Office or by another party with which 
    NASA has a shared interest. ``Non-NASA'' payload elements are those 
    which require only STS operation services from NASA and interface with 
    NASA through the Office of Space Flight.
        (c) In general, a Program Office will be designated responsibility 
    for formulating the ``NASA or NASA-related'' portion of an STS payload. 
    The Office of Space Flight will be responsible for formulating the 
    ``non-NASA'' portion of an STS payload. Flights may, of course, consist 
    wholly of payload elements of either type. Resource allocation for 
    mixed missions will be determined by the Program Office and the Office 
    of Space Flight.
    
    Subpart 1872.7--Acquisition and Other Considerations
    
    
    1872.701  Early involvement essential.
    
        (a) The distinctive feature of the AO process is that it is both a 
    program planning system and an acquisition system in one procedure. The 
    choice of what aeronautical and space phenomena to investigate is 
    program planning. Acquisition is involved with the purchase of property 
    and services to carry out the selected investigations.
        (b) Because of both the programmatic and multi-functional aspects 
    of the AO process, early involvement of external program office 
    elements is essential. Success of the process requires that it proceed 
    in a manner that meets program goals and complies with statutory 
    requirements and acquisition policy.
        (c) The planning, preparation and selection schedule for the 
    investigation should commence early enough to meet statutory and 
    regulatory requirements. Chief of these are the requirements for 
    soliciting maximum feasible competition and for conducting discussions 
    with offerors within the competitive range by the Project Office and/or 
    any other evaluation group or office authorized by the selection 
    official.
    
    
    1872.702  Negotiation, discussions, and contract award.
    
        (a) The AO shall be synopsized in the Commerce Business Daily. 
    Responses to the synopsis must be added to the AO mailing list. Every 
    effort should be made to publish opportunities far enough in advance to 
    encourage a broad response. (In no case less than 45 days before the 
    date set for receipt of proposals).
        (b) Significant items for consideration after receipt of proposals:
        (1) Late proposals--The policy on late proposals contained in 
    1815.412 is applicable. Potential investigators should be informed of 
    this policy. In the AO context, the selection official or designee will 
    determine whether a late proposal will be considered.
        (2) Competitive considerations. (i) The proposals submitted in 
    response to the AOs are not necessarily fully comparable. However, all 
    proposals within the scope of an opportunity must be evaluated in 
    accordance with the criteria in the AO.
        (ii) Cost must be considered in the evaluation if costs are 
    involved in the investigation. General cost information should be given 
    to the subcommittee by the Installation Project Office for use in 
    determining the categories into which the subcommittee places 
    proposals.
        (iii) Further information should be obtained, as necessary, by the 
    Installation Project Office and/or any other evaluation group 
    authorized by the selection official and from the investigators whose 
    proposals are being considered. This is similar to the acquisition 
    procedure for conducting written and oral discussions. A major 
    consideration during discussions is to avoid unfairness and unequal 
    treatment. Good judgment is required by in the extent and content of 
    the discussions. There should be no reluctance in obtaining the advice 
    and guidance of management and staff offices during the discussion 
    phase. A summary should be prepared of the primary points covered in 
    the written and oral discussions and show the effect of the discussions 
    on the evaluation of proposals. This summary should also contain 
    general information about the questions submitted to the investigators, 
    the amount of time spent in oral discussion, and revisions in 
    proposals, if any, resulting from the discussions.
        (iv) During the conduct of discussions, all proposers being 
    considered shall be offered an equitable opportunity to submit cost, 
    technical, or other revisions in their proposals as may result from the 
    discussions. All proposers shall be informed that any revisions to 
    their proposals must be submitted by a common cut-off date in order to 
    be considered. The record should note compliance of the investigators 
    with that cut-off date.
        (c) Significant items for consideration before award:
        (1) Issuance of a Request for Proposal (RFP)--A formal RFP should 
    not be issued to obtain additional information on proposals accepted 
    under the AO process. Additional technical, cost, or other data 
    received should be considered as a supplement to the original proposal.
        (2) Selection of Investigator/Contractor--The selection decision of 
    the Program AA approves the selected investigators and their 
    institutions as the only satisfactory sources for the investigations. 
    The selection of the
    
    [[Page 4488]]
    
    investigator does not constitute the selection of that person's 
    proposed supporting hardware fabricator unless the selection official 
    specifically incorporates the fabricator in the selection decision.
    
    
    1872.703  Application of the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) and 
    the NASA FAR Supplement.
    
        The AO process supplants normal acquisition procedures only to the 
    extent necessary to meet the distinctive features of the process. This 
    process is not intended to conflict with any established statutory 
    requirements.
    
    
    1872.704  Other administrative and functional requirements.
    
        After selection, all other applicable administrative and functional 
    requirements will be complied with or incorporated in any resultant 
    contract.
    
    
    1872.705  Format of Announcement of Opportunity (AO).
    
        Use the following format instructions when drafting AOs:
    
    OMB Approval Number 2700-0085
    
    National Aeronautics and Space Administration
    
    Washington, DC 20546
    
    Announcement of Opportunity
    
    AO No. ________________ (Issuance Date)
    
    (Descriptive Heading)
    
    I. Description of the Opportunity
    
        This section should set forth the basic purpose of the AO and 
    describe the opportunity in terms of NASA's desire to obtain 
    proposals which will meet the stated scientific, applications and/or 
    technological objectives. These objectives may be directed to the 
    generation of proposals for investigations and/or they may pertain 
    to the acquisition of dissimilar ideas leading to selection of 
    investigators, guest observers, guest investigators, or theorists. 
    In those instances where proposals for investigations are sought, 
    this section should describe the requirement, if any, for selected 
    investigators to serve on advisory or working groups. In those 
    instances where the project or program has not yet been approved, a 
    qualifying statement should be included to indicate that this AO 
    does not constitute an obligation for the Government to carry the 
    effort to completion.
    
    II. AO Objectives
    
        This section will give a succinct statement of the specific 
    scientific, applications, and/or technological objective(s) for the 
    opportunity(s) for which proposals are sought.
    
    III. Background
    
        This section should provide an explanation of the context of the 
    opportunity, i.e., information which will help the reader understand 
    the relevance of the opportunity.
    
    IV. Proposal Opportunity Period
    
        This section should provide the proposal opportunity period(s). 
    The following methods may be used individually or in conjunction for 
    establishing the proposal opportunity period(s):
        (a) The AO may be issued establishing a single date by which 
    proposals may be received. However, the AO could provide that the 
    agency may amend the AO to provide for subsequent dates for 
    submission of proposals, if additional investigations are desired.
        (b) The AO may be issued to provide for an initial submission 
    date with the AO to remain open for submission of additional 
    proposals up to a final cutoff date. This final date should be 
    related to the availability of resources necessary to evaluate the 
    continuous flow of proposals and the time remaining prior to the 
    flight opportunities contemplated by the AO.
        (c) The AO may be issued establishing a number of dates by which 
    proposals may be received. Normally no more than three proposal 
    submission dates should be established. The submittal dates may be 
    spread over the number of months most compatible with the possible 
    flight opportunities and the availability of resources necessary to 
    evaluate and fund the proposal. If desired, this section should 
    further inform the reader that if a proposal receives a Category I, 
    II, or III rating but is not selected for immediate support, the 
    proposal may, if desired by the proposer, be held by NASA for later 
    consideration within the ground rules set forth in paragraphs 1 and 
    2. The section should inform the reader that if the person wishes 
    the proposal to be so treated, it should be indicated in the 
    proposal. This section should further indicate that offerors whose 
    proposals are to be considered at a later time will be given the 
    opportunity to revalidate their proposals with their institution and 
    update cost data.
    
    V. Requirements and Constraints
    
        (a) This section will include technical, programmatic, cost, and 
    schedule requirements or constraints, as applicable, and will 
    specify performance limits such as lifetime, flight environment, 
    safety, reliability, and quality assurance provisions for flight-
    worthiness. It will specify the requirements and constraints related 
    to the flight crew and the ground support. It will also include 
    requirements for data analysis, estimated schedule of data shipment 
    to user for observer, need for preliminary or raw data analysis and 
    interim reports. It will specify the planned period (time) for data 
    analysis to be used for budgeting. It will provide any additional 
    information necessary for a meaningful proposal.
        (b) When NASA determines that instrumentation, ground support 
    equipment, or NASA supporting effort will be required or may be 
    expected to be required by the contemplated investigations, the AO 
    should indicate to the potential investigators that they must submit 
    specific information regarding this requirement to allow an in-depth 
    evaluation of the technical aspects, cost, management, and other 
    factors by the Installation Project Office.
    
    VI. Proposal Submission Information
    
        (a) Preproposal Activities--In this section, the AO will 
    indicate requiremets and activities such as the following:
        (1) Submittal of ``Notice of Intent'' to propose (if desired), 
    date for submission, and any additional required data to be 
    submitted. Indicate whether there are information packages which 
    will only be sent to those who submit ``Notice of Intent.''
        (2) Attendance at the preproposal conference (if held). 
    Information should be provided as to time, place, whether attendance 
    will be restricted in number from each institution, and whether 
    prior notice of intention to attend is required. If desired, a 
    request may be included that questions be submitted in writing 
    several days before the conference in order to prepare replies.
        (3) The name and address of the scientific or technical contact 
    for questions or inquiries.
        (4) Any other preproposal data considered necessary.
        (b) Format of Proposals--This section should provide the 
    investigator with the information necessary to enable an effective 
    evaluation of the proposal. The information is as follows:
        (1) Proposal--The AO should indicate how the proposal should be 
    submitted to facilitate evaluation. The proposal should be submitted 
    in at least two sections; (i) Investigation and Technical Section; 
    and (ii) Management and Cost Section.
        (2) Signatory--The proposal must be signed by an institutional 
    official authorized to ensure institutional support, sponsorship of 
    the investigation, management, and financial aspects of the 
    proposal.
        (3) Quantity--The number of copies of the proposal should be 
    specified. One copy should be clear black and white, and on white 
    paper of quality suitable for reproduction.
        (4) Submittal Address--Proposals from domestic sources should be 
    mailed to arrive not later than the time indicated for receipt of 
    proposals to:
    
    National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Office of (Program)
    
    Code-------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    AO No.-----------------------------------------------------------------
    
    Washington, DC 20546
    
        (5) Format--To aid in proposal evaluation, and to facilitate 
    comparative analysis, a uniform proposal format will be required for 
    each AO. The number of pages, page size, and restriction on photo 
    reduction, etc., may be included. The format contained in Appendix C 
    can be used as a guide. Proposers may be requested to respond to all 
    of the items or the AO may indicate that only selected items need be 
    addressed. Using the Appendix format as a guide, specific guidelines 
    may be prepared for the AO or an appropriate form developed.
        (c) Additional Information--This section may be used to request 
    or furnish data necessary to obtain clear proposals that should not 
    require further discussions with the proposer by the evaluators. 
    Other pertinent data could also be included, such as significant 
    milestones.
    
    [[Page 4489]]
    
        (d) Foreign Proposals--The procedures for submission of 
    proposals from outside the U.S. are contained in Appendix B, 
    ``General Instructions and Provisions.'' This section will describe 
    any additional requirements, for example, if information copies of 
    proposals are required to be furnished by the proposer to other 
    organizations at the same time the proposal is submitted.
        (e) Cost Proposals (U.S. Investigators Only)--This section 
    defines any special requirements regarding cost proposals of 
    domestic investigators. Reference than should be made to the cost 
    proposal certifications indicated in Appendix B, ``General 
    Instructions and Provisions.''
    
    VII. Proposal Evaluation, Selection, and Implementation
    
        (a) Evaluation and Selection Procedure.
        (1) This section should notify the proposers of the evaluation 
    process.
        (2) For example, a statement similar to the following should be 
    included:
        ``Proposals received in response to this AO will be reviewed by 
    a subcommittee appointed by the (appropriate Program AA). The 
    purpose of the review is to determine the scientific/technical merit 
    of the proposals in the context of this AO and so categorize the 
    proposals. Those proposals with are considered to have the greatest 
    scientific/technical merit are further reviewed for engineering, 
    integration, management, and cost aspects by the Project Office at 
    the installation responsible for the project. On the basis of these 
    reviews, and the reviews of the responsible Program Office and the 
    Steering Committee, the (appropriate Program Associate 
    Administrator) will appoint/select the investigators/
    investigations.''
        (b) Evaluation Criteria.
        (1) This section should indicate that the selection proposals 
    which best meet the specific scientific, applications, and/or 
    technological objectives, stated in the AO, is the aim of the 
    solicitation. This section should list the criteria to be used in 
    the evaluation of proposals and indicate their relative importance. 
    See NASA FAR Supplement 1872.402 for a listing of criteria generally 
    appropriate.
        (2) This section will also inform the proposers that cost and 
    management factors, e.g., proposed small business participation in 
    instrumentation fabrication or investigation support, will be 
    separately considered.
    
    VIII. Schedule
    
        This section should include the following, as applicable:
        (a) Preproposal conference date.
        (b) Notice of Intent submittal date.
        (c) Proposal submittal date(s).
        (d) Target date for announcement of selections.
    
    IX. Appendices
    
        (a) General Instructions and Provisions (must be attached to 
    each AO).
        (b) Other Pertinent Data, e.g., Spacelab Accommodations Data.
    
    /s/ Associate Administrator
    for (Program)
    
    
    1872.705-1 Appendix A:   General Instructions and Provisions
    
        Include the following in all Announcements of Opportunity:
    
    I. Instrumentation and/or Ground Equipment
    
        By submitting a proposal, the investigator and institution agree 
    that NASA has the option to accept all or part of the offeror's plan 
    to provide the instrumentation or ground support equipment required 
    for the investigation or NASA may furnish or obtain such 
    instrumentation or equipment from any other source as determined by 
    the selecting official. In addition, NASA reserves the right to 
    require use, by the selected investigator, of Government 
    instrumentation or property that becomes available, with or without 
    modification, that will meet the investigative objectives.
    
    II. Tentative Selections, Phased Development, Partial Selections, and 
    Participation With Others
    
        By submitting a proposal, the investigator and the organization 
    agree that NASA has the option to make a tentative selection pending 
    a successful feasibility or definition effort. NASA has the option 
    to contract in phases for a proposed experiment, and to discontinue 
    the investigative effort at the completion of any phase. The 
    investigator should also understand that NASA may desire to select 
    only a portion of the proposed investigation and/or that NASA may 
    desire the individual's participation with other investigators in a 
    joint investigation, in which case the investigator will be given 
    the opportunity to accept or decline such partial acceptance or 
    participation with other investigators prior to a selection. Where 
    participation with other investigators as a team is agreed to, one 
    of the team members will normally be designated as its team leader 
    or contact point.
    
    III. Selection Without Discussion
    
        The Government reserves the right to reject any or all proposals 
    received in response to this AO when such action shall be considered 
    in the best interest of the Government. Notice is also given of the 
    possibility that any selection may be made without discussion (other 
    than discussions conducted for the purpose of minor clarification). 
    It is therefore emphasized that all proposals should be submitted 
    initially on the most favorable terms that the offeror can submit.
    
    IV. Foreign Proposals
    
        See Appendix B, Management Plan and Cost Plan, paragraph (a)(3).
    
    V. Treatment of Proposal Data
    
        It is NASA policy to use information contained in proposals and 
    quotations for evaluation purposes only. While this policy does not 
    require that the proposal or quotation bear a restrictive notice, 
    offerors or quoters should place the following notice on the title 
    page of the proposal or quotation and specify the information, 
    subject to the notice by inserting appropriate identification, such 
    as page numbers, in the notice. Information (data) contained in 
    proposals and quotations will be protected to the extent permitted 
    by law, but NASA assumes no liability for use and disclosure of 
    information not made subject to the notice. To prevent inadvertent 
    disclosure, proposal data shall not be included in submissions (e.g. 
    final reports) that are routinely released to the public.
    
    Restriction on Use and Disclosure of Proposal and Quotation Information 
    (Data)
    
        The information (data) contained in [insert page numbers or 
    other identification] of this proposal or quotation constitutes a 
    trade secret and/or information that is commercial or financial and 
    confidential or privileged. It is furnished to the Government in 
    confidence with the understanding that it will not, without 
    permission of the offeror, be used or disclosed for other than 
    evaluation purposes; provided, however, that in the event a contract 
    is awarded on the basis of this proposal or quotation the Government 
    shall have the right to use and disclose this information (data) to 
    the extent provided in the contract. This restriction does not limit 
    the Government's right to use or disclose this information (data) if 
    obtained from another source without restriction.
    
    VI. Status of Cost Proposals (U.S. Proposals Only)
    
        The investigator's institution agrees that the cost proposal is 
    for proposal evaluation and selection purposes, and that following 
    selection and during negotiations leading to a definitive contract, 
    the institution may be required to resubmit cost information in 
    accordance with FAR 15.8.
    
    VII. Late Proposals
    
        The Government reserves the right to consider proposals or 
    modifications thereof received after the date indicated, should such 
    action be in the interest of the Government.
    
    VIII. Source of Space Transportation System Investigations
    
        Investigators are advised that candidate investigations for 
    Space Transportation System (STS) missions can come from many 
    sources.
    
    IX. Disclosure of Proposals Outside Government
    
        NASA may find it necessary to obtain proposal evaluation 
    assistance outside the Government. Where NASA determines it is 
    necessary to disclose a proposal outside the Government for 
    evaluation purposes, arrangements will be made with the evaluator 
    for appropriate handling of the proposal information. Therefore, by 
    submitting a proposal the investigator and institution agree that 
    NASA may have the proposal evaluated outside the Government. If the 
    investigator or institution desire to preclude NASA from using an 
    outside evaluation, the investigator or institution should so 
    indicate on the cover. However, notice is given that if NASA is 
    precluded from using outside evaluation, it may be unable to 
    consider the proposal.
    
    [[Page 4490]]
    
    X. Equal Opportunity (U.S. Proposals Only)
    
        By submitting a proposal, the investigator and institution agree 
    to accept the following clause in any resulting contract:
    
    Equal Opportunity
    
        During the performance of this contract, the Contractor agrees 
    as follows:
        (a) The Contractor will not discriminate against any employee or 
    applicant for employment because of race, color, religion, sex, or 
    national origin.
        (b) The Contractor will take affirmative action to ensure that 
    applicants are employed, and that employees are treated during 
    employment without regard to their race, color, religion, sex, or 
    national origin. This shall include, but not be limited to, (1) 
    employment, (2) upgrading, (3) demotion, (4) transfer, (5) 
    recruitment or recruitment advertising, (6) layoff or termination, 
    (7) rates of pay or other forms of compensation, and (8) selection 
    for training, including apprenticeship.
        (c) The Contractor shall post in conspicuous places available to 
    employees and applicants for employment the notices to be provided 
    by the Contracting Officer that explain this clause.
        (d) The Contractor shall, in all solicitations or advertisements 
    for employees placed by or on behalf of the Contractor, state that 
    all qualified applicants will receive consideration for employment 
    without regard to race, color, religion, sex, or national origin.
        (e) The Contractor shall send to each labor union or 
    representative of workers with which it has a collective bargaining 
    agreement or other contract or understanding the notice to be 
    provided by the Contracting Officer, advising the labor union or 
    workers' representative of the Contractor's commitments under this 
    clause, and post copies of the notice in conspicuous places 
    available to employees and applicants for employment.
        (f) The Contractor shall comply with Executive Order 11246, as 
    amended, and the rules, regulations, and orders of the Secretary of 
    Labor.
        (g) The Contractor shall furnish to the contracting agency all 
    information required by Executive Order 11246, as amended, and by 
    the rules, regulations, and orders of the Secretary of Labor. 
    Standard Form 100 (EEO-1), or any successor form, is the prescribed 
    form to be filed within 30 days following the award, unless filed 
    within 12 months preceding the date of award.
        (h) The Contractor shall permit access to its books, records, 
    and accounts by the contracting agency or the Office of Federal 
    Contract Compliance Programs (OFCCP) for the purposes of 
    investigation to ascertain the Contractor's compliance with the 
    applicable rules, regulations, and orders.
        (i) If the OFCCP determines that the Contractor is not in 
    compliance with this clause or any rule, regulation, or order of the 
    Secretary of Labor, the contract may be canceled, terminated, or 
    suspended in whole or in part, and the Contractor may be declared 
    ineligible for further Government contracts, under the procedures 
    authorized in Executive Order 11246, as amended. In addition, 
    sanctions may be imposed and remedies invoked against the Contractor 
    as provided in Executive Order 11246, as amended, the rules, 
    regulations, and orders of the Secretary of Labor, or as otherwise 
    provided by law.
        (j) The Contractor shall include the terms and conditions of 
    subparagraph 1 through 9 of this clause in every subcontract or 
    purchase order that is not exempted by the rules, regulations, or 
    orders of the Secretary of Labor issued under Executive Order 11246, 
    as amended, so that these terms and conditions will be binding upon 
    each subcontractor or vendor.
        (k) The Contractor shall take such action with respect to any 
    subcontract or purchase order as the contracting agency may direct 
    as a means of enforcing these terms and conditions, including 
    sanctions for non-compliance; provided, that if the Contractor 
    becomes involved in, or is threatened with, litigation with a 
    subcontractor or vendor as a result of direction, the Contractor may 
    request the United States to enter into the litigation to protect 
    the interests of the United States.
    
    XI. Patent Rights
    
        (a) For any contract resulting from this solicitation awarded to 
    other than a small business firm or nonprofit organization, the 
    clause at 1852.227-70, ``New Technology,'' shall apply. Such 
    contractor may, in advance of contract, request waiver of rights as 
    set forth in the provision at 1852.227-71, ``Request for Waiver of 
    Rights to Inventions.''
        (b) For any contract resulting from this solicitation awarded to 
    a small business firm or nonprofit organization, the clause at FAR 
    52.227-11, ``Patent Rights--Retention by the Contractor (Short 
    Form)'' (as modified by 1852.227-11), shall apply.
    
    
    1872.705-2  Appendix B: Guidelines for Proposal Preparation
    
        The following guidelines apply to the preparation of proposals in 
    response to an AO. The material is a guide for the proposer and not 
    intended to be encompassing or directly applicable to the various types 
    of proposals which can be submitted. The proposer should provide 
    information relative to those items applicable or as required by the 
    AO.
    
    I. Cover Letter
    
        A letter or cover page should be forwarded with the proposal 
    signed by the investigator and an official by title of the 
    investigator's organization who is authorized to commit the 
    organization responsible for the proposal.
    
    II. Table of Contents
    
        The proposal should contain a table of contents.
    
    III. Identifying Information
    
        The proposal should contain a short descriptive title for the 
    investigation, the names of all investigators, the name of the 
    organization or institution and the full name, address, and 
    telephone number of the Principal Investigator.
    
    Investigation and Technical Plan
    
    (a) Investigation and Technical Plan
    
        The investigation and technical plan generally will contain the 
    following:
        (1) Summary. A concise statement about the investigation, its 
    conduct, and the anticipated results.
        (2) Objective and Significant Aspects. A brief definition of the 
    objectives, their value, and their relationships to past, current, 
    and future effort. The history and basis for the proposal and a 
    demonstration of the need for such an investigation. A statement of 
    present development in the discipline field.
        (3) Investigation Approach.
        (i) Fully describe the concept of the investigation.
        (ii) Detail the method and procedure for carrying out the 
    investigation.
    
    (b) Instrumentation
    
        This section should describe all information necessary to plan 
    for experiment development, integration, ground operations, and 
    flight operations. This section must be complete in itself without 
    need to request additional data. Failure to furnish complete data 
    may preclude evaluation of the proposal.
        (1) Instrument Description--This section should fully describe 
    the instrument and indicate items which are proposed to be developed 
    as well as any existing instrumentation. Performance characteristics 
    should be related to the experiment objectives as stated in the 
    proposal.
        (2) Instrument Integration--This section should describe all 
    parameters of the instrument pertinent to the accommodation of the 
    instrument in the spacecraft, Spacelab, Shuttle Orbiter, Space 
    Station, etc. These include, but are not limited to, volumetric 
    envelope; weight; power requirements; thermal requirements; 
    telemetry requirement; sensitivity to or generation of contamination 
    (e.g., EMI gaseous effluent); data processing requirements.
        (3) Ground Operations--This section should identify requirements 
    for pre-launch or post-launch ground operations support.
        (4) Flight Operations--This section should identify any 
    requirements for flight operations support including mission 
    planning. Operational constraints, viewing requirements, and 
    pointing requirements should also be identified. Details of 
    communications needs, tracking needs, and special techniques, such 
    as extravehicular activity or restrictions in the use of control 
    thrusters at stated times should be delineated. Special 
    communications facilities that are needed must be described. Any 
    special orbital requirements, such as time of month, of day, phase 
    of moon, and lighting conditions are to be given in detail. Describe 
    real-time ground support requirements and indicate any special 
    equipment or skills required of ground personnel.
    
    (c) Data Reduction and Analysis
    
        A discussion of the data reduction and analysis plan including 
    the method and format. A section of the plan should include a 
    schedule for the submission of reduced data to the receiving point. 
    In the case of Space Science programs, the National Space
    
    [[Page 4491]]
    
    Science Data Center, Greenbelt, MD, will be the repository for such 
    data and the Department of Interior, Sioux Falls, SD, for earth 
    observations data.
    
    (d) Orbiter Crew and/or Payload Specialist Training Requirement
    
        A description of the tasks required of each crew member 
    (Commander, Pilot, Mission Specialist) or payload specialist should 
    be provided, including the task duration and equipment involved. 
    Indicate special training necessary to provide the crew members or 
    payload specialist(s) with the capability for performing the 
    aforementioned tasks.
    
    Management Plan and Cost Plan
    
    (a) Management Plan
    
        The management plan should summarize the management approach and 
    the facilities and equipment required. Additional guidelines 
    applicable to non-U.S. proposers are contained herein:
    
    (1) Management
    
        (i) The management plan sets forth the approach for managing the 
    work, the recognition of essential management functions, and the 
    overall integration of these functions.
        (ii) The management plan gives insight into the organization 
    proposed for the work, including the internal operations and lines 
    of authority with delegations, together with internal interfaces and 
    relationships with the NASA major subcontractors and associated 
    investigators. Likewise, the management plan usually reflects 
    various schedules necessary for the logical and timely pursuit of 
    the work accompanied by a description of the investigator's work 
    plan and the responsibilities of the co-investigators.
        (iii) The plan should describe the proposed method of instrument 
    acquisition. It should include the following, as applicable.
        (A) Rationale for the investigator to obtain the instrument 
    through or by the investigator's institution.
        (B) Method and basis for the selection of the instrument 
    fabricator.
        (C) Unique capabilities of the instrument fabricator that are 
    not available from any other source.
        (D) Characteristics of the proposed fabricator's instrument that 
    make it an inseparable part of the investigation.
        (E) Availability of personnel to administer the instrument 
    contract and technically monitor the fabrication.
        (F) Status of development of the instrument.
        (G) Method by which the investigator proposes to:
        (a) Prepare instrument specifications.
        (b) Review development progress.
        (c) Review design and fabrication changes.
        (d) Participate in testing program.
        (e) Participate in final checkout and calibration.
        (f) Provide for integration of instrument.
        (g) Support the flight operations.
        (h) Coordinate with co-investigators, other related 
    investigations, and the payload integrator.
        (i) Assure safety, reliability, and quality.
        (j) Provide required support for Payload Specialist(s), if 
    applicable.
        (H) Planned participation by small and/or minority business in 
    any subcontracting for instrument fabrication or investigative 
    support functions.
    
    (2) Facilities and Equipment
    
        All major facilities, laboratory equipment, and ground-support 
    equipment (GSE) (including those of the investigator's proposed 
    contractors and those of NASA and other U.S. Government agencies) 
    essential to the experiment in terms of its system and subsystems 
    are to be indicated, distinguishing insofar as possible between 
    those already in existence and those that will be developed in order 
    to execute the investigation. The outline of new facilities and 
    equipment should also indicate the lead time involved and the 
    planned schedule for construction, modification, and/or acquisition 
    of the facilities.
    
    (3) Additional Guidelines Applicable to Non-U.S. Proposers Only
    
        The following guidelines are established for foreign responses 
    to NASA's AO. Unless otherwise indicated in a specific announcement, 
    these guidelines indicate the appropriate measures to be taken by 
    foreign proposers, prospective foreign sponsoring agencies, and NASA 
    leading to the selection of a proposal and execution of appropriate 
    arrangements. They include the following:
        (i) Where a ``Notice of Intent'' to propose is requested, 
    prospective foreign proposers should write directly to the NASA 
    official designated in the AO and send a copy of this letter to the 
    International Relations Division, Office of External Relations, Code 
    IR, NASA, Washington, DC 20546, U.S.A.
        (ii) Unless otherwise indicated in the AO, proposals will be 
    submitted in accordance with this Appendix excluding cost plans. 
    Proposals should be typewritten and written in English.
        (iii) Persons planning to submit a proposal should arrange with 
    an appropriate foreign governmental agency for a review and 
    endorsement of the proposed activity. Such endorsement by a foreign 
    organization indicates that the proposal merits careful 
    consideration by NASA and that, if the proposal is selected, 
    sufficient funds will be available to undertake the activity 
    envisioned.
        (iv) Proposals including the requested number of copies and 
    letters of endorsement from the foreign governmental agency must be 
    forwarded to NASA in time to arrive before the deadline established 
    for each AO. These documents should be sent to:
    
    National Aeronautics and Space Administration, International 
    Relations Division, Code IR, Office of External Relations, 
    Washington, DC 20546, U.S.A.
    
        (v) Those proposals received after the closing date will be 
    treated in accordance with NASA's provisions for late proposals. 
    Sponsoring foreign government agencies may, in exceptional 
    situations, forward a proposal directly to the above address if 
    review and endorsement is not possible before the announced closing 
    date. In such cases, NASA should be advised when a decision on 
    endorsement can be expected.
        (vi) Shortly after the deadline for each AO, NASA's 
    International Relations Division will be advised the appropriate 
    sponsoring agency which proposals have been received and when the 
    selection process should be completed. A copy of this acknowledgment 
    will be provided to each proposer.
        (vii) Successful and unsuccessful proposers will be contacted 
    directly by the NASA Program Officer coordinating the AO. Copies of 
    these letters will be sent to the sponsoring Government agency.
        (viii) NASA's International Relations Division will then begin 
    making the arrangements to provide for the selectee's participation 
    in the appropriate NASA program. Depending on the nature and extent 
    of the proposed cooperation, these arrangements may entail:
        (A) A letter of notification by NASA.
        (B) An exchange of letters between NASA and the sponsoring 
    foreign governmental agency.
        (C) An agreement or Memorandum of Understanding between NASA and 
    the sponsoring foreign governmental agency.
    
    (b) Cost Plan (U.S. Investigations Only)
    
        The cost plan should summarize the total investigation cost by 
    major categories of cost as well as by function.
        (1) The categories of cost should include the following:
        (i) Director Labor--List by labor category, with labor hours and 
    rates for each. Provide actual salaries of all personnel and the 
    percentage of time each individual will devote to the effort.
        (ii) Overhead--Include indirect costs. Usually this is in the 
    form of a percentage of the direct labor costs.
        (iii) Materials--This should give the total cost of the bill of 
    materials including estimated cost of each major item. Include lead 
    time of critical items.
        (iv) Subcontracts--List those over $25,000, specify the vendor 
    and the basis for estimated costs. Include any baseline or 
    supporting studies.
        (v) Special Equipment--Include a list of special equipment with 
    lead and/or development time.
        (vi) Travel--List estimated number of trips, destinations, 
    duration, purpose, number of travelers, and anticipated dates.
        (vii) Other Costs--Costs not covered elsewhere.
        (viii) General and Administrative Expense--This includes the 
    expenses of the institution's general and executive offices and 
    other miscellaneous expenses related to the overall business.
        (ix) Fee (if applicable).
        (2) Separate schedules, in the above format, should be attached 
    to show total cost allocable to the following:
        (i) Principal Investigator and other Investigators' costs.
        (ii) Instrument costs.
        (iii) Integration costs.
        (iv) Data reduction and analysis including the amount and cost 
    of computer time.
        (e) If the effort is sufficiently known and defined, a funding 
    obligation plan should provide the proposed funding requirements of 
    the investigations by quarter and/or annum keyed to the work 
    schedule.
    
    [[Page 4492]]
    
    1872.705-3  Appendix C:  Glossary of Terms and Abbreviations Associated 
    with Investigations.
    
        Advisory Committee Subcommittee--Any committee, board, commission, 
    council, conference, panel, task force; or other similar group, or any 
    subcommittee or other subgroup thereof, that is not wholly composed of 
    full-time Federal Government employees, and that is established or 
    utilized by NASA in the interest of obtaining advice or 
    recommendations.
        Announcement of Opportunity (AO)--A document used to announce 
    opportunities to participate in NASA programs.
        AO Process--A term used to describe the program planning and 
    acquisition procedure used to acquire investigative effort, initiated 
    by an AO.
        Categorization--The process whereby proposed investigations are 
    classified into four categories: synopsized here as Category I--
    recommended for immediate acceptance; Category II--recommended for 
    acceptance but at a lower priority than Category I proposals; Category 
    III--sound investigations requiring further development; Category IV--
    rejected.
        Co-Investigator (Co-I)--Associate of a Principal Investigator, 
    responsible to the Principal Investigator for discrete portions or 
    tasks of the investigation. A NASA employee can participate as a Co-I 
    on an investigation proposed by a private organization.
        Data Users--Participants in NASA programs, selected to perform 
    investigations utilizing data from NASA payloads or facilities.
        Experiments--Activities or effort aimed at the generation of data. 
    NASA-sponsored experiments generally concern generation of data 
    obtained through measurement of aeronautical and space phenomena or use 
    of space to observe earth phenomena.
        Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR)--The regulations governing the 
    conduct of acquisition.
        Flight--That portion of the mission encompassing the period from 
    launch to landing or launch to termination of the active life of 
    spacecraft. The term shuttle ``flight'' means a single shuttle round 
    trip--its launch, orbital activity, and return; one flight might 
    deliver more than one payload. More than one flight might be required 
    to accomplish one mission.
        Flight Investigaton--Investigation conducted utilizing aeronautical 
    or space instrumentation.
        Flight Opportunity--A flight mission designed to accommodate one or 
    more experiments or investigations.
        Guest Investigators--Investigators selected to conduct observations 
    and obtain data within the capability of a NASA mission, which are 
    additional to the mission's primary objectives. Sometimes referred to 
    as Guest Observers
        Investigaton--Used interchangeably with ``Experiments.''
        Investigation Team--A group of investigators collaborating on a 
    single investigation.
        Investigator--A participant in an investigation. May refer to the 
    Principal Investigator, Co-Investigator, or member of an investigation 
    team.
        Mission--The performance of a coherent set of investigations or 
    operations in space to achieve program goals. (Example: Measure 
    detailed structure of Sun's chromosphere; survey mineral resources of 
    North America.)
        NASA FAR Supplement--Acquisition regulations promulgated by NASA in 
    addition to the FAR.
        NMI--NASA Management Instruction.
        Notice of Intent--A notice or letter submitted by a potential 
    investigator indicating the intent to submit a proposal in response to 
    an AO.
        Payload--A specific complement of instruments, space equipment, and 
    support hardware carried to space to accomplish a mission or discrete 
    activity in space.
        Peer Group--A gathering of experts in related disciplinary areas 
    convened as a subcommittee of the Program Office Steering Committee to 
    review proposals for flight investigations.
        Peer Review--The process of proposal review utilizing a group of 
    peers in accordance with the categorization criteria as outlined in 
    this Handbook.
        Principal Investigator (PI)--A person who conceives an 
    investigation and is responsible for carrying it out and reporting its 
    results. A NASA employee can participate as a PI only on a government-
    proposed investigation.
        Program--An activity involving human resources, materials, funding, 
    and scheduling necessary to achieve desired goals.
        Project--Within a program, an undertaking with a scheduled 
    beginning and ending, which normally involves the design, construction, 
    and operation of one or more aeronautical or space vehicles and 
    necessary ground support in order to accomplish a scientific or 
    technical objective.
        Project Office--An office generally established at a NASA field 
    installation to manage a project.
        Selection Official--The NASA official designated to determine the 
    source for award of a contract or grant.
        Space Facility--An instrument or series of instruments in space 
    provided by NASA to satisfy a general objective or need.
        Steering Committee--A standing NASA sponsored committee providing 
    advice to the Program Associate Administrators and providing procedural 
    review over the investigation selection process. Composed wholly of 
    full-time Federal Government employees.
        Study Office--An office established at a NASA field installation to 
    manage a potential undertaking which has not yet developed into project 
    status.
        Subcommittee--An arm of the Program Office Steering Committee 
    consisting of experts in relevant disciplines to review and categorize 
    proposals for investigations submitted in response to an AO.
        Supporting Research and Technology (SR&T)--The programs devoted to 
    the conduct of research and development necessary to support and 
    sustain NASA programs.
        Team--A group of investigators responsible for carrying out and 
    reporting the results of an investigation or group of investigations.
        Team Leader--The person appointed to manage and be the point of 
    contact for the team and who is responsible for assigning respective 
    roles and privileges to the team members and reporting the results of 
    the investigation.
        Team Member--A person appointed to a team who is an associate of 
    the other members of the team and is responsible to the team leader for 
    assigned tasks or portions of the investigation.
    
    [FR Doc. 97-1864 Filed 1-29-97; 8:45 am]
    BILLING CODE 7510-01-M
    
    
    

Document Information

Effective Date:
1/30/1997
Published:
01/30/1997
Department:
National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Entry Type:
Rule
Action:
Final rule.
Document Number:
97-1864
Dates:
January 30, 1997.
Pages:
4466-4492 (27 pages)
PDF File:
97-1864.pdf
CFR: (93)
48 CFR 1872.705-1)
48 CFR 1872.502(a)(3)
48 CFR 1834.7002(c)(2)
48 CFR 1872.403-1(e))
48 CFR 2.101
More ...