97-103

Procurement Notice


September 2, 2004

REMOVAL OF MIDRANGE PROCUREMENT PROCEDURES

 

BACKGROUND:  The Office of Federal Procurement Policy (OFPP) approved a test of NASA's MidRange Procurement Procedures in 1993.  The objective of the test was to reduce the leadtime and effort associated with the conduct of acquisitions between $25,000 (the small purchase threshold at that time) and $500,000.  OFPP test approval was needed to utilize electronic commerce to publicize and post solicitations along with a waiver to the publicizing/response times required by the FAR.  Subsequent changes to the test program increased the threshold to $10,000,000 for non-commercial items and $25,000,000 for commercial items. The test portion of MidRange procedures (waiver of publicizing/response times) expired in 1997.  The MidRange procedures are no longer considered unique and all the source selection methodologies under NFS 1871, MidRange Procurement Procedures, are directly traceable to FAR Parts 12, 14, and 15. The FAR provides contracting officers with broad discretion and flexibility in the source selection process in order to achieve a best value outcome.  A separate NASA MidRange process is no longer necessary.

   This PN removes Part 1871, MidRange Procurement Procedures, from the NASA FAR Supplement and makes the following changes:

   (a) Increases the threshold for written acquisition plans from $5M to $10M consistent with the exemption that existed for Mid Range acquisitions.

   (b) Increases the threshold for issuance of draft RFPs from $1M to $10M consistent with the exemption that existed for MidRange acquisitions.

   (c) Retained the Source Evaluation Board (SEB) threshold of $50M as the common threshold for the mandatory use of a Mission Suitability Factor with numerical weighting and scoring of subfactors for negotiated acquisitions. 

   (d) Provides that for negotiated acquisitions less than $50M, the contracting officer can use any source selection approach and rating method (including weighting and scoring of subfactors) that will result in the selection of the offer providing the best value to the Government consistent with the source selection requirements of FAR Subpart 15.3.

   (e) Requires contracting officers to document as part of the planning process the source selection approach and the rating method to be used, how it will be used, and how these will result in the selection of the offer representing the best value to NASA.  

 

 ACQUISITIONS AFFECTED BY CHANGES:  All acquisitions previously conducted under MidRange Procurement Procedures.

 

ACTION REQUIRED BY CONTRACTING OFFICERS:  Use the Uniform Contract Format  (UCF) for all non-commercial requirements and for commercial requirements use the format prescribed by FAR Part 12 for all solicitation issued after September 1, 2004.

 

CLAUSE CHANGES:  There are no clause changes as a result of this change.

 

PARTS AFFECTED: Parts 1807, 1812, 1815, 1853, and 1871.

 

REPLACEMENT PAGES:  You may use the enclosed pages to replace Part 1807, Part 1812, Part 1815, and Part 1853 of the NFS.  Part 1871 is removed in its entirety.  There are no replacement pages for Part 1871.

 

TYPE OF RULE AND PUBLICATION DATES:  The removal of Part 1871 was published as a final rule in the Federal Register (69 FR 53652 - 53653) on September 2, 2004.  The remainder of the changes do not have a significant effect beyond the internal operating procedures of the Agency or have a significant cost or administrative impact on contractors or offerors and therefore does not require codification in the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) or publication for public comment

 

HEADQUARTERS CONTACT:  Celeste Dalton, Code HK, (202) 358-1645, email: Celeste.M.Dalton@nasa.gov.

 

 

Tom Luedtke,

Deputy Chief Acquisition Officer/ Director for Procurement

 

Enclosures



PART 1807

ACQUISITION PLANNING

                                                                             

TABLE OF CONTENTS

 

SUBPART     1807.1              ACQUISITION PLANS

1807.103                                  Agency-head responsibilities.

1807.104                                  General procedures.

1807.105                                  Contents of written acquisition plans.

1807.107                                  Additional requirements for acquisitions involving bundling.

1807.107-70                              Orders against Federal Supply Schedule contracts or other

                                                   indefinite-delivery contracts awarded by another agency.

1807.170                                  Acquisition Strategy Meeting (ASM).

 

SUBPART     1807.2              PLANNING FOR THE PURCHASE OF SUPPLIES IN

                                                    ECONOMIC QUANTITIES

1807.204                                  Responsibilities of contracting officers.

 

SUBPART     1807.5              INHERENTLY GOVERNMENTAL FUNCTIONS

1807.503                                  Policy.

 

SUBPART     1807.70            CONSOLIDATED CONTRACTING

1807.7000                                General.

 

SUBPART     1807.71            MASTER BUY PLAN

1807.7100                               General.

1807.7101                               Applicability.

1807.7102                               Submission, selection, and notification procedures.

1807.7102-1                           Submission of Master Buy Plan.

1807.7102-2                           Submission of amendments to the Master Buy Plan.

1807.7102-3                           Selection and notification procedures.

1807.7103                               Format of Master Buy Plan.

 

SUBPART     1807.72           ACQUISITION FORECASTING

1807.7200                               Policy.

1807.7201                               Definitions.

1807.7202                               Responsibilities.

1807.7203                               Forecast data.

 

 

PART 1807

ACQUISITION PLANNING

 

Subpart 1807.1--Acquisition Plans

 

1807.103    Agency-head responsibilities.

   (d)(i)   Except as provided in paragraph (d)(iii) of this section, acquisition plans shall be prepared according to the following: 

               (A)  For acquisitions requiring Headquarters approval, by an Acquisition Strategy Meeting (ASM) (see 1807.170);

               (B)  For acquisitions not requiring Headquarters approval and expected to exceed $5 10 million, by installation-approved ASMs or written acquisition plans; and,

               (C)  For acquisitions not expected to exceed $5 10 million, in accordance with installation procedures.

         (ii)  The estimated dollar amounts shall include all options and later phases of the same program or project.

         (iii) Acquisition plans are not required for the following acquisitions:

               (A)  Architect-engineering services;

               (B)  Broad agency announcements (see 1835.016) or unsolicited proposals;

               (C)  Basic research from nonprofit organizations;

               (D)  Utility services available from only one source;

               (E)  From or through other Government agencies except when the value of the acquisition meets the Master Buy Plan threshold (see 1807.710(a)); or

               (F)  Industrial facilities required in support of related contracts.; or

               (G)  MidRange procedure awards (see 1871).  However, acquisition plans are required for commercial item acquisitions that exceed the MidRange dollar thresholds for noncommercial items.

         (iv) Acquisition plans shall be approved before soliciting proposals.

         (v)  Approval of an acquisition plan does not constitute approval of any special conditions, or special clauses that may be required unless the plan so specifies, and the individual having approval authority is a signatory of the plan.  All required deviations shall be approved through the procedures described in FAR 1.4 and 1801.4.

         (vi) A single acquisition plan may be used for all phases of a phased acquisition provided the plan fully addresses each phase, and no significant changes occur after plan approval to invalidate the description of the phases.  If such significant changes do occur, the plan shall be amended and approved at the same level as the original plan. 

   (e)  Acquisition plans should be prepared on a program or system basis when practical.  In such cases, the plan should fully address all component acquisitions of the program or system.

 

1807.104  General procedures.

   (a)  The acquisition planning team shall obtain input from the center offices responsible for matters of safety and mission assurance, occupational health, environmental protection, information technology, export control, and security.  Their presence on the team shall help to ensure that all NASA acquisitions are structured in accordance with NASA safety, occupational health, environmental, export control, and security policy.  As part of this process, the team shall recommend any appropriate solicitation or contract requirements for implementation of safety, occupational health, environmental, information technology, export control, and security concerns.  (See NPR 8715.3, NASA Safety Manual; NPR 7120.5, NASA Program and Project Management Processes and Requirements; NPR 2810.1, Security of Information Technology, and NPR 1620.1, Security Procedural Requirements, all available at www.nodis.hq.nasa.gov).

 

1807.105  Contents of written acquisition plans.

   Acquisition plans shall address each applicable topic listed in FAR 7.105, as supplemented by this section.  Plans shall be structured by subject heading using each italicized topic heading in the same sequence as presented in the FAR.  Subheadings should be used when appropriate (e.g., the separate items under contracting considerations at 7.105(b)(4)).  Topics not applicable to a given acquisition (e.g., design-to-cost and should-cost are not compatible with service acquisitions), should be marked N/A.  The requirements in FAR 7.105 regarding performance-based contracting methods shall not be limited to acquisition plans for service contracts.

   (a)(1) Describe in nontechnical terms the supplies or services to be acquired.  Include quantities.

   (a)(2) NPR 7120.5 shall be an integral part of acquisition planning for programs and projects subject to its requirements.  If the NPR does not apply, the acquisition plan shall clearly state that fact.  If the NPR does apply, specify whether all required NPR 7120.5 documentation is current and approved (see 1804.7301(b)(2)(i)).  If not, describe the approach for obtaining approval or the authority to proceed without approval before release of draft or final solicitations. For programs and projects under the NPR, all draft or final solicitations subject to, or directly or substantially in support of, those programs or projects shall clearly identify the program or project of which they are part.

   (a)(3) Identify the estimated cost and describe the estimating methodology.

   (a)(5) Specify the delivery or performance period requirements separately by the basic contract, each option, and the total.  Provide supporting rationale, which describes the relationship between the technical requirements and the proposed period of performance, including the basis for the decision regarding duration and the appropriateness of the inclusion of options. 

   (a)(7) Discuss project/program risks (see NPR 7120.5, NASA Program and Project Management Processes and Requirements).  In addition to technical, schedule, and cost risks, the discussion shall include such considerations as: safety and security  (including personnel, information technology, and facilities/property); the need to involve foreign sources (contractor and/or governmental), and risks of unauthorized technology transfer (see NPD 2110.1D and Export Control Program (http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/codei/nasaecp/ecpolicy.html)); and resource risk, including the necessary level and expertise of NASA personnel resources available to manage the project/program.  For each area of risk identified, the discussion shall include a quantification of the relative magnitude (e.g., high, medium, low) together with the specific actions taken to structure the acquisition approach to manage the risks throughout the acquisition process.   For example, this discussion would identify those areas that have safety risk, discuss how safety is addressed in contract requirements and evaluated in the source selection, and how it will be managed and incentivized during contract performance.  Decisions to accept, mitigate, track, and/or research risk factors shall be identified and documented as part of acquisition planning.

   (a)(8) Streamlining applies to all NASA acquisitions.  Describe all planned streamlining procedures.

   (b)(3) Discuss the source selection approach (trade-off, lowest price technically acceptable, combination of approaches) and the rating method (numerical scoring, acceptable/unacceptable, adjectival) to be used, how it will be used and why it is expected to result in the selection of the best value to NASA.  Address how cost realism will be evaluated.

   (b)(4)(A) If an incentive contract is planned, describe the planned incentive(s) and the anticipated effects.

            (B) Describe subcontracting issues, including all applicable subcontracting goals.  (See FAR Part 19 and Part 1819).

   (b)(5)(A) Identify the estimated cost separately by the basic contract, each option and total amount.

            (B) Identify the funding by fiscal year and unique project number (UPN).

            (C) Discuss planned approaches to eliminate funding shortfalls (vs. the estimated cost).

   (b)(6) Identify the type of work statement/specification planned.  Specifically address the applicability of performance-based requirement descriptions and the availability of commercial sources for the supplies/services.

   (b)(10) Address contract management issues, including --

            (A) Planned delegations of administrative functions; and

            (B) When contract changes are anticipated, the plan to manage such changes and the specific measures that will be taken to minimize the issuance of undefinitized contract actions.

(b) (20)  If the period between release of solicitation to contract award is more than 120 calendar days (180 days for formal SEB competitions), explain why that goal cannot be met.

 

1807.107  Additional requirements for acquisitions involving bundling.

   (c)  Requests for approval of proposed bundlings that do not meet the thresholds in FAR 7.107(b) must be sent to the Headquarters Office of Procurement (Code HS).

   (e)  The substantial bundling documentation requirements applies to each proposed NASA bundling expected to exceed $5 million or more.  The contracting officer must forward the documentation along with the measurable benefits analysis required by FAR 7.107(b) to the Headquarters Office of Procurement (Code HS) in sufficient time to allow a minimum of 10 days for review.

 

1807.107-70  Orders against Federal Supply Schedule contracts or other indefinite-delivery contracts awarded by another agency.

   The FAR and NFS requirements for justification, review, and approval of bundling of contract requirements also apply to an order from a Federal Supply Schedule contract or other indefinite-delivery contract awarded by another agency if the requirements consolidated under the order meet the definition of "bundling" at FAR 2.101.

 

1807.170  Acquisition Strategy Meeting (ASM).

   (a)  The ASM is an acquisition plan conducted through a meeting attended by all interested NASA offices.  The online Guide for Successful Headquarters Acquisition Strategy Meetings (ASMs) can be found at the following URL: http://ec.msfc.nasa.gov/hq/library/ASMs.html.  At the meeting, the acquisition plan topics and structure specified in 1807.105 are presented in briefing format, and formal written minutes prepared to summarize the decisions, actions, and conclusions of the ASM members.  The approved minutes, along with the briefing charts, shall be included in the contract file to document completion of the acquisition plan required by 1807.103.

   (b)  The ASM is not a requirements definition meeting.  It is a meeting to seek approval for the proposed acquisition approach for requirements that were previously defined and agreed to by the cognizant offices.

   (c)  Headquarters ASMs will be chaired by the Assistant Administrator for Procurement or designee.  The Headquarters Office of Procurement (Code HS) will prepare the minutes of  Headquarters ASMs and distribute them to all attendees for review prior to approval by the ASM chairperson.

   (d)  For field installation ASMs, the minutes shall be approved in accordance with installation procedures.

 

Subpart 1807.2--Planning for the Purchase of Supplies in Economic Quantities

  

1807.204  Responsibilities of contracting officers.

   (a)  The contracting officer shall transmit in writing to the cognizant inventory management/requirements office either the actual offeror responses or a summary of their salient points.  The transmittal should be made within five working days after the closing date for receipt of offers; however, if a response indicates the potential for a significant savings, it should be transmitted immediately.

 

Subpart 1807.5--Inherently Governmental Functions

 

1807.503  Policy.

   (e)  The field installation requirements office shall provide the contracting officer the written determination that none of the statement of work tasks are inherently governmental.  Disagreements regarding the determination shall be resolved in accordance with installation procedures.  

 

Subpart 1807.70--Consolidated Contracting

 

1807.7000  General.

   The Consolidated Contracting Initiative (CCI) is NASA’s commitment to the cooperative creation and utilization of contracts, whenever practicable, to meet common Agency needs.        CCI aims at improving acquisition efficiency by identifying and logically combining similar requirements.  Complete information on the initiative, with its implementation guidance, is available in the internet (http://prod.nais.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/cci/first.cgi).

 

Subpart 1807.71--Master Buy Plan

 

1807.7100  General.

   The Master Buy Plan provides information on planned acquisitions to enable management to focus its attention on a representative selection of high-dollar-value and otherwise sensitive acquisitions.

 

1807.7101  Applicability.

   (a)  The Master Buy Plan applies to each negotiated acquisition, including supplemental agreements, and acquisitions through or from other Government agencies, where the dollar value, including the aggregate amount of options, follow-on acquisitions, or later phases of multi-phase acquisitions, is expected to equal or exceed $50,000,000.

   (b)  For initial annual Master Buy Plan submission only, each installation shall submit its three largest acquisitions regardless of dollar value and all acquisitions over $50,000,000.

   (c)  The procedure also applies to:

         (1)  Any supplemental agreement that contains either new work, a debit change order, or a credit change order (or any combination/ consolidation thereof), if the absolute value of the actions equals or exceeds $50,000,000 (e.g., the absolute value of a supplemental agreement adding $30,000,000 of new work and deleting $30,000,000 of work is $60,000,000, and is therefore subject to the Master Buy Plan).

         (2)  Any supplement agreement that contains one or more elements (new work and/or individual change orders) of a sensitive nature that, in the judgment of the installation or Headquarters, warrants Headquarters consideration under the Master Buy Plan, even though the value does not equal or exceed $50,000,000.

         (3)  Any cooperative agreement notice where the total value (the Government's contribution plus the contribution of the recipient) of any resulting cooperative agreement is expected to equal or exceed $50,000,000.

         (4)  Any acquisition designated by NASA Headquarters regardless of its value.

   (d)  The Master Buy Plan does not apply to incremental funding actions or termination settlement agreements.

 

1807.7102  Submission, selection, and notification procedures.

 

1807.7102-1  Submission of Master Buy Plan.

   (a)  Prior to July 15th of every year, each installation shall submit to the Headquarters Office of Procurement (Code HS) a Master Buy Plan (electronically or original and eight copies) for the next fiscal year, listing every known acquisition that (1) meets the criteria in 1807.7101, (2) is expected to be initiated in that fiscal year, and (3) has not been included in a previous Master Buy Plan or amendment to a Master Buy Plan.

   (b)  The fiscal year Master Buy Plan shall list all uncompleted acquisitions selected for Headquarters review and approval from prior Master Buy Plans and amendments to Master Buy Plans.  These acquisitions should be listed by the appropriate fiscal year Master Buy Plan and individual item numbers, and should indicate the current status of the individual acquisition documents previously selected for Headquarters review and approval.

   (c)  Plans shall be prepared in accordance with 1807.7103 and shall identify the individual acquisition documents involved for every acquisition listed.  Acquisition documents that may require Headquarters approval will be held in abeyance until receipt of the notification required by 1807.7102-3.  This is not to preclude the planning for or initiation of such documents up to that point where Headquarters approval may be required.

 

1807.7102-2  Submission of amendments to the Master Buy Plan.

   (a)  Acquisitions identified by installations after submission of their Master Buy Plan and meeting the criteria in 1807.7102-1(a) shall be submitted to Headquarters in accordance with 1807.7103 and identified as an amendment to the fiscal year Master Buy Plan submission. 

   (b)  Master Buy Plan submissions should not be accomplished after the fact.  Amendments shall be submitted sufficiently in advance of contract award date to allow Headquarters to select those acquisition documents that will be subject to Headquarters review and approval without creating an unacceptable delay in contract placement.

   (c)  When timely submittal is not possible, the installation shall provide with the amendment a narrative explaining the circumstances leading to the late submittal.  A Master Buy Plan submission for a contract change order expected to meet the criteria in 1807.7101 shall be submitted to Headquarters immediately upon issuance of the change order.

 

1807.7102-3  Selection and notification procedures.

   (a)  The Headquarters Office of Procurement (Code HS) shall select acquisition documents from the Master Buy Plan and amendments to Master Buy Plans to receive Headquarters review and approval and shall designate source selection officials.

   (b)  When, subsequent to document selection or delegation, an acquisition is changed (for example, increase or decrease in dollar amount, change in requirement), canceled, superseded, deferred, or becomes no longer subject to the Master Buy Plan procedures in accordance with the criteria in 1807.7101, the installation shall immediately notify Code HS, giving the reasons.  Code HS shall notify the installation's procurement office in writing of any further action that may be required.

   (c)  Acquisition documents not selected for Headquarters review will be subject to after-the-fact reviews by Headquarters during normal procurement management surveys or other special reviews. Acquisition delegations may subsequently be rescinded if a Headquarters review is deemed appropriate.

 

1807.7103  Format of Master Buy Plan.

   In accordance with the requirements of 1807.7102-1 and 1807.7102-2, installations must prepare Master Buy Plans and amendments to Master Buy Plans in accordance with the Master Buy Plan  Database (MBPD) instructions at http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/procurement/regs/Table1807.doc and submit them in accordance with the MBPD User Manual Instructions listed at http://ec.msfc.nasa.gov/hq/library/masterbuyplan.pdf.

 

Subpart 1807.72--Acquisition Forecasting

 

1807.7200  Policy.

   (a) As required by the Business Opportunity Development Reform Act of 1988, it is NASA

policy to –

         (1) Prepare an annual forecast and semiannual update of expected contract opportunities or classes of contract opportunities for each fiscal year;

         (2) Include in the forecast contract opportunities that small business concerns, including those owned and controlled by socially and economically disadvantaged individuals, may be capable of performing; and

         (3) Make available such forecasts to the public.

   (b) The annual forecast and semiannual update are available on the NASA Acquisition Internet

Service (http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/procurement/).

 

1807.7201  Definitions.

   "Class of contracts" means a grouping of acquisitions, either by dollar value or by the nature of supplies and services to be acquired.

   "Contract opportunity" means planned new contract awards exceeding $25,000.

 

1807.7202  Responsibilities.

   (a)  NASA Procurement Officers shall post the data required by 1807.7203 directly to the NASA Acquisition Internet Service not later than October 1 for the annual forecast and April 15 for the semiannual update.

   (b)  Code HS will manage policy and monitor compliance with the NASA Acquisition Forecast process.

 

1807.7203  Forecast data.

   (a)  The annual forecast shall contain --

         (1)  Summary historical data (based on information provided by the Headquarters Office of Procurement (Codes HC and HS)) on the class of contract opportunities below the simplified acquisition threshold;

         (2)  Identification of all known contract opportunities in excess of the simplified acquisition threshold.  Each such action should be identified as one of the three broad categories of acquisition -- Research and Development, Services, or Supplies and Equipment and shall include the following information:

               (i)  A brief description not to exceed ten typed lines;

               (ii) Approximate dollar value within the following dollar ranges:  $100,000 to $1,000,000; $1,000,000 to $5,000,000; and over $5,000,000;

               (iii) Anticipated time (by fiscal year quarter) for the issuance of the solicitation;

               (iv)  Identification if it is reserved for performance by small business concerns including those owned and controlled by socially and economically disadvantaged individuals;

               (v)  Identification as competitive or noncompetitive; and

               (vi) Identification and telephone number of a center point of contact.

   (b)  The semiannual report shall be an update of the data provided by the annual forecast.  This update should provide information on new requirements not previously reported and on changes in data related to actions previously identified.



PART 1812

ACQUISITION OF COMMERCIAL ITEMS

 

TABLE OF CONTENTS

 

SUBPART     1812.1           ACQUISITION OF COMMERCIAL ITEMS -- GENERAL

 

SUBPART     1812.3              SOLICITATION PROVISIONS AND CONTRACT CLAUSES

                                                   FOR THE ACQUISITION OF COMMERCIAL ITEMS          

1812.301                                Solicitation provisions and contract clauses for the acquisition of commercial items.

1812.302                                 Tailoring of provisions and clauses for the acquisition of commercial items.

 

SUBPART      1812.4             UNIQUE REQUIREMENTS REGARDING TERMS AND        CONDITIONS FOR COMMERCIAL ITEMS

1812.404                                 Warranties.

 

SUBPART     1812.70            COMMERCIAL SPACE HARDWARE OR SERVICES

1812.7000                              Prohibition on guaranteed customer bases for new commercial space hardware or services.

 

 

PART 1812

ACQUISITION OF COMMERCIAL ITEMS

 

Subpart 1812.1--Acquisition of Commercial Items--General

 

Subpart 1812.3--Solicitation Provisions and Contract Clauses

 for the Acquisition of Commercial Items

 

1812.301  Solicitation provisions and contract clauses for the acquisition of commercial  items.

   (f)(i)   The following clauses are authorized for use in acquisitions of commercial items when required by the clause prescription:

            (A)  1852.214-71,  Grouping for Aggregate Award.

            (B)  1852.214-72,  Full Quantities.

            (C)  1852.215-84,  Ombudsman.

            (D)  1852.219-75,  Small Business Subcontracting  Reporting.

            (E)  1852.219-76,  NASA 8 Percent Goal.

            (F)  1852.223-70,  Safety and Health.

            (G)  1852.223-71,  Frequency Authorization.

            (H)   1852.223-72, Safety and Health (Short Form).

(I) 1852.223-73, Safety and Health Plan.

(J) 1852.223-75, Major Breach of Safety and Security.

(K) 1852.228-72, Cross-Waiver of Liability for Space Shuttle Services.

(L) 1852.228-76, Cross-Waiver of Liability for Space Station Activities.

(M) 1852.228-78, Cross-Waiver of Liability for NASA Expendable Launch Vehicles.

(N) 1852.246-72, Material Inspection and Receiving Report.

       (ii)  No other provisions and clauses prescribed in the NFS or center documents shall be used in acquisitions of commercial items, except as permitted by FAR 12.302.

 

1812.302  Tailoring of provisions and clauses for the acquisition of commercial items.

  (c)  The Assistant Administrator for Procurement (Code HS) is the approval authority for waivers.  Requests shall be prepared and submitted in accordance with 1801.471.

 

Subpart 1812.4--Unique Requirements Regarding Terms and

 Conditions for Commercial Items

 

1812.404  Warranties.

   (b)     In acquisitions under the Simplified Acquisition Threshold specified in FAR Part 13, no express warranty should be required other than the offeror's commercial warranty.

 

Subpart 1812.70--Commercial Space Hardware or Services

 

1812.7000  Prohibition on guaranteed customer bases for new commercial space

hardware or services.

   Public Law 102-139, title III, Section 2459d, prohibits NASA from awarding a contract with an expected duration of more than one year if the primary effect of the contract is to provide a guaranteed customer base for, or establish an anchor tenancy in, new commercial space hardware or services.  Exception to this prohibition may be authorized only by an appropriations Act specifically providing otherwise.



PART 1815

CONTRACTING BY NEGOTIATION

 

TABLE OF CONTENTS

 

SUBPART  1815.1  SOURCE SELECTION PROCESSES AND TECHNIQUES

1815.101       Best value continuum.

SUBPART       1815.1            SOURCE SELECTION PROCESSES AND TECHNIQUES

1815.101                                 Best value continuum.

 

SUBPART         1815.2           SOLICITATION AND RECEIPT OF PROPOSALS AND

                           INFORMATION

    1815.201                             Exchanges with industry before receipt of proposals.

    1815.203                             Requests for proposals.

    1815.203-70                        Installation reviews.

    1815.203-71                        Headquarters reviews.

    1815.203-72                        Risk management.

    1815.204                             Contract format.

    1815.204-2                          Part I-The Schedule.

    1815.204-5                          Part IV-Representations and instructions.

    1815.204-70                        Page limitations.

    1815.207                             Handling proposals and information.

    1815.207-70                        Release of proposal information.

    1815.207-71                        Appointing non-Government evaluators as special Government

                                                  employees.

    1815.208                             Submission, modification, revision, and withdrawal of proposals.

    1815.209                             Solicitation provisions and contract clauses.

    1815.209-70                        NASA solicitation provisions.

 

SUBPART     1815.3             SOURCE SELECTION

    1815.300                             Scope of subpart.

    1815.300-70                        Applicability of subpart.

    1815.303                              Responsibilities.

    1815.304                             Evaluation factors and significant subfactors.

    1815.304-70                        NASA evaluation factors.

    1815.305                             Proposal evaluation.

    1815.305-70                        Identification of unacceptable proposals.

    1815.305-71                        Evaluation of a single proposal.

    1815.306                             Exchanges with offerors after receipt of proposals.

    1815.307                             Proposal revisions.

    1815.308                             Source selection decision.

    1815.370                             NASA source evaluation boards.

 

SUBPART      1815.4            CONTRACT PRICING

    1815.403                             Obtaining cost or pricing data.

    1815.403-1                          Prohibition on obtaining cost or pricing data.

    1815.403-170                      Waivers of cost or pricing data.

    1815.403-3              Requiring information other than cost or pricing data.

    1815.403-4                          Requiring cost or pricing data.

    1815.404                             Proposal analysis.

    1815.404-2                          Information to support proposal analysis.

    1815.404-4                          Profit.

    1815.404-470                      NASA Form 634

    1815.404-471                      NASA structured approach for profit or fee objective.

    1815.404-471-1                  General.

    1815.404-471-2                  Performance risk.

    1815.404-471-3                  Contract type risk and working capital adjustment.

    1815.404-471-4                  Other considerations.

1815.404-471-5                                    Facilities capital cost of money.

1815.404-471-6                  Modification to structured profit/fee approach for nonprofit

                                                   Organizations.

    1815.404-472                   Payment of profit or fee under letter contracts.

    1815.406                             Documentation.

    1815.406-1                          Prenegotiation objectives.

    1815.406-170                      Content of the prenegotiation position memorandum.

    1815.406-171                      Installation reviews.

    1815.406-172                      Headquarters reviews.

    1815.406-3                          Documenting the negotiation.

    1815.407                             Special cost or pricing areas.

    1815.407-2                          Make-or-buy programs.

    1815.408                             Solicitation provisions and contract clauses.

    1815.408-70                        NASA solicitation provisions and contract clauses.

 

SUBPART     1815.5             PREAWARD, AWARD, AND POSTAWARD          

                                                  NOTIFICATIONS, PROTESTS, AND MISTAKES

    1815.504                             Award to successful offeror.

    1815.506                             Postaward debriefing of offerors.

    1815.506-70                        Debriefing of offerors - Major System acquisitions.

 

SUBPART   1815.6               UNSOLICITED PROPOSALS

    1815.602                             Policy.

    1815.604                             Agency points of contact.

    1815.606                             Agency procedures.

    1815.606-70                        Relationship of unsolicited proposals to NRAs.

    1815.609                             Limited use of data.

    1815.609-70                        Limited use of proposals.

    1815.670                             Foreign proposals.

 

SUBPART    1815.70            OMBUDSMAN

    1815.7001                           NASA Ombudsman Program.

    1815.7002                            Synopses of solicitations and contracts.

    1815.7003                           Contract clause.

 

 

PART 1815

CONTRACTING BY NEGOTIATION

 

Subpart 1815.1--Source Selection Processes and Techniques

 

1815.101 Best value continuum.

 When a written acquisition plan is not required by 1807.103, the contracting officer must document in the contract file the source selection approach and the rating method to be used, how they will be used, and how these will result in selection of the best value to the government.

Subpart 1815.1--Source Selection Processes and Techniques

 

1815.101 Best value continuum.

 When a written acquisition plan is not required by 1807.103, the contracting officer must document in the contract file the source selection approach and the rating method to be used, how they will be used, and how these will result in selection of the best value to the government.

 

Subpart 1815. 2--Solicitation and Receipt of Proposals and Information

 

1815.201 Exchanges with industry before receipt of proposals.

   (c) (6) (A)  Except for acquisitions described in 1815.300-70(b) contracting officers shall issue draft requests for proposals (DRFPs) for all competitive negotiated acquisitions expected to exceed $1010,000,000 (including all options or later phases of the same project).  DRFPs shall invite comments from potential offerors on all aspects of the draft solicitation, including the requirements, schedules, proposal instructions, and evaluation approaches.  Potential offerors should be specifically requested to identify unnecessary or inefficient requirements.  If the DRFP contains Government-unique standards, potential offerors should be invited to identify voluntary consensus standards that meet the Government's requirements as alternatives to Government-unique standards cited as requirements, in accordance with FAR 11.101 and OMB Circular A-119.  Comments should also be requested on any perceived safety, occupational health, security (including information technology security), environmental, export control, and/or other programmatic risk issues associated with performance of the work.  When considered appropriate, the statement of work or the specifications may be issued in advance of other solicitation sections.

            (B) Contracting officers shall plan the acquisition schedule to include adequate time for issuance of the DRFP, potential offeror review and comment, and NASA evaluation and disposition of the comments.

            (C) When issuing DRFPs, potential offerors should be advised that the DRFP is not a solicitation and NASA is not requesting proposals.

            (D) Whenever feasible, contracting officers should include a summary of the disposition of significant DRFP comments with the final RFP.

            (E) If performance-based payments are planned to be used in a competitive negotiated acquisition, the DRFP shall request potential offerors to suggest terms, including performance events or payment criteria.  Contracting officers shall use that information to establish a common set of performance-based payments parameters in the formal RFP when practicable.

            (F) The procurement officer may waive the requirement for a DRFP upon written determination that the expected benefits will not be realized given the nature of the supply or service being acquired.  The DRFP shall not be waived because of poor or inadequate planning.

   (f)(i) Upon release of the formal RFP, the contracting officer shall direct all personnel associated with the acquisition to refrain from communicating with prospective offerors and to refer all inquiries to the contracting officer or other authorized representative.  This procedure is commonly known as a "blackout notice" and shall not be imposed before release of the RFP.  The notice may be issued in any format (e.g., letter or electronic) appropriate to the complexity of the acquisition.

       (ii) Blackout notices are not intended to terminate all communication with offerors.  Contracting officers should continue to provide information as long as it does not create an unfair competitive advantage or reveal proprietary data. 

 

1815.203 Requests for proposals.

 

1815.203-70 Installation reviews.

   (a) Installations shall establish procedures to review all RFPs before release.  When appropriate given the complexity of the acquisition or the number of offices involved in solicitation review, centers should consider use of a single review meeting called a Solicitation Review Board (SRB) as a streamlined alternative to the serial or sequential coordination of the solicitation with reviewing offices.  The SRB is a meeting in which all offices having review and approval responsibilities discuss the solicitation and their concerns.  Actions assigned and changes required by the SRB shall be documented.

   (b) When source evaluation board (SEB) procedures are used in accordance with 1815.370, the SEB shall review and approve the RFP prior to issuance.

 

1815.203-71 Headquarters reviews.

   For RFPs requiring Headquarters review and approval, the procurement officer shall submit ten copies of the RFP to the Assistant Administrator for Procurement (Code HS).  Any significant information relating to the RFP or the planned evaluation methodology omitted from the RFP itself should also be provided.

 

1815.203-72 Risk management.

   In all RFPs and RFOs for supplies or services for which a technical proposal is required, proposal instructions shall require offerors to identify and discuss risk factors and issues throughout the proposal where they are relevant, and describe their approach to managing these risks.

 

1815.204 Contract format.

 

1815.204-2 Part I - The Schedule.

   (c) To the maximum extent practicable, requirements should be defined as performance based specifications/statements of work that focus on required outcomes or results, not methods of performance or processes.

 

1815.204-5 Part IV - Representations and instructions.

   (b) The information required in proposals should be kept to the minimum necessary for the source selection decision.

 

1815.204-70 Page limitations.

   (a) Technical and contracting personnel will agree on page limitations for their respective portions of an RFP.  Unless approved in writing by the procurement officer, the page limitation for the contracting portion of an RFP (all sections except Section C, Description/ specifications/work statement) shall not exceed 150 pages, and the page limitation for the technical portion (Section C) shall not exceed 200 pages.  Attachments to the RFP count as part of the section to which they relate.  In determining page counts, a page is defined as one side of a sheet, 8 1/2" x 11", with at least one inch margins on all sides, using not smaller than 12-point type.  Foldouts count as an equivalent number of 8 1/2" x 11" pages.  The metric standard format most closely approximating the described standard 8 1/2" x 11" size may also be used.

   (b) Page limitations shall also be established for proposals submitted in competitive acquisitions.  Accordingly, technical and contracting personnel will agree on page limitations for each portion of the proposal.  Unless a different limitation is approved in writing by the procurement officer, the total initial proposal, excluding title pages, tables of content, and cost/price information, shall not exceed 500 pages using the page definition of 1815.204-70(a).  Firm page limitations shall also be established for final proposal revisions, if requested.  The appropriate page limitations for final proposal revisions should be determined by considering the complexity of the acquisition and the extent of any discussions.  The same page limitations shall apply to all offerors.  Pages submitted in excess of specified limitations will not be evaluated by the Government and will be returned to the offeror.

 

1815.207 Handling proposals and information.

 

1815.207-70 Release of proposal information.

   (a) NASA personnel participating in any way in the evaluation may not reveal any information concerning the evaluation to anyone not also participating, and then only to the extent that the information is required in connection with the evaluation.  When non-NASA personnel participate, they shall be instructed to observe these restrictions. 

   (b)(1) Except as provided in paragraph (b)(2) of this section, the procurement officer is the approval authority to disclose proposal information outside the Government.  If outside evaluators are involved, this authorization may be granted only after compliance with FAR 37.2 and 1837.204, except that the determination of unavailability of Government personnel required by FAR 37.2 is not required for disclosure of proposal information to JPL employees.

       (2) Proposal information in the following classes of proposals may be disclosed with the prior written approval of a NASA official one level above the NASA program official responsible for the overall conduct of the evaluation.  If outside evaluators are involved, the determination of unavailability of Government personnel required by FAR 37.2 is not required for disclosure in these instances.

            (i) Proposals submitted in response to broad agency announcements such as Announcements of Opportunity and NASA Research Announcements;

            (ii) Unsolicited proposals; and

            (iii) SBIR and STTR proposals.

       (3) If JPL personnel, in evaluating proposal information released to them by NASA, require assistance from non-JPL, non-Government evaluators, JPL must obtain written approval to release the information in accordance with paragraphs (b)(1) and (b)(2) of this section.

 

1815.207-71 Appointing non-Government evaluators as special Government employees.

   (a) Except as provided in paragraph (c) of this section, non-Government evaluators, except employees of JPL, shall be appointed as special Government employees.

   (b) Appointment as a special Government employee is a separate action from the approval required by paragraph 1815.207-70(b) and may be processed concurrently.  Appointment as a special Government employee shall be made by:

       (1) the NASA Headquarters personnel office when the release of proposal information is to be made by a NASA Headquarters office; or

       (2) the installation personnel office when the release of proposal information is to be made by the installation.

   (c) Non-Government evaluators need not be appointed as special Government employees when they evaluate:

       (1) Proposals submitted in response to broad agency announcements such as Announcements of Opportunity and NASA Research Announcements;

       (2) Unsolicited proposals; and

       (3) SBIR and STTR proposals.

 

1815.208 Submission, modification, revision, and withdrawal of proposals.

   (b) The FAR late proposal criteria do not apply to Announcements of Opportunity, NASA Research Announcements (see 1852.235-72), and Small Business Innovative Research (SBIR) Phase I and Phase II solicitations, and Small Business Technology Transfer (STTR) solicitations.  For these solicitations, proposals or proposal modifications received from qualified firms after the latest date specified for receipt may be considered if a significant reduction in cost to the Government is probable or if there are significant technical advantages, as compared with proposals previously received.  In such cases, the project office shall investigate the circumstances surrounding the late submission, evaluate its content, and submit written recommendations and findings to the selection official or a designee as to whether there is an advantage to the Government in considering it.  The selection official or a designee shall determine whether to consider the late submission.

 

1815.209 Solicitation provisions and contract clauses.

   (a) The contracting officer shall insert FAR 52.215-1 in all competitive negotiated solicitations.

 

1815.209-70 NASA solicitation provisions.

   (a) The contracting officer shall insert the provision at 1852.215-77, Preproposal/Pre-bid Conference, in competitive requests for proposals and invitations for bids where the Government intends to conduct a preproposal or pre-bid conference.  Insert the appropriate specific information relating to the conference.

  (b) When it is not in the Government’s best interest to make award for less than the specified quantities solicited for certain items or groupings of items, the contracting officer shall insert the provision at 1852.214-71, Grouping for Aggregate Award.  See 1814.201-670(b).

  (c) When award will be made only on the full quantities solicited, the contracting officer

shall insert the provision at 1852.214-72, Full Quantities.  See 1814.201-670(c).

   (d) The contracting officer shall insert the provision at 1852.215-81, Proposal Page Limitations, in all competitive requests for proposals.

 

Subpart 1815. 3--Source Selection

 

1815.300 Scope of subpart.

 

1815.300-70 Applicability of subpart.

   (a)(1) Except as indicated in paragraph (b) of this section, NASA competitive negotiated acquisitions shall be conducted as follows:

            (i) Acquisitions of $50 million or more -- in accordance with FAR 15.3 and this subpart.

            (ii) Other acquisitions -- in accordance with FAR 15.3 and this subpart except section 1815.370 and use of a mission suitability factor and numerical scoring is optional and use of a mission suitability factor and numerical scoring is optional.

       (2) Estimated dollar values of acquisitions shall include the values of multiple awards, options, and later phases of the same project.

   (b) FAR 15. 3 and this subpart are not applicable to acquisitions conducted under the following procedures:

       (1) Announcements of Opportunity (see Part 1872).

       (2) NASA Research Announcements (see 1835.016-71).

       (33) The Small Business Innovative Research (SBIR) program and the Small Business Technology Transfer (STTR) pilot program under the authority of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 638).

       (4) Architect and Engineering (A&E) services (see FAR 36.6 and 1836.6).

 

1815.303 Responsibilities.

   (a) The SSA shall be established at the lowest reasonable level for each acquisition. Notwithstanding the FAR designation of the contracting officer as SSA, the SSA for center acquisitions shall be established  in accordance with center procedures.  For acquisitions designated

as Headquarters selections, the SSA will be identified as part of the Master Buy Plan process (see 1807.71).

   (b)(i) The source selection authority (SSA) is the Agency official responsible for proper and efficient conduct of the source selection process and for making the final source selection decision. The SSA has the following responsibilities in addition to those listed in the FAR:

            (A) Approve the source selection source selection approach, rating method, evaluation factors, subfactors, the weight of the evaluation factors and subfactors, when used, and any special standards of responsibility (see FAR 9.104-2) before release of the RFP, or delegate this authority to appropriate management personnel;

            (B) Appoint the source selection team.  However, when the Administrator will serve as the SSA, the Official-in-Charge of the cognizant Headquarters Program Office will appoint the team; and

            (C) Provide the source selection team with appropriate guidance and special instructions to conduct the evaluation and selection procedures.

   (b)(2) Approval authorities for Acquisition Plans and Acquisition Strategy Meetings are in accordance with 1807.103.

 

1815.304 Evaluation factors and significant subfactors.

   (c)(4)(A) The extent of participation of small disadvantaged business (SDB) concerns shall be evaluated as a subfactor under the Mission Suitability factor.  If a Mission Suitability factor is not used, the SDB participation shall be evaluated as a separate factor or subfactor, as appropriate.

            (B) SDB concerns that choose the FAR 19.11 price evaluation adjustment shall receive the lowest possible score/rating under the FAR 15.304(c)(4) evaluation.

 

1815.304-70 NASA evaluation factors.

   (a) Typically, NASA establishes three evaluation factors:  Mission Suitability, Cost/Price, and Past Performance.  Evaluation factors may be further defined by subfactors.  Evaluation subfactors should be structured to identify significant discriminators, or "key swingers" - the essential information required to support a source selection decision.  Too many subfactors undermine effective proposal evaluation.  All evaluation subfactors should be clearly defined to avoid overlap and redundancy.

   (b) Mission Suitability factor.

       (1) This factor indicates the merit or excellence of the work to be performed or product to be delivered.  It includes, as appropriate, both technical and management subfactors.  Mission Suitability shall be numerically weighted and scored on a 1000-point scale. (See 1815.300-70(a)(1)(ii).)

(See 1815.300-70(a)(1)(ii).)

       (2) The Mission Suitability factor may identify evaluation subfactors to further define the content of the factor.  Each Mission Suitability subfactor shall be weighted and scored.  The adjectival rating percentages in 1815.305(a)(3)(A) shall be applied to the subfactor weight to determine the point score.  The number of Mission Suitability subfactors is limited to five.  The Mission Suitability evaluation subfactors and their weights shall be identified in the RFP.

       (3) For cost reimbursement acquisitions, the Mission Suitability evaluation shall also include the results of any cost realism analysis.  The RFP shall notify offerors that the realism of proposed costs may significantly affect their Mission Suitability scores.

       (4) If the solicitation requires the submission of a Safety and Health Plan (see 1823.7001(c) and NPR 8715.3, NASA Safety Manual, Appendix H), safety and health must be a consideration in the evaluation.  The Mission Suitability factor, if used, shall include a subfactor for safety and health.

   (c) Cost/Price factor.  This factor evaluates the reasonableness and, if necessary, the cost realism, of proposed costs/prices.  The Cost/Price factor is not numerically weighted or scored.

   (d) Past Performance factor.

       (1) This factor indicates the relevant quantitative and qualitative aspects of each offeror's record of performing services or delivering products similar in size, content, and complexity to the requirements of the instant acquisition.

       (2) The RFP shall instruct offerors to submit data (including data from relevant Federal, State, and local governments and private contracts) that can be used to evaluate their past performance.  Typically, the RFP will require:

            (i) A list of contracts similar in size, content, and complexity to the instant acquisition, showing each contract number, the type of contract, a brief description of the work, and a point of contact from the organization placing the contract.  Normally, the requested contracts are limited to those received in the last three years.  However, in acquisitions that require longer periods to demonstrate performance quality, such as hardware development, the time period should be tailored accordingly.

            (ii) The identification and explanation of any cost overruns or underruns, completion delays, performance problems, and terminations. 

       (3) The contracting officer may start collecting past performance data before proposal receipt.  One method for early evaluation of past performance is to request offerors to submit their past performance information in advance of the proposal due date.  The RFP could also include a past performance questionnaire for offerors to send their previous customers with instructions to return the completed questionnaire to the Government.  Failure of the offeror to submit its past performance information early or of the customers to submit the completed questionnaires shall not be a cause for rejection of the proposal nor shall it be reflected in the Government's evaluation of the offeror's past performance.

       (4) The contracting officer shall evaluate the offeror's past performance in occupational health, security, safety, and mission success (e.g., mishap rates and problems in delivered hardware and software that resulted in mishaps or failures) when these areas are germane to the requirement.

 

1815.305 Proposal evaluation.

   (a) Each proposal shall be evaluated to identify and document:

       (i) Any deficiencies;

       (ii) All strengths and significant weaknesses;

       (iii) The numerical score and/or adjectival rating of each Mission Suitability subfactor and for the Mission Suitability factor in total, if applicable if applicable;

       (iv) Cost realism, if appropriate;

       (v) The Past Performance evaluation factor; and

       (vi) Any programmatic risk to mission success, e.g., technical, schedule, cost, safety, occupational health, security, export control, or environmental.  Risks may result from the offeror's technical approach, manufacturing plan, selection of materials, processes, equipment, or as a result of the cost, schedule, and performance impacts associated with its approach.  Risk evaluations must consider the probability of the risk occurring, the impact and severity of the risk, the timeframe when the risk should be addressed, and the alternatives available to meet the requirements.  Risk assessments shall be considered in determining Mission Suitability strengths, weaknesses, deficiencies, and numerical or adjectival ratings. Identified risks and the potential for cost impact shall be considered in the cost or price evaluation.

   (a)(1) Cost or price evaluation.

            (A) Cost or pricing data shall not be requested in competitive acquisitions.  See 1815.403-1(b)(1) and 1815.403-3(b).

            (B) When contracting on a basis other than firm-fixed-price, the contracting officer shall perform price and cost realism analyses to assess the reasonableness and realism of the proposed costs.   A cost realism analysis will determine if the costs in an offeror's proposal are realistic for the work to be performed, reflect a clear understanding of the requirements, and are consistent with the various elements of the offeror's technical proposal.  The analysis should include:

                 (a) The probable cost to the Government of each proposal, including any recommended additions or reductions in materials, equipment, labor hours, direct rates, and indirect rates.  The probable cost should reflect the best estimate of the cost of any contract which might result from that offeror's proposal.

                 (b) The differences in business methods, operating procedures, and practices as they affect cost.

                 (c) A level of confidence in the probable cost assessment for each proposal.  

            (C) The cost realism analysis may result in adjustments to Mission Suitability scores in accordance with the procedure described in 1815.305(a)(3)(B).

   (a)(2) Past performance evaluation.

            (A) The Past Performance evaluation assesses the contractor's performance under previously awarded contracts.

            (B) The evaluation may be limited to specific areas of past performance considered most germane for the instant acquisition.  It may include any or all of the items listed in FAR 42.1501, and/or any other aspects of past performance considered pertinent to the solicitation requirements or challenges.  Regardless of the areas of past performance selected for evaluation, the same areas shall be evaluated for all offerors in that acquisition. 

            (C) Questionnaires and interviews may be used to solicit assessments of the offeror's performance, as either a prime or subcontractor, from the offeror's previous customers.

            (D) All pertinent information, including customer assessments and any offeror rebuttals, will be made part of the source selection records and included in the evaluation.

   (a)(3) Technical Evaluation.

            (A) Mission Suitability subfactors and the total Mission Suitability factor shall be evaluated using the following adjectival ratings, definitions, and percentile ranges.

 

ADJECTIVAL RATING

DEFINITIONS

PERCENTILE RANGE

 

Excellent

A comprehensive and thorough proposal of exceptional merit with one or more significant strengths. No deficiency or significant weakness exists.                   

 

91-100

 

Very Good

A proposal having no deficiency and which demonstrates over-all competence.  One or more significant strengths have been found, and strengths outbalance any weaknesses that exist.              

 

71-90

 

Good

A proposal having no deficiency and which shows a reasonably sound response.  There may be strengths or weaknesses, or both.  As a whole, weaknesses not off-set by strengths do not significantly detract from the offeror’s response.      

 

51-70

Fair

A proposal having no deficiency and which has one or more weaknesses. Weaknesses outbalance any strengths.

31-50

 

Poor

A proposal that has one or more deficiencies or significant  weaknesses that demonstrate a lack of overall competence or would require a major proposal revision to correct.

 

0-30

 

            (B) When contracting on a cost reimbursement basis, the Mission Suitability evaluation shall reflect the results of any required cost realism analysis performed under the cost/price factor.  A structured approach shall be used to adjust Mission Suitability scores based on the degree of assessed cost realism.  An example of such an approach would:

                 (a) Establish a threshold at which Mission Suitability adjustments would start.  The threshold should reflect the acquisition's estimating uncertainty (i.e., the higher the degree of estimating uncertainty, the higher the threshold);

                 (b) Use a graduated scale that proportionally adjusts a proposal's Mission Suitability score for its assessed cost realism;

                 (c) Affect a significant number of points to induce realistic pricing.

                 (d) Calculate a Mission Suitability point adjustment based on the percentage difference between proposed and probable cost as follows:

 

Services

Hardware Development

Point Adjustment

 +/- 5 percent

 +/- 30 percent

0

 +/- 6 to 10 percent

 +/- 31 to 40 percent

-50

 +/- 11 to 15 percent

 +/- 41 to 50 percent

-100

 +/- 16 to 20 percent

 +/- 51 to 60 percent

-150

 +/- 21 to 30 percent

 +/- 61 to 70 percent

-200

 +/- more than 30 percent

 +/- more than 70 percent

-300

 

   (a)(4) The cost or price evaluation, specifically the cost realism analysis, often requires a technical evaluation of proposed costs.  Contracting officers may provide technical evaluators a copy of the cost volume or relevant information from it to use in the analysis.

   (b) The contracting officer is authorized to make the determination to reject all proposals received in response to a solicitation.

 

1815.305-70 Identification of unacceptable proposals.

   (a) The contracting officer shall not complete the initial evaluation of any proposal when it is determined that the proposal is unacceptable because:

       (1) It does not represent a reasonable initial effort to address the essential requirements of the RFP or clearly demonstrates that the offeror does not understand the requirements;

       (2) In research and development acquisitions, a substantial design drawback is evident in the proposal, and sufficient correction or improvement to consider the proposal acceptable would require virtually an entirely new technical proposal; or

       (3) It contains major deficiencies or omissions or out-of-line costs which discussions with the offeror could not reasonably be expected to cure.

   (b) The contracting officer shall document the rationale for discontinuing the initial evaluation of a proposal in accordance with this section.

 

1815.305-71 Evaluation of a single proposal.

   (a) If only one proposal is received in response to the solicitation, the contracting officer shall determine if the solicitation was flawed or unduly restrictive and determine if  the single proposal is an acceptable proposal.  Based on these findings, the SSA shall direct the contracting officer to:

       (1) Award without discussions provided the contracting officer determines that adequate price competition exists (see FAR 15.403-1(c)(1)(ii));

       (2) Award after negotiating an acceptable contract.  (The requirement for submission of cost or pricing data shall be determined in accordance with FAR 15.403-1); or

       (3) Reject the proposal and cancel the solicitation.

   (b) The procedure in 1815.305-71(a) also applies when the number of proposals equals the number of awards contemplated or when only one acceptable proposal is received.

 

1815.306 Exchanges with offerors after receipt of proposals.

   (c)(2) A total of no more than three proposals shall be a working goal in establishing the competitive range.  Field installations may establish procedures for approval of competitive range determinations commensurate with the complexity or dollar value of an acquisition.

   (d)(3)(A) The contracting officer shall identify any cost/price elements that do not appear to be justified and encourage offerors to submit their most favorable and realistic cost/price proposals, but shall not discuss, disclose, or compare cost/price elements of any other offeror.  The contracting officer should question inadequate, conflicting, unrealistic, or unsupported cost information; differences between the offeror's proposal and most probable cost assessments; cost realism concerns; differences between audit findings and proposed costs; proposed rates that are too high/low; and labor mixes that do not appear responsive to the requirements.  No agreement on cost/price elements or a "bottom line " is necessary.

            (B) The contracting officer shall discuss contract terms and conditions so that a "model" contract can be sent to each offeror with the request for final proposal revisions.  If the solicitation allows, any proposed technical performance capabilities above those specified in the RFP that have value to the Government and are considered proposal strengths should be discussed with the offeror and proposed for inclusion in that offeror’s "model" contract. If the offeror declines to include these strengths in its "model" contract, the Government evaluators should reconsider their characterization as strengths. 

   (e)(1) In no case shall the contracting officer relax or amend RFP requirements for any offeror without amending the RFP and permitting the other offerors an opportunity to propose against the relaxed requirements.

 

1815.307 Proposal revisions.

   (b)(i) The request for final proposal revisions (FPRs) shall also:

            (A) Instruct offerors to incorporate all changes to their offers resulting from discussions, and require clear traceability from initial proposals;

            (B) Require offerors to complete and execute the "model" contract, which includes any special provisions or performance capabilities the offeror proposed above those specified in the RFP;

            (C) Caution offerors against unsubstantiated changes to their proposals; and

            (D) Establish a page limit for FPRs.

       (ii) Approval of the Assistant Administrator for Procurement (Code HS) is required to reopen discussions for acquisitions of $50 million or more. Approval of the procurement officer is required for all other acquisitions.

       (iii) Proposals are rescored or rerated rerated based on FPR evaluations.  Scoring or rating changes between initial and FPRs shall be clearly traceable.

 

1815.308 Source selection decision.

   (1) All significant evaluation findings shall be fully documented and considered in the source selection decision.  A clear and logical audit trail shall be maintained for the rationale for ratings and scores, including a detailed account of the decisions leading to the selection.  Selection is made on the basis of the evaluation criteria established in the RFP.

   (2) Before award, the SSA shall sign a source selection statement that clearly and succinctly justifies the selection.  Source selection statements must describe:  the acquisition; the evaluation procedures; the substance of the Mission Suitability evaluation; and the evaluation of the Cost/Price and Past Performance factors.  The statement also addresses unacceptable proposals, the competitive range determination, late proposals, or any other considerations pertinent to the decision.  The statement shall not reveal any confidential business information.  Except for certain major system acquisition competitions (see 1815.506-70), source selection statements shall be releasable to competing offerors and the general public upon request.  The statement shall be available to the Debriefing Official to use in postaward debriefings of unsuccessful offerors and shall be provided to debriefed offerors upon request.

   (3) Once the selection decision is made, the contracting officer shall award the contract.

 

1815.370 NASA source evaluation boards.

   (a) The source evaluation board (SEB) procedures shall be used for those acquisitions identified in 1815.300-70(a)(1)(i).

   (b) The SEB assists the SSA by providing expert analyses of the offerors' proposals in relation to the evaluation factors and subfactors contained in the solicitation.  The SEB will prepare and present its findings to the SSA, avoiding trade-off judgments among either the individual offerors or among the evaluation factors. The SEB will not make recommendations for selection to the SSA.

   (c) Designation.

       (1) The SEB shall be comprised of competent individuals fully qualified to identify the strengths, weaknesses, and risks associated with proposals submitted in response to the solicitation.  The SEB shall be appointed as early as possible in the acquisition process, but not later than acquisition plan or acquisition strategy meeting approval.   

       (2) While SEB participants are normally drawn from the cognizant installation, personnel from other NASA installations or other Government agencies may participate.  When it is necessary to disclose the proposal (in whole or in part) outside the Government, approval shall be obtained in accordance with 1815.207-70.

       (3) When Headquarters retains SSA authority, the Headquarters Office of Procurement (Code HS) must concur on the SEB appointments.  Qualifications of voting members, including functional title, grade level, and related SEB experience, shall be provided.

   (d) Organization.

       (1) The organization of an SEB is tailored to the requirements of the particular acquisition.  This can range from the simplest situation, where the SEB conducts the evaluation and fact-finding without the use of committees or panels/consultants (as described in paragraphs (d)(4) and (5) of this section) to a highly complex situation involving a major acquisition where two or more committees are formed and these, in turn, are assisted by special panels or consultants in particular areas.  The number of committees or panels/consultants shall be kept to a minimum.   

       (2) The SEB Chairperson is the principal operating executive of the SEB.  The Chairperson is expected to manage the team efficiently without compromising the validity of the findings provided to the SSA as the basis for a sound selection decision.

       (3) The SEB Recorder functions as the principal administrative assistant to the SEB Chairperson and is principally responsible for logistical support and recordkeeping of SEB activities. 

       (4) An SEB committee functions as a factfinding arm of the SEB, usually in a broad grouping of related disciplines (e.g., technical or management).  The committee evaluates in detail each proposal, or portion thereof, assigned by the SEB in accordance with the approved evaluation factors and subfactors and summarizes its evaluation in a written report to the SEB.  The committee will also respond to requirements assigned by the SEB, including further justification or reconsideration of its findings.  Committee chairpersons shall manage the administrative and procedural matters of their committees.

       (5) An SEB panel or consultant functions as a factfinding arm of the committee in a specialized area of the committee's responsibilities.  Panels are established or consultants named when a particular area requires deeper analysis than the committee can provide.

       (6) The total of all such evaluators (committees, panels, consultants, etc. excluding SEB voting members and ex officio members) shall be limited to a maximum of 20, unless approved in writing by the procurement officer.

   (e) Voting members.  

       (1) Voting members of the SEB shall include people who will have key assignments on the project to which the acquisition is directed.  However, it is important that this should be tempered to ensure objectivity and to avoid an improper balance.  It may even be appropriate to designate a management official from outside the project as SEB Chairperson.

       (2) Non-government personnel shall not serve as voting members of an SEB.

       (3) The SEB shall review the findings of committees, panels, or consultants and use its own collective judgment to develop the SEB evaluation findings reported to the SSA.  All voting members of the SEB shall have equal status as rating officials.

       (4) SEB membership shall be limited to a maximum of 7 voting individuals.  Wherever feasible, an assignment to SEB membership as a voting member shall be on a full-time basis.  When not feasible, SEB membership shall take precedence over other duties.

       (5) The following people shall be voting members of all SEBs:

            (i) Chairperson.

            (ii) A senior, key technical representative for the project.

            (iii) An experienced procurement representative.

            (iv) A senior Safety & Mission Assurance (S&MA) representative, as appropriate.

            (v) Committee chairpersons (except where this imposes an undue workload).

   (f) Ex officio members.

       (1) The number of nonvoting ex officio (advisory) members shall be kept as small as possible. Ex officio members should be selected for the experience and expertise they can provide to the SEB.  Since their advisory role may require access to highly sensitive SEB material and findings, ex officio membership for persons other than those identified in paragraph (f)(3) of this section is discouraged.

       (2) Nonvoting ex officio members may state their views and contribute to the discussions in SEB deliberations, but they may not participate in the actual rating process.  However, the SEB recorder should be present during rating sessions.

       (3) For field installation selections, the following shall be nonvoting ex officio members on all SEBs:

            (i) Chairpersons of SEB committees, unless designated as voting members.

             (ii) The procurement officer of the installation, unless designated a voting member.

            (iii) The contracting officer responsible for the acquisition, unless designated a voting member.

            (iv) The Chief Counsel and/or designee of the installation.

            (v) The installation small business specialist.

            (vi) The SEB recorder.

   (g) Evaluation.

       (1) If committees are used, the SEB Chairperson shall send them the proposals or portions thereof to be evaluated, along with instructions regarding the expected function of each committee, and all data considered necessary or helpful.

       (2)  While oral reports may be given to the SEB, each committee shall submit a written report which should include the following:

            (i)  Copies of individual worksheets and supporting comments to the lowest level evaluated;

            (ii) An evaluation sheet summarized for the committee as a whole; and

            (iii) A statement for each proposal describing any strengths, deficiencies, or significant weaknesses which significantly affected the evaluation and stating any reservations or concerns, together with supporting rationale, which the committee or any of its members want to bring to the attention of the SEB.

       (3)     The SEB process must be adequately documented.  Clear traceability must exist at all levels of the SEB process.  All reports submitted by committees or panels will be retained as part of the SEB records.

       (4)  Each voting SEB member shall thoroughly review each proposal and any committee reports and findings.  The SEB shall rate or score the proposals for each evaluation factor and subfactor according to its own collective judgment.  SEB minutes shall reflect this evaluation process.

   (h)  SEB presentation. 

       (1) The SEB Chairperson shall brief the SSA on the results of the SEB deliberations to permit an informed and objective selection of the best source(s) for the particular acquisition.

       (2) The presentation shall focus on the significant strengths, deficiencies, and significant weaknesses found in the proposals, the probable cost of each proposal, and any significant issues and problems identified by the SEB.  This presentation must explain any applicable special standards of responsibility; evaluation factors and subfactors;  the significant strengths and significant weaknesses of the offerors; the Government cost estimate, if applicable; the offerors' proposed cost/price; the probable cost; the proposed fee arrangements;  and the final adjectival ratings and scores to the subfactor level.

       (3) Attendance at the presentation is restricted to people involved in the selection process or who have a valid need to know.  The designated individuals attending the SEB presentation(s) shall:

            (i) Ensure that the solicitation and evaluation processes complied with all applicable agency policies and that the presentation accurately conveys the SEB’s activities and findings;

            (ii) Not change the established evaluation factors, subfactors, weights, or scoring systems; or the substance of the SEB's findings.  They may, however, advise the SEB to rectify procedural omissions, irregularities or inconsistencies, substantiate its findings, or revise the presentation.

       (4) The SEB recorder will coordinate the formal presentation including arranging the time and place of the presentation, assuring proper attendance, and distributing presentation material.

       (5) For Headquarters selections, the Headquarters Office of Procurement (Code HS) will coordinate the presentation, including approval of attendees.  When the Administrator is the SSA, a preliminary presentation should be made to the head of the contracting activity and to the Official-in-Charge of the cognizant Headquarters Program Office.

   (i)  Recommended SEB presentation format.

       (1) Identification of the Acquisition.  Identifies the installation, the nature of the services or hardware to be acquired, some quantitative measure including the Government cost  estimate for the acquisition, and the planned contractual arrangement.  Avoids detailed objectives of the acquisition.

       (2) Background.  Identifies any earlier phases of a phased acquisition or, as in the case of continuing support services, identifies the incumbent and any consolidations or proposed changes from the existing structure.

       (3) Evaluation Factors, Subfactors, and Elements.  Explains the evaluation factors, subfactor, and any special standards of responsibility.  Lists the relative order of importance of the evaluation factors and the numerical weights of the Mission Suitability subfactors.  Presents the adjectival scoring system used in the Mission Suitability and Past Performance evaluations.

       (4) Sources.  Indicates the number of offerors solicited and the number of offerors expressing interest (e.g., attendance at a preproposal conference).  Identifies the offerors submitting proposals, indicating any small businesses, small disadvantaged businesses, and women-owned businesses. 

       (5) Summary of Findings.  Lists the initial and final Mission Suitability ratings and scores, the offerors' proposed costs/prices, and any assessment of the probable costs.  Introduces any clear discriminator, problem, or issue which could affect the selection.  Addresses any competitive range determination.   

       (6) Significant Strengths, Deficiencies, and Significant Weaknesses of Offerors.  Summarizes the SEB's findings, using the following guidelines:

            (i) Present only the significant strengths, deficiencies, and significant weaknesses of individual offerors. 

            (ii) Directly relate the significant strengths, deficiencies, and significant weaknesses to the evaluation factors, and subfactors.

            (iii) Indicate the results and impact, if any, of discussions and FPRs on ratings and scores.

       (7) Final Mission Suitability Ratings and Scores.  Summarizes the evaluation subfactors, the maximum points achievable, and the scores of the offerors in the competitive range.

       (8) Final Cost/Price Evaluation.  Summarizes proposed costs/prices and any probable costs associated with each offeror including proposed fee arrangements.  Presents the data as accurately as possible, showing SEB adjustments to achieve comparability.  Identifies the SEB's confidence in the probable costs of the individual offerors, noting the reasons for low or high confidence.

       (9) Past Performance.  Reflects the summary conclusions, supported by specific case data.

       (10) Special Interest.  Includes only information of special interest to the SSA that has not been discussed elsewhere, e.g., procedural errors or other matters that could affect the selection decision.

   (j) A source selection statement shall be prepared in accordance with 1815.308.  For installation selections, the installation Chief Counsel or designee will prepare the source selection statement.  For Headquarters selections, the Office of General Counsel or designee will prepare the statement.

 

Subpart 1815.4--Contract Pricing

 

1815.403 Obtaining cost or pricing data.

 

1815.403-1 Prohibition on obtaining cost or pricing data.

   (b)(1) The adequate price competition exception is applicable to both fixed-price and cost-reimbursement type acquisitions.  Contracting officers shall assume that all competitive acquisitions qualify for this exception. 

   (c)(4) Waivers of the requirement for submission of cost or pricing data shall be prepared in accordance with FAR 1.704.  A copy of each waiver shall be sent to the Headquarters Office of Procurement (Code HK).

 

1815.403-170 Waivers of cost or pricing data.

   (a) NASA has waived the requirement for the submission of cost or pricing data when

contracting with the Canadian Commercial Corporation (CCC).  This waiver applies to the CCC and its subcontractors.  The CCC will provide assurance of the fairness and reasonableness of the proposed price.  This assurance should be relied on; however, contracting officers shall ensure that the appropriate level of information other than cost or pricing data is submitted by subcontractors to support any required proposal analysis, including a technical analysis and a cost realism analysis.  The CCC also will provide for follow-up audit activity to ensure that any excess profits are found and refunded to NASA.

   (b) NASA has waived the requirement for the submission of cost or pricing data when contracting for Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) program Phase II contracts.  However, contracting officers shall ensure that the appropriate level of information other than cost or pricing data is submitted to determine price reasonableness and cost realism.

 

1815.403-3 Requiring information other than cost or pricing data.

   (b)     As indicated in 1815.403-1(b)(1), the adequate price competition exception applies to all competitive acquisitions.  For other than firm-fixed-price competitions, only the minimum information other than cost or pricing data necessary to ensure price reasonableness and assess cost realism should be requested.  For firm-fixed-price competitions, the contracting officer shall not request any cost information, unless proposed prices appear unreasonable or unrealistically low given the offeror’s proposed approach and there are concerns that the contractor may default.

 

1815.403-4 Requiring cost or pricing data.

   (b)(2) If a certificate of current cost or pricing data is made applicable as of a date other than the date of price agreement, the agreed date should generally be within two weeks of the date of that agreement.

 

1815.404 Proposal analysis.

 

1815.404-2 Information to support proposal analysis.

   (a)(1)(A) A field pricing report consists of a technical report and an audit report by the cognizant contract audit activity.  Contracting officers should request a technical report from the ACO only if NASA resources are not available.

            (B) When the required participation of the ACO or auditor involves merely a verification of information, contracting officers should obtain this verification from the cognizant office by telephone rather than formal request of field pricing support.

            (C) When the cost proposal is for a product of a follow-on nature, contracting officers shall ensure that the following items, at a minimum are considered:  actuals incurred under the previous contract, learning experience, technical and production analysis, and subcontract proposal analysis.  This information may be obtained through NASA resources or the cognizant DCMA ACO or DCAA.

            (D) Requests for field pricing assistance may be made on NASA Form 1434, Letter of Request for Pricing-Audit-Technical Evaluation Services.

 

1815.404-4 Profit. 

   (b)(1) (i)(a) The NASA structured approach for determining profit or fee objectives, described in 1815.404-471 shall be used to determine profit or fee objectives in the negotiation of contracts greater than or equal to $100,000 that use cost analysis and are:

                      (1) Awarded on the basis of other than full and open competition (see FAR 6.3);

                      (2) Awarded under NASA Research Announcements (NRAs) and Announcements of Opportunity (AO’s); or

                      (3) Awarded under the Small Business Innovative Research (SBIR) or the Small Business Technology Transfer Research (STTR) programs.

                 (b) The rate calculated for the basic contract may only be used on actions under a negotiated contract when the conditions affecting profit or fee do not change.

                 (c) Although specific agreement on the applied weights or values for individual profit or fee factors shall not be attempted, the contracting officer may encourage the contractor to –

                      (1) Present the details of its proposed profit amounts in the structured approach format or similar structured approach; and

                      (2) Use the structured approach method in developing profit or fee objectives for negotiated subcontracts.

            (ii) The use of the NASA structured approach for profit or fee is not required for: 

                 (a) Architect-engineer contracts;

                 (b) Management contracts for operation and/or maintenance of Government facilities;

                 (c) Construction contracts;

                 (d) Contracts primarily requiring delivery of materials supplied by subcontractors;

                 (e) Termination settlements; and

                 (f) Contracts having unusual pricing situations when the procurement officer determines in writing that the structured approach is unsuitable.

   (c)(2) Contracting officers shall document the profit or fee analysis in the contract file.

 

1815.404-470 NASA Form 634.

   NASA Form (NF) 634 shall be used in performing the analysis necessary to develop profit or fee objectives.

 

1815.404-471 NASA structured approach for profit or fee objective.

 

1815.404-471-1 General.

   (a) The structured approach for determining profit or fee objectives (NF 634) focuses on three profit factors:

       (1) Performance risk;

       (2) Contract type risk including working capital adjustment; and

       (3) Other Considerations which may be considered by the contracting officer to account for special circumstances that are not adequately addressed in the performance risk and contract type risk factors.

   (b) The contracting officer assigns values to each profit or fee factor; the value multiplied by the base results in the profit/fee objective for that factor.  Each factor has a normal value and a designated range of values.  The normal value is representative of average conditions on the prospective contract when compared to all goods and services acquired by NASA.  The designated range provides values based on above normal or below normal conditions.  Values outside the designated range must not be used.  In the negotiation documentation, the contracting officer need not explain assignment of the normal value, but must address conditions that justify assignment of other than the normal value.

 

1815.404-471-2 Performance risk.

   (a) Risk Factors.  Performance risk addresses the contractor’s degree of risk in fulfilling the contract requirements.  It consists of three risk factors: 

       (1) Technical – the technical uncertainties of performance;

       (2) Management – the degree of management effort necessary to ensure that contract requirements are met; and

       (3) Cost control – the contractor’s efforts to reduce and control costs.

   (b) Risk factor weighting, values and calculations.  A weighting and value is assigned to each of the risk factors to determine a profit/fee objective. 

   (c) Values. The normal value is 6 percent and the designated range is 4 percent to 8 percent.

   (d) Evaluation criteria for technical risk factor.

   (1) In determining the appropriate value for the technical risk factor, the contracting officer shall review the contract requirements and focus on the critical performance elements in the statement of work or specifications.  Contracting officers shall consider the –

            (i) Technology being applied or developed by the contractor;

            (ii) Technical complexity;

            (iii) Program maturity;

            (iv) Performance specifications and tolerances;

            (v) Delivery schedule; and

            (vi) Extent of a warranty or guarantee.

   (2) Above normal conditions indicating substantial technical risk. 

            (i) The contracting officer may assign a higher than normal value in those cases where there is a substantial technical risk, such as when –

                 (A) The contractor is either developing or applying advanced technologies;

                 (B) Items are being manufactured using specifications with stringent tolerance limits;

                 (C) The efforts require highly skilled personnel or require the use of state-of-the-art machinery;

                 (D)  The services or analytical efforts are extremely important to the government and must be performed to exacting standards;

                 (E)  The contractor’s independent development and investment has reduced the Government’s risk or cost;

                 (F)  The contractor has accepted an accelerated delivery schedule to meet the Government’s requirements; or

                 (G)  The contractor has assumed additional risk through warranty provisions.

            (ii)  The contracting officer may assign a value significantly above normal.  A maximum value may be assigned when the effort involves–

                 (A)  Extremely complex, vital efforts to overcome difficult technical obstacles that require personnel with exceptional abilities, experience, and professional credentials;

                 (B)  Development or initial production of a new item, particularly if performance or quality specifications are tight; or

                 (C)  A high degree of development or production concurrency.

(3)  Below normal conditions indicating lower than normal technical risk.

            (i)  The contracting officer may assign a lower than normal value in those cases where the technical risk is low, such as when the –

                 (A)  Acquisition is for off-the-shelf items;

                 (B)  Requirements are relatively simple;

                 (C)  Technology is not complex;

                 (D)  Efforts do not require highly skilled personnel;

                 (E)  Efforts are routine; or

                 (F)  Acquisition is a follow-on effort or a repetitive type acquisition.

            (ii)  The contracting officer may assign a value significantly below normal.  A minimum value may be justified when the effort involves –

                 (A)  Routine services;

                 (B)  Production of simple items;

                 (C)  Rote entry or routine integration of Government-furnished information; or

                 (D)  Simple operations with Government-furnished property.

   (e)  Evaluation criteria for management risk factor.

   (1)  In determining the appropriate value for the management risk factor, the contracting officer shall review the contract requirements and focus on the critical performance elements in the statement of work or specifications.  Contracting officers shall –

            (i)   Assess the contractor’s management and internal control systems using contracting office information and reviews made by contract administration offices;

            (ii)  Assess the management involvement expected on the prospective contract action; and

            (iii) Consider the degree of cost mix as an indication of the types of resources applied and value added by the contractor.

   (2)  Above normal conditions indicating substantial management risk. 

            (i)  The contracting officer may assign a higher than normal value when the management effort is intense, such as when –

                 (A)  The contractor’s value added is both considerable and reasonably difficult; or

                 (B)  The effort involves a high degree of integration and coordination.

            (ii) The contracting officer may justify a maximum value when the effort –

                 (A)  Requires large-scale integration of the most complex nature;

                 (B)  Involves major international activities with significant management coordination; or

                 (C)  Has critically important milestones.

   (3)  Below normal conditions indicating lower than normal management risk.

       (i)  The contracting officer may assign a lower than normal value when the management effort is minimal, such as when –

                 (A)  The program is mature and many end item deliveries have been made;

                 (B)  The contractor adds minimum value to an item;

                 (C)  The efforts are routine and require minimal supervision;

                 (D)  The contractor fails to provide an adequate analysis of subcontractor costs; or

                 (E)  The contractor does not cooperate in the evaluation and negotiation of the proposal.

            (ii)  The contracting officer may assign a value significantly below normal.  A minimum value may be assigned when –

                 (A)  Reviews performed by the field administration offices disclose unsatisfactory management and internal control systems (e.g., quality assurance, property control, safety, security); or

                 (B)  The effort requires an unusually low degree of management involvement.

   (f)  Evaluation criteria for cost control risk factor.

       (1)  In determining the appropriate value for the cost control risk factor, the contracting officer shall –

            (i)   Evaluate the expected reliability of the contractor’s cost estimates (including the contractor’s cost estimating system);

            (ii)  Evaluate the contractor’s cost reduction initiatives  (e.g., competition advocacy programs);

            (iii) Assess the adequacy of the contractor’s management approach to controlling cost and schedule; and

            (iv) Evaluate any other factors that affect the contractor’s ability to meet the cost targets (e.g., foreign currency exchange rates and inflation rates).

   (2)  Above normal conditions indicating substantial cost control risk.

       (i)  The contracting officer may assign a value higher than normal value if the contractor can demonstrate a highly effective cost control program, such as when –

         (A)  The contractor has an aggressive cost reduction program that has demonstrable benefits;

         (B)  The contractor uses a high degree of subcontract competition; or

         (C)  The contractor has a proven record of cost tracking and control.

(3)  Below normal conditions indicating lower than normal cost control risk.

            (i)  The contracting officer may assign a lower than normal value in those cases where the contractor demonstrates minimal concern for cost control, such as when –

                 (A)  The contractor’s cost estimating system is marginal;

                 (B)  The contractor has made minimal effort to initiate cost reduction programs;

                 (C)  The contractor’s cost proposal is inadequate; or

                 (D)  The contractor has a record of cost overruns or the indication of unreliable cost estimates and lack of cost control.

 

1815.404-471-3     Contract type risk and working capital adjustment.

   (a)  Risk factors   The contract type risk factor focuses on the degree of cost risk accepted by the contractor under varying contract types.  The working capital adjustment is an adjustment added to the profit objective for contract type risk.  It applies to fixed-price type contracts that provide for progress payments.  Though it uses a formula approach, it is not intended to be an exact calculation of the cost of working capital.  Its purpose is to give general recognition to the contractor’s cost of working capital under varying contract circumstances, financing policies, and the economic environment.  This adjustment is limited to a maximum of 2 percent.

   (b)  Risk factor values and calculations.  A risk value is assigned to calculate the profit or fee objective for contract type.  A contract length factor is assigned and applied to costs financed when a working capital adjustment is appropriate. This calculation is only performed when the prospective contract is a fixed-price contract containing provisions for progress payments.

   (c)  Values:  Normal and designated ranges.

 

Contract Type

Notes

Normal Value (Percent)

Designated Range (Percent)

Firm-fixed-price, no financing

(1)

5

4 to 6

Firm-fixed-price with performance-based payments

(6)

4

2.5 to 5.5

Firm-fixed-price with progress payments

(2)

3

2 to 4

Fixed-price-incentive, no financing

(1)

3

2 to 4

Fixed-price-incentive, with performance-based payments

(6)

2

.5 to 3.5

Fixed-price, redeterminable

(3)

--

 --

Fixed-price-incentive, with progress payments

(2)

1

0 to 2

Cost-plus-incentive-fee

(4)

1

0 to 2

Cost-plus-award fee

(4)

.75

.5 to 1.5

Cost-plus-fixed fee

(4)

.5

0 to 1

Time-and materials

(5)

.5

0 to 1

Labor-hour

(5)

.5

0 to 1

Firm-fixed-price, level-of-effort, term

(5)

.5

0 to 1

 

       (1)  “No financing,” means that the contract either does not provide progress or performance based payments, or provides them only on a limited basis.  Do not compute a working capital adjustment.

       (2)  When progress payments are present, compute a working capital adjustment.

       (3)  For purposes of assigning profit values, treat a fixed-price redeterminable contract as if it were a fixed-price-incentive contract with below normal provisions.

       (4)  Cost-plus contracts shall not receive the working capital adjustment.

       (5)  These types of contracts are considered cost-plus-fixed-fee contracts for the purposes of assigning profit values.  Do not compute the working capital adjustment.  However, higher than normal values may be assigned within the designated range to the extent that portions of cost are fixed.         

       (6)  When performance-based payments are used, do not compute a working capital adjustment.

   (d)  Evaluation criteria.

       (1)  General.  The contracting officer shall consider elements that affect contract type risk such as –

            (i)   Length of contract;

            (ii)  Adequacy of cost projection data;

            (iii) Economic environment;

            (iv) Nature and extent of subcontracted activity;

            (v)  Protection provided to the contractor under contract provisions (e.g., economic price adjustment clauses);

            (vi) The ceilings and share lines contained in the incentive provisions; and

            (vii) The rate, frequency, and risk to the contractor of performance-based payments, if provided.

       (2)  Mandatory.  The contracting officer shall assess the extent to which costs have been incurred prior to definitization of the contract.  When costs have been incurred prior to definitization, generally regard the contract type risk to be in the low end of the designated range.  If a substantial portion of the costs have been incurred prior to definitization, the contracting officer may assign a value as low as 0 percent regardless of contract type.

       (3)  Above normal conditions.  The contracting officer may assign a higher than normal value when there is substantial contract type risk.  Conditions indicating higher than normal contract type risk are –

            (i)   Efforts where there is minimal cost history;

            (ii)  Long-term contracts without provisions protecting the contractor, particularly when there is considerable economic uncertainty;

            (iii) Incentive provisions that place a high degree of risk on the contractor;

            (iv) Performance-based payments totaling less than the maximum allowable amount(s) specified at FAR 32.1004(b)(2); or

            (v)  An aggressive performance-based payment schedule that increases risk.

       (4)  Below normal conditions.  The contracting officer may assign a lower than normal value when the contract type risk is low.  Conditions indicating lower than normal contract type risk are:

            (i)   Very mature product line with extensive cost history;

            (ii)  Relatively short-term contracts;

            (iii) Contractual provisions that substantially reduce the contractor’s risk, e.g. economic price adjustment provisions; and

            (iv) Incentive provisions that place a low amount of risk on the contractor.

            (v)  A performance-based payment schedule that is routine with minimal risk.

   (e)  Costs financed.

       (1)  Costs financed equal the total costs multiplied by the percent of costs financed by the contractor.

       (2)  Total costs may be reduced as appropriate when –

            (i)   The contractor has little cash investment (e.g., subcontractor progress payments are liquidated late in the period of performance);

            (ii)  Some costs are covered by special funding arrangements, such as advance payments;

       (3)  The portion financed by the contractor is generally the portion not covered by progress payments.  (i.e. – for progress payments: 100 percent minus the customary progress payments rate.  For example, if a contractor receives progress payments at 75 percent, the portion financed by the contractor is 25 percent.  On contracts that provide progress payments to small business, use the customary progress payment rate for large businesses.) 

   (f)  Contract length factor.

   (1)  This is the period of time that the contractor has a working capital investment in the contract.  It –

            (i)  Is based on the time necessary for the contractor to complete the substantive portion of the work;

            (ii)  Is not necessarily the period of time between contract award and final delivery, as periods of minimal effort should be excluded;

            (iii) Should not include periods of performance contained in option provisions when calculating the objective for the base period; and

            (iv) Should not, for multiyear contracts, include periods of performance beyond that required to complete the initial year's requirements.

       (2)  The contracting officer –

            (i)  Should use the following to select the contract length factor:

 

Period to perform substantive portion (in months)

Contract length factor

21 or less …

.40

22 to 27 …

.65

28 to 33 …

.90

34 to 39 …

1.15

40 or more …

1.40

 

            (ii)  Should develop a weighted average contract length when the contract has multiple deliveries; and

            (iii) May use sampling techniques provided they produce a representative result.

       (3)  Example:  A prospective contract has a performance period of 40 months with end items being delivered in the 34th, 36th, 38th and 40th months of the contract.  The average period is 37 months and the contract length factor is 1.15.

 

 1815.404-471-4 Other considerations.

   (a)  Other Considerations may be included by the contracting officer to account for special circumstances, such as contractor efficiencies or unusual acceptance of contractual or program risks that are not adequately addressed in the structured approach calculations described in 1815.404-471-2 or 1815.404-471-3.  The total adjustment resulting from Other Considerations may be positive or negative but in no case should the total adjustment exceed +/-5 percent.

   (b)  The contracting officer shall analyze and verify information provided by the contractor that demonstrates that the special circumstances being recognized under this section –

       (1)  Provide substantial benefits to the Government under the contract and/or overall program; 

       (2)  Have not been recognized in the structured approach calculations; and

       (3)  Represent unusual and innovative actions or acceptance of risk by the contractor.

   (c)  Examples of special circumstances include, but are not limited to the following:

       (1)  Consistent demonstration by the contractor of excellent past performance within the last three years, with a special emphasis on excellence in safety, may merit an upward adjustment of as much as 1 percent.  Similarly, an assessment of poor past performance, especially in the area of safety, may merit a downward adjustment of as much -1 percent.  This consideration is especially important when negotiating modifications or changes to an ongoing contract.

       (2)  Extraordinary steps to achieve the Government’s socio-economic goals, environmental goals, and public policy goals established by law or regulation that are sufficiently unique or unusual may merit an upward adjustment of as much as .5 percent. Similarly, for non-participation in or violation of Federal programs, the contracting officer may adjust the objective by as much as -.5 percent.  However, this consideration does not apply to the utilization of small disadvantaged businesses.  Incentives for use of these firms may only be structured according to FAR 19.1203 and 19.1204(c).

       (3)  Consideration of up to  1 percent should be given when contract performance requires the expenditure of significant corporate capital resources. 

       (4)  Unusual requests for use of government facilities and property may merit a downward adjustment of as much as - 1 percent.

       (5)  Cost efficiencies arising from innovative product design, process improvements, or integration of a life cycle cost approach for the design and development of systems that minimize maintenance and operations costs, that have not been recognized in Performance Risk or Contract Type Risk, may merit an upward adjustment. This factor is intended to recognize and reward improvements resulting from better ideas and management that will benefit the Government in the contract and/or program.

   (d)  Other considerations need not be limited to situations that increase profit/fee levels.  A negative consideration may be appropriate when there is a significant expectation of near-term spin-off benefits as a direct result of the contract.

 

1815.404-471-5    Facilities capital cost of money.

   (a)  When facilities capital cost of money is included as an item of cost in the contractor’s proposal, it shall not be included in the cost base for calculating profit/fee.  In addition, a reduction in the profit/fee objective shall be made in the amount equal to the facilities capital cost of money allowed in accordance with FAR 31.205-10(b) or 1 percent of the cost base, whichever is less.

   (b)  CAS 417, cost of money as an element of the cost of capital assets under construction, should not appear in contract proposals.  These costs are included in the initial value of a facility for purposes of calculating depreciation under CAS 414.

 

1815.404-471-6 Modification to structured profit/fee approach for nonprofit organizations.

   (a)  The structured approach was designed for determining profit or fee objectives for

commercial organizations.   However, the structured approach must be used as a basis for

arriving at profit/fee objectives for nonprofit organizations (FAR Subpart 31.7), excluding

educational institutions (FAR Subpart 31.3), in accordance with paragraph (b) of this section.  It is NASA policy not to pay profit or fee on contracts with educational institutions.

   (b)  For contracts with nonprofit organizations under which profit or fee is involved, an adjustment of up to 3 percent of the costs in Block 13 of NASA Form 634 must be

subtracted from the total profit/fee objective. In developing this adjustment, it is necessary to consider the following factors:

       (1)  Tax position benefits;

       (2)  Granting of financing through letters of credit;

       (3)  Facility requirements of the nonprofit organization; and

       (4) Other pertinent factors that may work to either the advantage or disadvantage of the contractor in its position as a nonprofit organization.

 

1815.404-472    Payment of profit or fee under letter contracts.

   NASA's policy is to pay profit or fee only on definitized contracts.

 

1815.406    Documentation.

 

1815.406-1    Prenegotiation objectives.  

   (b)(i)   Before conducting negotiations requiring installation or Headquarters review, contracting officers or their representatives shall prepare a prenegotiation position memorandum setting forth the technical, business, contractual, pricing, and other aspects to be negotiated.

       (ii)  A prenegotiation position memorandum is not required for contracts awarded under the  competitive negotiated procedures of FAR 15.3 and 1815.3.

 

1815.406-170    Content of the prenegotiation position memorandum.

   The prenegotiation position memorandum (PPM) should fully explain the contractor and Government positions.  Since the PPM will ultimately become the basis for negotiation, it should be structured to track to the price negotiation memorandum (see FAR 15.406-3 and 1815.406-3).  In addition to the information described in FAR 15.406-1 and, as appropriate, 15.406-3(a), the PPM should address the following subjects, as applicable, in the order presented:

   (a)  Introduction.   Include a description of the acquisition and a history of prior acquisitions for the same or similar items. Address the extent of competition and its results.  Identify the contractor and place of performance (if not evident from the description of the acquisition).  Document compliance with law, regulations and policy, including JOFOC, synopsis, EEO compliance, and current status of contractor systems (see FAR 15.406-3(a)(4)).  In addition, the negotiation schedule should be addressed and the Government negotiation team members identified by name and position.

   (b)  Type of contract contemplated.   Explain the type of contract contemplated and the reasons for its suitability.

   (c)  Special features and requirements.   In this area, discuss any special features (and related cost impact) of the acquisition, including such items as --

       (1)  Letter contract or precontract costs authorized and incurred;

       (2)  Results of preaward survey;

       (3)  Contract option requirements;

       (4)  Government property to be furnished;

       (5)  Contractor/Government investment in facilities and equipment (and any modernization to be provided by the contractor/Government);

       (6)  Any deviations, special clauses, or unusual conditions anticipated, for example, unusual financing, warranties, EPA clauses and when approvals were obtained, if required; and

       (7)  Any risk management issues, e.g., mission success, safety, occupational health, information technology, export control, security, and environmental risks.

   (d)  Cost analysis.  For the basic requirement, and any option, include--

       (1)  A parallel tabulation, by element of cost and profit/fee, of the contractor's proposal and the Government's negotiation objective.  The negotiation objective represents the fair and reasonable price the Government is willing to pay for the supplies/services.  For each element of cost, compare the contractor's proposal and the Government position, explain the differences and how the Government position was developed, including the estimating assumptions and projection techniques employed, and how the positions differ in approach.  Include a discussion of excessive wages found (if applicable) and their planned resolution.  Explain how historical costs, including costs incurred under a letter contract (if applicable), were used in developing the negotiation objective.

       (2)  Significant differences between the field pricing report (including any audit reports) and the negotiation objectives and/or contractor's proposal shall be highlighted and explained.  For each proposed subcontract meeting the requirement of FAR 15.404-3(c), there shall be a discussion of the price and, when appropriate, cost analyses performed by the contracting officer, including the negotiation objective for each such subcontract.  The discussion of each major subcontract shall include the type of subcontract, the degree of competition achieved by the prime contractor, the price and, when appropriate, cost analyses performed on the subcontractor's proposal by the prime contractor, any unusual or special pricing or finance arrangements, and the current status of subcontract negotiations.

       (3)  The rationale for the Government's profit/fee objectives and, if appropriate, a completed copy of the NASA Form 634, Structured Approach--Profit/Fee Objective, and DD Form 1861, Contract Facilities Capital Cost of Money, should be included.  For incentive and award fee contracts, describe the planned arrangement in  terms of share lines, ceilings, and cost risk.

   (e)  Negotiation approval sought.   The PPM represents the Government's realistic assessment of the fair and reasonable price for the supplies and services to be acquired.  If negotiations subsequently demonstrate that a higher dollar amount (or significant term or condition) is reasonable, the contracting officer shall document the rationale for such a change and request approval to amend the PPM from the original approval authority.

 

1815.406-171    Installation reviews.

   Each contracting activity shall establish procedures to review all prenegotiation position memoranda.  The scope of coverage, exact procedures to be followed, levels of management review, and contract file documentation requirements  should be directly related to the dollar value and complexity of the acquisition.  The primary purpose of these reviews is to ensure that the negotiator, or negotiation team, is thoroughly prepared to enter into negotiations with a well-conceived, realistic, and fair plan.

 

1815.406-172    Headquarters reviews. 

   (a)  When a prenegotiation position has been selected for Headquarters review and approval, the contracting activity shall submit to the Office of Procurement (Code HS) one copy each of the prenegotiation position memorandum, the contractor's proposal, the Government technical evaluation, and all pricing reports (including any audit reports).

   (b)  The required information described in paragraph (a) of this section shall be furnished to Headquarters as soon as practicable and sufficiently in advance of the planned commencement of negotiations to allow a reasonable period of time for Headquarters review.  Electronic submittal is acceptable.

 

1815.406-3    Documenting the negotiation.  

   (a)(i)  The price negotiation memorandum (PNM) serves as a detailed summary of:  the technical, business, contractual, pricing (including price reasonableness), and other elements of the contract negotiated; and the methodology and rationale used in arriving at the final negotiated agreement.

       (ii)  A PNM is not required for a contract awarded under competitive negotiated procedures.  However, the information required by FAR 15.406-3 shall be reflected in the evaluation and selection documentation to the extent applicable.

       (iii) When the PNM is a "stand-alone" document, it shall contain the information required by the FAR and NFS for both PPMs and PNMs. However, when a PPM has been prepared under 1815.406-1, the subsequent PNM need only provide any information required by FAR 15.406-3 that was not provided in the PPM, as well as any changes in the status of factors affecting cost elements (e.g., use of different rates, hours, or subcontractors; wage rate determinations; or the current status of the contractor's systems).

 

1815.407    Special cost or pricing areas.

 

1815.407-2    Make-or-buy programs.  

   (e)(1)  Make-or-buy programs should not include items or work efforts estimated to cost less than $500,000.

 

1815.408    Solicitation provisions and contract clauses.

 

1815.408-70    NASA solicitation provisions and contract clauses. 

   (a)  The contracting officer shall insert the provision at 1852.215-78, Make-or-Buy Program Requirements, in solicitations requiring make-or-buy programs as provided in FAR 15.407-2(c).  This provision shall be used in conjunction with the clause at FAR 52.215-9, Changes or Additions to Make-or-Buy Program.  The contracting officer may add additional paragraphs identifying any other information required in order to evaluate the program.

   (b)  The contracting officer shall insert the clause at 1852.215-79, Price Adjustment for "Make-or-Buy" Changes, in contracts that include FAR 52.215-9 with its Alternate I or II.  Insert in the appropriate columns the items that will be subject to a reduction in the contract value.

 

Subpart 1815.5--Preaward, Award, and Postaward

Notifications, Protests, and Mistakes

 

1815.504  Award to successful offeror.

   The reference to notice of award in FAR 15.504 on negotiated acquisitions is a generic one.  It relates only to the formal establishment of a contractual document obligating both the Government and the offeror.  The notice is effected by the transmittal of a fully approved and executed definitive contract document, such as the award portion of SF 33, SF 26, SF 1449, or SF 1447, or a letter contract when a definitized contract instrument is not available but the urgency of the requirement necessitates immediate performance.  In this latter instance, the procedures for approval and issuance of letter contracts shall be followed.

 

1815.506  Postaward debriefing of offerors.

 

1815.506-70  Debriefing of offerors - Major System acquisitions.  

   (a)  When an acquisition is conducted in accordance with the Major System acquisition procedures in Part 1834 and multiple offerors are selected, the debriefing will be limited in such a manner that it does not prematurely disclose innovative concepts, designs, and approaches of the successful offerors that would result in a transfusion of ideas.

   (b)  When Phase B awards are made for alternative system design concepts, the source selection statements shall not be released to competing offerors or the general public until the release of the source selection statement for Phase C/D without the approval of the Assistant Administrator for Procurement (Code HS).

 

Subpart 1815.6--Unsolicited Proposals

 

1815.602  Policy.

   (1)  An unsolicited proposal may result in the award of a contract, grant, cooperative agreement, or other agreement.  If a grant or cooperative agreement is used, the NASA Grant and Cooperative Agreement Handbook (NPR 5800.1) applies.

   (2)  Renewal proposals, (i.e., those for the extension or augmentation of current contracts)  are subject to the same FAR and NFS regulations, including the requirements of the Competition in Contracting Act, as are proposals for new contracts.

 

1815.604  Agency points of contact.  

  (a)(6) Information titled "Guidance for the Preparation and Submission of Unsolicited Proposals" is available on the Internet at http://ec.msfc.nasa.gov/hq/library/unSol-Prop.html. A deviation is required for use of any modified or summarized version of the Internet information or for alternate means of general dissemination of unsolicited proposal information.

 

1815.606  Agency procedures.  

   (a)  NASA will not accept for formal evaluation unsolicited proposals initially submitted to another agency or to the Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) without the offeror's express consent.

  (b)(i)   NASA Headquarters and each NASA field installation shall designate a point of contact for receiving and coordinating the handling and evaluation of unsolicited proposals.

       (ii)  Each installation shall establish procedures for handling proposals initially received by other offices within the installation.  Misdirected proposals shall be forwarded by the point of contact to the proper installation.  Points of contact are also responsible for providing guidance to potential offerors regarding the appropriate NASA officials to contact for general mission-related inquiries or other preproposal discussions.

       (iii) Points of contact shall keep records of unsolicited proposals received and shall provide prompt status information to requesters.  These records shall include, at a minimum, the number of unsolicited proposals received, funded, and rejected during the fiscal year; the identity of the offerors; and the office to which each was referred.  The numbers shall be broken out by source (large business, small business, university, or nonprofit institution).

 

1815.606-70  Relationship of unsolicited proposals to NRAs.

   An unsolicited proposal for a new effort or a renewal, identified by an evaluating office as being within the scope of an open NRA, shall be evaluated as a response to that NRA (see 1835.016-71), provided that the evaluating office can either:

   (a)  State that the proposal is not at a competitive disadvantage, or

   (b)  Give the offeror an opportunity to amend the unsolicited proposal to ensure compliance with the applicable NRA proposal preparation instructions.  If these conditions cannot be met, the proposal must be evaluated separately.

 

1815.609  Limited use of data.

 

1815.609-70  Limited use of proposals.

   Unsolicited proposals shall be evaluated outside the Government only to the extent authorized by, and in accordance with, the procedures prescribed in, 1815.207-70.

 

1815.670  Foreign proposals.

   Unsolicited proposals from foreign sources are subject to NPD 1360.2, Initiation and Development of International Cooperation in Space and Aeronautics Programs.

 

Subpart 1815.70--Ombudsman

 

1815.7001  NASA Ombudsman Program.

   NASA's implementation of an ombudsman program is in NPR 5101.33, Procurement Advocacy Programs.

 

1815.7002  Synopses of solicitations and contracts.

   In all synopses announcing competitive acquisitions, the contracting officer shall indicate that the clause at 1852.215-84, Ombudsman, is applicable.  This may be accomplished by referencing the clause number and identifying the installation Ombudsman.

1815.7003  Contract clause. 

   The contracting officer shall insert a clause substantially the same as the one at 1852.215-84, Ombudsman, in all solicitations (including draft solicitations) and contracts.  Use the clause with its Alternate I when a task or delivery order contract is contemplated.



PART 1853

FORMS

 

TABLE OF CONTENTS

 

SUBPART      1853.1             GENERAL

1853.100                                 Scope of subpart.

1853.101                                 Requirements for use of forms.

1853.103                                 Exceptions.

1853.105                                 Computer generation.

1853.107                                 Obtaining forms.

1853.108                                 Recommendations concerning forms.

 

SUBPART      1853.2             PRESCRIPTION OF FORMS

1853.200                                 Scope of subpart.

1853.204                                 Administrative matters.

1853.204-70                            General (NASA Forms 507, 507A, 507B, 507G, 507M, 531,

                                                  533M, 533Q, 1098, 1356, 1611, 1612, and Department of Defense

                                                  Form 1593).

1853.208                                 Required sources of supplies and services.

1853.208-70                            Other Government sources (Standard Form 1080, Air Force

                                                  Form 858, Department of Energy Form CA-10-90.COM, Nuclear

                                                  Regulatory Commission Form 313).

1853.215                                 Contracting by negotiation.

1853.215-70                            Price negotiation (NASA Form 634 and Department of Defense

                                                  Form 1861).

1853.216                                 Types of contracts.

1853.216-70                            Assignees under cost-reimbursement contracts (NASA Forms

                                                  778, 779, 780, and 781).

1853.217                                 Special contracting methods (NASA Form 523).

1853.225                                 Foreign Acquisition (Customs Form 7501).

1853.232-70                            Contract financing (Standard Forms 272, 272A).

1853.242                                 Contract administration.

1853.242-70                            Delegation (NASA Forms 1430, 1430A, 1431, 1432, 1433, and

                                                  1634) and service request (NASA Form 1434).

1853.242-71                            Notifications (NASA Form 456).

1853.242-72                            Evaluation of Performance (NASA Form 1680).

1853.245-70                            Property (NASA Form 1018, Department of Defense Form 1419).

1853.246                                 Quality assurance (Department of Defense Forms 250 and 250c).

1853.249-70                            Termination of contracts (NASA Forms 1412, 1413).

1853.271     MidRange Procurement Procedures (NASA Forms 1667 and

             1668).

 

SUBPART      1853.3             ILLUSTRATIONS OF FORMS

1853.300                                 Scope of subpart.

1853.301                                 Standard forms.

1853.303                                 Agency forms.

 

PART 1853

FORMS

 

Subpart 1853.1--General

 

1853.100  Scope of subpart.

   This subpart contains information regarding the forms prescribed in this Regulation.  Unless specified otherwise, the policies in FAR Part 53 apply to NASA-prescribed forms.

 

1853.101  Requirements for use of forms.

   The requirements for use of the forms in this part are contained in Parts 1801 through 1852 where the subject matter applicable to each form is addressed.  The specific location of each form's prescription is identified in subpart 1853.2.

 

1853.103  Exceptions.

   (1)     Requests for exceptions to stan­dard or optional forms shall be forwarded through the center forms manager to the Headquarters Office of Procurement (Code HK).

   (2)     Alteration of any form in this part is prohibited unless prior ap­proval has been obtained from the Headquarters Office of Management Systems and Facilities, Information Resources Management Division (Code JT).  Requests for alteration shall be coordinated with the center forms manager before transmittal to Code JT.

   (3)     Use for the same purpose of any form other than one pre­scribed by this Regulation requires prior approval of Code HK.

 

1853.105   Computer generation.

   Forms prescribed by this Regulation may be adapted for computer prepara­tion pro­viding there is no change to the name, content, or sequence of the data elements, and the form carries the form number and edition date.

 

1853.107  Obtaining forms.

   (c)(i)  NASA centers and offices may obtain forms prescribed in the FAR or in this Regulation from Goddard Space Flight Center, Code 239.  Orders should be placed on a NASA Form 2, Request for Blank Forms, Publications and Issuances.

       (ii)        Contracting officers, at the time of contract award, shall ensure that contrac­tors are notified of the procedures for obtaining NASA forms required for performance under the contract.

 

1853.108  Recommendations concerning forms. 

   Code HK is the office responsible for submitting form recommendations.

 

Subpart 1853.2--Prescription of Forms

 

1853.200  Scope of subpart.

   This subpart summarizes the prescrip­tions of NASA forms and other forms adop­ted by NASA for use in acquisition.

 

1853.204  Administrative matters.

 

1853.204-70  General (NASA Forms 507, 507A, 507B, 507G, 507M, 531, 533M, 533Q, 1098, 1356, 1611, 1612; and Department of Defense Form 1593).

   (a) The following forms are prescribed in 1804.670-3:

       (1)        NASA Form 507, Individual Procure­ment Action Report (New Awards).

       (2)        NASA Form 507A, Individual Pro­cure­ment Action Report (New Awards) Supple­ment A.

       (3)        NASA Form 507B, Individual Pro­cure­ment Action Report Supplement B.

       (4)        NASA Form 507G, Individual Pro­cure­ment Action Report (Grants/Orders).

       (5)        NASA Form 507M, Individual Pro­cure­ment Action Report (Modifications).

   (b)     NASA Form 531, Name Check Request.  Prescribed in 1852.204-76.

   (c) The following forms are prescribed in 1842.72:

       (1)        NASA Form 533M, Monthly Contrac­tor Financial Management Report.

       (2)        NASA Form 533Q, Quarterly Con­trac­tor Financial Management Report.

   (d)     NASA Form 1098, Checklist for Con­tract Award File Content.  Prescribed in 1804.803-70.

   (e) NASA Form 1356, C.A.S.E. Report on College and University Projects.  Prescribed in 1804.671.

   (f) NASA Form 1611, Contract Comple­tion Statement.  Prescribed in 1804.804-2 and 1804.804-5.

   (g) The following forms are prescribed in 1804.804-5:

       (1)        NASA Form 1612, Contract Closeout Checklist.

       (2)        DD Form 1593, Contract Adminis­tra­tion Completion Record.

 

1853.208  Required sources of supplies and services.

 

1853.208-70  Other Government sources (Standard Form 1080, Air Force Form 858,

Department of Energy Form CA-10-90.COM, Nuclear Regulatory Commission Form 313).

   (a) SF 1080, Voucher for Transfers Between Appropriations and/or Funds (Disbursement).  Prescribed in 1808.002-72(e).

   (b)     Air Force Form 858, Forecast of Re­quirements (Missile Propellants and Pressu­rants).  Prescribed in 1808.002-72(f).

   (c) U.S. Department of Energy Isotope and Technical Service Order Form CA-10-90.COM. Prescribed in 1808.002-70(a).

   (d)     Nuclear Regulatory Commission Form 313, Application for Material License. Prescribed in 1808.002-70(a).

 

1853.215  Contracting by negotiation.

 

1853.215-70  Price negotiation (NASA Form 634 and Department of Defense Form 1861).

   (a) NASA Form 634, Structured Ap­proach--Profit/Fee Objective.  Prescribed in 1815.404-470.

   (b)     DD Form 1861, Contract Facilities Capital Cost of Money.  Prescribed in 1830.70, and instructions for completion are in 1830.7001-2.

 

1853.216  Types of contracts.

 

1853.216-70  Assignees under cost-reim­bursement contracts (NASA Forms 778, 779, 780, and 781).

   The following forms are prescribed in 1852.216-89:

   (a) NASA Form 778, Contractor's Re­lease.

   (b)     NASA Form 779, Assignee's Release.

   (c) NASA Form 780, Contractor's Assign­ment of Refunds, Rebates, Credits, and Other Amounts.

   (d)     NASA Form 781, Assignee’s Assign­ment of Refunds, Rebates, Credits, and Other Amounts.

 

1853.217  Special contracting methods (NASA Form 523).

   NASA Form 523, NASA-Defense Purchase Request.  Prescribed in 1808.002-72(b) and 1817.7002.

 

1853.225  Foreign Acquisition (Customs Form 7501).

   Customs Form 7501, Entry Summary.  Prescribed in 1825.903 and 14 CFR 1217.104.

 

1853.232-70  Contract financing (Standard Forms 272, 272A).

   The following forms are prescribed in 1832.412(a)(ii):

   (a) SF 272, Federal Cash Transactions Report.

   (b)     SF 272A, Federal Cash Transactions Report Continuation.

 

1853.242  Contract administration.

 

1853.242-70  Delegation (NASA Forms 1430, 1430A, 1431, 1432, 1433, and 1634) and service request (NASA Form 1434).

   (a) NASA Form 1430, Letter of Contract Administration Delegation, General.  Prescribed in 1842.202(d)(ii).

   (b)     NASA Form 1430A, Letter of Contract Administration Delegation, Special Instruc­tions.  Prescribed in 1842.202(d)(ii).

   (c) NASA Form 1431, Letter of Acceptance of Contract Administration Delegation.  Prescribed in 1842.202(d)(iii).

   (d)     NASA Form 1432, Letter of Contract Administration Delegation, Termination.  Prescribed in 1842.202(b)(i)(G).

   (e) NASA Form 1433, Letter of Audit Delegation.  Prescribed in 1842.202(d)(iv).

   (f) NASA Form 1634, Contracting Officer Technical Representative (COTR) Delegation.  Prescribed in 1842.270(b).

   (g) NASA Form 1434, Letter of Request for Pricing-Audit-Technical Evaluation Servic­es.  Prescribed in 1815.404-2(a)(1)(D).

 

1853.242-71  Notifications (NASA Form 456).

   NASA Form 456, Notice of Contract Costs Suspended and/or Disapproved.  Prescribed in 1842.803(b)(2).

 

1853.242-72  Evaluation of Performance (NASA Form 1680).

   NASA Form 1680, Evaluation of Performance.  Prescribed in 1842.1503.

 

1853.245-70  Property (NASA Form 1018, Department of Defense Form 1419).


   (a) NASA Form 1018, NASA Property in the Custody of Contractors.  Prescribed in 1845.505-14.  Instructions for form completion are in 1845.7101.

   (b)     DD Form 1419, DOD Industrial Plant Equipment Requisition.  Prescribed in 1852.245-70.  Instructions for form completion are in 1845.7102.

 

1853.246  Quality Assurance (Department of Defense Forms 250 and 250c).

   The following forms are prescribed in 1846.670.  Instructions for form completion are in 1846.670:

   (a) DD Form 250, Material Inspection and Receiving Report.

   (b)     DD Form 250c, Material Inspection and Receiving Report- Continuation Sheet.

 

1853.249-70  Termination of contracts (NASA Forms 1412, 1413).

   (a) NASA Form 1412, Termination Au­thor­ity.  Prescribed in 1849.101-71.

   (b)     NASA Form 1413, Termination Docket Checklist.  Prescribed in 1849.105-70.

 

1853.271  MidRange Procurement Procedures (NASA Forms 1667 and 1668).

  The following forms are prescribed in 1871.105(f):

  (a)  NASA Form 1667, Request for Offer.

  (b)  NASA Form 1668, Contract.

 

Subpart 1853.3--Illustrations of Forms

 

1853.300  Scope of subpart.

   This subpart contains illustrations of NASA forms and other forms used by NASA in acquisitions and not prescribed in the FAR.

 

1853.301  Standard forms.

   This section illustrates standard forms (SFs) specified for use in acquisitions.

 

1853.303  Agency forms.

   This section illustrates NASA and other agency forms specified for use in acquisitions.  The other agency forms are arranged numerically by agency following the NASA forms.