70RSAT20RB000000002 Passenger Self Screening BAA Call.pdf

Broad Agency Announcement (BAA) Call Solicitation 70RSAT20RB00000002 under BAA HSHQDC-16-R-B0004 Project: Passenger Self-Screening System Concept Development

1.Introduction

This BAA Call solicitation (70RSAT20RB00000002) is a Call issued against Department of Homeland Security (DHS), Science & Technology (S&T), 5-Year Broad Agency Announcement (BAA), HSHQDC-16-R-B0004 “Apex Screening at Speed Program (Apex SaS).” All terms and conditions of the DHS S&T 5-Year BAA HSHQDC-16-R-B0004 apply to this solicitation unless otherwise noted herein.

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Science and Technology Directorate (S&T) Screening at Speed (SaS) program pursues transformative research and development (R&D) activities that support a future vision for increasing aviation security effectiveness from curb to gate while dramatically reducing wait times and improving the passenger experience. To enable this vision, SaS, in conjunction with the Transportation Security Administration’s (TSA’s) Innovation Task Force, is considering the development of a passenger self-screening solution to transform the TSA’s concept of operations. This concept is initially targeted towards the TSA Pre™ environment, but as the capability matures it may be deployed as a part of a variety of security postures.

Just like self-checkout at grocery stores, self-tagging checked baggage, or ATM machines, many patrons prefer an experience that they can complete all by themselves, at their own pace. Personal screening stations would increase the overall passenger screening throughput. SaS is exploring ideas to bring similar concepts to the passenger screening process. SaS would like to collaborate with stakeholders to develop a solution that would:

• Enable a self-sufficient experience in the passenger screening process

• Allow for passenger on-person screening and divestment of personal property

(for X-ray screening) to occur in a single step, compared to the two distinct steps that exist at airports today

• Enable passengers to directly receive on-person alarm information while divesting, and allow for the passenger self-resolution of alarms through continued divestment to reduce instances where a pat-down/secondary screening procedure would be necessary

• Allow passengers to complete the screening process more quickly

• Maintain or improve the current security posture at the airport checkpoint

This effort seeks to rapidly develop a solution to detect weapons and organic threat items hidden on passengers without the same level of Transportation Security Officer (TSO) engagement normally present in the screening process. The solution would be deployed in conjunction with an X-ray system and an Automated Screening Lane (ASL) so that a passenger may be screened while they complete the divestiture process for inspection of their accessible property. A successful solution would lead to a passenger friendly, intuitive screening process while improving security, accelerating passenger throughput, and reducing pat-down rates.

This R&D Acquisition will develop three components of a future Passenger Self Screening Solution. The first effort, under technical topic area (TTA) #1, includes the systems engineering, and concept design and development of passenger-self screening solution. This effort uses a phased approach to develop requirements, monitor progress, and reduce technical risk in a methodical way. The goal of the base period is to develop a sufficiently specified system concept where DHS S&T would be able to assess the viability of the concept and to specify high-level requirements for subsystems suitable for future research and development acquisition efforts. If all options are exercised, the final result is the delivery of design documentation that can be used in building an engineering prototype.

The second effort, under TTA #2, seeks to rapidly mature novel low to mid technology readiness level hardware systems that are capable of safely detecting anomalous passenger activity and threat items hidden on passengers or in their accessible property.

DHS S&T is seeking technologies that may be matured to TRL 6 or above in twelve months or less.

The third effort, under TTA #3, seeks to rapidly mature novel software systems that can detect anomalous passenger activity and threat items hidden on passengers or in their accessible property. DHS S&T is seeking technologies that may be matured to TRL 6 or above in twelve months or less.

2.Project Description/Scope

BAA Call solicitation 70RSAT20RB00000002 will develop system concept designs and subsystems to advance aviation security and improvised explosive threat detection while enhancing the passenger experience. The primary technical focus is developing concepts that allow DHS S&T to assess the viability of the concept and to develop a research and development strategy to mature and transition this capability. In parallel to concept development, the focus is on maturing TRL of potential hardware and software subsystems in order to evaluate them for suitability to the self-screening concept.

Efforts under this BAA Call are anticipated to be either Type II (period of performance 24 months or less) or Type III (period of performance 12 months or less) effort as defined in 5-Year BAA HSHQDC-16-R-B0004 that may offer capability into the current passenger self-screening maturation strategy.

Achieving a future vision of passenger self-screening requires mature systems and subsystems using next generation techniques for distinguishing prohibited items and threat materials from the complex stream-of-commerce that passes through an airport checkpoint. This BAA Call solicits responses to the following three technical topic areas:

• Self-Screening System Design Concepts

• Self-Screening Hardware Subsystem Acceleration

• Self-Screening Software Subsystem Acceleration

DHS S&T may make multiple awards for each TTA (Topic Areas 1-3) under this BAA Call pending the quality of proposals received and the availability of funds. S&T reserves the right to make multiple, one, or no awards from this BAA Call.

Central to this R&D acquisition will be the use of collaborative, multi-faceted research and development teams to achieve the desired end goals for the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Science and Technology Directorate (S&T) and the Transportation Security Administration (TSA). Candidate team members may consist of, but are not limited to, original equipment manufacturers (OEMs), university researchers, national laboratories, third party innovators of algorithms, and component manufacturers in the supply chain. The formation of strong systems development teams combining practical industry engineering experience with fundamental and applied research capabilities in multi-disciplinary fields including mathematics, x-ray physics, explosive/materials chemistry, and information science provides the greatest potential for developing and transitioning enhanced capabilities to TSA for deployment in aviation security environments.

Each TTA is discussed in detail below and specific objectives for each TTA are also provided. Of particular note, it is anticipated that both metrics and analysis techniques to measure the development progress will evolve during the project.

3.Technical Topic Areas

TTA #1 Passenger Self-Screening Concept Designs

This effort seeks to rapidly develop a passenger self-screening solution design that will detect weapons and organic threat items hidden on passengers without the level of Transportation Security Officer (TSO) engagement normally present in the screening process. These efforts are envisioned to be Type II efforts as defined in Section 2.2 of BAA HSHQDC-16-R-B0004 with a 20 month period of performance. All parties that have advanced knowledge of transportation security system equipment are encouraged to propose.

The advanced technologies listed below are representative only of some technologies that may be employed in or interfaced with the passenger self-screening solution:

• X-ray Imaging

• CT Imaging

• Millimeter wave Imaging

• Metal Detectors

• Video Analytics

• Advanced threat detection algorithms

The above technologies are provided to help interested Offerors understand potential program technical areas but are not meant to be inclusive for this BAA Call.

A secondary goal is to support integration of third party software components, such as those discussed in TTA #3, into OEM equipment with greater ease. Technology developed within this TTA will need to support an open architecture with Government intellectual property and data rights that will allow technology partners (including those that may be performing under TTA #2 and TTA #3) access to the raw measurement data and the data processing resource environment for the purpose of algorithm development, software integration and testing initiatives. The goal is to facilitate opportunities for innovation, especially for third party algorithms, and increase the ability for OEMs to better deliver needed capability through such partnerships. Recognizing the significant research and development under this TTA, the goal will be to provide a preliminary Interface Control Document (ICD) describing the data, metadata formats, and a CONOP document on how to interface to the system. Such a document should allow technology partners (including those that may be performing under TTA #2 and TTA #3) to access required measurement data and processing resources for the purpose of algorithm integration and testing.

The development efforts under this TTA shall have formal design reviews such as System Concept Review (SCR), Preliminary Design Review (PDR), and Critical Design Review (CDR). These reviews will act as key go-/no-go decision points and will be further defined if a request for full proposal is made by the Government. Sample TTA #1 statement of work (SOW) shows notional schedules for TTA #1 efforts. Offerors should include a process for incorporating human factors and human performance design principles throughout the development of the equipment. SCR, PDR, and CDR should contain subject matter expert design inputs for Human Factors (HF) or Human Systems Integration (HSI). An initial project management plan will be due fifteen (15) days after award. Offerors must include personnel, test facilities & capabilities, and initial project timelines in the plan. Sample TTA #1 SOW identifies key deliverables for efforts under this TTA.

TTA #2 Hardware Subsystem Technology Maturation

This effort seeks to rapidly develop screening technologies that will allow the passenger self-screening solution to detect threats on passengers or in their accessible property.

These efforts are envisioned to be Type III efforts as defined in Section 2.2 of BAA HSHQDC-16-R-B0004 with maximum 12 month period of performance (not including evaluation period). Prototype hardware developed under this effort should be ready for testing at DHS S&T directed site within 14 months. All parties that have advanced knowledge of transportation security system equipment are encouraged to propose.

The advanced technologies listed below are representative of some technologies that SaS program has previously invested in:

• Video Analytics

• Millimeter-wave (K-Band, W-band, Ultra-wide Band, and other frequencies)

• Millimeter-wave shoe scanners

• X-ray CT

• Multi-view enhancements to AT-2 X-ray systems

• Multi-energy enhancements to X-ray systems

• X-ray diffraction

• Phase contrast imaging

• NQR

• Augmented Reality and related Human-Systems Integration technologies

The above technologies are provided to help interested Offerors understand potential program technical areas but are not meant to be inclusive for this BAA Call.

A secondary goal is to support integration of third-party software components, such as those discussed in TTA #3, into OEM equipment with greater ease. Technology developed within this TTA will need to support an open architecture that will allow technology partners (including those that may be performing under TTA #3) access to the raw measurement data and the data processing resource environment for the purpose of algorithm development, software integration and testing initiatives. The goal is to facilitate opportunities for innovation, especially for third party algorithms, and increase the ability for OEMs to better deliver needed capability through such partnerships.

Recognizing the significant research and development under this TTA, the goal will be to provide a preliminary Interface Control Document (ICD) describing the data, metadata formats, and a CONOP document on how to interface to the system. Such a document should allow technology partners (including those that may be performing under TTA #3) to access required measurement data and processing resources for the purpose of algorithm integration and testing.

The Government is highly interested in solutions that have the potential to advance an overall Self-Screening solution as is described in section 1.2.

The development efforts under this TTA shall have formal design reviews such as, PDR and test readiness review (TRR). These reviews will act as key go-/no-go decision points and will be further defined if a request for full proposal is made by the Government.

Offerors should include a process for incorporating human factors and human performance design principles throughout the development of the equipment. PDR and TRR should contain subject matter expert design inputs for Human Factors (HF) or Human Systems Integration (HSI). An initial project management plan will be due fifteen

(15) days after award. Offerors must include personnel, test facilities & capabilities, and initial project timelines in the plan. Sample TTA #2 SOW identifies key deliverables for efforts under this TTA.

TTA #3 Software Subsystem Technology Maturation

Under prior BAAs several advanced reconstruction and automated threat recognition (ATR) algorithm methodologies were explored and assessed for their feasibility and effectiveness to enhance the detection of explosives threats in checked and carry-on baggage screening. In this TTA, S&T is seeking to continue exploration and development of advanced reconstruction and ATR algorithm technologies for carry-on baggage and on-person screening. Additionally, S&T is seeking to develop advanced video analytics algorithms to detect anomalous passenger activity. A primary interest is in enhancing detection capabilities to cover a broader range of threat detection classes, significantly reduce primary screening false alarms, detect threats at TSA Tier levels higher than 2, and reduce pat-down rates. This includes explosive and prohibited items that are listed for checked or carry-on baggage. The efforts proposed under this TTA section must demonstrate that the technique can rapidly reach TRL 6 or above maturity to enhance threat detection capabilities within the Type III 12 month time frame (not including evaluation period). Algorithms should have the capability to adjust parameters affecting probability of false alarm, probability of detection, and screening speed in order to optimize the screening capability to passenger risk and the general threat environment.

Traditionally, OEMs have developed their own in-house detection algorithm methodologies. Since both third party (non-OEM developed) and OEM developed advanced ATR algorithms can be viable on an OEM platform, this TTA strongly encourages collaborative third party (non-OEM) and OEM algorithm development teams.

These efforts are envisioned to be predominantly Type III efforts as defined in Section

2.2 of BAA HSHQDC-16-R-B0004 with a maximum of 12 month period of performance.

The ATR and video analytics algorithm technologies developed under this TTA may be required to be integrated into an operationally viable platform/environment, tested and evaluated at a government test facility (such as the TSL) under operationally realistic Stream of Commerce (SOC) screening conditions.

In keeping with S&T’s interest in maintaining open architecture standards for new development efforts, the efforts in this TTA shall define and specify an application programming interface (API) that will be used for integrating the algorithms into a platform. The API specifications will be delivered to S&T to reflect the “to be built” state and updated with the “as built” and “delivered” states. Offerors should also use a process for incorporating human factors and human performance design principles, as necessary, throughout the development of the algorithm, the API, and the performance specifications.

The Government is highly interested in solutions that have the potential to advance an overall Self-Screening solution as is described in section 1.2.

The development efforts under this TTA shall have formal design reviews such as System Concept Review (SCR), Design Review (DR), as well as test readiness and test results reviews. These reviews will act as key go-/no-go decision points and will be further defined if a request for full proposal is made by the Government. Sample TTA #3 SOW shows notional schedules for TTA #3 efforts. Offerors should include a process for incorporating human factors and human performance design principles throughout the development of the equipment. SCR and DR should include subject matter experts in design for Human Factors (HF) or Human Systems Integration (HSI). An initial project management plan will be due fifteen (15) days after award. Offerors must include personnel, test facilities & capabilities, and initial project timelines in the plan. Sample TTA #3 SOW identifies key deliverables for efforts under this TTA.

4.Project Structure

The Passenger Self-Screening Concepts BAA Call is structured into three distinct TTAs that aim to 1) develop and demonstrate concepts for Self-Screening systems, 2) mature and evaluate hardware subsystems for suitability for self-screening use cases 3) mature and evaluate software subsystems for suitability for self-screening use cases. The sample TTA SOWs are provided to establish project structure for each TTA.

5.Project Schedule/Milestones The sample TTA SOWs are provided to establish project schedules/milestones under each TTA.

Attachments:

TTA#1 Passenger Self-Screening Concept Designs TTA#2 Hardware Subsystem Technology Maturation TTA#3 Software Subsystem Technology Maturation

6.Special Instructions/Notifications

Response Dates

Event Time Due Date or Date Due Questions Due 12:00 PM Eastern Time August 5, 2020 Answers Posted N/A August 11, 2020 White Papers Due 12:00 PM Eastern Time August 20, 2020 Notification of White Paper Evaluation Results

N/A September 10, 2020

Proposals Due 12:00 PM Eastern Time September 28, 2020 Notification of Proposal Evaluation Results

October 2020

Contractual or Technical Inquiries

All contractual or technical questions regarding this BAA Call solicitation must be emailed to SaSBAA_SelfScreening@hq.dhs.gov no later than 12:00 PM Eastern Time August 5, 2020. Emails submitting questions are to include “Questions for 70RSAT20RB0000002” in the subject line. All questions and responses will be posted as an amendment to this solicitation on Contract Opportunities on beta.Sam.gov. Questions will only be accepted and answered electronically. Offerors should be aware that contractor support personnel have access to this mailbox and that proprietary information should not be emailed to this inbox unless and until your organization has a signed company to company agreement with Noblis. See the paragraph entitled “Company to Company Agreements” below for additional information.

General Instructions and Information

This BAA Call solicitation (70RSAT20RB00000002) is only seeking the submission of white papers at this time, subject to the date identified in the “Response Dates” table above. Full proposals are not being requested at this time. Invitations to submit full proposals will be extended based on white paper evaluation results in accordance with the date identified in the “Response Dates” table above. Full proposals must be received by the due date identified in the “Response Dates” table above. This Call is open to all responsible sources and is considered to be full and open competition.

Procedures for submission of white papers to the DHS S&T Portal are provided in Section 8 of BAA HSHQDC-16-R-B0004. Each submission must clearly state which TTA is being addressed. Note that Offerors must complete the company/organization portal registration PRIOR to submitting a white paper for the first time. Ensure adequate time to complete the company/organization registration as delays in this process will not be authorization for late submissions of white papers. Company/organization registration information is in Section 10.1 of BAA HSHQDC-16-R-B0004. In addition, each subsequent white paper requires registration in the portal. Information regarding white paper registration is in paragraph 10.2 of BAA HSHQDC-16-R-B0004. White papers also must comply with the information in BAA HSHQDC-16-R-B0004 paragraph 11.4 regarding Company to Company Agreements.

To be considered for award, Offerors MUST submit white papers and Company to Company Agreements with Noblis, Inc. compliant with the response dates listed in the Response Dates table above, in accordance with the requirements in DHS BAA HSHQDC-16-R-B0004. Submissions not in compliance with BAA HSHQDC-16-R- B0004 may be rejected (note: the cover page created by the DHS S&T BAA Portal must be included but does not count against the page count). White papers will only be accepted via the portal. No emailed white paper submissions will be accepted for review.

No classified white papers will be accepted.

White papers will be evaluated and Offerors will either be encouraged or not encouraged to submit a full proposal. Offerors who are not encouraged to submit a full proposal are still permitted to do so. Feedback regarding the evaluation findings of submitted white papers will not be provided.

Procedures for submission of full proposals can be found in Section 8 of BAA HSHQDC- 16-R-B0004. Invitations to submit full proposals will be extended based on white paper evaluation results in accordance with the date identified in the “Response Dates” table above. Full proposals must be received by the due date identified in the “Response Dates” table above. Full proposals are not being requested at this time. In accordance with paragraph 8.4 of BAA HSHQDC-16-R-B0004, Offerors must submit a white paper that can be evaluated in order to be considered for participation in the submission of proposals.

DHS has a strong preference for open source licensing of software for all software developed and delivered, and the licenses for all proposed software deliverables will have to be identified in all submitted full proposals. However, as an alternative to open source release, Offerors may also offer a strong technical transition plan for deployment of the technologies developed.

All software developed and delivered is subject to security auditing; therefore, the Offeror’s technical approach must identify how security auditing will occur. DHS expects Offerors to follow industry best practices on software design

Evaluation

As stated in BAA HSHQDC-16-R-B0004, DHS S&T reserves the right to select for award and to fund all, some, or none of the proposals received in response to this BAA Call solicitation.

The Evaluation Criteria in BAA HSHQDC-16-R-B0004, Section 11 “EVALUATION OF WHITE PAPERS AND PROPOSALS” apply to this Call.

DHS S&T intends to use the following ratings to evaluate white papers and full proposals:

Criterion I and Criterion II Excellent (E) - A very convincing demonstration that the BAA requirements are met by the Offeror’s display of the highest levels of innovation, technical competence, and managerial ability. The white paper/proposal fully and completely meets the expectations of the BAA and sets forth plans, approaches, and analyses that show a high probability of meeting DHS requirements.

Very Good (VG) - Analyses, approaches, and planning considerations demonstrate that the Offeror is able to interpret goals and project them into plans, analyses, etc., in a clear, concise manner. By this analysis, the Offeror demonstrates an acute awareness of the subtle interactions influencing system design; technical and planning efforts show strong promise of meeting DHS requirements.

Good (G) - Plans, approaches, and analyses are provided to the extent requested, and the key or pivotal points raised by the applicable factors have been satisfactorily covered in the white paper. The Offeror has presented an orderly plan to meet the stated goals, but the white paper/full proposal does not necessarily demonstrate any exceptional features, innovations, analysis, or originality. The technical analyses satisfactorily meet requirements and are technically sound.

Fair (F) - The white paper/full proposal indicates minimal understanding of the problem.

The technical analyses meet the goals and are technically sound, but the Offeror fails to demonstrate a reasonable probability of successfully achieving the desired outcome of the topic area.

Unacceptable (U) - The white paper does not meet the BAA’s criterion.

Criterion III Reasonable (R) – White paper/full proposal cost information appears reasonable based on the proposed time/level of effort and materials needed to successfully complete tasks associated with this effort. The Government has few, if any questions on costs.

Likely Reasonable with Questions (Q) – White paper/full proposal cost information may be reasonable after the Government receives additional information to evaluate costs.

Not Reasonable (N) – White paper/full proposal cost information does not appear reasonable. Costs are not adequately tied to technical approach or are not logical.

Company to Company Agreements

White papers must comply with the information in BAA HSHQDC-16-R-B0004 paragraph

11.4 regarding Company to Company Agreements.

Important Note: DHS intends to use Noblis, Inc. for routine administrative support during the evaluation process of both white papers and full proposals. All Offerors, Prime Contractors only (this applies to all Offerors, whether or not the Offeror is a company) must submit an executed Company to Company Agreement with Noblis, Inc., found in Appendix A, along with their white paper submission. Company to Company Agreements must be dated this year (2020). The Agreement found in Appendix A shall not be altered. Submissions that do not include an executed Agreement will be considered non-responsive and will not be considered. To get the Noblis, Inc. Point of Contact information, Offerors are to send an email to SaSBAA_SelfScreening@hq.dhs.gov and indicate “NDA” in the Subject line. Offerors are encouraged to allow sufficient time to permit agreement execution.

Type Classification Ceilings BAA HSHQDC-16-R-B0004, describes the Type Classifications for proposals. Specific to this Call, the ceiling values for each type are as follows:

Type I – Type I awards are not anticipated under this solicitation.

Type II – Type II awards are limited to a total contract value not to exceed $2,500,000.00, not including operational evaluation, pilot, and/or transition options.

Type III – Type III awards are limited to a total contract value not to exceed $1,500,00.00, not including operational evaluation, pilot, and/or transition options.

The timelines and dollar values included in HSHQDC-16-R-B0004 and referenced in this document for types of awards are the anticipated award amounts and timelines, but the Government may exceed these amounts at its discretion. However, Offerors are highly encouraged to stay within the parameters identified above.

Foreign Participation

Offerors are reminded that foreign participation may occur as defined in BAA HSHQDC- 16-R-B0004, Section 1.3. Offerors, including those located outside the continental United States, should provide full costs (delivery costs included) for any deliverables not anticipated for delivery in a softcopy format. All materials submitted in response to this solicitation shall be in the English language. White papers, and later proposals, received in other than English shall be rejected. Offerors invited to submit proposals shall do so only in terms of U.S. dollars. Proposals received in other than U.S. dollars shall be rejected.

Export Control Requirements

Offerors are reminded of the export control markings required by BAA HSHQDC-16-R- B0004, Section 12.5.

Travel

For purposes of estimating costs for full proposals, Offerors should anticipate travel to three (3) project meetings per year at DHS S&T Headquarters in Washington DC. Travel will be reimbursed in accordance with the limitations set forth in FAR 31.205-46, Travel Costs, and the Federal Travel Regulation. Local travel within a 50-mile radius from the Contractor’s facility or the Contractor’s assigned duty station will not be reimbursed.

This includes travel, subsistence, and associated labor charges for travel time. Travel performed for personal convenience or daily travel to and from work at the Contractor’s facility or local Government facility (i.e., designated work site) shall not be reimbursed hereunder. The Contractor shall not be reimbursed for moving or relocation expenses for the Contractor or Contractor employees, and/or subcontractors.

Order of Precedence

In the event that any of the terms and conditions contained in this solicitation conflict with terms and conditions included in BAA HSHQDC-16-R-B0004, the terms and conditions in this Call shall take precedence.

7. Sensitive Information

DHS has and will exercise full control over granting, denying, withholding, or terminating unescorted Government facility, Government systems and/or sensitive Government information access for Contractor employees, based upon the results of a

DHS fitness (suitability) investigation. DHS may, as it deems appropriate, authorize and make a favorable entry of duty (EOD) decision based on preliminary security checks. The favorable EOD decision would allow the contactor to commence work temporarily prior to the completion of the full investigation. The granting of a favorable EOD decision shall not be considered as assurance that a full employment contractor fitness (suitability) authorization will follow as a result thereof. The granting of a favorable EOD decision or a full contractor fitness (suitability) authorization determination shall in no way prevent, preclude, or bar the withdrawal or termination of any such access by DHS, at any time during the term of the task order. No employee of the contractor shall be allowed unescorted access to a Government facility, access to any sensitive information or access to DHS Systems without a favorable EOD decision or contractor fitness (suitability) determination by the DHS Office of Security. Contract employees assigned to the task order not needing access to sensitive DHS information, DHS systems or access to DHS facilities will not be subject to security contractor fitness (suitability) screening. Contract employees waiting an EOD decision may not begin work on the task order. Limited access to Government buildings is allowable prior to the EOD decision if the contractor is escorted by a Government employee. This limited access is to allow contractors to attend briefings, nonrecurring meetings, and begin transition work. Classified information is Government information which requires protection in accordance with Executive Order 13526, National Security Information (NSI) as amended and supplemental directives. If the contractor has access to classified information at a DHS owned or leased facility, it shall comply with the security requirements of DHS and the facility. If the contractor is required to have access to classified information at another Government Facility, it shall abide by the requirements set forth by the agency.

Depending on an Offeror’s specific proposal and the TTA proposed under, Offerors may have access to sensitive information in awards under this BAA Call. DHS S&T will comply with the requirements of HSAR Class Deviation 15-01 and the HSAM Appendix G Sensitive Information Checklist for individual awards under this BAA. Accordingly the clauses below may apply to individual awards under this BAA.

Safeguarding of Sensitive Information (MAR 2015)

(a) Applicability. This clause applies to the Contractor and its contractors, its subcontractors, and their employees (hereafter referred to collectively as “Contractor”). The Contractor shall insert the substance of this clause in all subcontracts.

(b) Definitions. As used in this clause—

“Personally Identifiable Information (PII)” means information that can be used to distinguish or trace an individual's identity, such as name, social security number, or biometric records, either alone, or when combined with other personal or identifying information that is linked or linkable to a specific individual, such as date and place of birth, or mother’s maiden name. The definition of PII is not anchored to any single category of information or technology. Rather, it requires a case-by-case assessment of the specific risk that an individual can be identified.

In performing this assessment, it is important for an agency to recognize that non-personally identifiable information can become personally identifiable information whenever additional information is made publicly available—in any medium and from any source—that, combined with other available information, could be used to identify an individual.

PII is a subset of sensitive information. Examples of PII include, but are not limited to: name, date of birth, mailing address, telephone number, Social Security number (SSN), email address, zip code, account numbers, certificate/license numbers, vehicle identifiers including license plates, uniform resource locators (URLs), static Internet protocol addresses, biometric identifiers such as fingerprint, voiceprint, iris scan, photographic facial images, or any other unique identifying number or characteristic, and any information where it is reasonably foreseeable that the information will be linked with other information to identify the individual.

“Sensitive Information” is defined in HSAR clause 3052.204-71, Contractor Employee Access, as any information, which if lost, misused, disclosed, or, without authorization is accessed, or modified, could adversely affect the national or homeland security interest, the conduct of Federal programs, or the privacy to which individuals are entitled under section 552a of Title 5, United States Code (the Privacy Act), but which has not been specifically authorized under criteria established by an Executive Order or an Act of Congress to be kept secret in the interest of national defense, homeland security or foreign policy. This definition includes the following categories of information:

(1) Protected Critical Infrastructure Information (PCII) as set out in the Critical Infrastructure Information Act of 2002 (Title II, Subtitle B, of the Homeland Security Act, Public Law 107-296, 196 Stat. 2135), as amended, the implementing regulations thereto (Title 6, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 29) as amended, the applicable PCII Procedures Manual, as amended, and any supplementary guidance officially communicated by an authorized official of the Department of Homeland Security (including the PCII Program Manager or his/her designee);

(2) Sensitive Security Information (SSI), as defined in Title 49, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 1520, as amended, “Policies and Procedures of Safeguarding and Control of SSI,” as amended, and any supplementary guidance officially communicated by an authorized official of the

Department of Homeland Security (including the Assistant Secretary for the Transportation Security Administration or his/her designee);

(3) Information designated as “For Official Use Only,” which is unclassified information of a sensitive nature and the unauthorized disclosure of which could adversely impact a person’s privacy or welfare, the conduct of Federal programs, or other programs or operations essential to the national or homeland security interest; and

(4) Any information that is designated “sensitive” or subject to other controls, safeguards or protections in accordance with subsequently adopted homeland security information handling procedures.

“Sensitive Information Incident” is an incident that includes the known, potential, or suspected exposure, loss of control, compromise, unauthorized disclosure, unauthorized acquisition, or unauthorized access or attempted access of any Government system, Contractor system, or sensitive information.

“Sensitive Personally Identifiable Information (SPII)” is a subset of PII, which if lost, compromised or disclosed without authorization, could result in substantial harm, embarrassment, inconvenience, or unfairness to an individual. Some forms of PII are sensitive as stand-alone elements. Examples of such PII include: Social Security numbers (SSN), driver’s license or state identification number, Alien Registration Numbers (A-number), financial account number, and biometric identifiers such as fingerprint, voiceprint, or iris scan. Additional examples include any groupings of information that contain an individual’s name or other unique identifier plus one or more of the following elements:

(1) Truncated SSN (such as last 4 digits)

(2) Date of birth (month, day, and year)

(3) Citizenship or immigration status

(4) Ethnic or religious affiliation

(5) Sexual orientation

(6) Criminal History

(7) Medical Information

(8) System authentication information such as mother’s maiden name, account passwords or personal identification numbers (PIN)

Other PII may be “sensitive” depending on its context, such as a list of employees and their performance ratings or an unlisted home address or phone number. In contrast, a business card or public telephone directory of agency employees contains PII but is not sensitive.

(c) Authorities. The Contractor shall follow all current versions of Government policies and guidance accessible at http://www.dhs.gov/dhs-security-and-training-requirements-contractors, or available upon request from the Contracting Officer, including but not limited to:

(1) DHS Management Directive 11042.1 Safeguarding Sensitive But Unclassified (for Official Use Only) Information

(2) DHS Sensitive Systems Policy Directive 4300A

(3) DHS 4300A Sensitive Systems Handbook and Attachments

(4) DHS Security Authorization Process Guide

(5) DHS Handbook for Safeguarding Sensitive Personally Identifiable Information

(6) DHS Instruction Handbook 121-01-007 Department of Homeland Security Personnel Suitability and Security Program

(7) DHS Information Security Performance Plan (current fiscal year)

(8) DHS Privacy Incident Handling Guidance

(9) Federal Information Processing Standard (FIPS) 140-2 Security Requirements for Cryptographic Modules accessible at http://csrc.nist.gov/groups/STM/cmvp/standards.html

(10) National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) Special Publication 800-53 Security and Privacy Controls for Federal Information Systems and Organizations accessible at http://csrc.nist.gov/publications/PubsSPs.html

(11) NIST Special Publication 800-88 Guidelines for Media Sanitization accessible at http://csrc.nist.gov/publications/PubsSPs.html

(d) Handling of Sensitive Information. Contractor compliance with this clause, as well as the policies and procedures described below, is required.

(1) Department of Homeland Security (DHS) policies and procedures on Contractor personnel security requirements are set forth in various Management Directives (MDs), Directives, and Instructions. MD 11042.1, Safeguarding Sensitive But Unclassified (For Official Use Only) Information describes how Contractors must handle sensitive but unclassified information. DHS uses the term “FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY” to identify sensitive but unclassified information that is not otherwise categorized by statute or regulation. Examples of sensitive information that are categorized by statute or regulation are PCII, SSI, etc.

The DHS Sensitive Systems Policy Directive 4300A and the DHS 4300A

Sensitive Systems Handbook provide the policies and procedures on security for Information Technology (IT) resources. The DHS Handbook for Safeguarding Sensitive Personally Identifiable Information provides guidelines to help safeguard SPII in both paper and electronic form. DHS Instruction Handbook 121-01-007 Department of Homeland Security Personnel Suitability and Security Program establishes procedures, program responsibilities, minimum standards, and reporting protocols for the DHS Personnel Suitability and Security Program.

(2) The Contractor shall not use or redistribute any sensitive information processed, stored, and/or transmitted by the Contractor except as specified in the contract.

(3) All Contractor employees with access to sensitive information shall execute DHS Form 11000-6, Department of Homeland Security Non- Disclosure Agreement (NDA), as a condition of access to such information. The Contractor shall maintain signed copies of the NDA for all employees as a record of compliance. The Contractor shall provide copies of the signed NDA to the Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR) no later than two (2) days after execution of the form.

(4) The Contractor’s invoicing, billing, and other recordkeeping systems maintained to support financial or other administrative functions shall not maintain SPII. It is acceptable to maintain in these systems the names, titles and contact information for the COR or other Government personnel associated with the administration of the contract, as needed.

(e) Authority to Operate. The Contractor shall not input, store, process, output, and/or transmit sensitive information within a Contractor IT system without an Authority to Operate (ATO) signed by the Headquarters or Component CIO, or designee, in consultation with the Headquarters or Component Privacy Officer.

Unless otherwise specified in the ATO letter, the ATO is valid for three (3) years.

The Contractor shall adhere to current Government policies, procedures, and guidance for the Security Authorization (SA) process as defined below.

(1) Complete the Security Authorization process. The SA process shall proceed according to the DHS Sensitive Systems Policy Directive 4300A (Version 11.0, April 30, 2014), or any successor publication, DHS 4300A Sensitive Systems Handbook (Version 9.1, July 24, 2012), or any successor publication, and the Security Authorization Process Guide including templates.

(i) Security Authorization Process Documentation. SA documentation shall be developed using the Government provided Requirements Traceability Matrix and Government security documentation templates. SA documentation consists of the following: Security Plan, Contingency Plan, Contingency Plan Test Results, Configuration Management Plan, Security Assessment Plan, Security Assessment Report, and Authorization to Operate Letter. Additional documents that may be required include a Plan(s) of Action and Milestones and Interconnection Security Agreement(s). During the development of SA documentation, the Contractor shall submit a signed SA package, validated by an independent third party, to the COR for acceptance by the Headquarters or Component CIO, or designee, at least thirty

(30) days prior to the date of operation of the IT system. The Government is the final authority on the compliance of the SA package and may limit the number of resubmissions of a modified SA package. Once the ATO has been accepted by the Headquarters or Component CIO, or designee, the Contracting Officer shall incorporate the ATO into the contract as a compliance document. The Government’s acceptance of the ATO does not alleviate the Contractor’s responsibility to ensure the IT system controls are implemented and operating effectively.

(ii) Independent Assessment. Contractors shall have an independent third party validate the security and privacy controls in place for the system(s). The independent third party shall review and analyze the SA package, and report on technical, operational, and management level deficiencies as outlined in NIST Special Publication 800-53 Security and Privacy Controls for Federal Information Systems and Organizations. The Contractor shall address all deficiencies before submitting the SA package to the Government for acceptance.

(iii) Support the completion of the Privacy Threshold Analysis (PTA) as needed. As part of the SA process, the Contractor may be required to support the Government in the completion of the PTA. The requirement to complete a PTA is triggered by the creation, use, modification, upgrade, or disposition of a Contractor IT system that will store, maintain and use PII, and must be renewed at least every three (3) years. Upon review of the PTA, the DHS Privacy Office determines whether a Privacy Impact Assessment (PIA) and/or Privacy Act System of Records Notice (SORN), or modifications thereto, are required. The Contractor shall provide all support necessary to assist the Department in completing the PIA in a timely manner and shall ensure that project management plans and schedules include time for the completion of the PTA, PIA, and SORN (to the extent required) as milestones. Support in this context includes responding timely to requests for information from the Government about the use, access, storage, and maintenance of PII on the Contractor’s system, and providing timely review of relevant compliance documents for factual accuracy. Information on the DHS privacy compliance process, including PTAs, PIAs, and SORNs, is accessible at http://www.dhs.gov/privacy-compliance.

(2) Renewal of ATO. Unless otherwise specified in the ATO letter, the ATO shall be renewed every three (3) years. The Contractor is required to update its SA package as part of the ATO renewal process. The Contractor shall update its SA package by one of the following methods:

(1) Updating the SA documentation in the DHS automated information assurance tool for acceptance by the Headquarters or Component CIO, or designee, at least 90 days before the ATO expiration date for review and verification of security controls; or (2) Submitting an updated SA package directly to the COR for approval by the Headquarters or Component CIO, or designee, at least 90 days before the ATO expiration date for review and verification of security controls. The 90 day review process is independent of the system production date and therefore it is important that the Contractor build the review into project schedules. The reviews may include onsite visits that involve physical or logical inspection of the Contractor environment to ensure controls are in place.

(3) Security Review. The Government may elect to conduct random periodic reviews to ensure that the security requirements contained in this contract are being implemented and enforced. The Contractor shall afford DHS, the Office of the Inspector General, and other Government organizations access to the Contractor’s facilities, installations, operations, documentation, databases and personnel used in the performance of this contract. The Contractor shall, through the Contracting Officer and COR, contact the Headquarters or Component CIO, or designee, to coordinate and participate in review and inspection activity by Government organizations external to the DHS. Access shall be provided, to the extent necessary as determined by the Government, for the Government to carry out a program of inspection, investigation, and audit to safeguard against threats and hazards to the integrity, availability and confidentiality of Government data or the function of computer systems used in performance of this contract and to preserve evidence of computer crime.

(4) Continuous Monitoring. All Contractor-operated systems that input, store, process, output, and/or transmit sensitive information shall meet or exceed the continuous monitoring requirements identified in the Fiscal Year 2014 DHS Information Security Performance Plan, or successor publication. The plan is updated on an annual basis. The Contractor shall also store monthly continuous monitoring data at its location for a period not less than one year from the date the data is created. The data shall be encrypted in accordance with FIPS 140-2 Security Requirements for Cryptographic Modules and shall not be stored on systems that are shared with other commercial or Government entities. The Government may elect to perform continuous monitoring and IT security scanning of Contractor systems from Government tools and infrastructure.

(5) Revocation of ATO. In the event of a sensitive information incident, the Government may suspend or revoke an existing ATO (either in part or in whole). If an ATO is suspended or revoked in accordance with this provision, the Contracting Officer may direct the Contractor to take additional security measures to secure sensitive information. These measures may include restricting access to sensitive information on the Contractor IT system under this contract. Restricting access may include disconnecting the system processing, storing, or transmitting the sensitive information from the Internet or other networks or applying additional security controls.

(6) Federal Reporting Requirements. Contractors operating information systems on behalf of the Government or operating systems containing sensitive information shall comply with Federal reporting requirements.

Annual and quarterly data collection will be coordinated by the Government. Contractors shall provide the COR with requested information within three (3) business days of receipt of the request.

Reporting requirements are determined by the Government and are defined in the Fiscal Year 2014 DHS Information Security Performance Plan, or successor…