ATCH 7_NITE-STAR CD IDIQ_Section M_Draft.pdf

National Space Test and Training Complex (NSTTC) Innovative Technology & Engineering - Space Test and

Range (NITE-STAR)

Capability Development

Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ)

FA2553-25-R-B002

SECTION M – EVALUATION FACTORS

FOR AWARD

17 July 2025

NITE-STAR Capability Development IDIQ Attachment 7 Section M

Table of Contents

1. BASIS FOR CONTRACT AWARD

1.1 Number of Contracts to be Awarded

1.2 Discussions/Clarifications

1.3 Use of Supporting Information

1.4 Proposal Documentation

2. EVALUATION METHODOLOGY

3. EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

4. VOLUME II – TECHNICAL FACTOR

4.1 General

4.2 Technical Factor Rating

4.3 Gated Technical Factor Evaluation

4.3.1 Subfactor 1 (Gate 1) – Security Compliance Requirements

4.3.2 Subfactor 2 – Qualifying Relevant Projects (QRPs)

4.3.2.1 Recent

4.3.2.2 Relevant

5 VOLUME III – SMALL BUSINESS PARTICIPATION COMMITMENT FACTOR

5.1 General

5.2 Small Business Participation Commitment Document Evaluation

5.3 Small Business Participation Commitment Rating

6 VOLUME IV – CONTRACT DOCUMENTATION

6.1 General

6.2 Organizational Conflict of Interest (OCI)

6.3 Small Business Subcontracting Plan

6.4 Contractor Responsibility

NITE-STAR Capability Development IDIQ Attachment 7 Section M

1. BASIS FOR CONTRACT AWARD

This acquisition will be conducted pursuant to the source selection procedures in accordance with Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 15.101-2 and 15.3 as supplemented by Department of Defense (DoD) Source Selection Procedures referenced in Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (DFARS) 215.300 and Department of the Air Force Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (DAFFARS) Mandatory Procedures 5315.3 to make an integrated assessment for Qualifying Offerors. The result of this source selection is a Multiple Award (MA) Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) contract vehicle. The Government will award contract(s) to those Offeror(s) whose proposals conform to the solicitation’s requirements and are determined, based on the evaluation factors, to be a Qualifying Offeror. While the Government will strive for maximum objectivity, the source selection process, by its nature, is subjective, and therefore professional judgment is implicit throughout the entire process.

The Government will review all documents for compliance and acceptability with Section L instructions and evaluate proposals based on the evaluation factors and subfactors. Offerors must furnish adequate and specific information in its response. A Qualifying Offeror is one that is determined to be a responsible source, submits a technically acceptable proposal, provides an acceptable Small Business Participation Document, and the contracting officer has no reason to believe would be likely to offer other than fair and reasonable pricing. A proposal will be eliminated from further consideration if the proposal is so grossly and obviously deficient as to be totally unacceptable on its face.

1.1 Number of Contracts to be Awarded

In accordance with FAR 15.304(c)(1)(ii), the Government intends to award a MA IDIQ contract to all Qualifying Offerors determined to be capable of meeting NITE-STAR Capability Development requirements. The Government reserves the right not to award any contracts under this solicitation. All Qualifying Offerors awarded a basic contract will also be awarded a Task Order for a Post Award Kickoff Conference, which satisfies the minimum order requirement.

1.2 Discussions/Clarifications

The Government may award without discussions and as such, Offerors are strongly advised to submit their best proposal. Offerors may be asked to clarify certain aspects of their proposal.

Communication conducted to resolve minor or clerical errors will not constitute discussions and the Procuring Contracting Officer (PCO) reserves the right to award IDIQ contracts without the opportunity for proposal revision. The Government, however, reserves the right to conduct discussions if deemed in its best interest.

If, during the evaluation period, it is determined to be in the best interest of the Government to hold discussions, Offeror responses to Evaluation Notices (ENs) and the Final Proposal Revision (FPR) will be considered in making the source selection decision.

NITE-STAR Capability Development IDIQ Attachment 7 Section M

1.3 Use of Supporting Information

All Offerors are to note that in conducting this source selection, the Government reserves the right to use data provided by the Offeror as well as additional data obtained from other sources.

Furthermore, the Government reserves the right to verify information contained within Offeror submissions.

1.4 Proposal Documentation

The PCO must receive the complete proposal no later than the submission due date and time as specified in Section L (Attachment 6). All required documentation must be included in the Offeror submission as specified within Section L (Attachment 6) and all data must be complete and accurate. Proposal content and format must be submitted as instructed in Section L (Attachment 6). In addition, the proposal must be signed by an authorized individual.

2. EVALUATION METHODOLOGY

If the Offeror’s proposal is evaluated against the first technical subfactor and does not receive a pass rating, then it will not be considered for further evaluation or award.

3. EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

The following evaluation factors and subfactors will be used to evaluate each proposal.

Factor 1: Technical (Acceptable/Unacceptable) Subfactor 1 (Gate 1): Security Compliance Review (Pass/Fail) Subfactor 2: Qualifying Relevant Projects (Pass/Fail)

Factor 2: Small Business Participation Commitment (Acceptable/Unacceptable)

4. VOLUME II – TECHNICAL FACTOR

4.1 General

The following evaluation factor and subfactors will be used to evaluate each proposal.

Technical Factor

Subfactor 1 (Gate 1): Security Compliance Requirements Subfactor 2: Qualifying Relevant Projects (QRPs)

The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s technical proposal and assign a rating of Pass or Fail for each of the subfactors listed above. Only one rating will be assigned to the Technical Factor.

NITE-STAR Capability Development IDIQ Attachment 7 Section M

4.2 Technical Factor Rating

The technical rating reflects the evaluation of the Offeror’s ability to meet the Government’s requirement. One technical rating will be assigned to each technical subfactor. To be considered technically acceptable and eligible for award, a proposal must receive a “pass” rating in each technical subfactor. Any subfactor evaluated as “fail” will render the entire proposal unacceptable, and therefore, ineligible for award.

4.3 Gated Technical Factor Evaluation

The Government will evaluate an Offeror’s proposal utilizing a gated technical evaluation approach. If the Offeror’s proposal does not pass Gate 1, then the proposal will not be further evaluated or be considered eligible for award. The rating scale for technical subfactors will be Pass/Fail.

4.3.1 Subfactor 1 (Gate 1) – Security Compliance Requirements

The Government will evaluate whether the Offeror demonstrated a minimum facility clearance (FCL) of TOP SECRET, with Special Access Program-Facility (SAP-F) overlay that has been accredited for performing and safeguarding work up to Top Secret/Sensitive Compartmented Information (TS/SCI) and Special Access Program (SAR/SAP) at time of proposal submission and demonstrated the ability to perform cyber security and risk management framework (RMF) type of work IAW National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) SP 800-37 and NIST SP 800-53 regulations.

Rating Description

Pass

Offeror demonstrated a minimum FCL of TOP SECRET, with SAP-F overlay that has been accredited for performing and safeguarding work up to TS/SCI and SAR/SAP at time of proposal submission and demonstrated the ability to perform cyber security and RMF type of work IAW NIST SP 800-37 and NIST SP 800-53 regulations.

Fail

Offeror did not demonstrate a minimum facility clearance FCL of TOP SECRET with SAP-F overlay that has been accredited for performing and safeguarding work up to TS/SCI and SAR/SAP at time of proposal submission and/or did not demonstrate the ability to perform cyber security and RMF type of work IAW NIST SP 800-37 and NIST SP 800-53 regulations.

Table 1 – Security Compliance Requirements Ratings

NITE-STAR Capability Development IDIQ Attachment 7 Section M

4.3.2 Subfactor 2 – Qualifying Relevant Projects (QRPs)

The Government will determine whether the Offeror demonstrated recent and relevant work experience by evaluating two (2) QRPs. QRPs beyond the two (2) required will not be evaluated.

When evaluating the recency and relevancy of the work experience submitted for each QRP, the Government will only consider work experience performed as the prime contractor on a United States Government contract. The Government is not bound by the Offeror’s opinion of recency and relevancy. The evaluation of the Offeror’s QRPs will not include the evaluation of past/present projects of any subcontractor(s) even though they may have performed major or critical aspects of the project.

4.3.2.1 Recent

To be considered recent work experience, all QRPs must demonstrate a minimum of six

(6) months of continuous contract performance within the past five (5) years as from the date of issuance of this solicitation.

4.3.2.2 Relevant

To be considered relevant work experience, QRPs must meet the following criteria:

QRP One (1) - Low-Earth Orbit (LEO) Space System:

The work experience must include, at a minimum, system development (vehicle and payload), integration, testing, launch support, and on-orbit system checkout. Additionally, the space system must have the following attributes or have demonstrated the following capabilities:

Operated in the LEO regime, defined as an altitude at or below 2,000km Single vehicle mass at or above 100kg Design life threshold of at least one (1) year Sensing capabilities:

- In-situ

- Communication relay, or remoting sensing capabilities in any phenomenology Completion of uplink and downlink for Telemetry, Tracking & Commanding

(TT&C) via commercial or Government-owned satellite control networks Completion of mission data downlink

NITE-STAR Capability Development IDIQ Attachment 7 Section M

QRP Two (2) - Geosynchronous/Geostationary Orbit (GEO) Space System:

The work experience must include, at a minimum, system development (vehicle, payload, and ground system), integration, testing, launch support, and on-orbit system checkout.

Additionally, the system (vehicle, payload, and ground system) must have the following attributes, or have demonstrated the following capabilities:

Operated in the GEO regime Single vehicle mass at or above 500kg Design life threshold of at least three (3) years Sensing capabilities:

- In-situ

- Communication relay, or remoting sensing capabilities in any phenomenology Completion of secure ground TT&C and mission data transmission for satellite and payload operations via commercial or Government-owned satellite control networks.

Rating Description

Pass

Recent – All QRPs demonstrated a minimum of six (6) months of on-going performance or performance that occurred during the past five (5) years as from the date of issuance of this solicitation.

AND

Relevant – Work experience for all QRPs includes, at a minimum, system development, integration, testing, launch support, and on-orbit system checkout; and space systems for each QRP have the attributes and capabilities required.

Fail

Recent – At least one (1) QRP demonstrated less than six (6) months of on-going performance or performance that did not occur during the past five (5) years from the date of issuance of this solicitation.

AND/OR

Relevant – Work experience for at least one (1) QRP did not include, at a minimum, system development, integration, testing, launch support, and on-orbit system checkout; or space systems for at least one (1) QRP did not have the attributes and capabilities required.

Table 2 – QRP Ratings

NITE-STAR Capability Development IDIQ Attachment 7 Section M

5 VOLUME III – SMALL BUSINESS PARTICIPATION COMMITMENT FACTOR

5.1 General

Offeror’s Small Business Participation Commitment Document shall be evaluated, as outlined below, to determine if the Offeror provides an adequate approach to meeting the objectives of the Small Business Program and demonstrates an understanding of those objectives. However, Factor 2: Small Business Participation Commitment will not be evaluated if an Offeror is rated as Unacceptable for Factor 1: Technical.

5.2 Small Business Participation Commitment Document Evaluation The Government will evaluate whether the Small Business Participation Commitment Document submission addresses each of the following elements in sufficient detail.

An adequate description of the extent of participation of proposed Small Businesses when subcontracting possibilities exist is provided, including the company names with CAGE codes the Offeror plans to use in the performance of this resultant contract.

An adequate description of the subcontracted work to be performed by these proposed companies is provided.

The associated goals expressed in terms of percentages of the total planned subcontracted dollars is provided. The Offeror’s Small Business Participation Submission will be evaluated against the DoD Fiscal Year 2025 (FY) subcontract small business goals found at https://www.sba.gov/document/support-agency-contracting-goals.

Adequate rationale is provided if limited or no subcontracting possibilities exist for these socio-economic entities. Offerors are cautioned against only acknowledging a goal is not met, if applicable. Adequate rationale includes specific reasons why a goal is unmet and any actions being taken to increase any unmet goals.

5.3 Small Business Participation Commitment Rating

The rating reflects the evaluation of the acceptability of the Offeror’s approach for meeting the Government’s Small Business Program objectives. The Offeror’s proposal shall be evaluated to determine whether the proposal is acceptable or unacceptable, using the ratings and descriptions outlined in the table below. Only one rating will be assigned to the Small Business Participation Commitment factor.

Rating Definition

Acceptable Proposal indicates an adequate approach and understanding of small business objectives.

Unacceptable Proposal does not indicate an adequate approach and/or does not meet small business objectives.

Table 3 – Small Business Participation Commitment Ratings

NITE-STAR Capability Development IDIQ Attachment 7 Section M

6 VOLUME IV – CONTRACT DOCUMENTATION

6.1 General

The proposal documentation contained in Volume IV will be reviewed to ensure all required documentation was provided in response to the solicitation. The provided documentation will be relied upon to facilitate the Contracting Officer’s determination of contractor responsibility and to determine eligibility for award. Failure to comply with the terms and conditions of the solicitation may result in the Offeror being ineligible for award.

6.2 Organizational Conflict of Interest (OCI)

In the event an actual or potential OCI(s) with respect to the performance of itself or its subcontractors or teammates exists, the Offeror’s proposed OCI Mitigation Plan must be determined acceptable to the Government. Any proposed avoidance or mitigation techniques shall be consistent with FAR 9.5 and the most recent decisions of the Government Accountability Office and the U.S. Court of Federal Claims. The OCI Mitigation Plan will be evaluated in accordance with FAR 9 and against the OCI Mitigation Plan Checklist (Attachment 8) to ensure all OCIs are sufficiently avoided, neutralized, or mitigated. Ongoing exchanges may take place regarding OCI concerns, questions, or clarifications; these exchanges will not constitute discussions.

6.3 Small Business Subcontracting Plan

The Small Business Subcontracting Plan will be assessed to determine acceptability by the Contracting Officer. However, the Small Business Subcontracting Plan will not be assessed if an Offeror is rated as unacceptable for Factor 1: Technical or Factor 2: Small Business Participation Commitment.

The Small Business Subcontracting Plan must correspond to the Small Business Participation Commitment Document and not create a conflict. The Small Business Subcontracting Plan must adhere to the requirements found at FAR 19.704(a).

6.4 Contractor Responsibility

No award shall be made unless the PCO makes an affirmative determination of responsibility. To be determined responsible, an Offeror must meet each of the general standards described in FAR 9.104-1, DFARS 209.104-1, and DAFFARS 5309.104-1.