SSP USNS WASHINGTON CHAMBERS MTA 2022 (Final signed PDF).pdf

SOURCE SELECTION INFORMATION — SEE FAR 2.101 & 3.104

SOURCE SELECTION PLAN (SSP)

PROPOSAL FOR THE MTA

OF

USNS WASHINGTON CHAMBERS (T-AKE 11)

SOLICITATION N3220521R4221

SOURCE SELECTION PLAN APPROVAL

Solicitation: N3220521R4221

Approved by: _________________________________________________________ Henry Bijak Date Division Director

Source Selection Authority (SSA)

Reviewed by: _________________________________________________________

Donnie Leger Date

Source Selection Evaluation Board (SSEB) Chairperson

John Massey Date

Technical Evaluation Team (TET) Chairperson

Patrick Mayette Date

Legal Advisor (N00L)

Joe Martin Date

Contracting Officer

Erik Harwood Date

Requirements Owner (RO)

PPE USNS WASHINGTON CHAMBERS

N3220521R4221

TABLE OF CONTENTS

TITLE

PAGE

1.0 BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES 2

2.0 ACQUISITION STRATEGY 2-3

3.0 SOURCE SELECTION TEAM (SST) 3

4.0 STANDARDS OF CONDUCT 4

5.0 COMMUNICATIONS 4-5

6.0 EVALUATION FACTORS AND SUBFACTORS 5-6

7.0 EVALUATION AND DOCUMENTATION PROCEDURES 6-11

8.0 SCHEDULE OF EVENTS 11

9.0 NON-GOVERNMENT PERSONNEL 11

10.0 SECURING SOURCE SELECTION MATERIALS 11-12

REFERENCES

REFERENCE (A): DOD SOURCE SELECTION PROCEDURES, DATED 8 JUNE 2016

ATTACHMENTS

ATTACHMENT 1: SOURCE SELECTION TEAM (SST) – ORGANIZATION AND

RESPONSIBILITIES

ATTACHMENT 2: APPOINTMENT LETTER OF THE SSEB CHAIR

ATTACHMENT 3: APPOINTMENT LETTER FOR THE SSEB MEMBERS

ATTACHMENT 4: CERTIFICATE OF NON-DISCLOSURE AND STATEMENT OF

FINANCIAL INTEREST

ATTACHMENT 5: RATINGS AND DEFINITIONS

ATTACHMENT 6: PLAN OF ACTION AND MILESTONES (POA&M)

ATTACHMENT 7: SOLICITATION SECTIONS L&M

ATTACHMENT 8: EVALUATION NOTICE WORKSHEET

ATTACHMENT 9: TECHNICAL EVALUATION WORKSHEET

ATTACHMENT 10: SAMPLE TECHNICAL EVALUTION WORKSHEET

ATTACHMENT 11: SUMMARY OF TECHNICAL EVALUATION RATING MATRIX

ATTACHMENT 12: SAMPLE PAST PERFORMANCE EVALUATION WORKSHEET

1.0 BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

1. This Source Selection Plan (SSP) establishes the guidelines for conducting a competitively negotiated source selection under RFP N3220521R4221. The proposed acquisition is to perform the Midterm Availability (MTA) on the USNS WASHINGTON

CHAMBERS (T-AKE 11) that will commence at the Contractors’ facility on or about 14

March 2022 and will continue for an anticipated period of 29 calendar days.

2. The solicitation contains two (2) categories of Work Items: Category “A” and Category

“B.” Category “A” work items are work that the contractor will be required to accomplish during the performance period and Category “B” work items are work the

Government may elect to invoke during contract performance if the need for the work becomes evident. In addition, the solicitation contains a CLIN for contract growth, which comprises Additional Government Requirements (AGR) and Other Direct Costs (ODC).

3. The objectives of the source selection process are to:

• Ensure the impartial, equitable, and comprehensive evaluation of Offerors’ proposals;

• Select the offeror with the Lowest Price Technically Acceptable (LPTA) proposal considering price, technical factors, and past performance;

• Document the basis for the selection decision.

4. This SSP describes how proposals will be solicited from industry; how proposals will be evaluated, rated, and summarized after receipt; how proposals will be negotiated; and how the successful offeror will be selected for award. Additionally, this SSP provides the composition of the Source Selection Team (SST); establishes standards for protecting and retaining source selection records and data; and provides a timetable for contract execution.

5. Amendments to this SSP shall be retained in the contract file with the initially approved version. Amendments that change aspects of this SSP other than the composition of the

SST must be approved by the SSA with concurrence of the Contracting Officer and Legal

Advisor. Amendments that change only the composition of the SST may be approved by the SSEB Chairperson with concurrence of the Contracting Officer and Legal Advisor.

All amendments must clearly document the changes made and the amendment’s approval date.

2.0 ACQUISITION STRATEGY

1. This acquisition is being conducted in accordance with Federal Acquisition Regulations

(FAR) Part 15 Procedures. This procurement will be conducted as a total small business set-aside. Changes made to Sections L&M in future Amendments to the Solicitation are automatically incorporated into this (SSP) Attachment.

2. The Government intends to award a single Firm-Fixed Price (FFP) contract. Contract performance will last for 29 calendar days commencing on 14 March 2022 and concluding 13 April 2022.

3. There is no expectation that offers will be obtained from at least two responsible small business concerns. Therefore, this will not be set-aside for small business.

4. The Government expects to obtain best value under this negotiated acquisition from the technically acceptable proposal with the lowest evaluated price. Therefore, evaluation of proposals submitted in response to the RFP will be conducted using a Lowest Price, Technically Acceptable (LPTA) source selection process based on the criteria established in the solicitation.

3.0 SOURCE SELECTION TEAM (SST)

1. The evaluation process and source selection for this acquisition involve a two-tier approach consisting of a Source Selection Evaluation Board (SSEB) and the Source Selection

Authority (SSA). The SSEB will conduct evaluations of proposals received against solicitation requirements without performing a comparative analysis. The results of the evaluations will be provided to the SSA for comparative analysis and a decision to award a contract or enter into discussions. The members of the SST and their responsibilities are identified in Attachment 1. Chart 1 depicts the structure of the SST:

CHART 1: SST ORGANIZATION

4.0 STANDARDS OF CONDUCT

1. All personnel involved in the source selection process are considered “Procurement

Officials” and must comply with Subsection 27(a) of the Office of Federal Procurement

Policy Act, 41 U.S.C., Section 423; FAR 3.104; and the rules and procedures outlined in this SSP.

Source Selection

Authority /

Contracting Officer

Advisor(s):

(Legal, Small

Business, Technical)

SSEB

Chairperson

Functional Team Leads

Functional Team Members

2. The equitable and comprehensive evaluation of each offeror’s proposal depends on the capability of the Government to evaluate each offer independently and impartially. Prior to evaluating offers—

a. All members of the SST (Attachment 1) must complete a Certificate of Non-

Disclosure and Statement of Financial Interest, provided as Attachment 4; must have a current certificate of completion for the DoD ethics training (completed within the past 12 months); and must have an Office of Government Ethics

(OGE) Form 450 on file with the MSC Office of Counsel.

b. The designated Legal Advisor for this source selection or his/her designee shall review the Certificate of Non-Disclosure and Statement of Financial Interest and

OGE Form 450 of each member of the SST identified in Attachment 1 to ensure there are no actual or apparent conflicts of interest (COIs) with any of the offerors. The Certificates of Non-Disclosure and Statements of Financial Interest shall be placed in the contract file. During the source selection process, members of the SST are responsible for notifying the Legal Advisor of any COIs that arise.

5.0 COMMUNICATIONS

1. COMMUNICATIONS WITH INDUSTRY:

a. Within the SST, the only persons authorized to communicate with any offeror are the Contracting Officer or a person designated by the Contracting Officer.

b. Upon receipt of any communication regarding this procurement from any offeror, members of the SST shall notify the Contracting Officer, and if necessary, consult the Legal Advisor to ensure there is no danger of compromising the source selection process.

c. Members of the SST shall not accept an invitation from any offeror or any of its personnel to participate in any event/function, regardless of how remote it may be from the source selection process, without consulting and obtaining the approval of the Legal Advisor. Standards of conduct/COI questions should be referred to the Legal Advisor as soon as they arise.

2. INTERNAL GOVERNMENT COMMUNICATIONS:

a. Members of the SST shall not discuss any part of the source selection with anyone not a member of the SST, except with written permission of the Contracting

Officer. This rule is applied regardless of the rank or position of the inquirer.

b. Members of the SST shall not discuss proposals, findings, recommendations, etc., outside working places or within hearing range of individuals not participating in the source selection.

c. Members of the SST shall limit e-mail communications that contain source selection information to the maximum extent practicable. Members sending e-mails relating to the source selection shall take care to ensure all message recipients are authorized to access the information in the message.

6.0 EVALUATION FACTORS AND SUBFACTORS

1. BASIS FOR AWARD:

a. The Government will evaluate offers using a Lowest Price, Technically

Acceptable (LPTA) process in accordance with FAR 15.101-2. The technical factor and past performance factor will be evaluated on an acceptable/unacceptable basis. Technical tradeoffs will not be made, and no additional credit will be given for exceeding the minimum requirements of the solicitation. Award will be made to the lowest evaluated price proposal whose offer conforms fully to the solicitation requirements and meets the acceptability standards for all non-price factors and subfactors. In order to be eligible for award, an offer must receive an acceptable rating in every non-price factor and subfactor. An unacceptable rating in any non-price factor will render the entire offer unacceptable. For large businesses, the Government will evaluate the Small

Business Subcontracting Plan in accordance with FAR 52.219-9 with its Alternate

II. Failure by a large business to submit and negotiate a subcontracting plan acceptable to the Contacting Officer will render its offer ineligible for award of a contract.

b. The Government intends to award without discussions. Pursuant to FAR

52.215-1(f)(4), however, the Government reserves the right to conduct discussions if the Contracting Officer later determines them to be necessary. In the event that discussions are held, a competitive range determination will be made.

c. In selecting the lowest-priced offeror with an acceptable rating for all non-price factors, the following factors and subfactors will be considered:

Technical Factors

Factor 1 – Understanding the Statement of Work

Subfactor 1.1 – Time Phased Sequencing Network

Subfactor 1.2 – Problem Areas

Subfactor 1.3 – Engineering

Subfactor 1.4 – Material Availability

Subfactor 1.5 – Material Control and Storage

Subfactor 1.6 – Heavy Weather Plans

Subfactor 1.7 – Cold Weather Plans

Factor 2 – Ability to Perform the Statement of Work

Subfactor 2.1 – Man-hour Chart

Subfactor 2.2 – Growth Absorption

Subfactor 2.3 – Facilities

Factor 3 – Management Control and Quality Assurance

Subfactor 3.1 – Organization and Key Personnel

Subfactor 3.2 – Subcontractor Participation

Subfactor 3.3 – Quality Control Plan

Subfactor 3.4 – Hazardous Waste Management Plan

Past Performance Factors

Factor 1 – Quality of product or service

Factor 2 – Timeliness or scheduling of service/deliveries

Factor 3 – Business relations/customer satisfaction

Factor 4 – Key personnel and staffing (including subcontractors)

Factor 5 – Cost Controls (Cost Contracts Only)

Price Factor

d. NOTE. Offerors are cautioned that any offer receiving a rating of unacceptable for any technical subfactor may be rated unacceptable overall for the technical factor. Any offer rated unacceptable for the technical factor or past performance factor will be ineligible for award.

7.0 EVALUATION AND DOCUMENTATION PROCEDURES

1. EVALUATION PROCESS:

a. SSEB Briefing.

Prior to commencement of evaluations, the Contracting Officer, with assistance from the Legal Advisor, shall brief the members of the SSEB regarding procurement integrity, security, and the source selection procedures contained in this SSP and solicitation sections L&M.

b. Distribution.

Upon receipt of proposals, the Contracting Officer shall screen each proposal for adequacy and completeness. The Contracting Officer shall forward the technical proposals to the Technical Evaluation Team (TET) Lead. The Contracting

Officer shall forward past performance information to the Past Performance

Evaluation Team (PPET) Lead. The Contracting Officer shall forward the price proposals to the Price Evaluation Team (PET) Lead.

c. Technical Evaluation.

i. Upon receipt of the technical proposals, the TET Lead will distribute the technical proposals to the TET members. All proposals will be evaluated in accordance with Section M of the RFP to determine technical acceptability, and thus eligibility for award. Each member, including the

TET Lead, will make an independent, impartial evaluation of each technical offer. Evaluators will rate proposals against the minimum technical requirements delineated in the solicitation only and will not compare proposals to one another. Evaluators must use their professional, objective judgment while evaluating and must evaluate each offer solely upon its contents and not upon a preconceived opinion of the offeror or its proposal. Each evaluator will review each offeror’s proposal to ensure it is in compliance with the minimum technical requirements in the solicitation. Each evaluator will document any errors, omissions, deficiencies or needed clarifications.

ii. Upon completion of the technical evaluation by the individual TET members, the TET Lead will review the individual evaluations and will work with the evaluators to determine a consensus rating for the technical factor. If consensus cannot be reached among the evaluators regarding the rating or narrative justification supporting an offeror’s proposal rating, the

TET Lead will facilitate the discussion among evaluators to try to resolve the difference. If a consensus cannot be reached, the TET Lead will require that any dissenting evaluators submit a minority report that will then be made part of the final written report forwarded to the SSA.

iii. The TET Lead will prepare a written technical evaluation report. The findings of the report will reflect the collective opinion of the TET and will not be determined by a majority vote or average. The report will include recommended items for discussion, if necessary, for the

Contracting Officer to incorporate into Evaluation Notices (ENs) if discussions are held. In addition to the TET Lead, all technical evaluators will sign the technical evaluation report to demonstrate concurrence with the findings therein, except when a minority report has been generated. If a minority report has been generated, evaluators who concur with the TET report will sign the TET report, and dissenting evaluators will sign the minority report. Once signed, the TET report will supersede any contradictory and/or dissenting opinions reflected in individual evaluations that are not otherwise captured in a minority report. The TET

Lead will provide the TET report and any minority reports, as well as a recommended "technical competitive range," to the SSEB Chairperson.

d. Past Performance.

i. Upon receipt of the past performance information, the PPET will evaluate each offeror’s past performance information as submitted in its proposal and obtained in accordance with the solicitation. The evaluation will be conducted in accordance with Section M of the RFP to determine acceptability, and thus eligibility for award. The evaluation will document any errors, omissions, deficiencies or needed clarifications.

ii. The PPET Lead will prepare a written past performance evaluation report.

The report will include recommended items for discussion, if necessary, for the Contracting Officer to incorporate into an EN if discussions are held. Once signed, the past performance evaluation report will supersede any contradictory and/or dissenting opinions reflected in individual evaluations that are not otherwise captured in the report. The PPET Lead will forward the past performance evaluation report and any minority reports to the SSEB Chairperson.

e. Price Evaluation.

i. Price proposals will be evaluated in accordance with the RFP by the Price

Evaluation Team (PET). As adequate price competition is anticipated, price analysis techniques will be used to evaluate proposals and support the Contracting Officer’s determination that the price is fair and reasonable. In the event only one technically acceptable offer is received, price analysis will be conducted using recent similar contracts, price indices, the Government estimate and/or other price indicators as deemed necessary by the Government. However, pursuant to FAR 15.403-3(b), if there are unusual circumstances where it is concluded that additional information is necessary to determine the reasonableness of price, the

Contracting Officer will, to the maximum extent possible, obtain the additional information from sources other than the offeror so as to preclude the up-front submission of cost and pricing data. Additionally, the Contracting Officer will, to the maximum extent practicable, limit the scope of the request for information relating to this procurement to include only that information that is in the form regularly maintained by the offeror as part of its normal operations. If a fair and reasonable price cannot be determined from price analysis, the Government will request cost or pricing data. The Government’s right to request cost or pricing data will be noted in the solicitation.

ii. The PET will document any errors, omissions, deficiencies or needed clarifications. Price proposals will not be scored or rated using adjectival ratings. The PET Lead will prepare a written report of the results of the price evaluation and forward a report to the SSEB Chairperson. This report may take the form of a spreadsheet, if permitted by the Contracting

Officer. The report will delineate issues or areas of concern and include recommended items for discussion, if necessary, for the Contracting

Officer to incorporate into an EN if discussions are held.

iii. The price proposals and evaluation results shall not be disclosed to anyone other than the Contracting Officer, PET members, Legal Advisor, SSEB

Chairperson, Contract Review Board (CRB) members, or the SSA unless the Contracting Officer determines that disclosure to others is necessary.

f. Compliance with Solicitation Requirements.

i. The PET will evaluate proposals to determine compliance with the solicitation including proposal submission requirements. The PET Lead shall submit the results of the evaluation to the Contracting Officer and include recommended items for discussion, if necessary, for the

Contracting Officer to incorporate into an EN if discussions are held. The

Contracting Officer may designate the format in which the results are to be submitted.

g. Consolidation of Team Findings / Documentation of Evaluation Results.

i. The Leads of the Technical, Past Performance, and Price Evaluation

Teams will separately discuss their evaluations with the SSEB

Chairperson. The SSEB Chairperson will ensure that the evaluation process followed the evaluation criteria outlined in the RFP and SSP and that the ratings were consistently applied. The combination of the

Technical, Past Performance, and Price reports may constitute the SSEB report.

h. Award Without Discussions.

i. If the SSA makes a determination to award on initial offers without discussions, Section 2, Award Decision, will become the next applicable section of this SSP.

i. Discussion Approval and Process.

i. If the SSA makes a determination not to award on initial offers, the

Contracting Officer will prepare the Pre-negotiation BCM in accordance with MSC procurement policies, to include a Competitive Range

Determination. The Contracting Officer will obtain approval of the BCM approving official, with concurrence of the SSA and the Legal Advisor prior to opening discussions and notifying any offeror of its elimination from the competitive range.

ii. The Contracting Officer will conduct discussions with all offerors in the competitive range. The discussions will be initiated through the issuance of ENs and will address any outstanding issues from all proposal sections.

The Contracting Officer will revise the competitive range, if appropriate, during the discussion process with the concurrence of the BCM Approval

Authority, the SSA, and the Legal Advisor. The Contracting Officer will issue a request for Final Proposal Revisions (FPRs) to all offerors remaining within the competitive range.

j. FPR Evaluation.

i. Upon receipt of FPRs, the Contracting Officer will separate the technical, past performance, and price sections from each proposal and will forward the applicable sections to the appropriate team Leads. The SSEB will evaluate the FPRs following the same procedures as those for the original offers.

k. Evaluation Quality Review.

i. If directed by the SSA, one or more advisors selected by the SSA shall conduct a quality review of some or all of the evaluation reports. The

SSA shall determine which evaluation reports are reviewed. The review will focus on ensuring the evaluation process follows the evaluation criteria and the ratings are appropriately and consistently applied. The results of this review shall be provided to the SSA in a written report. The advisors, including the legal advisor if assigned, shall have had no other involvement in the procurement.

2. AWARD DECISION:

a. SSA Decision.

i. The SSA will use the factors established in the solicitation to make the source selection decision. The SSA, with assistance of the Contracting

Officer and Legal Advisor, will document the decision in the source selection decision document (SSDD). The SSDD shall be the single summary document supporting selection of the best-value proposal consistent with the stated evaluation criteria. It shall clearly explain the decision and document the reasoning used by the SSA to reach the decision consistent with FAR 15.308. The SSDD shall be concise and include the following:

Brief description of the procurement.

Names of offerors submitting proposals and, when applicable, those offerors within the competitive range.

Selection decision, to include price to be paid.

b. Review and Award Process.

i. The Contracting Officer will prepare the BCM and process the award approval documentation in accordance with MSC procurement policies.

3. PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENT OF CONTRACT AWARD AND POST-AWARD

ISSUES:

a. The Contracting Officer shall conduct all required notification and post-award actions, including preparation and delivery of pre-award notices for small business programs in FAR 15.503(a)(2)) and 19.302(d)(1); preparation and coordination of contract award information to the Navy Chief of Information

(CHINFO) for public announcement in accordance with COMSCINST 5700.5

(series), Congressional Notification of Contract Awards; and post-award notices in FAR 15.503(b). The SSA and Legal Advisor shall support the Contracting

Officer as required in preparing for and conducting debriefings.

8.0 SCHEDULE OF EVENTS

1. The Plan of Action and Milestones is provided in Attachment 6.

9.0 NON-GOVERNMENT PERSONNEL

1. Use of non-Government personnel as advisors may be authorized, but should be minimized as much as possible. Non-Government advisors, other than Federally-Funded

Research and Development Centers (FFRDCs,) shall be supported by a written determination in accordance with FAR 37.203 and 37.204.

2. aAll non-Government personnel / advisors will be required to sign a non-disclosure agreement and submit documentation to the Contracting Officer indicating their personal stock holdings prior to being allowed access to source selection sensitive information.

Non-Government personnel / advisors will not be given access to any proprietary information without the consent of the contractor submitting a proposal.

3. Limitations on use of non-Government personnel / advisors. Non-Government advisors may assist in and provide input regarding the evaluation, but they may not determine ratings or rankings of offerors’ proposals. Disclosure of past performance information to non-Government personnel is strictly prohibited (reference DoD Contractor Performance

Assessment Report System (CPARS) Policy Guide, Architect-Engineer Contract

Administration Support System (ACASS) Policy Guide, and Construction Contractor

Appraisal Support System (CCASS) Policy Guide). Accordingly, non-Government advisors shall not participate in the review and evaluation of past performance information. (See FAR 42.1503).

10.0 SECURING SOURCE SELECTION MATERIALS

1. PHYSICAL SECURITY:

a. The physical security of proposals and other source selection information, including evaluation materials, is extremely important and must be safeguarded to protect the integrity of the source selection process. Any release of material submitted by an offeror could have serious consequences for the Government.

All hardcopy evaluation documents will be secured, preferably in locked containers or rooms, when not under the direct control of authorized personnel, and at the end of each workday. All electronic source selection information will be properly safeguarded to ensure access is limited to authorized personnel within the SST. Proposals and other source selection information shall be released only to authorized personnel within the SST.

b. Upon completion of the source selection process, all source selection information generated during the process will be turned over to the Contracting Officer to be retained for the life of the contract. Reference (A) contains a list of 13 types of documentation that must be retained in the contract file. No documentation, data, records, or other evaluation materials generated, produced, or used during the course of this source selection process (including copies) will be disposed of without the Contracting Officer’s approval and the Legal Advisor’s concurrence.

2. RELEASE OF DATA:

a. Details of the source selection activities are not to be made known to anyone other than the authorized members of the SST or persons explicitly designated by the

Contracting Officer, even after award of the contract. Disclosure of the proceedings, evaluation results, or proposal information could result in appeals or protests that could result in delay or cancellation of the procurement. The

Contracting Officer, in consultation with the Legal Advisor, must approve in writing any release of source selection information to individuals not on the SST or not previously designated by the Contracting Officer to receive source selection information.

b. In the event any SST member believes source selection information has been released to individuals not authorized to receive it, the team member has a responsibility to notify the Contracting Officer and the Legal Advisor immediately for handling in accordance with FAR 3.104-7.

ATTACHMENT 1 Page 1

SOURCE SELECTION INFORMATION — SEE FAR 2.101 & 3.104

ATTACHMENT 1

SOURCE SELECTION TEAM (SST) - ORGANIZATION AND RESPONSIBILITIES

Function Assigned Code Position

Source Selection Authority (SSA) SSA Henry Bijak N104B Deputy Director

Source Selection Evaluation Board (SSEB)

Chairperson Donnie Leger N104B Supervisory Contract Specialist

[TET Lead] Scott Alvey N756 Supervisory Project Engineer

[PET Lead] Ed Ruhling N104B1 Contract Specialist

[PPET Lead] Frank Crozier N104B1 Contract Specialist

Technical Evaluation Team (TET) Evaluator Erik Harwood N756 Principal Port Engineer

Evaluator Jordan Timmons N756 Port Engineer

Evaluator Scott Ketterman N756 Port Engineer

Price Evaluation Team (PET) Evaluator Franklin Crozier N104B1 Contract Specialist

Pricing Technical Advisor

John Massey

N756

Supervisory Project Engineer

Past Performance Evaluation Team (PPET) Evaluator Franklin Crozier N104B1 Contract Specialist

Contracting Officer Contracting Officer Joe Martin N104B Deputy Director

Legal Advisor Legal Advisor Destiny Johnson N00L Assistant Counsel

Requirements Owner (RO)

Erik Harwood N756 Principal Port Engineer

Small Business Advisor

Small Business Advisor Jacqueline Alford N9 Small Business Specialist

ATTACHMENT 1 Page 2

SOURCE SELECTION INFORMATION — SEE FAR 2.101 & 3.104

SOURCE SELECTION AUTHORITY (SSA)

1. The SSA is the individual designated to make the best value decision.

2. The SSA shall—

a. Be responsible for the proper and efficient conduct of the source selection process in accordance with this procedure and all applicable laws and regulations.

b. Appoint the chairperson for the SSEB.

c. Ensure that personnel appointed to the SST are knowledgeable of policy and procedures for properly and efficiently conducting the source selection. Ensure the SST members have the requisite acquisition experience, skills, and training necessary to execute the source selection, and ensure the highest level of team membership consistency for the duration of the selection process.

d. Ensure that realistic source selection schedules are established and source selection events are conducted efficiently and effectively in meeting overall program schedules. The schedules should support proper and full compliance with source selection procedures outlined in the DOD Source Selection

Procedures, dated 8 June 2016, and this SSP.

e. Ensure all involved in the source selection are briefed and knowledgeable about applicable portions of 41 U.S.C. § 2102 - Prohibitions on Disclosing and

Obtaining Procurement Information; FAR 3.104 regarding unauthorized disclosure of contractor bid and proposal information and source selection information; and 5 Code of Federal Regulations Part 2635, Standards of Ethical

Conduct for Employees of the Executive Branch, regarding applicable standards of conduct (including procedures to prevent the improper disclosure of information). To confirm statutory and regulatory compliance, ensure all persons receiving source selection information sign a Non-disclosure Agreement and a

Conflict of Interest Statement. Ensure Conflict of Interest Statements (from both

Government members/advisors and nongovernment team advisors) are appropriately reviewed and actual or potential conflict of interest issues are resolved prior to granting access to any source selection information.

f. If the solicitation states the Government intends to award without discussions and it is later determined that discussions are necessary, review and approve the

PCO’s written rationale (see FAR 15.306(a)(3)). If discussions will be conducted, review and approve the PCO’s written determination of the competitive range or elimination of an offeror previously determined to be in the competitive range.

g. Select the source whose proposal offers the best value to the Government in accordance with evaluation criteria and basis for award stated in the solicitation.

h. Document the rationale in the (SSDD).

ATTACHMENT 1 Page 3

SOURCE SELECTION INFORMATION — SEE FAR 2.101 & 3.104

SOURCE SELECTION EVALUATION BOARD (SSEB)

1. The SSEB is comprised of a Chairperson and Evaluators (also known as SSEB

Members). The SSEB Members will be organized into functional teams corresponding to the specific evaluation criteria. Each functional team will have a Lead to serve as the primary team representative to the SSEB Chairperson. In the event a particular functional team has only one member, that member will be the functional team Lead.

2. Government personnel assigned to the SSEB shall consider this duty as their primary responsibility. Their source selection assignment shall take priority over other work assignments.

3. Neither the SSEB Chairperson nor the SSEB members shall perform comparative analysis of proposals or make source selection recommendations unless requested by the

SSA.

4. The SSEB Chairperson shall:

a. Be responsible for the overall management of the SSEB and act as the SSEB’s interface to the SSA.

b. Establish functional evaluation teams, as appropriate, to support an efficient source selection evaluation. Appoint Leads and members to the functional evaluation teams, subject to approval of the SSA.

c. Ensure the skills of the personnel, the available resources, and the time assigned are commensurate with the complexity of the acquisition.

d. Ensure members of the SSEB are trained and knowledgeable on how an evaluation is conducted prior to reviewing any proposals.

e. Ensure the evaluation process follows the evaluation criteria and ratings are being consistently applied.

f. Provide consolidated evaluation results to the SSA.

g. Support any post source selection activities such as debriefings and post-award reviews/meetings, as required.

h. Serve as a technical advisor as required.

5. Each SSEB functional team Lead shall:

a. Be responsible for consolidating the evaluation findings of the team.

b. Serve as the functional team’s interface with the SSEB Chairperson.

6. The SSEB Members shall:

a. Conduct a comprehensive review and evaluation of proposals based solely on the evaluation criteria outlined in the solicitation.

b. Assist the SSEB Chairperson in documenting the SSEB evaluation results.

c. Support any post-source-selection activities, such as debriefings and post-award reviews/meetings, as required.

ATTACHMENT 1 Page 4

SOURCE SELECTION INFORMATION — SEE FAR 2.101 & 3.104

CONTRACTING OFFICER

1. The Contracting Officer will serve as the primary business advisor and principal guidance source for the entire Source Selection.

2. In addition to responsibilities listed in FAR 15. 303(c), the Contracting Officer shall—

a. Manage all business aspects of the acquisition and work with the SSEB Chair to ensure the evaluation is conducted in accordance with the evaluation criteria specified in the solicitation. Advise and assist the SSA in the execution of his or her responsibilities.

b. Ensure that required approvals are obtained and the appropriate notification clause is included in the solicitation before nongovernment personnel are allowed to provide source selection support (e.g. FAR 7.503 and 37.205).

c. In accordance with FAR 3.104 and DFARS 203.104, ensure that procedures exist to safeguard source selection information and contractor bid or proposal information (FAR 15.207). Approve appropriate access to or release of source selection information and contractor bid or proposal information after consulting

Legal Counsel before and after contract award.

d. Maintain as a minimum, the documents and source selection evaluation records in accordance with DOD Source Selection Procedures, dated 8 June 2016.

e. Release the final solicitation only after obtaining all required approvals including the SSA approval of the SSP.

f. Serve as the single point of contact for all solicitation-related inquiries from actual or prospective offerors.

g. After receipt of proposals, control exchanges with offerors in accordance with

FAR 15.306.

h. Prior to conducting discussions, determine the competitive range, document the basis for excluding any offeror from the competitive range, and submit it to the

SSA for review and approval. Written notice of this decision shall be provided to the unsuccessful offeror(s) in accordance with FAR 15.503(a)..

i. Ensure all SSEB members sign a Certificate of Non-Disclosure and Statement of

Financial Interest form (Attachment 2).

j. Ensure offerors are debriefed as required and document in the contract file the debriefing(s) provided to Offerors IAW FAR 15.505 or 15.506, as applicable.

k. Prepare a list of offerors (including significant subcontractors) for review by members of the Source Selection Team when signing Attachment 2.

ATTACHMENT 1 Page 5

SOURCE SELECTION INFORMATION — SEE FAR 2.101 & 3.104

LEGAL ADVISOR

1. Legal Counsel is an integral part of the source selection process and is crucial in reviewing documentation for legal sufficiency as well as providing legal advice throughout the source selection process.

2. The Legal Advisor shall —

a. Assist as needed in development of the Acquisition Plan (AP) and SSP and advise on legal sufficiency prior to approval.

b. Review solicitation for legal sufficiency and ensure consistency with the SSP.

c. Assist the Contracting Officer in briefing all SSEB members prior to commencement of proposal evaluations on duties, responsibilities, conduct, and specific source selection procedures using the SSP as the guide.

d. Review the Certificate of Non-Disclosure and Statement of Financial Interest form and OGE Form 450 of each member of the SSEB to ensure that there are no actual or apparent conflicts of interest.

e. Provide legal advice and guidance to the SS as needed.

f. Review source selection documentation for legal sufficiency and consistency with the solicitation and SSP.

g. Assist Contracting Officer with reviewing the written analyses and evaluations of the SSEB to ensure narrative rationale supports assigned rating and evaluation is in compliance with the SSP.

h. Assist the Contracting Officer in debriefing unsuccessful Offerors as required.

REQUIREMENTS OWNER (RO)

1. The Requirements Owner is the generator of the acquisition requirement based on the need to satisfy a capability or performance gap.

2. The Requirements Owner shall —

a. Establish robust support, review, training on requirements development, and requirements validation procedures to ensure Government requirements are clear, concise, and descriptive in outlining the mission need and desired outcome.

b. Ensure that requirements documents are stable, reviewed, and validated by the appropriate authority outlined in Service and DoD Agency requirement validation procedures.

c. Assist the SSA, Contracting Officer, and SST with identifying the resources required to obtain a product or service that will meet Government performance standards and requirements.

ATTACHMENT 2 Page 1

SOURCE SELECTION INFORMATION — SEE FAR 2.101 & 3.104

ATTACHMENT 2

APPOINTMENT LETTER OF THE SOURCE SELECTION EVALUATION BOARD CHAIR

From: SSA

To: Donnie Leger, SSEB Chairperson

Ref: (a) Solicitation N3220521R4221

Encl: (1) Source Selection Plan

1. Pursuant to my duties as the Source Selection Authority (SSA) for reference (a), you are designated the Chair of the SSEB. As Chair, you will be responsible for managing and administering the total

SSEB effort in accordance with enclosure (1) and evaluating all proposals received in response to the solicitation.

2. Request you initiate action to select and appoint working-level experts as members to the SSEB in accordance with the procedure in enclosure (1).

3. Enclosure (1) prescribes duties and responsibilities for all participants on the Source Selection

Board and describes the applicable acquisition policies, procedures, and milestones.

4. Upon receipt of this letter, you will not discuss or disclose your appointment or any information regarding the proceedings of this Source Selection Board to anyone not having bona fide need to know.

Date Source Selection Authority

I accept the appointment as the Chair, SSEB for referenced solicitation.

Date SSEB Chairperson

ATTACHMENT 3 Page 1

SOURCE SELECTION INFORMATION — SEE FAR 2.101 & 3.104

ATTACHMENT 3

APPOINTMENT LETTER OF THE SOURCE SELECTION EVALUATION BOARD (SSEB)

MEMBERS

From: SSEB Chairperson

To: John Massey

Ref: (a) Solicitation No. N3220521R4221

Encl: (1) Source Selection Plan

1. Pursuant to my duties as the Chairman, SSEB, you have been selected and hereby designated as a member of the SSEB for reference (a). You will be responsible to me in the evaluation of all proposals received from industry in response to reference (a).

2. Enclosure (1) prescribes duties and responsibilities for all participants on the Source Selection

Board for the referenced solicitation and describes the applicable acquisition policies, procedures, and milestones.

3. You will be given an indoctrination briefing on _______________ at ____________.

(Insert Date and Time)

Subsequent SSEB meetings will be held as the SSEB members’ duties are required.

Date Chair, SSEB

I accept the appointment as a member of the SSEB for referenced solicitation.

Date Appointee

ATTACHMENT 4 Page 1

SOURCE SELECTION INFORMATION — SEE FAR 2.101 & 3.104

ATTACHMENT 4

CERTIFICATE OF NON-DISCLOSURE AND STATEMENT OF FINANCIAL INTEREST

I understand that I may have access to information received in confidence from non-Federal entities including, but not limited to, technical approaches, past performance information, trade secrets, inventions, discoveries, financial and technical reports, and cost or pricing-related information. I may also have access to other procurement information such as the names, identities, and number of non-Federal entities under consideration and the methods, procedures, standards, and ratings used in the evaluation process.

I understand that information gained during the procurement process may constitute “source selection information” and “contractor bid and proposal information” as those terms are defined in FAR §§ 2.101 and 3.104-1. I also understand that federal law (41 U.S.C. § 423, as implemented by FAR §§ 3.104-2, 3.104-3, 3.104-4, 3.104-7, and 3.104-8) prohibits the unauthorized disclosure of such information. I agree not to disclose such information to any individual outside of the acquisition team without authorization from the Contracting Officer or Legal Advisor. I also understand that my obligation not to disclose such information does not terminate with the award of a contract or any other contract action. Finally, I understand that my unauthorized disclosure of such information could result in termination of my employment and/or disciplinary action, including criminal prosecution.

I have examined the list of offerors dated __________ that the Contracting Officer has provided to me.

I have reviewed my personal and financial interests, as well as those of my spouse, my dependents, and members of my household. To the best of my knowledge and belief, I affirm that those interests are not likely to create a real or apparent conflict of interest with my participation in this acquisition. I will immediately notify the Contracting Officer if a proposal is received from a firm in which I, my spouse, my dependent(s), or any member(s) of my household has a personal or financial interest. I acknowledge that a personal or financial interest may require my removal from further participation in this source selection.

Check One:

I HAVE a current Confidential Financial Disclosure Report (OGE Form 450) on file with MSC.

I DO NOT HAVE an OGE Form 450 on file with MSC. I will complete one and submit it to the Contracting Officer prior to participating in this procurement.

With respect to the foregoing, I understand that these provisions are consistent with and do not supersede, conflict with, or otherwise alter the employee obligations, rights, or liabilities created by existing statute or Executive order relating to (1) classified information, (2) communications to Congress, (3) the reporting to an Inspector General of a violation of any law, rule, or regulation, or mismanagement, a gross waste of funds, an abuse of authority, or a substantial and specific danger to public health or safety, or (4) any other whistleblower protection. The definitions, requirements, obligations, rights, sanctions, and liabilities created by controlling Executive orders and statutory provisions are incorporated into this agreement and are controlling.

(Printed Name) (Signature and Date)

Counsel Review:

I find no actual or apparent conflict of interest exists with any of the offerors.

I find a conflict of interest exists as follows:

(Printed Name) (Signature and Date)

ATTACHMENT 5 Page 1

SOURCE SELECTION INFORMATION — SEE FAR 2.101 & 3.104

ATTACHMENT 5

RATINGS / DEFINITIONS

TECHNICAL ACCEPTABLE/UNACCEPTABLE RATINGS

RATING DESCRIPTION

ACCEPTABLE

Proposal meets the minimum requirements of the solicitation.

UNACCEPTABLE

Proposal does not meet the minimum requirements of the solicitation.

Note: Any offeror which receives a rating of Unacceptable on any Technical factor or subfactor cannot receive an award.

PAST PERFORMANCE EVALUATION RATINGS

RATING DESCRIPTION

ACCEPTABLE

Based on the offeror’s performance record, the

Government has a reasonable expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort, or the offeror’s performance record is unknown

UNACCEPTABLE

Based on the offeror’s performance record, the

Government does not have a reasonable expectation that the offeror will be able to successfully perform the required effort.

Note: In the case of an offeror without a record of relevant past performance or for whom information on past performance is not available or so sparse that no meaningful past performance rating can be reasonably assigned, the offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on past performance (see FAR 15.305(a) (2) (iv)). Therefore, the offeror shall be determined to have unknown past performance. In the context of acceptability/unacceptability, “unknown” shall be considered “acceptable.”

DEFINITIONS

Clarifications: Limited exchanges between the Government and Offerors that may occur when award without discussions is contemplated.

Competitive Range: See FAR 15.306(c).

Deficiency: See the definition in FAR 15.001. A deficiency may be an omission of data, which makes it impossible to assess compliance with the evaluation factors/subfactors, or may be an ambiguity that must be resolved before an assessment of compliance can be made.

ATTACHMENT 5 Page 2

SOURCE SELECTION INFORMATION — SEE FAR 2.101 & 3.104

Discussions: Negotiations conducted in a competitive acquisition. Discussions take place after establishment of the competitive range.

Evaluation Notice (EN): Written notification to the offeror in support of discussions to identify— (a) any adverse past performance information to which the offeror has not yet had an opportunity to respond, (b) significant weaknesses, and (c) any deficiencies that have been identified during the evaluation. The SSEB prepares ENs, and the Contracting Officer and Legal

Advisor review them prior to release to the offeror.

Lowest Price Technically Acceptable (LPTA): Process used in competitive negotiated contracting where the best value is expected to result from selection of the technically acceptable proposal with the lowest evaluated price. See FAR 15.101-2.

Omission: The absence from a proposal of information requested by the solicitation’s instructions to Offerors. An omission may or may not constitute a deficiency.

Price Reasonableness: Price Reasonableness means that the price, in its nature and amount, does not exceed that which would be incurred by a prudent person in the conduct of competitive business.

ATTACHMENT 6 Page 1

SOURCE SELECTION INFORMATION — SEE FAR 2.101 & 3.104

ATTACHMENT 6

PLAN OF ACTION AND MILESTONES (POA&M)

MILESTONE

Original Planned

Date

Current Planned

Date

Achieved

Date

Notification of Requirement by Requiring Code 05 March 2021 7 March 2021 7 March 2021

Received Requirement 26 June 2021 26 June 2021 26 June 2021

Synopsize 9 July 2021 9 July 2021 14 July 2021

Source Selection Plan Approval 9 Aug 2021 9 Aug 2021

Issue Solicitation 14 Aug 2021 14 Aug 2021

Solicitation Closes 28 Aug 2021 28 Aug 2021

Tech Evaluation Due 26 Nov 2021 26 Nov 2021

Pre-Negotiation BCM Complete 21 Oct 2021 21 Oct 2021

Pre-Negotiation BCM Approved 29 Oct 2021 29 Oct 2021

Send IFNs 29 Oct 2021 29 Oct 2021

Conduct Discussions With Offerors 6 Nov 2021 6 Nov 2021

Revised Offers Due 16 Nov 2021 16 Nov 2021

Tech Evaluation Due 26 Nov 2021 26 Nov 2021

Post-Negotiation BCM Complete 10 Dec 2021 10 Dec 2021

Post-Negotiation BCM Approved 18 Dec 2021 18 Dec 2021

CHINFO 6 Jan 2022 6 Jan 2022

Contract Award 13 Jan 2022 13 Jan 2022

Availability start 14 March 2022 14 March 2022

ATTACHMENT 8 Page 1

ATTACHMENT 7

SOLICITATION SECTIONS L&M

Section L - Instructions, Conditions and Notice to Bidders

CLAUSES INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE

52.204-7 System for Award Management OCT 2018

52.204-16 Commercial and Government Entity Code Reporting AUG 2020

52.204-22 Alternative Line Item Proposal JAN 2017

52.211-6 Brand Name or Equal AUG 1999

52.211-7 Alternatives to Government-Unique Standards NOV 1999

52.214-34 Submission Of Offers In The English Language APR 1991

52.214-35 Submission Of Offers In U.S. Currency APR 1991

52.215-1 Instructions to Offerors--Competitive Acquisition JAN 2017

252.204-7019 Notice of NIST SP 800-171 DoD Assessment Requirements

NOV 2020

252.215-7008 Only One Offer JUL 2019

252.215-7010 Requirements for Certified Cost or Pricing Data and Data Other Than Certified Cost or Pricing Data

JUL 2019

252.215-7013 Supplies and Services Provided by Nontraditional Defense Contractors.

JAN 2018

CLAUSES INCORPORATED BY FULL TEXT

52.216-1 TYPE OF CONTRACT (APR 1984)

The Government contemplates award of a Firm Fixed Price contract resulting from this solicitation.

(End of provision)

ATTACHMENT 8 Page 2

52.233-2 SERVICE OF PROTEST (SEP 2006)

(a) Protests, as defined in section 33.101 of the Federal Acquisition Regulation, that are filed directly with an agency, and copies of any protests that are filed with the Government Accountability Office (GAO), shall be served on the Contracting Officer (addressed as follows) by obtaining written and dated acknowledgment of receipt from Donnie Leger, 471 East C Street, Norfolk VA 23511

(b) The copy of any protest shall be received in the office designated above within one day of filing a protest with the GAO.

52.252-1 SOLICITATION PROVISIONS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE (FEB 1998)

This solicitation incorporates one or more solicitation provisions by reference, with the same force and effect as if they were given in full text. Upon request, the Contracting Officer will make their full text available. The offeror is cautioned that the listed provisions may include blocks that must be completed by the offeror and submitted with its quotation or offer. In lieu of submitting the full text of those provisions, the offeror may identify the provision by paragraph identifier and provide the appropriate information with its quotation or offer.