1) RFP-BVSS MG 03042024 HBend Magnets.pdf

(9/8/23)

REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL (RFP) No.: MG 03042024

PROPOSAL DUE DATE: 03/29/2024

Advanced Light Source Upgrade (ALS-U) Storage Ring “Hard Bend”

(HBEND) Magnets

North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) Code: 332999, All Other Miscellaneous Fabricated Metal Product Manufacturing

Procurement Point of Contact: Martha Gamarano Grausz Telephone No: (510) 486-6618 Email: mggrausz@lbl.gov

University of California, Managing and Operating Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory Request for Proposal No. MG 03042024

1. INTRODUCTION

The University of California, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (“University” or “LBNL”) requests a proposal for eight (8) HBEND permanent magnet (PM) dipole bending magnets for the ALS-U storage ring, in accordance with this RFP, Sample Subcontract, and other enclosures.

This solicitation is governed by procurement policies and procedures established under the University’s Prime Contract No. DE-AC02-05CH11231 with the U.S. Government, represented by the Department of Energy (DOE), for management and operation of LBNL. Proposals submitted will be treated as offers and any resulting award(s) will be a Subcontract under the University’s Prime Contract.

Timeline of Events Request for Proposal Release 03/04/2024 Offeror Questions Due (see page 02) 03/18/2024, no later than 3:00 pm Pacific Time

Proposals Due 03/29/2024, no later than 3:00 pm Pacific Time

Table 1

This acquisition is for the manufacturing, assembly, inspection, and testing work required to produce the eight (8) fully assembled HBEND PM dipole bending magnets for the ALS-U storage ring.

1.1 Estimated Term

It is expected that the Subcontract will be performed over a period of 20 months and the ordered items should be delivered by 76 weeks after receipt of order (ARO).

1.2 NAICS Code and Small Business Size Standard

The North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) Code for this acquisition is 332999, All Other Miscellaneous Fabricated Metal Product Manufacturing. The corresponding small business size standard for this acquisition is 750 in number of employees.

The offeror shall complete the Small Business Program Representations clause in the attached Representations and Certifications form based on this small business size standard. Refer to Subpart 19.1

- Size Standards, of the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) for information on calculating the number of employees.

Under 15 U.S.C. 645(d), any person who misrepresents a firm's status as a business concern that is small, HUBZone small, small disadvantaged, service-disabled veteran-owned small, economically disadvantaged women-owned small, or women-owned small eligible under the Women-Owned Small Business (WOSB) Program in order to obtain a contract to be awarded under the preference programs established pursuant to section 8, 9, 15, 31, and 36 of the Small Business Act or any other provision of Federal law that specifically references section 8(d) for a definition of program eligibility, shall-

(i) Be punished by imposition of fine, imprisonment, or both;

(ii) Be subject to administrative remedies, including suspension and debarment; and

(iii) Be ineligible for participation in programs conducted under the authority of the Act.

2. SOLICITATION RESPONSE REQUIREMENTS AND EVALUATION FOR AWARD

2.1 General

The offeror must submit documentation illustrating their approach for satisfying the requirements of this solicitation. Failure to submit any of the information required by this solicitation may be cause for unfavorable consideration or exclusion from further consideration. Proposals must be written in English and be clear, coherent, and prepared in sufficient detail for effective evaluation.

Written proposals must be submitted by email (or other form of secure electronic submission) to the University Procurement Representative (mggrausz@lbl.gov) no later than 3:00 pm Pacific Time on 03/29/2024.

Additional contact information is referenced below:

Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory Attention: Martha Gamarano Grausz Mail Stop 971-PROC

RFP MG 03042024

One Cyclotron Road Berkeley, CA 94720

All correspondence in conjunction with this solicitation must be directed to the University Procurement Representative. Proposals shall be valid for a period of 120 days from the proposal due date. Acceptance of late proposals will be at the University’s discretion. The University reserves the right to reject any proposal, to waive any minor proposal irregularities, or to cancel this RFP at any time prior to award without cost to the University. The University will not reimburse any firm for proposal preparation or any other costs related to the participation in this RFP.

2.2 Offerors’ Questions

The University will respond to questions submitted via email to the University Procurement Representative on or before 3:00 pm Pacific Time on 03/18/2024. Questions submitted after this date may not be answered prior to the proposal due date. Answers to questions that are submitted timely will be issued or be made available to all offerors electronically, ensuring that the identity of all offerors will remain anonymous.

2.3 Evaluation and Selection

2.3.1 Determination of Responsive and Responsible Offers

The University intends to select for award the responsive and responsible offeror whose proposal demonstrates that the offeror(s) can satisfy the minimum technical requirements specified later in this RFP (if any minimum requirements are specified) and contain(s) the combination of price, performance features, and supplier attributes (described later in this RFP) offering the best overall value to the University.

An initial review of offers will be performed by the Procurement Specialist to determine if the offer is complete and provides all the required information to enable the University to evaluate the offer to determine if it is responsive.

Offerors may be contacted only for clarification purposes during the initial review. Incomplete offers may be considered non-responsive and may be excluded from further consideration if the omissions are substantive (e.g., one or more required documents not submitted, one or more evaluation factors not addressed). Offerors will be notified when appropriate in the interest of fair business practice and professional courtesy if their offer was determined non-responsive and/or not meeting minimum requirements and the reasons for rejection will be provided if a debrief is requested.

A responsive offeror is one whose proposal satisfies the requirements of this RFP including those listed in Section 2.4, and the requirements of the Sample Subcontract and its incorporated documents. A responsible offeror is one that has adequate financial resources, ability to comply with the performance schedule, has a satisfactory performance record, has the necessary technical skills to be considered capable of performing and is otherwise eligible and qualified to perform the proposed Subcontract at the time of award. An offeror cannot be determined as “responsible” if it is currently ineligible for receiving new federal government prime contracts or subcontracts. The determination of responsiveness and responsibility of complete offers will be made by a team consisting of technical and procurement personnel and considering the evaluation factors described in Section 2.4, below.

2.3.2 Evaluation of Technical Requirements, Supplier Attributes and Non-Technical Factors Once the University has determined offers are complete in the initial review, they will be evaluated to confirm that minimum requirements of the solicitation stated in Section 2.4.2.1 have been met.

The University will go on to determine the best overall value by evaluating the desired performance features, supplier attributes, and non-technical factors including the price. The University Procurement Representative will make a determination for award to the successful offeror based on the results of the evaluation.

The University’s expectations for these evaluation factors are stated in Section 2.4.2.2 and 2.4.3.2. The University reserves the right to award to other than the lowest price offeror(s). Offerors should therefore strive to be persuasive in describing the value of their proposed performance features, supplier attributes, and other factors, including how they would enhance the likelihood of successful performance and achievement of the University’s objectives. Price will be evaluated based on the total proposed price, including freight and (if applicable) import duties and tariffs.

2.3.3 Additional Evaluation Considerations

The University’s evaluation will be based on the information provided by the offeror(s), the University’s own experience with the offeror(s), and/or information obtained from the offeror’s references and other sources. In its evaluation, the University will consider the degree of substantiation of the proposed approaches in the proposal volumes and in response to any discussions, if held. The University is not responsible for locating or securing any information which is not included in the proposal. To ensure sufficient information is available, offerors must furnish as part of their proposal all descriptive material (such as manuals, drawings, technical specifications, or other information) necessary for the University’s evaluation.

Offerors are advised that, although negotiations may follow receipt of proposals, award may be made without discussions on proposals received. If the University determines that revised proposals are necessary, the University may solicit them from only those offerors deemed to have a reasonable chance to be selected for award. An offeror is identified as having a reasonable chance of award based on the evaluation indicating they are responsive and responsible; their offer satisfies the minimum requirements of the solicitation; they have presented acceptable or strong performance features and supplier attributes;

they have sufficient bandwidth to take on new work; and their proposed pricing is considered fair and reasonable. The University reserves the right to make no awards, a single award, or multiple awards as a result of this solicitation, if it is in the best interest of the University.

2.4 Proposal Submittal Requirements

Proposals should consist of a cover letter, a technical volume, and a business volume. Offerors should submit these as separate documents. All proposals must be submitted in the following formats: MS Word, MS Excel, PDF, or an alternate format approved by the University Procurement Representative.

Proposals must include information on the following evaluation factors. Please note that a description of the information required of each factor is provided after the table below.

Volume Factor

Cover Letter Per Section 2.4.1

Technical Volume

Technical Evaluation Factors

Factor 1 – Ability to Meet Technical Requirements

Factor 2 – Past Performance

Factor 3 - Manufacturing Capabilities

Factor 4 - Delivery & Schedule

Factor 5 - Quality Management System

Technical Enclosures

Business Volume

Non-Technical Evaluation Factors

Enclosures Offeror’s Acceptance of the terms, conditions, general provisions, and other incorporated documents of the Sample Subcontract Financial Resources

Proposed Government Furnished Property/Subcontractor Acquired Property

Price Proposal

Table 2

2.4.1 Cover Letter

The cover letter must identify the offeror’s name and address, solicitation number and title, the name(s), title(s), email address(es), and telephone number(s) of the individuals in offeror’s organization who have commitment authority on behalf of the offeror and will be responsible for contractual negotiations and administration of any resultant Subcontract.

2.4.2 Technical Volume

The technical volume should contain a comprehensive discussion of how the offeror will fulfill the technical requirements and successfully perform the Subcontract, including a discussion of important performance features and supplier attributes, highlighting any aspects which may separate it from its competitors.

2.4.2.1 Technical Evaluation Factors

The technical volume should identify, describe, and discuss the following performance features and supplier attributes the University has identified as desirable for the successful performance of the proposed Subcontract. The University will use these criteria for the subjective evaluation of proposals. The criteria are listed in the relative order of importance to the University. The offeror should discuss them in the proposal and may identify other performance features and supplier attributes not listed below that the offeror believes may be of value to the University. If the University agrees, they will be considered in the evaluation process. In all cases, the University will assess the value of each proposal as submitted.

The following adjectival ratings will be used to rate the performance features and supplier attributes:

● Excellent: Proposal demonstrates excellent understanding and satisfaction of the University’s requirements. Its approach significantly exceeds the desired performance features and supplier attributes and is highly beneficial to the University. There are no evaluated weaknesses.

● Good: Proposal demonstrates good understanding and satisfaction of the University’s requirements.

Its approach exceeds the desired performance features and supplier attributes and is beneficial to the University. There are no significant evaluated weaknesses.

● Acceptable: Proposal demonstrates an adequate understanding and satisfaction of the University’s requirements. Its approach satisfies most desired performance features and supplier attributes and is beneficial to the University. There may be minor, but correctable evaluated weaknesses.

● Unacceptable: Proposal fails to demonstrate an adequate understanding of the University’s requirements or its approach fails to meet desired performance features or supplier attributes that are beneficial to the University. There are unacceptable weaknesses that can only be met with major changes to the proposed approach.

• Factor 1 – Ability to Meet Technical Requirements The technical proposal should demonstrate the offeror’s ability to successfully meet the requirements of the technical specifications set out in the Statement of Work (SOW) AL-1685-4598. Revision A Titled ALS-U Storage Ring HBEND Magnets, dated, 01/26/2024 and the associated specifications listed below. The technical proposal must, at a minimum, address how the offeror meet the requirements of the following:

• AL-1685-4598 SOW

o Section 3 Deliverables o Section 4 Project Administration o Section 5 Shipping, Handling, and Storage o Section 6 Quality Assurance

• AL-1685-4599 Technical Specifications for the ALS-U Storage Ring HBEND Magnets, Revision A, dated 02/20/2024 o Section 2 Magnetic Specifications o Section 3 HBEND Component and Assembly Description o Section 4 HBEND Magnet Assembly Alignment and Positioning o Section 5 LBNL HBEND Assembly Tooling Requirements o Section 6 Certifications, Inspections, Testing,and Reporting

• Factor 2 – Past Performance

A. The offeror should have successfully performed within the last five years contracts similar in type and complexity as the proposed Subcontract. The offeror must include in its proposal a written description of up to two contracts within the last five years that demonstrate that the offeror has successfully performed similar work in a quality manner (e.g., letters of reference, project documentation, etc.).

B. For these reference contracts, the offeror should also:

• Describe unexpected setbacks or problems encountered in the identified contracts and any corrective actions that were taken.

• Provide details of experience with handling of comparable or larger sized permanent magnets.

• Provide details of experience with epoxied systems for accelerators.

• Supply the resumes/vitae of all key project personnel such as the project manager, project engineer, lead production managers, and lead quality assurance personnel who will be assigned for the life of the program. This must also include key personnel of subcontractor.

The offeror will be evaluated based on their demonstrated past performance to successfully plan and execute the manufacture of similar/comparable products that meet the criteria for similar projects, under similar circumstances and schedule requirements. The offeror’s past performance will be evaluated based on information provided by past customers and examples of recent prior contracts.

The offeror will also be evaluated on their identification and corrective action for any issues or problems encountered during past performance of similar contracts.

• Factor 3 – Manufacturing Capabilities (Including lower-tier subcontractors)

The offeror must provide a plan to successfully demonstrate the offeror’s resources and project management support that are adequate to deliver the devices on schedule, using a quality-controlled manufacturing process and include adequate procurement capabilities, fabrication facilities, and testing facilities to execute the subcontract.

The offeror’s proposal will be evaluated regarding their approach and execution plan to satisfy and execute all the Statement of Work (SOW) AL-1685-4598. Revision A Titled ALS-U Storage Ring HBEND Magnets, dated, 01/26/2024 and specification requirements as described in this RFP, specifically but not limited to the following:

a) Identifies all subcontracted scope of work and also provide a synopsis of its experience in working together with its lower-tier-subcontractors.

b) Outlines of equipment, space, and processes that are sufficient to produce the ALS-U

HBEND Production Magnets.

c) Identifies assembly space that will be employed for the project. The assembly space is of sufficient size and cleanliness, can be temperature controlled with access control.

d) A summary of, the software and/or other tools that are used for internal tracking, ERP

(Enterprise Resource Planning) and MRP (Material Requirement Planning). Include in the summary the length of time the software or other tools have been in use.

e) Description of any specialized production areas.

f) A list of measurement equipment that will be utilized to verify mechanical tolerances of components as well as the equipment that will be employed to align and/or verify tolerance of assemblies. Measurement accuracy must be 10 percent or better compared to requirements as specified on drawings or specifications. The following information must be included on the measurement equipment list:

o Data on the advertised accuracy and actual measured accuracy.

o The measurement envelope for the equipment.

o An indication of which of the equipment is owned versus leased.

o The approximate age of the equipment. Outlines how & where components will be manufactured or procured and the engineering & manufacturing schedule (EPMS).

g) Identification of measurements or verifications that would require additional equipment or sub-contracting.

h) A list of equipment for magnetic mapping that will be utilized for the magnet measurement and verification. The following information should be included on the magnetic measurement equipment list:

o Data on the advertised accuracy and actual measured accuracy.

o An indication of which of the equipment is owned versus leased.

o The approximate age of the equipment.

o A copy of the most recent calibration certificate.

i) Descriptions of limitations of access to the University staff, if any, to the assembly and measurement areas where University work is being performed for inspection and documentation, including the ability to take photograph during the inspections.

• Factor 4 - Delivery & Schedule

The offeror must submit a delivery schedule which address all requirements contained in the Statement of Work (SOW) AL-1685-4598. Revision A Titled ALS-U Storage Ring HBEND Magnets, dated, 01/26/2024 and specifications of this RFP, including but not limited to Manufacturing Readiness

Review, Assembly Readiness Review, Factory acceptance test (FAT) procedures review, shipping plan review, hold points, testing, inspections, evaluation, & delivery of all deliverables that meets the University’s project schedule requirements. Schedule must be provided in Calendar Weeks ARO.

The offeror, will be evaluated on whether its submitted schedule and delivery rate successfully meets the University’s requirements. The offeror may submit an alternate schedule and delivery rate with justification for additional lead time or a delivery schedule that meets or beats the project schedule requirements to determine if it would result in a better value to the University. Acceptance of an alternate schedule will be at the sole discretion of the University.

Offeror’s documentation submitted should include but not be limited to the following:

a) Proposed lead times and the ability to meet the projected delivery schedules.

b) Proposed carrier and estimate of total shipping costs

• Factor 5 – Quality Management System

The offeror must submit with its proposal a copy of their Quality Management System (QMS) or Quality Assurance (QA) Program Manual that demonstrates how Quality Assurance is incorporated into its policies, processes, and work activities. The QMS or QA Program may be a standalone document or QA Standard Operating Procedures (SOP) that collectively describe the QMS or QA Program. QA program requirements must be flowed down to lower-tier offerors and subcontractors.

The basis for the offeror’s QMS or QA Program should be American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) Nuclear Quality Assurance (NQA-1), International Standards Organization (ISO) 9001, or other QMS/QA industry standard. The offeror should provide any applicable third-party accreditation(s) of their QMS or QA Program for the requested item(s)/service(s) (e.g., ISO, International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC), National Voluntary Laboratory Accreditation Program (NVLAP), DOE Laboratory Accreditation Program (DOELAP), Automotive Service Excellence (ASE), Accredited Quality Contractor (AQC), National Environmental Balancing Bureau (NEBB) Firm Accreditation, Testing, Adjusting and Balancing Bureau (TABB)). The offeror will also complete and return the ALS-U Supplier Quality Evaluation Survey AL-1208-0209 for the University to assess their capabilities.

The offeror should submit evidence and will be evaluated to confirm that their complete Quality Assurance Systems and any certifications that are the basis for their manufacture and quality assurance will meet the requirements of this RFP. The offeror must also submit a complete ALS-U Supplier Quality Evaluation Survey AL-1208-0209. Offeror’s QA documentation submitted to address this factor should include, but not be limited to, the following:

a) Completion of the ALS-U QA survey – AL-1208-0209

b) Indication of all current certifications for production standards such as ISO programs.

c) A quality manual or quality plan that outlines the processes that will be utilized to ensure ALS-

U QC standards are satisfied.

d) Example of a standard non-conformance report and the change approval process.

e) Example of a material and assembly shop work instruction/traveler.

f) Describe the calibration system for measuring and test equipment, including equipment identification, calibration procedure, traceability of standards to national standards, calibration intervals, and recall system.

g) Specify how calibration certificates are tracked, stored, and monitored.

h) If the Offeror intends to utilize subcontractors, provide a list of potential subcontractors.

2.4.2.2 Technical Enclosures

The offeror must complete the following enclosure and submit it with the technical volume:

• Technical Compliance Matrix - HBEND Production Magnet

2.4.3 Business Volume

2.4.3.1 Enclosures

The offeror must complete the following enclosures and submit them with the business volume:

• Representations & Certifications

• Price Proposal Schedule –Offerors must propose a milestone payment schedule with their offer for consideration/negotiation if milestone payments are desired.

• The Sample Subcontract with any and all edits and/or comments or acceptance statement.

The following enclosures are provided for informational purposes and do not need to be returned with the proposal:

• General Provisions for Commercial Supplies and Services (Domestic), Dated 12/22/2023

• General Provisions for Commercial Supplies and Services (Foreign), Dated 12/22/2023

2.4.3.2 Non-Technical Factors

The following non-technical factors will also be evaluated as a part of the negotiation and award process.

2.4.3.2.1 Offeror’s Acceptance of Terms and Conditions

Offeror’s Acceptance of the terms, conditions, general provisions, and other incorporated documents of the Sample Subcontract.

The offeror should accept the terms, conditions, general provisions, and other incorporated documents of the Sample Subcontract, including the requirement to include clauses in its lower-tier subcontracts at any tier, to the extent applicable. The terms and conditions of the Sample Subcontract have been approved by the DOE, and it is not the University’s intent to make material changes. While an offeror may identify “exceptions” to the Sample Subcontract, such exceptions may reflect unfavorably upon the offeror’s proposal. Exceptions make it difficult to compare competing offers, and the process of resolving exceptions may be time-consuming and result in unacceptable delays in the award of a Subcontract.

The offeror should include in its proposal a statement that the offeror takes no exceptions to the terms, conditions, general provisions, or the incorporated documents of the Sample Subcontract. The offeror should include in its request for consideration of exceptions a redlined version of the Sample Subcontract with all proposed revisions indicated by tracked changes, or a separate sheet with all proposed revisions indicated by tracked changes, referencing the article or clause to which the proposed revision applies. The offeror must also include in its request for consideration of any exception, a business case for that exception, providing a justification for the requested change and an analysis of any increased risk to the University.

The University will attempt to resolve exceptions in a timely manner through an iterative process and with review, concurrence, and/or approval of both the University and DOE. However, offerors are advised that when exceptions cannot be resolved and agreement cannot be reached on terms and conditions, award will not be made to otherwise successful offerors.

2.4.3.2.2 Financial Resources

The offeror should have adequate financial resources to perform the resulting Subcontract, or the ability to obtain them.

The proposal should describe the offeror’s current financial condition and its financial ability to fully support performance of the proposed Subcontract. The University reserves the right to request the offeror’s financial statements or additional financial information regarding the offeror’s financial resources.

Information may include an independent CPA-audited or reviewed year-end financial statements for the last two fiscal years in the form of balance sheets, income statements, and statements of cash flow, and include information on any commitments or explicit arrangements that will be relied on to acquire the needed facilities, equipment, other resources, or personnel.

Information may also include the following:

• A Dun and Bradstreet report no more than 6-months-old or documentation that provides equivalent financial information to the D&B categories referenced below.

• The Offeror will be evaluated based on a rating between low & moderate for the following categories;

o Risk Assessment o D&B PAYDEX score o D&B Rating o D&B Financial Stress Score

2.4.3.2.3 Government Furnished Property or Subcontractor Acquired Property Offeror’s Identification by make, model, and description of any of the following types of property proposed to be used in performance of the Subcontract:

• Any government property desired to be furnished by the University; and

• Any property to be acquired by the offeror for use in performing the Subcontract and which will become University property.

2.4.3.2.4 Price Proposal

Price, while being an important factor, is not in and of itself the determining factor in the selection of the successful offeror for award of the Subcontract contemplated by this solicitation. Price is not weighted;

rather, each offeror’s price will be evaluated for realism, reasonableness, and completeness of the proposed Subcontract price. The price proposal must include a total firm fixed price and a completed Price Schedule.

3. SOLICITATION PROVISIONS

3.1 Restriction on Disclosure and Use of Proposal Data

The University will safeguard any commercial or financial data or information contained in proposals when marked in accordance with paragraph (e) of Federal Acquisition Regulation clause 52.215-1. Such data or information includes (i) trade secrets or (ii) commercial or financial information that is privileged or considered business confidential, either of which is developed at private expense.

The University will endeavor to properly maintain such data and information to the same degree as its own data and information and not disclose such data or information to individuals other than those working for the University or the Government on this procurement. These individuals will be bound by an obligation of confidentiality to use such data or information solely for the purpose of evaluation of the proposal. Proposals received will be retained and disposed of in accordance with requirements in the University’s Prime Contract with DOE.

If the offeror intends to use a product or process for which there is a patent position, the proposal should so indicate and list patent applications and/or patents granted (including dates, numbers, and descriptions), and whether the Government has rights related to the patents.

3.2 Export Control Classification Information

Before Subcontract award, the offeror will provide export control classification information for all items as required by the Representations and Certifications. Items may not be accepted without the export control information required by this Request for Proposal.

If any of the ordered items (including data, software, or services) are export controlled under the International Traffic in Arms Regulations (22 CFR Sections 120-130, aka "ITAR"); the Export Administration Regulations (15 CFR Sections 730-774, aka "EAR"); the Nuclear Related Regulations (10 CFR 110 and 10 CFR 810); the Foreign Assets Control Regulations (31 CFR section 500-599, aka "OFAC"); or if sourced internationally, i.e., controlled under a country's equivalent dual use or military strategic goods list, then the Subcontractor agrees to provide the Procurement Representative with written notification of this export controlled status prior to shipment or transfer to the University. The notification must specifically identify the export-controlled item(s) and its export classification. The University reserves the right to cancel or modify any part of the Subcontract that includes export-controlled items, data, software, or services prior to accepting delivery. Subcontractor shall indemnify the University and the Government for all export enforcement mitigation cost, fines, or penalties incurred by the University, specifically arising from Subcontractor's failure to comply with this notification provision and the University's reliance on the Subcontractor's representation as provided.

3.3 System for Award Management (SAM)

The selected offeror will be required to be registered in the federal government’s SAM database within 30 days of Subcontract award. This requirement will not apply if the work supports emergency operations or the Subcontract is with an individual for work performed outside the U.S. and its outlying areas. Refer to the System for Award Management (FAR Clause 52.204-7) and System for Award Management Maintenance (FAR clause 52.204-13) clauses for additional information.

3.4 Buy American Act Requirements - Supplies

The General Provisions of the Sample Subcontract include FAR Clause 52.225-1, Buy American Act - Supplies, which requires that only domestic end products be delivered (i.e., products manufactured in the United States or unmanufactured products mined or produced in the United States), unless a specific exception applies. The offeror is to indicate in the Representations & Certifications form, to be submitted with the proposal, whether it proposes to furnish any foreign end products.

The University may apply an exception to the Buy American Act for a proposed foreign end product if:

1. Its price, including any customs duty, is more than 20% less than the price for a comparable domestic end product available from a large business concern, or more than 30% less than the price for a comparable domestic end product available from a small business concern; or

2. A domestic end product satisfying the University’s requirements is not reasonably available.

If the offeror proposes to furnish any foreign end product, the proposal should also include information and data supporting its use as an exception to the Buy American Act. Refer to FAR Clause 52.225-1 for the definition of end product, domestic end product, and foreign end product.

3.5 Ensuring Adequate COVID-19 Safety Protocols

Any Subcontract awarded as a result of this solicitation will include FAR 52.223-99 ENSURING

ADEQUATE COVID-19 SAFETY PROTOCOLS FOR FEDERAL CONTRACTORS (OCT 2021)

(DEVIATION), this clause implements Executive Order 14042, Ensuring Adequate COVID Safety Protocols for Federal Contractors, dated September 9, 2021 (published in the Federal Register on September 14, 2021, 86 FR 50985).

Enforcement of FAR 52.223-99 is currently enjoined by a federal court. Therefore, compliance with this clause is not currently required. However, should the federal injunction be lifted in the future, this clause will be applicable and enforceable, and prompt compliance will be required.

3.6 Notice of Sherman Antitrust Act – Federal Antitrust Enforcement This solicitation is subject to the Sherman Antitrust Act which prohibits agreements among competitors to fix prices, rig bids, or engage in other anticompetitive activity. Criminal prosecution of Sherman Act violations is the responsibility of the Antitrust Division of the United States Department of Justice.

Violation of the Sherman Act is a felony punishable by up to 10 years imprisonment and a $1 million fine for individuals and a fine of up to $100 million for corporations. In addition, collusion among competitors may also involve violations of the mail or wire fraud statute, the false statements statute, or other federal felony statutes, all of which the Antitrust Division prosecutes.

In addition to receiving a criminal sentence, a corporation or individual convicted of a Sherman Act violation may be ordered to make restitution to the victims for all overcharges. Victims of bid-rigging and price-fixing conspiracies also may seek civil recovery of up to three times the amount of damages suffered.

(END OF RFP DOCUMENT)