RFP 367893_Amd 01_9.15.2026.pdf

SLAC NATIONAL ACCELERATOR LABORATORY • 2575 SAND HILL ROAD • MENLO PARK • CALIFORNIA • 94025 • USA

Operated by Stanford University for the U.S. Department of Energy

AMENDMENT OF SOLIC. – SUBCONT.MOD. (REV. 05/24/12) SLAC-SCM-GEN-015 PAGE 1 OF 2

SUPPLY CHAIN MANAGEMENT

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/SUBCONTRACT MODIFICATION

Acting Under Contract DE-ACO2-76-SF00515

1. Amendment/Modification Number:

2. Effective Date:

9/15/2026

3. Solicitation/Subcontract Number:

367893

4. Issued By:

The Board of Trustees of the Leland Stanford, Jr. University SLAC National Accelerator Laboratory 2575 Sand Hill Road Menlo Park, CA 94025

5. Administered By:

SLAC National Accelerator Laboratory 2575 Sand Hill Road Menlo Park, CA 94025 Bldg. 041, M/S: 01

6. Name and Address of Seller:

To: All Offerors

7A. Amendment of Solicitation Number: 367893 7B. Dated (See Item 9):

8A. Modification of Subcontract Number:

8B. Dated (See Item 14D):

9. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

The above numbered solicitation is amended as set forth in Item 11.

The hour and date specified for receipt of Offers is extended to Click here to enter a date. at , is not extended.

Offers must acknowledge receipt of this amendment prior to the hour and date specified in the solicitation or as amended, by one of the following methods: (a) By completing items 8 and 13, and return 1 copies of the amendment; (b) By acknowledging receipt of this amendment on each copy of the offer submitted; or (c) By separate letter which includes a reference to the solicitation and amendment numbers.

FAILURE OF YOUR ACKNOWLEDGEMENT TO BE RECEIVED AT THE PLACE DESIGNATED FOR THE

RECEIPT OF OFFERS PRIOR TO THE HOUR AND DATE SPECIFIED MAY RESULT IN REJECTION OF YOUR OFFER. If by virtue of this amendment you desire to change an offer already submitted you may do so as long as it is received prior to the opening hour and date specified.

10. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO MODIFICATION OF SUBCONTRACTS

A. This change order is issued pursuant to (specify authority) . The changes set forth in Item 11 are made in the subcontract order number stated in Item 8A.

B. The above numbered subcontract is modified to reflect the administrative changes set forth in Item 11.

C. This supplemental agreement is entered into pursuant of authority of: .

D. Other (Specify type of modification and authority): .

11. Description of Amendment/Modification:

The purpose of this Amendment is as follows:

(1) Revise Section F - Deliveries or Performance

- Extend the SLAC Requested Delivery Date from 18 Months ARO to 19 Months ARO

(2) Revise Section L - Instructions to Offerors

- Amend Factor 4, Schedule, to account for 19 Month ARO delivery schedule and consideration of alternative proposed schedules

(3) Revise Section L - Attachment 01

- Amend Matrix to account for changes to Factor 4

(4) Revise Section M - Evaluation of Offers

- Amend Factor 4, Schedule, to account for 19 Month ARO delivery schedule and consideration of alternative proposed schedules

(5) Incorporate Technical Responses to Request for Clarifications dated 9/15/2026

The following attachments of solicitation RFP 367893(RE) are superseded, incorporated and replaced as follows:

AMENDMENT OF SOLIC. – SUBCONT.MOD. (REV. 05/24/12) SLAC-SCM-GEN-015 PAGE 2 OF 2

(1) Section F- Deliveries or Performance - Amendment 01 dated 9/15/2026

(2) Section L - Instructions to Offerors - Amendment 01 dated 9/15/2026

(3) Section L - Attachment 01 - Qualifications Matrix - Amendment 01 dated 9/15/2026

(4) Section M - Evaluation of Offers - Amendment 01 dated 9/15/2026

(5) Responses to Request for Clarifications dated 9/15/2026

Except as provided herein, all terms and conditions of the document referenced in Item 7a or 8a, remains unchanged and in full force and effect.

12. Accounting Information:

Previous total value: Change in total value: Revised total value:

Previous funded value: Change in funded value: Revised funded value:

Seller is required to sign and return a copy of this document. (Check if applicable)

The Board of Trustees of the Leland Stanford, Jr.

University SLAC National Accelerator Laboratory

13A. Signature of authorized person for seller:

14A. Signature of authorized person:

13B. Name of signer:

14B. Name of signer:

Ryan Enos

13C. Title of signer:

14C. Title of signer:

Sr. Subcontracts Administrator

13D. Date

14D. Date:

9/15/2026

SECTION F (REV. 06/04/12) SLAC-SCM-GEN-032 PAGE 1 OF 1

Section F – Deliveries or Performance

Amendment 01 dated 9/15/2026

ITEM

NO.

SUPPLIES/SERVICES QTY

SLAC

REQUESTED

DELIVERY DATE

VENDOR

PROPOSED

DELIVERY DATE

SPEAR 3 BEAMLINE 18 in-vacuum undulator in accordance with Section C, Engineering Note M927 dated August 13, 2026 & Technical Specification FP-202-

631-14 (Rev. 10) dated March 10, 2026.

1 LOT

19 Months

After Receipt of

Order

Note: The above date is SLAC desired delivery date. Offeror may propose their delivery dates for

SLAC’s review and consideration.

Section L – Instructions to Offerors

1. GENERAL INFORMATION

Section L – Instructions to Offerors for Firm Fixed Price Subcontract provides general guidance for preparing proposals as well as specific instructions on the format and content of the proposal. The

Offeror’s proposal must include all data and information requested by the ITO and must be submitted in accordance with these instructions. The proposal shall be compliant with the requirements as stated in the Specification. Non-conformance with the instructions provided in this ITO may result in an unfavorable proposal evaluation.

Proposals must be valid for ninety (90) days from the proposal due date. The Offeror shall make a clear statement in its proposal cover letter utilizing the following language, “The undersigned agrees that this offer is valid for ninety (90) days and shall furnish any or all items upon which prices are offered at the price set opposite each item, delivered via email, within the time specified in the schedule.”

The deadline to submit Request for Clarification is due September 25, 2026, at 5:00 PM PST and shall be addressed and e-mailed to the Senior Subcontract Administrator, Ryan Enos at ryane@slac.stanford.edu.

Proposals are due no later than Friday, October 16, 2026, at 5:00pm PST and shall be addressed and e-mailed to the Senior Subcontract Administrator, Ryan Enos at ryane@slac.stanford.edu.

Proposals shall be submitted on the forms furnished or copies thereof and must be manually or electronically signed. If erasures or other changes appear on the forms; the person signing the proposal must initial each erasure or change.

Point of Contact: The Senior Subcontract Administrator, Ryan Enos is the sole point of contact for this acquisition. Address any questions or concerns you may have to the Senior Subcontract

Administrator at e-mail: ryan.enos@slac.stanford.edu. All exchanges of source selection information between SLAC and Offerors will be controlled by the Subcontract Administrator.

Cost/Price Reasonableness and Realism: Unrealistically low or high proposed costs or prices, initially or subsequently, may be grounds for eliminating a proposal from consideration either on the basis that the Offeror does not understand the requirements, or has made an unrealistic offer. Offers should be sufficiently detailed to demonstrate their reasonableness. The burden of proof for credibility of proposed costs/prices rests with the Offeror. The Offeror’s Cost/Price proposal consists of the firm fixed price to deliver the products required as set forth in the solicitation and must be prepared in a manner that is current, accurate, and responsive to the RFP.

SLAC intends to award without discussions with respective Offerors. SLAC, however, reserves the right to conduct discussions if deemed in its best interest.

mailto:ryane@slac.stanford.edu mailto:ryane@slac.stanford.edu mailto:ryan.enos@slac.stanford.edu

Also note that the following requirements apply to this procurement and any resultant Purchase Order:

• E-Verify as required by FAR 52.222-54, “Employment Eligibility Verification”

Marking of Proprietary/Confidential Information. Offerors shall properly mark and identify with a restrictive legend or information markings on pages of the proposal that contain proprietary / confidential information.

For Offeror to be eligible for a subcontract award with SLAC, Offeror shall be registered with the System for Award Management (SAM), the Official U.S. Government system that consolidated the capabilities of CCR / FedReg, ORCA, and EPLS. There is NO fee to register for this site. All potential bidders are to advise / indicate local distributors and make sure the SAM.gov registration requirement extends out to local distributors. Entities may register at no cost directly at the SAM website:

https://sam.gov/content/home?api_key=ROEXk2SBBROUbVQ4L38wSJsGEvZ3oWtLxva9h0zV

**SAM.gov registration is not required for foreign entities but a Unique Entity Identifier must be assigned.

North American Industry Classification Code (NAICS). SLAC has identified the primary NAICS for this requirement as 333248 – All Other Industrial Machinery Manufacturing. Offerors are responsible for ensuring their SAM.gov registration accurately reflects the stated NAICS code.

SLAC will not be liable for any expense incurred in preparing any supplier’s response nor for any expense for materials or services not funded on this subcontract.

2. PREPARATION OF PROPOSALS

Volume I must contain the following information but not contain any pricing information. All pricing information shall be submitted in Volume II – Business Proposal. Proposals will be evaluated based on key evaluation factors thereunder.

Volume I – Technical Proposal

The cover sheet should include:

• Project Title: SSRL BL18 IVU_RFP_367893(RE)

• Volume I - Technical Proposal

• Date of submission

• Subcontractor Name

• Contact information

Factor 1 – Past Performance

Provide a list of the undulator magnets and any IVU’s the supplier has designed, assembled, tuned, and delivered in the previous five years. This list shall include: the type of undulator; the period length; the number of poles; the minimum gap and associated maximum deflection parameter, Kmax; the RMS phase error at minimum gap; the first and second integrals of the vertical field By at (x,y)=0; the achieved integral quadrupole, sextupole, and octupole normal and skew multipoles at (x,y)=0; and the permanent magnet material and pole material where applicable. A clear statement of the supplier’s responsibility for magnet design, magnet assembly, magnetic field shimming/correction/QC, and mechanical system design/construction for each insertion device listed shall be provided as well as the contact information of the associated https://sam.gov/content/home?api_key=ROEXk2SBBROUbVQ4L38wSJsGEvZ3oWtLxva9h0zV customer and suitable permission to make verbal or written communication with the customer contact.

Factor 2 – Magnetic Design, Magnetic Quality Control, and Magnetic Performance

Provide a technical description of a preliminary undulator magnetic design meeting the specifications of SSRL Engineering Note (EN) M927. The technical description shall include the following information as a minimum:

2.1 Field plots of one full, central period magnetic model depicting By(X= 0, Z) and By(X, Z = peak field location) at 6.13 mm VCA (vertical clear aperture, between the wake current sheets) and magnetic pole gap of 6.3mm with the relevant magnetic properties used for the model listed [Br, μ// (recoil permeability), μ⊥(permeability perpendicular to the magnetization vector), pole and PM dimensions, PM set back dimension].

2.2 A preliminary end pole section magnetic design.

2.3 The proposed permanent magnet materials and associated properties, including room temperature intrinsic B-H curves.

2.4 The proposed pole materials and associated properties (B-H curve).

2.5 A summary description of the vendor magnetic QC facilities/capabilities and the undulator magnetic tuning and characterization plan.

2.6 Description of where raw material and magnetic material will be procured from for supply chain security.

2.7 Design and manufacturing schedule to include a capacity chart.

Factor 3 – Mechanical, Vacuum System, and Motion Control Designs

Provide a technical description of a preliminary undulator mechanical, vacuum system and motion control designs meeting the specifications of SSRL EN M927. The technical description shall include the following information as a minimum:

3.1 A sketch and description of the conceptual mechanical design of the magnet keepers and magnet arrays.

3.2 A sketch and description of the conceptual design of the vacuum sub-system including the entrance and exit taper sections.

3.3 A sketch and description of the conceptual mechanical design of the support frame, supports, and gap actuation sub-system

3.4 A summary description of the vendor vacuum facilities/capabilities

3.5 A Quality Assurance Plan outlining clear standards, methods, and responsibilities to prevent errors and ensure a product or service consistently meets requirements

Factor 4 – Schedule

Provide a summary schedule identifying key milestones for design, fabrication, long-lead items, assembly, tuning, and delivery. The schedule must demonstrate completion no later than 19 months after receipt of order. Alternative schedules exceeding 19 months may be submitted for SLAC’s review and consideration.

Volume II – Business Proposal

The cover sheet should include:

• Project Title: SSRL BL18 IVU_RFP_367893(RE)

• Volume I - Technical Proposal

• Date of submission

• Subcontractor Name

• Contact information

Clearly stamp all company financial documents as “Business Sensitive”, if applicable, on any included documents.

Factor 5. Financial / Organizational

Offerors are to provide Dun & Bradstreet report. If Offeror has an SER score greater than 6 or does not participate in Dun & Bradstreet, Offeror will provide audited financial statements for the past two years.

The following are to be filled out, signed and returned with your proposal

• Section J – Attachment 02 – Small Business Subcontracting Plan – to be filled out if applicable (Large Businesses when cost proposal is over $900,000). If not applicable, please indicate the reason.

The following require no action by Offerors – for information purposes only

• Section J – Attachment 01 – Tax Resale and Exempt Certificate

The following are to be filled out, signed and returned with your proposal from Section K

• Section K – Attachment 01A – Domestic entities: Representation and Certification Supplement dated August 2022 OR

• Section K – Attachment 01B – Foreign entities: International Representation and Certifications Supplement dated May 2023

• Section K – Attachment 02 – Buy American Act Certificate dated October 2025

The following is to be filled out, signed and returned with proposal from Section L

• Section L – Attachment 01 – Offeror’s Technical & Business Proposal Qualification Matrix Checklist

• Section L – Attachment 02 – Offeror’s Request for Clarification – to be filled out if applicable

Factor 6. Price

• Submit RFP Section A (completed form), acknowledgement of issued amendments

• Submit RFP Section B with firm fixed prices for each item o Offerors are to submit price certification (e.g. published price lists, redacted invoices or redacted quotes for items procured) o If no price certification method listed above is available, Offeror certificate on company letterhead indicating SLAC is receiving the best price offered and provide a redacted invoice of previously sold in-vacuum undulators or similar specifications or exact specifications.

3. METHOD OF TRANSMISSION / ORGANIZATION / NUMBER OF COPIES / PAGE LIMITS:

Proposals must be submitted via email for purposes of proposal submission deadline. The Offeror shall prepare the proposal as set forth in the Proposal Organization Table. The titles and contents of the volumes shall be as defined in this table, all of which shall be within the required pages limits and with the number of copies as specified. The contents of each proposal volume are described in the ITO paragraph as noted in the table below:

PROPOSAL ORGANIZATION TABLE

Volume ITO Section Volume Title Copies Page Limit

I 2 Technical Proposal 1 None

II 2 Business Proposal 1 None

4. LATE PROPOSALS AND MODIFICATIONS

Proposals and Modifications thereof received by email designated in the Request for Proposals after the due date and time will not be considered.

5. WITHDRAWALS OF PROPOSALS

Proposals may be withdrawn by email, addressed as instructed for the proposal, and received from the Offerors prior to award.

6. AMENDMENT

The right is reserved, as the interests of SLAC may require, to revise or amend the solicitation documents and drawings prior to the due date set for submission of proposals. Such revisions and amendments, if any will be announced on an “Amendment of Solicitation / Subcontract

Modification” form. Copies of such amendment as may be issued will be furnished to all prospective

Offerors. If the revisions and amendments are of a nature which requires material changes in quantities or proposal prices or both, the date set for submission of proposals may be postponed by such number of days, as in the opinion of SLAC will enable the Offerors to develop their proposals. In such case, the Amendment of Solicitation / Subcontract Modification form will include an announcement of the new due date for receipt of proposals.

7. EXPLANATION TO OFFERORS / OFFEROR QUESTIONS & CLARIFICATIONS

Any explanation desired by an Offeror regarding the meaning or interpretation of the Request for

Proposal, drawings, specifications, etc., must be requested in writing to the attention of the

Subcontract Administrator, Ryan Enos, using the form, “Offeror’s Request for Clarifications.”

Sufficient time must be allowed for a reply to reach the Offeror before the due date for submission of proposals. Oral clarification of requirements or instructions provided by SLAC before the award of the Subcontract will not be binding. Questions containing Offeror’s non-proprietary information and corresponding clarifications will be shared with all Offerors. Transmittal shall be sent via email in PDF format.

8. TAXES

Attention of Offerors and their prospective Sub-subcontractors is directed to the Article titled, “Federal, State and Local Taxes” of the General Terms and Conditions and to the California State

Board of Equalization Regulations relating to sales of machinery and equipment for delivery under construction contracts with the United States government. However, responsibility for determination of the applicability of California State Board of Equalization Regulations shall rest solely with the Offeror, and no representation, or guarantee either expressed or implied is made by the Government or SLAC hereunder as to the application thereof. SLAC will not reimburse Offeror for taxes as a separate line item.

9. SPECIFIED PRODUCT AVAILABILITY

Where the Technical Specifications, Statement of Work, or Drawings list a specific product, the

Offerors may assume that the product is commercially available; however, availability within the required performance period may require payment, by the successful Subcontractor at no additional cost to SLAC, of premiums for expediting production or shipment. The Offerors are cautioned to confirm not only product prices, but costs associated with timely acquisition of the product as required to meet performance period requirements. The Offerors are required to notify

SLAC Subcontract Administrator prior to the proposal due date of any obvious product unavailability.

10. SPECIFIED PRODUCT OR METHOD COMPATIBILITY

Where the Technical Specifications, Statement of Work, or Drawings list a specific product or method, the Offerors may assume that the product or method is compatible with other requirements of the Subcontract. The Offerors are required to notify SLAC Subcontract Administrator prior to the date set for receipt of proposals of any obvious incompatibility between a specified product or method and other requirements of the Subcontract.

11. EXCEPTIONS SLAC’S STANDARD TERMS AND CONDITIONS, PROVISIONS, AND / OR

CLAUSES

Offeror must identify any exceptions to SLAC terms and conditions or exceptions to any other element of the requirements that are a part of this RFP, with their proposal. SLAC will not entertain any exceptions not identified in the proposal submission. Exceptions taken may be cause for rejection of a proposal. Inclusion of any assumptions, clarifications, exclusions or conditions may be cause for rejection of the proposal as non-responsive.

Section L – Attachment 01 – Offeror’s Technical & Business Proposal

Qualifications Matrix Checklist

BL18 IVU_RFP_0000367893(RE)

Vendor name: _________________________

TECHNICAL SUBMISSION

REQUIREMENTS

TECHNICAL EVALUATION CRITERIA EXCEEDS MEETS DOES NOT

MEET

IF DOES NOT

MEET,

REASON

1. Past Performance

Provide a list of the undulator magnets and any IVU’s the supplier has designed, assembled, tuned, and delivered in the previous five years. This list shall include:

the type of undulator; the period length; the number of poles; the minimum gap and associated maximum deflection parameter, Kmax; the RMS phase error at minimum gap; the first and second integrals of the vertical field By at (x,y)=0; the achieved integral quadrupole, sextupole, and octupole normal and skew multipoles at (x,y)=0; and the permanent magnet material and pole material where applicable. A clear statement of the supplier’s responsibility for magnet design, magnet assembly, magnetic field shimming/correction/QC, and mechanical system design/construction for each insertion device listed shall be provided as well as the contact information of the associated customer and suitable permission to make verbal or written communication with the customer contact.

Offerors with no relevant past or present performance history shall receive the rating of "Does Not Meet Requirements".

1. Past Performance

(i) Vendor’s demonstrated capability to deliver undulator magnets on schedule and per specification and (ii) vendor’s specific experience and capabilities with hybrid undulator design, fabrication, assembly, magnetic field shimming/correction/QC, and mechanical/vacuum system design/construction for each insertion device and testing in general with emphasis on in-vacuum undulators.

EXCEEDS: The Offeror demonstrates exceptional relevant past performance through the successful completion of three or more in-vacuum undulator magnet projects within the past five years, providing SLAC with a high level of confidence in the Offeror’s ability to successfully perform the required effort.

MEETS: The Offeror demonstrates relevant past performance through the successful completion of at least one in-vacuum undulator magnet project within the past five years, providing SLAC with a reasonable expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

DOES NOT MEET: Based on the offeror’s past performance record, SLAC has no expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

2. Magnetic Design, Magnetic QC, and Magnetic Performance

Provide a technical description of a preliminary undulator magnetic design meeting the specifications of SSRL EN M927. The technical description shall include the following information as a minimum:

2.1 Field plots of one full, central period

magnetic model depicting By(X= 0, Z) and By(X, Z = peak field location) at 6.13 mm VCA (vertical clear aperture, between the wake current sheets) and magnetic pole gap of 6.3mm with the relevant magnetic properties used for the model listed [Br, μ// (recoil permeability), μ (permeability perpendicular to the magnetization vector), pole and PM dimensions, PM set back dimension].

2.2 A preliminary end pole section

magnetic design.

2.3 The proposed permanent magnet

materials and associated properties, including room temperature intrinsic B-H curves.

2.4 The proposed pole materials and

associated properties (B-H curve).

2.5 A summary description of the vendor

magnetic QC facilities/capabilities and the undulator magnetic tuning and characterization plan.

2.6 Description of where raw material and

magnetic material will be procured from for supply chain security.

2.7 Design and manufacturing schedule to

include a capacity chart.

2. Magnetic Design, Magnetic QC, and

Magnetic Performance

The Offeror will be evaluated on how its technical quality and risk of the vendor's magnetic design per with specific reference to the requirements of SSRL

EN M927, (i) the characteristics of the proposed magnetic material including susceptibility to radiation, demagnetization, and/or mechanical damage, (ii) the vendor’s magnetic QC capabilities and the technical quality of the vendor’s magnetic QC plan, (iii) the calculated performance of the magnetic design, and (iv) the design and manufacturing schedule.

EXCEEDS: Offeror provides comprehensive technical drawings, detailed descriptions, and/or supporting documentation that demonstrate innovative design approaches, enhanced technical capabilities, or value-added features that exceed the requirements of this section and provide measurable benefits in performance, reliability, quality, maintainability, and/or risk reduction.

MEETS: Offeror provides documentation that proves they are compliant with all requirements in this section.

DOES NOT MEET: Offeror is not able to provide documentation that proves the

Offeror is compliant with all requirements in this section.

3. Mechanical, Vacuum System, and Motion Control Designs

Provide a technical description of a preliminary undulator mechanical, vacuum system and motion control designs meeting the specifications of SSRL EN M927. The technical description shall include the following information as a minimum:

3.1 A sketch and description of the

conceptual mechanical design of the magnet keepers and magnet arrays.

3.2 A sketch and description of the

conceptual design of the vacuum sub-system including the entrance and exit taper sections.

3.3 A sketch and description of the

conceptual mechanical design of the support frame, supports, and gap actuation sub-system

3.4 A summary description of the vendor

vacuum facilities/capabilities

3.5 A Quality Assurance Plan outlining

clear standards, methods, and responsibilities to prevent errors and ensure a product or service consistently meets requirements

3. Mechanical, Vacuum System, and Motion Control Designs

The Offeror’s documentation will be evaluated on how its technical quality and risk of the vendor's mechanical, vacuum system, and motion control designs with reference to the requirements of SSRL EN M927.

Specific emphasis includes: (i) the magnet keeper assembly and backing beam design for phase error control, (ii) support frame rigidity and gap drive reproducibility, (iii) entrance/exit taper assemblies and associated vacuum design, (iv) properly designed vacuum vessel with adequate pumping systems, and (v) a detailed quality assurance plan.

EXCEEDS: Offeror provides comprehensive technical drawings, detailed descriptions, and supporting documentation that demonstrate innovative design approaches, enhanced technical capabilities, or value-added features that exceed the requirements of this section and provide measurable benefits in performance, reliability, quality, maintainability, and/or risk reduction.

MEETS: Offeror provides documentation that proves they are compliant with all requirements in this section.

DOES NOT MEET: Offeror is not able to provide documentation that proves the Offeror is compliant with all requirements in this section.

4. Schedule

Provide a summary schedule identifying key milestones for design, fabrication, long-lead items, assembly, tuning, and delivery. The schedule must demonstrate completion no later than 19 months after receipt of order. Alternative schedules

4. Schedule

The Offeror will be evaluated based on their proposed delivery and milestone schedule with emphasis on ability to meet the 18-month period of performance from award date to IVU delivery.

exceeding 19 months may be submitted for SLAC’s review and consideration.

EXCEEDS: Offeror provides documentation demonstrating the capability to deliver ahead of the 19‑month schedule following receipt of order.

MEETS: Offeror provides documentation that demonstrates they are capable of meeting the requested delivery schedule or an alternate schedule acceptable to SLAC.

DOES NOT MEET: Offeror is not able to provide documentation that demonstrates they are capable of meeting the requested delivery schedule or their alternative schedule is not acceptable to SLAC.

BUSINESS SUBMISSION REQUREMENTS BUSINESS EVALUATION CRITERIA MEETS DOES NOT

MEET

IF DOES NOT

MEET,

REASON

Factor 5. Financial

Standing/Organizational

Factor 5. Financial

Standing/Organizational

Provide Dun & Bradstreet (D&B) report

OR

If Offeror does not participate in Dun & Bradstreet, Offeror will provide audited financial statement reports for the past two years.

Dun & Bradstreet report will be reviewed to verify a SER score of 6 or lower – SER scores higher than 6, audited financials will be reviewed for risk

MEETS: SER Score 6 or lower

DOES NOT MEET: SER Score 7 or higher – audited Financial Statements will be reviewed for risk

Section F – Deliveries Performance – Filled out with proposed delivery schedule

MEETS: Section F is filled out and returned

DOES NOT MEET: Section F is not filled out and returned

Section J – Small Business Subcontracting

Plan – Offerors are to fill out, sign and return with proposal (if applicable) – Only required for large businesses when cost proposal is over $900,000

MEETS: Section J Attachment 02 is filled out and returned

DOES NOT MEET: Section J Attachment 02 is not filled out and returned

Section K – Domestic entitles:

Representation and Certifications

Supplement dated August 2022 – Offerors are to fill out, sign and return with proposal (if applicable)

OR

MEETS: Representation and Certification Supplement is completed and signed

DOES NOT MEET: Representation and Certification Supplement is not completed, signed and submitted

Section K - Foreign entities: International

Representations and Certifications

Supplement May 2023 - filled out and signed

Section K – Buy American Act Certificate –

Offerors are to fill out, sign and return with proposal

MEETS: BAA is completed signed and submitted with proposal.

DOES NOT MEET: BAA is not completed signed and submitted with proposal.

Section L – Attachment 01 - Offeror’s

Technical & Business Proposal Qualification

Matrix Checklist

MEETS: Qualification Matrix Checklist is completed, signed and submitted with proposal.

DOES NOT MEET: Qualification Matrix Checklist is not completed, signed and submitted with proposal.

Factor 6. Price Factor 6. Price MEETS DOES NOT

MEET

IF DOES NOT

MEET,

REASON

Submit RFP Section A (completed form), acknowledgement of issued amendments

MEETS: Section A is signed and submitted. If applicable, addendums are signed and submitted.

DOES NOT MEET: Section A or addendums if applicable are not signed and submitted

RFP Section B – Offerors are to submit filled out Section B with firm fixed prices for each item

Price Certification – Offerors are to submit price certification (i.e. published price list, redacted invoice or redacted quotes for items procured)

MEETS: Section B Submitted with pricing and company information completed

DOES NOT MEET: Section B is not submitted with pricing and company information completed

If no price certification method list above is available, Offerors are to submit an Offeror certificate on company letterhead indicating

SLAC is receiving the best price

I. BASIS FOR AWARD

A. This is a Best Value Trade-off source selection conducted in accordance with SLAC Policies, Procedures, and Terms and Conditions. SLAC will select the best overall offer, based upon an integrated assessment of all the technical and business factors and sub-factors including price with technical evaluation factors and subfactors being more important than business factors and subfactors, including price. Key evaluation factors and subfactors are listed in descending order of importance for selecting a Subcontractor.

B. The subcontract may be awarded to the responsible Offeror whose proposal conforms to the solicitation’s requirements to include all stated terms, conditions, representations, certifications, and all other information required by Section A of this solicitation and is judged, based on the evaluation factors and sub-factors to represent the best value to SLAC.

C. SLAC seeks to award to the Offeror who gives SLAC the greatest confidence that it best meets, or exceeds, the requirements. This may result in an award to a higher rated, higher priced Offeror, where the decision is consistent with the evaluation factors, and the SSA reasonably determines that the technical superiority and/or overall business approach of the higher price Offeror supersedes the cost difference.

The SSA will base the source selection decision on an integrated assessment of proposals against all source selection criteria in the solicitation. While SLAC’s source selection evaluation team and the SSA 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 evaluation process shall proceed as follows: Offeror is cautioned to submit sufficient information in the format specified in Section L. Offeror may be asked to clarify certain aspects of their proposal. Communication conducted to resolve minor or clerical errors will not constitute discussions and the Subcontract Administrator reserves the right to award a contract without the opportunity for proposal revision. SLAC intends to award without discussions with respective Offerors. SLAC, however, reserves the right to conduct discussions if deemed in its best interest.

D. Rejection of Unrealistic Offers. SLAC may reject any proposal that is evaluated to be unrealistic in terms of program commitments, contract terms and conditions, or unrealistically high or low in cost when compared to SLAC’s estimates, such that the proposal is deemed to reflect an inherent lack of competence or failure to comprehend the complexity and risks of the program.

E. Correction Potential of Proposals. SLAC will consider, throughout the evaluation, the “correction potential” of any deficiency or uncertainty. The judgment of such “correction potential” is within the sole discretion of SLAC. If an aspect of an Offeror’s proposal Does Not Meet SLAC’s requirements and is not considered correctable, the Offeror may be eliminated.

F. Evaluation Factors. Key evaluation factors and subfactors are listed in descending order of importance for selecting a Subcontractor. SLAC will select the best overall offer, based upon an integrated assessment of all the technical factors and subfactors, and business factors and subfactors, including price. Technical evaluation factors and subfactors are more important than business factors and sub- factors, including price.

G. This action requires a degree of technical, personnel and managerial capability, capacity, experience, and management excellence. This selection process will involve submittal of a Technical Proposal (Volume I) and submittal of a Business Proposal (Volume II). After initial evaluation of the Technical and Business Proposals, SLAC may establish a competitive range, and conduct interviews with Offerors who are within the competitive range. Further instructions on the interviews will be provided to the Offerors after the competitive range is established.

Section M – Evaluation of Offers

H. The following evaluation factors and sub-factors will be used to evaluate each proposal. Award will be made to the Offeror(s) proposing the combination most advantageous to SLAC based upon the evaluation factors and subfactors as described in instructions in Section L and the criteria of the evaluation factors in Section M.

II. EVALUATION METHOD

Although price is important it will not be used for the sole basis for award. A qualitative assessment based on the Evaluation Factors will be evaluated. The technical differences shall be noted between the proposal offers and adequately documented to determine any price/technical tradeoff to support the final award.

The focus of the proposal evaluation and selection process will be to identify the individual proposal strengths, weaknesses and deficiencies. The evaluation will analyze each Offeror’s resources available to perform under the contract and how they will be used during contract performance. This includes the

Offeror’s analysis of their resources for this project and their proven ability through demonstrated past experience to satisfy all the requirements.

Volume I – Technical Proposal Evaluation

All proposals shall be evaluated utilizing a technical rating based on “Exceeds, Meets, and/or Does Not

Meet” the technical requirements. Additionally, each rating shall include a descriptive statement or comment providing a written rationale for the rating based on overall strengths, weaknesses, value additions and deficiencies in the proposal responses.

Technical Evaluation Criteria Factors

Factor 1. Past Performance

(i) Vendor’s demonstrated capability to deliver undulator magnets on schedule and per specification and (ii) vendor’s specific experience and capabilities with hybrid undulator design, fabrication, assembly, magnetic field shimming/correction/QC, and mechanical/vacuum system design/construction for each insertion device and testing in general with emphasis on in-vacuum undulators.

EXCEEDS: The Offeror demonstrates exceptional relevant past performance through the successful completion of three or more in-vacuum undulator magnet projects within the past five years, providing SLAC with a high level of confidence in the Offeror’s ability to successfully perform the required effort.

MEETS: The Offeror demonstrates relevant past performance through the successful completion of at least one in-vacuum undulator magnet project within the past five years, providing SLAC with a reasonable expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

DOES NOT MEET: Based on the offeror’s past performance record, SLAC has no expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

Offerors with no relevant past or present performance history shall receive the rating "Does Not Meet

Requirements".

Factor 2. Magnetic Design, Magnetic Quality Control, and Magnetic Performance

The technical quality and risk of the vendor's magnetic design per Section L Subfactors 2.1 through 2.7 will be evaluated with specific reference to the requirements of SSRL Engineering Note (EN) M927, (i) the characteristics of the proposed magnetic material including susceptibility to radiation, demagnetization, and/or mechanical damage, (ii) the vendor’s magnetic QC capabilities and the technical quality of the vendor’s magnetic QC plan, (iii) the calculated performance of the magnetic design, and (iv) the design and manufacturing schedule.

EXCEEDS: Offeror provides comprehensive technical drawings, detailed descriptions, and/or supporting documentation that demonstrate innovative design approaches, enhanced technical capabilities, or value-added features that exceed the requirements of this section and provide measurable benefits in performance, reliability, quality, maintainability, and/or risk reduction.

MEETS: Offeror provides documentation that proves they are compliant with all requirements in this section.

DOES NOT MEET: Offeror is not able to provide documentation that proves the Offeror is compliant with all requirements in this section.

Factor 3. Mechanical, Vacuum System, and Motion Control Design

The technical quality and risk of the vendor's magnetic design per Section L Subfactors 3.1 through 3.5 the vendor's mechanical, vacuum system, and motion control designs will be evaluated for with reference to the requirements of SSRL EN M927. Specific emphasis includes: (i) the magnet keeper assembly and backing beam design for phase error control, (ii) support frame rigidity and gap drive reproducibility, (iii) entrance/exit taper assemblies and associated vacuum design, (iv) properly designed vacuum vessel with adequate pumping systems, and (v) a detailed quality assurance plan.

EXCEEDS: Offeror provides comprehensive technical drawings, detailed descriptions, and supporting documentation that demonstrate innovative design approaches, enhanced technical capabilities, or value-added features that exceed the requirements of this section and provide measurable benefits in performance, reliability, quality, maintainability, and/or risk reduction.

MEETS: Offeror provides documentation that proves they are compliant with all requirements in this section.

DOES NOT MEET: Offeror is not able to provide documentation that proves the Offeror is compliant with all requirements in this section.

Factor 4. Schedule

Proposed delivery and milestone schedule with emphasis on ability to meet the 19-month period of performance from award date to IVU delivery will be evaluated as follows:

EXCEEDS: Offeror provides documentation demonstrating the capability to deliver ahead of the 19‑month schedule following receipt of order.

MEETS: Offeror provides documentation that demonstrates they are capable of meeting the requested delivery schedule or an alternate schedule acceptable to SLAC.

DOES NOT MEET: Offeror is not able to provide documentation that demonstrates they are capable of meeting the requested delivery schedule or their alternative schedule is not acceptable to SLAC.

Volume II – Business Proposal Evaluation

Business Evaluation Criteria Factors

Factor 5. Financial / Organizational

Dun & Bradstreet report will be reviewed to verify a SER score of 6 or lower. For Offerors with a SER score greater than 6, audited Financial Statements will be reviewed for risk

a. SER Score 6 or lower OR reviewed financial statements are accepted = MEETS

b. SER Score 7 or higher OR reviewed financial statements are not accepted = DOES NOT MEET

The following are to be filled out, signed and returned with your proposal under Section J

Section J – Attachment 02 – Small Business Subcontracting Plan – to be filled out if applicable (for large businesses when cost proposal is over $900,000). If not applicable, please indicate the reason.

The following require no action by Offerors – for information purposes only under Section J

Section J – Attachment 01 – Tax Resale and Exempt Certificate

The following will be evaluated for submission and completion from Section K

Section K – Attachment 01a – Domestic entities: Representation and Certification Supplement dated August

2022 OR

Section K – Attachment 01b – Foreign entities: International Representation and Certifications Supplement dated May 2023

Section K – Attachment 02 – Buy American Act Certificate dated October 2025

The following will be evaluated for submission and completion from Section L

Section L – Attachment 01 – Offeror’s Technical & Business Proposal Qualification Matrix Checklist

Section L – Attachment 02 – Offeror’s Request for Clarifications – to be filled out if applicable

Factor 6. Price

RFP Section A Subcontract Form, will be reviewed for completeness (filled out and signed by an authorized representative of the Offeror’s company, including issued Amendments, if applicable)

RFP Section B (Supplier or Service Prices) will be reviewed for completeness and reasonableness

• Proposal price will be evaluated against SLAC’s cost estimate or compared with other Offerors

• Proposal will be evaluated on submission on price certification method (i.e. published price list, redacted invoice, redacted quote)

• If no price certification method listed above is available, Offeror certificate on company letterhead indicating SLAC is receiving the best price offered and provide a redacted invoice of previously sold in-vacuum undulators of similar specifications or exact specifications

The Business proposal submissions will be evaluated with the following adjectival ratings:

Meets

Requirements

Acceptable Overall Proposal. The proposal meets SLAC’s requirements for submission of complete and correct documentation, shows a satisfactory level of financial health, and meets

SLAC’s funding profile.

Does Not Meet

Requirements

Unacceptable Overall Proposal. The proposal Does Not Meet

SLAC’s requirements for submission of complete and correct documentation, shows an unsatisfactory level of financial health, and/or fails to meet SLAC’s funding profile.

III. DEBRIEFINGS

Debriefings may be requested within 3 days after receipt of an unsuccessful award notification. The discussion shall not include comparisons with the other proposals. An explanation of the evaluation of significant elements in the Offeror’s proposal, summary of the rationale for eliminating the Offeror from the competition and assure the Offeror that its proposal was treated fairly, impartially, and objectively. The Sr. Subcontracts Administrator will aim to conduct debriefing(s) within 5 days of the written request.

ATTACHMENT 02

OFFEROR’s REQUEST FOR CLARIFICATIONS

Request for Proposal No: SLAC_RFP_367893(RE)

BL18 In-Vacuum Undulator

Amendment 01 Dated 9/15/2026

ITEM # DATE

SUBMITTED

RFP

DOCUMENT

REFERENCE

QUESTION RESPONSE

DATE

RESPONSE RFP

ACTIONS

1 9/9/2026 Section C Magnetics

a. If the magnetic field is calculated using the same magnetic structure as that employed for the BL17 IVU, the simulation results are as follows:

i. Beff = 0.996T @pole piece gap 6.3mm < spec. 1.07T. Are you seeing similar results in simulation?

ii. (Br = 1.24T)

9/15/26 The SSRL BL17 IVU design served as the starting point for the reference design that underpins the BL18 IVU specification (EN M927). The reference design assumes the BL17 IVU geometry with the following modifications:

permanent magnet (PM) width = 80 mm, PM height = 40 mm, Br =

1.31 T, BL18 gap = 6.3 mm. For a

22mm period, Radia simulations indicate that this reference design achieves a K_max_eff = 2.20.

SLAC recognizes that the larger PM dimensions may present fabrication challenges and/or create difficulties meeting the requirements specified in section

6.3.12 of EN M927.

Accordingly, SLAC would also consider a design based on a 23 mm period. Radia simulations of a reference design with a BL17

RFP

DOCUMENT

REFERENCE

QUESTION RESPONSE

DATE

RESPONSE RFP

ACTIONS

IVU geometry except PM width =

64.85 mm, PM length = 7.9mm (23.0 mm period), Br = 1.24 T, and BL18 gap = 6.3 mm yield a K_max_eff = 2.225 (B_max_eff >= 1.024).

From SLAC's perspective, a key performance requirement is achieving K_max_eff >= 2.20 to ensure acceptable 1st to 3rd harmonic crossover. The deflection parameter in EN M927 Table 2 and associated text would not change if the period requirement were revised to 23 mm with concomitant reduction in number of periods.

2 9/9/2026 Section C Length

a. If the design is based on the BL17 reference design, the overall length of BL18 would be as follows:

i. Modules: 22 x 151 = 3,322 mm

ii. End Modules: 22 x 2 = 44 mm

iii. End Blocks ( Magic Finger ): 20 x 2 = 40 mm

iv. RF-Taper+End Flange

Upper Stream: 180 mm

Down Steam: 222 mm

Total Length: 3808 mm > Spec. 3798.3 mm -> Although the resulting overall length would be longer than specified, we would like to know whether this would be considered

9/15/26 The EN M927 specification assumes that minor redesign of the taper sections may be sufficient to accommodate 151 full periods at a 22 mm period length while maintaining compliance with the specified overall IVU length.

The key requirement is compliance with the specified longitudinal envelope of 3798.3 ± 2.0 mm. The complete IVU, including the magnetic structure, taper sections, and upstream/downstream interface regions, must fit within this envelope.

RFP

DOCUMENT

REFERENCE

QUESTION RESPONSE

DATE

RESPONSE RFP

ACTIONS

acceptable.

SLAC allows that the total number of full-strength periods listed in EN M927 Table 2 may be reduced from 151 to 150 for a 22 mm period magnet if necessary.

For a 23 mm period design, the corresponding acceptable number of full-strength periods is 144.

3 Section F Schedule

You specified 18 months ARO. Is this firm?

9/15/26 The 18-month ARO requirement was established to support installation during SSRL’s scheduled accelerator shutdown beginning in August 2028 and to provide sufficient time for on-site inspection and installation preparation. SLAC would consider a delivery schedule of up to 19 months ARO as compliant, as this would still provide a narrow margin to meet this installation window. Please note that missing the August 2028 installation window would result in approximately a one-year delay, as the next suitable installation opportunity is currently planned for August 2029.

Proposals with delivery later than 19 months ARO may still be considered, but SLAC will make that determination only after reviewing all offers received.

Regardless of the proposed timeline, it is essential that the schedule is realistic and supported by the vendor’s

RFP

DOCUMENT

REFERENCE

QUESTION RESPONSE

DATE

RESPONSE RFP

ACTIONS

available resources and commitments.

Note:

Complete and e-mail this form to the Sr. Subcontract Administrator, Ryan Enos, at ryane@slac.stanford.edu by September 25, 2026, 5pm PST with any questions or clarifications regarding this proposal.

mailto:ryan.enos@slac.stanford.edu