Attachment 3 - Sections L and M.pdf

SECTION L - INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS, AND NOTICES

TO OFFERORS

1 General Information

1.1. Solicitation Type: This is a Request for Quotation (RFQ) conducted under FAR Part 13, Simplified Acquisition Procedures.

1.2. Project Title: Dyess AFB Giant Voice.

1.3. Description of Requirement: 7 BW/CP has a requirement to replace the antiquated existing Giant Voice (GV) system to include engineering, design, furnishing, installation and testing. The contractor shall provide all management, personnel, equipment, supplies, facilities, transportation, tools, materials, supervisions, and other items and non-personal services necessary for the GV system upgrade in order to provide emergency, intelligible voice, tones, and prerecorded alert notifications across Dyess AFB, communicating over the existing VHF infrastructure and defined in the Performance Work Statement. This includes replacing seventeen (17) existing Whelen omni-directional siren speaker arrays.

1.4. Contract Type: The Government anticipates awarding a Firm-Fixed-Price contract.

However, the government reserves the right to cancel this solicitation at any point before an award is made. The government will not reimburse offers for any costs associated with preparation, or submittal of offers.

2 Instructions for Preparing Quotations

2.1. Submission Instructions:

2.1.1 Quotations must be submitted electronically to cheryl.lynn.1@us.af.mil, and bennie.simmons@us.af.mil by 19 September 2025.

2.1.2 Late quotations may not be considered.

2.2. Quotation Format: Quotations shall consist of the following separately attached documents:

2.2.1 Volume 1: Price Quotation (Mandatory)

2.2.1.1 Complete Pricing Schedule, including unit prices and extended amounts for all line items (Base Year and Options).

2.2.1.2 Provide the total cost for all line items.

2.3.1 Volume 2: Technical Approach (Mandatory)

2.3.1.1 Clearly and concisely describe your proposed approach to meeting the requirements outlined in the PWS, drawings, and specifications.

2.3.1.2 Include a brief project schedule indicating key milestones and deliverables.

2.3.1.3 Describe the equipment to be used to complete all work.

mailto:cheryl.lynn.1@us.af.mil

2.3.2 Volume 3: Past Performance Information (Mandatory)

2.3.2.1 Provide a minimum of three (3) and a maximum of five (5) references for contracts of similar size and scope performed within the last three (3) years.

2.3.2.2 For each reference, include:

• Contract number

• Customer name and address

• Point of contact (name, title, phone number, and email address)

• Brief description of the work performed

• Contract value

• Period of performance

• Assessment of the Contractor's performance (e.g., on time, within budget, quality of work)

3 Page Limits:

3.2 Volume 2 (Technical Approach): Maximum 10 pages.

3.3 Volume 3 (Past Performance Information): Maximum 1 page per reference (up to 5 pages total).

4 Quotation Validity: Quotations must remain valid for a minimum of 90 days from the submission date.

5 Conditions and Notices

5.1 Site Visit: An optional site visit will be scheduled at the following location:

374 Ave B BLDG 6122

Dyess AFB, TX 79607 Site visit will be on: Monday, September 15, 2025 at 1PM CDT.

Interested contractors MUST RSVP to cheryl.lynn.1@us.af.mil and bennie.simmons@us.af.mil NLT Thursday, September 11, 2025 at 3PM CDT. If the offeror does not have existing base access, an escort will be provided.

5.2 Award Without Discussion: The Government intends to evaluate quotations and award a contract without discussions but reserves the right to conduct discussions if deemed necessary.

5.3 Best Value Determination: The Government will award to the offeror responsible whose quotation represents the best value to the Government, considering price, technical mailto:cheryl.lynn.1@us.af.mil mailto:bennie.simmons@us.af.mil approach, and past performance.

5.4 Small Business Set-Aside: This procurement is 100% set aside for Small Business.

Offerors must represent their size status in SAM.gov.

5.5 SAM Registration: All offerors must be registered in the System for Award Management (SAM) at www.sam.gov , at time of quote submission to be eligible for award.

http://www.sam.gov/

SECTION M - EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

1. Evaluation Factors

This is a competitive best value source selection in which competing offerors technical acceptability and past performance history will be evaluated on a basis significantly more important than cost or price considerations. By submission of its offer, the offeror accedes to all solicitation requirements, including terms and conditions, representations and certifications.

Failure to meet a requirement may result in an offer being determined technically unacceptable.

Offerors must clearly identify any exception to the solicitation terms and conditions and provide complete accompanying rationale. The evaluation process shall proceed as follows:

1. Technical Acceptability

2. Price Evaluation

3. Performance Confidence Assessment

2. Factor 1: Technical Acceptability

2.1 The Government will evaluate the offeror's technical approach based on its demonstration of a clear understanding of the requirements and its ability to successfully perform the work. The technical approach will be rated as either Acceptable or Unacceptable.

2.1.1 Acceptable: The quotation clearly demonstrates a thorough understanding of the requirements, provides a feasible approach to completing the work, and demonstrates the ability to meet all specifications. (See PWS 1.6.1. Specific Tasks)

2.1.2 Unacceptable: The quotation fails to demonstrate a sufficient understanding of the requirements, proposes an unfeasible approach, or fails to meet one or more specifications.

3. Factor 2: Price Evaluation

3.1 The Government shall rank all technically acceptable offers by price, including any option prices if applicable. An offeror’s proposed prices will be determined by multiplying the quantities identified by the proposed unit price for each Contract Line Item Number to confirm the extended amount for each. The price evaluation will document the reasonableness and affordability of the proposed total evaluation price.

4. Factor 3: Performance Confidence Assessment

4.1 The Contracting Officer shall seek relevant performance information on five lowest priced offerors based on (1) the past and present efforts provided by the offeror and (2) data independently obtained from other government and commercial sources. The government reserves the right to seek information on higher priced offerors if none of the lower priced offerors receive a Substantial Confidence performance confidence assessment.

4.2 The purpose of the past performance evaluation is to assess the offeror's ability to successfully perform the required work based on its previous experience.

4.2.1 Past performance will be rated as follows:

4.2.2 Substantial Confidence: Based on the offeror's recent/relevant performance record, the Government has a high expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

4.2.3 Satisfactory Confidence: Based on the offeror's recent/relevant performance record, the Government has a reasonable expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

4.2.4 Limited Confidence: Based on the offeror's recent/relevant performance record, the Government has a low expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

4.2.5 No Confidence: Based on the offeror's recent/relevant performance record, the Government has no expectation that the offeror will be able to successfully perform the required effort.

4.2.6 Neutral: No recent/relevant performance record is available or the offeror is a new entrant. A neutral rating will be assigned in these cases.

4.3 In determining the relevancy of past performance information, the Government will consider the following factors:

4.3.1 Similarity of the work performed to the requirements of this solicitation.

4.3.2 Contract dollar value.

4.3.3 Complexity of the work.

4.3.4 Recency of the performance.

4.4 The Government may consider past performance information from any available source, including but not limited to:

4.4.1 References provided by the offeror

4.4.2 CPARS (Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System)

4.4.3 Other government databases

4.4.4 Information obtained through market research

5. Basis for Award

The Government will consider the evaluation results for all factors to determine which quotation represents the best value. The best value decision is a trade-off between price, technical acceptability, and past performance. A technically acceptable quotation with a strong past performance record may warrant paying a higher price than a lower-priced quotation with a weaker technical approach or a less favorable past performance record. The Government may select other than the lowest priced quote or the quote with the highest past performance confidence rating.