PA System COMBO Amendment 2.pdf

COMBINED SYNOPSIS/SOLICITATION FOR COMMERCIAL PRODUCT

Public Address System / Intercom System for Joint Base Charleston Schoolhouse

FA441826Q0065

Amendment 2

i. This is a combined synopsis/solicitation for commercial products or commercial services prepared in accordance with FAR Part 12. This announcement constitutes the only solicitation. Offers are being requested and a separate written solicitation will not be issued.

ii. Solicitation number FA441826Q0065 is issued as a request for quotation.

iii. This acquisition is full and open competition. Solicitation provisions and clauses are incorporated by reference. The full text of provisions and clauses may be accessed electronically at www.acquisition.gov.

iv. The associated NAICS is 334290, Hardware Manufacturing with a size standard of 800 employees. The associated PSC is 5830 Intercommunication and Public Address Systems, Except Airborne

v. Contractors shall submit a quote in reference to the attached Statement of Objectives

(SOO). All responsible sources may submit a quotation, bid, or proposal, as appropriate, which will be considered by the agency.

vi. The contractor shall furnish, install, configure, integrate, and test a complete Public

Address (PA) and intercom communication system for the designated schoolhouse facility. The system shall include all equipment, hardware, software, cabling, mounting materials, and ancillary components necessary to provide a fully operational and integrated solution.

vii. Place of Performance: Joint Base Charleston – Weapons Station (JB CHS - WS)

viii. Period of Performance: See below, Part III, Notional Work Schedule.

ix. RFO 52.212-1, Instructions to Offerors-Commercial, applies to this acquisition with the following Addenda:

Site Visit Information: Prior to submission of quotes, parties interested in responding to this RFQ are highly encouraged to attend the SITE VISIT CURRENTLY SCHEDULED FOR 29 July 2026 at 0900 EST. No other Site Visit opportunities will be available.

Attendees shall be interested vendors only. Vendors interested in meeting potential offerors shall not use this site visit for these purposes. Attendees are limited to one (1) personnel per firm. Registrants must email name, company, email and phone number for each attendee to Jesus Diaz, Contract Specialist, jesus.diaz.7@us.af.mil no later than 21 July 2026 by 1230 EST. Upon registration, Vendors will receive meeting location, base access information, and itinerary information for the Site Visit.

http://www.acquisition.gov/ mailto:jesus.diaz.7@us.af.mil

Request for Information (RFI): Questions received, in writing, and subsequent answers will be posted to Sam.gov. Offerors are encouraged to submit in writing all questions and requests for clarifications no later than 1000 EST, 04 August 2026. The decision whether to respond to questions and requests for clarification made after 1000 EST, 04 August 2026 shall be at the sole discretion of the Contracting Officer. Failure of a prospective offeror to submit any questions will be construed to mean that the prospective offeror fully understands all requirements of the solicitation. Questions must be emailed to jesus.diaz.7@us.af.mil.

This solicitation consists of the following documents:

Attachment 1 – Statement of Objectives Rev 1 Attachment 2 – Building Floor Plan Rev 1 (In order for a vendor to receive attachment 2 Rev 1, the vendor will have to send a request for the updated attachment to jesus.diaz.7@us.af.mil.)

Attachment 3 – WD 2015 - 4427 Rev 33 dated 13 May 2026 Attachment 4 – Provisions and Clauses Attachment 5 – Questions and Answers (In order for a vendor to receive pictures from attachment 5, the vendor will have to send a request to jesus.diaz.7@us.af.mil)

The Solicitation response will consist of four parts:

PART I – Price:

CLIN Description Qty U/M Total Price 0001 Public Announing System (PA) IAW SOO 1 Lot

Along with the Total Price, the offeror shall submit a comprehensive Bill of Materials (BOM) that identifies all equipment, components, parts and materials required to complete the installation and meet the requirements of the Statement of Objectives (SOO). The BOM shall include item descriptions, quantities, manufacturer names and model numbers (as applicable). The information provided must be sufficient to verify technical compliance and evaluate the completeness of the proposed solution.

PART II – Performance Work Statement: The offeror shall provide a contractor-developed Performance Work Statement (PWS) that aligns with the requirements of the Statement of Objectives (SOO) and includes meaningful, measurable, and outcome based performance standards.

Part III – Notional Work Schedule: The offeror shall provide a notional work schedule demonstrating its understanding of the requirement and its approach to completing the work in accordance with the Statement of Objectives (SOO); please ensure Part III includes total amount of time required to complete project after receipt of order.

Submission of the schedule shall constitute the offeror's acknowledgment and agreement to comply with the work hour restrictions specified in part 3 work schedule of the SOO.

The information provided must be sufficient to demonstrate a clear understanding of the performance requirements and scheduling constraints.

mailto:jesus.diaz.7@us.af.mil

PART IV – Past Performance

Only references for same or similar type contracts are desired. Provide a maximum of three (3) references of “Recent" and "Relevant" projects. "Recent" is defined as projects performed within the past five (5) years from date of solicitation issuance. "Relevant" is defined as performance effort involving essentially the same magnitude of effort and complexity this solicitation requires. The evaluation of past performance information will consider past performance information regarding predecessor companies, key personnel who have relevant experience, or subcontractors that will perform major or critical aspects of the requirement when such information is relevant to the instant acquisition. At a minimum, furnish the following information for each reference:

1) Contract Number.

2) Contract Dollar Value.

3) Brief summary of the requirement.

x. FAR 52.212-2, Evaluation - Commercial Services, applies to this acquisition with the following Addenda:

The government will award a contract resulting from this solicitation to the responsible offeror whose offer conforming to the solicitation will be most advantageous to the Government. The following factors will be used to evaluate offers:

1) Price

2) Technical

3) Past Performance

When combined, technical and past performance are significantly more important than price.

This is a competitive, best value acquisition, following Acquisition of Commercial Products and Commercial Services procedures in accordance with RFO12.203(b). By submission of its offer in accordance with the instructions provided in clause RFO 52.212-1, Instructions to Offerers, the offerer agrees to the terms of this model contract and all such offers shall be treated equally except for their prices and performance records. Offerers must clearly identify any exception to the solicitation terms and conditions and provide complete accompanying rationale.

The evaluation process shall proceed as follows:

Factor 1 Price - Offerers shall be ranked according to total evaluated price, from lowest to highest. An offeror’s total evaluated price will be determined by the total displayed on PART II – Bill of Materials and Labor.

Factor 2 Technical -To be eligible for award, an offeror must receive a rating of Technically Acceptable. To be considered technically acceptable, the offeror shall submit a contractor generated Performance Work Statement and Notional Work Schedule that fully aligns with the Statement of Objectives (SOO). The PWS shall clearly describe the offeror's proposed approach for furnishing, installing, configuring, integrating, and testing the Public Address (PA) and intercom communication system and shall demonstrate how all SOO requirements will be met.

Technical capability is defined as follows:

Technically acceptable – Offeror's PWS and notional schedule fully align Statement of Objectives (SOO).

Technically unacceptable - Offeror's PWS and notional schedule do not fully align Statement of Objectives (SOO).

Factor 3: Past Performance Evaluation - Beginning with the lowest priced, technically acceptable offer, the contracting officer will evaluate any submitted references and will seek recent data independently obtained from other government and commercial sources.

Recent past performance includes performance of efforts within the past five (5) years.

Relevant past performance includes performance of efforts involving similar scope and magnitude of the required effort.

The purpose of the past performance evaluation is to allow the government to assess the offeror’s probability of meeting the solicitation requirements based on the offeror’s demonstrated past performance.

The evaluation process will result in an overall past performance evaluation rating of Substantial Confidence, Satisfactory Confidence, Neutral Confidence, Limited Confidence, or No Confidence as defined in the table below.

Table 1. Past Performance Evaluation Rating Method

Adjectival Rating Description

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.

Satisfactory Confidence

Government has a reasonable expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

Neutral Confidence No recent/relevant performance record is available, or the offeror’s performance record is so sparse that no meaningful confidence assessment rating can be reasonably assigned.

The offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on the factor of past performance.

Limited Confidence

Government has a low expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

No Confidence

Government has no expectation that the offeror will be able to successfully perform the required effort.

Past performance regarding predecessor companies, key personnel who have relevant experience, or subcontractors that will perform major or critical aspects of the requirement will not be rated as highly as past performance information for the principal offeror. Offerors with no recent/relevant performance history or if the offeror’s performance record is so sparse that no meaningful confidence assessment rating can be reasonably assigned shall receive the rating "Neutral Confidence," meaning the rating is treated neither favorably nor unfavorably.

In evaluating past performance, the government reserves the right to give greater consideration to information on those contracts deemed most relevant to the effort described in this solicitation. The following table describes past performance relevancy ratings.

Table 2. Past Performance Relevancy Ratings

Adjectival Rating Description

Very Relevant

Present/past performance effort involved essentially the same scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

Relevant Present/past performance involved similar scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

Somewhat Relevant Present/past performance effort involved some of the scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

Not Relevant Present/past performance effort involved little or none of the scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

If the lowest priced, technically acceptable evaluated offer is judged to have a “Substantial Confidence” rating, then that offer represents the best value for the government and the evaluation process stops at this point. Award shall be made to that offeror without further consideration of any other offers.

If the lowest priced, technically acceptable evaluated offeror is not judged to have a “Substantial Confidence” rating, the next lowest priced offeror will be evaluated, and the process will continue (in order by price and technical acceptability) until an offeror is judged to have a “Substantial Confidence” rating or until all offerors are evaluated. The Government shall then make an integrated assessment best value award decision considering a trade-off between Technical, Past Performance and Price to determine the best value for the Government.

Offerors are cautioned to submit sufficient information, and in the format specified in the preparation instructions, to permit a meaningful evaluation of past performance. Offerors may be asked to make clear certain aspects of their quote or respond to adverse past performance information to which the offeror has not previously had an opportunity to respond. Adverse past performance is defined as past performance information that supports a less than satisfactory rating on any evaluation element or any unfavorable comments received from sources without a formal rating system. Communication conducted to resolve minor or clerical errors will not constitute interchanges and the contracting officer reserves the right to award a contract without the opportunity for revision.

The Government intends to make award based on the initial proposal submissions without conducting interchanges. However, the Government reserves the right to hold interchanges using Interchange Notices (INs) if, during the evaluation, it is determined to be in the best interest of the Government. Offeror responses to INs will be considered in making the award decision. The Government may conduct Interchanges with one, some, none, or all Vendors at its discretion.

xi. If offerors have not completed their annual representations and certifications on

SAM.gov, offerors shall include a completed copy of the provision at 52.212-3, Offeror Representations and Certifications-Commercial Products and Commercial Services, with its offer.

xii. Response to this combined synopsis/solicitation must be received via email by 04:00 PM

02 September 2026, Eastern Daylight Time. Quotes must be emailed electronically to jesus.diaz.7@us.af.mil. The solicitation number, FA441826Q0065, and the name of the offeror must be in the subject line. Emails with a time stamp after the solicitation has closed will be late quotes and will be processed in accordance with RFO 52.212-1.

xiii. For information regarding the solicitation, please contact TSgt Jesus Diaz, Contract

Specialist, at jesus.diaz.7@us.af.mil or Roger Crews, Contracting Officer, at roger.crews@us.af.mil.

mailto:jesus.diaz.7@us.af.mil mailto:roger.crews@us.af.mil