(U) 00. HADES_Section L_20260630.pdf

UNCLASSIFIED

i

UNCLASSIFIED

HYBRID ARCHITECTURE AND DEVELOPMENT FOR

EXPERIMENTAL SYSTEMS (HADES) SERVICES

PART IV – REPRESENTATIONS AND INSTRUCTIONS

SECTION L – INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITION AND NOTICES TO

OFFERORS

FA8809-26-R-B002

SPACE SYSTEMS COMMAND (SSC)

SYSTEMS DELTA 89 (SYD89)

INNOVATION AND PROTOTYPING DELTA (SD)

INNOVATION AND PROTOTYPING DIVISION GROUND (SDG)

KIRTLAND AFB, NM

30 JUNE 2026

Distribution Statement A. Approved for public release. Distribution is unlimited.

Destruction Notice: For unclassified, limited documents, destroy by any method that will prevent disclosure of the contents or reconstruction of the document.

ii

UNCLASSIFIED

Innovation and Prototyping Division Ground

SSC/SYD89/SDG

Kirtland AFB, NM

6/30/2026

HYBRID ARCHITECTURE AND DEVELOPMENT FOR

EXPERIMENTAL SYSTEMS (HADES) SERVICES

PART IV – REPRESENTATIONS AND INSTRUCTIONS

SECTION L – INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITION AND NOTICES TO

OFFERORS

(U) Contents

(U) Contents .................................................................................................................................................................. ii

1. (U) PROGRAM OBJECTIVES

1.1 (U) Overview

1.2 (U) GSE Overview

1.3 (U) Proposal Evaluation

1.3.1 (U) Relative Importance (Evaluation Factors)

1.3.2 (U) Technical Factors

1.3.2.1 (U) The Relative Importance of Technical Subfactors:

1.4 (U) Expectations of Offerors

1.5 (U) Requirements, Proposal Instructions, and Evaluation Cross-References

2. (U) GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS

2.1 (U) General Information

2.1.1 (U) Point of Contact

2.1.2 (U) Debriefings

2.1.3 (U) Discrepancies

2.1.4 (U) RFP Documents and Bidders’ Library

2.1.5 (U) Source Selection Information and Secure Communications

2.1.6 (U) Proposal Validity Statement

2.1.7 (U) Use of Non-Government Advisors

2.1.7.1 (U) Roles and Responsibilities (The Aerospace Corporation)

2.1.7.2 (U) Nondisclosure and Conflicts of Interest

2.1.7.3 (U) Objection Process

2.2 (U) Proposal Organization and Page Limits

2.2.1 (U) Proposal Organization

2.2.1.1 (U) Proposal Organization Table

2.2.1.2 (U) Page Limitations and Counting Rules

2.2.2 (U) Number of Copies

2.2.3 (U) Page Size and Format

2.2.3.1 (U) Page Definition

2.2.3.2 (U) Visual Displays and Graphics

2.2.3.3 (U) Applicability

2.2.4 Section L to Section M Cross-Reference (Government Reference)

2.3 (U) Proposal Preparation

2.3.1 (U) Classified Information

2.3.2 (U) Cross-Referencing

2.3.3 (U) Table of Contents

2.3.4 (U) Acronyms and Abbreviations

2.3.5 (U) Binding and Labeling

2.3.6 (U) Electronic Submission Requirements iii

UNCLASSIFIED

2.3.6.1 (U) General Submission Instructions

2.3.6.2 (U) File Format and Compatibility

2.3.6.3 (U) File Naming and Labeling

2.3.6.4 (U) Cost/Price Volume Requirements

2.3.6.4.1 (U) Electronic Format Requirements

2.3.6.4.2 (U) Spreadsheet and Formula Requirements

2.4 (U) Proposal Submittal and Deadline

2.4.1 (U) Electronic Delivery Instructions

2.4.2 (U) Deadline and Late Submission Policy

3. (U) VOLUME I – EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

3.1 (U) Required Content

3.2 (U) Use of Executive Summary & Page Limits

4. (U) VOLUME II – TECHNICAL

4.1 (U) General

4.2 (U) Volume Organization

4.2.1 (U) Contractor Work Breakdown Structure (CWBS)

4.2.2 (U) Cost/Price Information Note

4.2.3 (U) Volume II Template Outline Example

4.3 (U) Technical Subfactors and Instructions for Specific Content

4.3.1 (U) Subfactor 1.1, Program Management: Administrative Requirements (Sec M 4.3.1)

4.3.1.1 (U) Key Personnel (Sec. M. 4.3.1.1)

4.3.1.2 (U) Personnel Security Requirements (Sec. M. 4.3.1.2)

4.3.1.3 (U) Transition (Sec. M. 4.3.1.5)

4.3.1.4 (U) Small Business (Sec. M. 4.3.1.6)

4.3.2 (U) Subfactor 1.2 – Program Management: Staffing/Labor Profile

4.3.2.1 (U) Staffing Matrices

4.3.2.2 (U) Labor Profile Matrices

4.3.2.3 (U) Narrative Explanation and Alignment

4.3.3 (U) Subfactor 1.3 – Program Management: Emerging Requirements Response

4.3.3.1 (U) Scenario Description and Baseline Assumptions

4.3.3.1.1 (U) Baseline Environment

4.3.3.1.2 (U) Mission X Overview

4.3.3.1.3 (U) Mitigation Approach and Uncertainty

4.3.3.1.4 (U) Task Parameters (Schedule and Performance)

4.3.3.2 (U) Response Requirements (Sec M 4.3.3.2)

4.3.3.3 (U) Response Format and Page Limit

4.3.4 (U) Subfactor 1.4 – Systems Engineer: SE Approach and Methodology

4.3.4.1 (U) SE Lifecycle Coverage

4.3.4.2 (U) Multi-Mission, Multi–Task Order Execution

4.3.4.3 (U) Tailoring For HADES-Specific Challenges

4.3.4.4 (U) SE Methods, Tools, and Standards

4.3.4.5 (U) Integration of Cybersecurity and Configuration Management

4.3.5 (U) Subfactor 1.5 – Systems Engineering: Configuration Management

4.3.6 (U) Volume II, Attachment 1 – Cross-Reference Matrix

4.3.6.1 (U) Cross-Reference Matrix

5. (U) VOLUME III – COST/PRICE

5.1 (U) General Instructions

5.1.1 (U) Volume Organization

5.1.2 (U) Rounding

5.2 (U) Introductory Section of the Cost/Price Volume

5.2.1 (U) Time-Phased, Person-Loading Graph

5.2.2 (U) Offeror Summary Table

5.3 (U) Cost/Price Summaries Estimating Techniques and Methods

5.3.1 (U) Offeror’s Total Proposed Price (TPP) Calculation iv

UNCLASSIFIED

5.3.2 (U) Cost Element Summaries

5.4 (U) Discussion of Cost Elements by Task Order CLIN

5.4.1 (U) Mapping of Technical Proposal to Basis of Estimate

5.4.1.1 Cross-Reference Breakdown/Reference

5.4.2 (U) Contractor Work Breakdown Structure (CWBS) Summaries

5.4.2.1 Cross-Reference Breakdown/Reference

5.4.3 (U) Labor Hour Basis of Estimate

5.4.3.1 (U) Rationale & Justification

5.4.4 (U) Rates

5.4.4.1 (U) Forward Price Rate Agreement/Forward Pricing Rate Recommendation (FPRA/FPRR)

5.4.4.2 (U) Section L, Appendix B Instructions (Labor Rate Pricing Tables)

5.4.4.3 (U) Section L, Appendix C Instructions (Labor Rate Cost Element Summary Tables)

5.4.5 (U) Cost Estimating Relationships (CERs)

5.4.6 (U) Travel by CLIN

5.4.7 (U) Other Direct Costs (ODCs)

5.4.8 (U) Subcontractor/Inter-Divisional Transfers

5.5 (U) Discussion of Business Systems and Offeror’s Unique Approach

5.5.1 (U) Offeror’s Business Systems

5.5.1.1 (U) Companies with Approved Business Systems

5.5.1.2 (U) Companies with Business System Deficiencies

5.5.1.3 (U) Companies Not Required to Have Government-Approved Business Systems

5.5.1.3.1 (U) Accounting System

5.5.1.3.2 (U) Estimating System

5.6 (U) Cost/Price File Formats and Electronic Submission

6. (U) VOLUME IV – PAST PERFORMANCE

6.1 (U) General Instructions

6.1.1 (U) Commercial Client Authorization: Guidance and Alternatives

6.2 (U) Early Proposal Information

6.3 (U) Relevant Contracts

6.3.1 (U) Specific Content

6.3.1.1 (U) Mapping to TO’s

6.3.1.2 (U) Optional TO-Specific Notation

6.3.1.3 (U) Evaluation Consideration

6.3.1.4 (U) Contract Submission Limits

6.4 (U) Past/Present Performance Volume Organization

6.4.1 (U) Section 1 – Volume Organization

6.4.2 (U) Section 2 – Prime Contractor Narratives

6.4.3 (U) Section 3 – Subcontractor Narratives

6.4.4 (U) Page Limitations

6.5 (U) Specific Volume Content

6.5.1 (U) Section 1 – Volume Introduction

6.5.1.1 (U) Introduction

6.5.1.2 (U) Organizational Structure and Responsibilities

6.5.1.3 (U) Organizational Structure Change History

a. (U) Organizational Structure Change History – Narrative Explanation (If Applicable)

b. (U) Organizational Structure Change History – Narrative Example (If Applicable)

c. (U) Subcontractor/Teaming Partner Roadmaps (If Applicable)

d. (U) Evaluation Use and Purpose

6.5.1.4 (U) Contract Data Matrix

6.5.1.5 (U) Subcontractor/Teaming Partner Consent Forms

6.5.1.5.1 (U) Submission Requirements

6.5.1.5.2 (U) Purpose

6.5.1.6 (U) Commercial Client Authorization Letters

6.5.1.6.1 (U) Submission Requirements

6.5.1.6.2 (U) Timeline for Submission v

UNCLASSIFIED

6.5.1.7 (U) Past Performance Questionnaire and Tracking Record

6.5.2 (U) Section 2 – Relevant Past/Present Performance (Prime Offeror)

6.5.2.1 (U) Instructions for Completing the Relevancy Matrix

a. Relevancy Matrix Determination

b. Relevancy Rational Detail Requirements

c. Classified Information Handling Guidance

d. Quantitative Data Requirements

6.5.2.2 (U) Cross-Reference to Section M, Relevancy Matrix

6.5.2.3 (U) Contract Performance

6.5.2.3.1 (U) Program Management (PM) Performance

a. PM-1: Workforce & Resource Management

b. PM-2: Stakeholder Coordination & Communication

c. PM-3: Transition Management

d. PM-4: Maintenance & Sustainment

6.5.2.3.2 (U) Systems Engineering (SE) Performance

a. SE-1: Requirements Analysis & Solution Development

b. SE-2: Stakeholder Coordination & Communication

c. SE-3: Testing, Verification & Problem Resolution

d. SE-4: Transition to Operations

6.5.2.3.3 (U) Cost and Schedule Performance

a. Cost Performance

b. Schedule Performance

6.5.2.3.4 (U) Problems and Corrective Actions

6.5.2.3.5 (U) Award Fee Data (If Applicable)

6.5.2.3.6 (U) Performance Metrics Summary Table

6.5.2.3.7 (U) Guidance on Quality Ratings

6.5.3 (U) Section 3 – Relevant Past/Present Performance (Subcontractors)

6.6 (U) Past/Present Performance Questionnaire Responsibilities

6.6.1 (U) Offeror Responsibilities and “Best Efforts” Standard

6.6.2 (U) Evaluation Treatment of Missing Questionnaires

6.6.3 (U) Alternative Performance Documentation

6.7 (U) Consent Letter

6.7.1 (U) Attachment 1 – Performance Questionnaire

6.7.2 (U) Attachment 2 – Standard Transmittal Letter

6.7.3 (U) Attachment 3 – Subcontractor/Teaming Partner Consent Form

6.7.4 (U) Attachment 4 – Commercial Client Authorization Letter

6.7.5 (U) Attachment 5 – Past Performance Questionnaire Tracking Record

6.7.6 (U) Summary of Attachment Requirements

6.7.7 (U) Offeror Certification

7. (U) VOLUME V – CONTRACT DOCUMENTATION

7.1 (U) Model Contract/Representations and Certifications

7.2 (U) Model Contract: Sections A through K

7.2.1 (U) Section A – Solicitation/Contract Form

7.2.2 (U) Section B – Supplies or Services and Costs/Prices

7.2.3 (U) Section G – Contract Administrative Data

7.2.4 (U) Section H – Special Contract Requirements

7.2.5 (U) Section I – Contract Clauses

7.2.6 (U) Section J – Attachments to the Model Contract

7.2.6.1 (U) OCI Mitigation Plan

7.2.6.2 (U) Rates

7.2.6.3 (U) Small Business Subcontracting Plan

7.2.6.4 (U) Small Business Participation Commitment Document

7.2.6.5 (U) Associate Contractor Agreements

7.3 (U) Exceptions to Solicitation Requirements

7.3.1 (U) Statement of Agreement vi

UNCLASSIFIED

7.3.2 (U) Authorized Offeror Personnel

7.3.3 (U) Government Offices

7.3.4 (U) Company/ Division Address, Identifying Codes, and Applicable Designations

7.3.5 (U) Potential Organizational Conflict of Interest (OCI)

7.3.5.1 (U) Offeror Responsibilities

7.3.5.2 (U) Government Rights and Offeror Obligations

7.3.5.3 (U) Resolution of OCI Issues

7.3.6 (U) Financial Capability Review

ATTACHMENT 1 – (U) PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE

1. (U) INSTRUCTIONS TO EVALUATORS

2. (U) CONTRACT INFORMATION

3. (U) RATING SCALE

4. (U) SECTION 1: PROGRAM MANAGEMENT

4.1 (U) Workforce Management and Staffing

4.2 (U) External Coordination and Responsiveness

4.3 (U) Transition Management

4.4 (U) Maintenance and Sustainment

5. (U) SECTION 2: SYSTEMS ENGINEERING

5.1 (U) Requirements Analysis and Solution Development

5.2 (U) Design, Implementation and Integration

5.3 (U) Testing and Problem Resolution

5.4 (U) Quality of Deliverables

5.5 (U) Innovation and Process Improvement

6. (U) SECTION 3: COST AND SCHEDULE PERFORMANCE

6.1 (U) Cost Performance

6.2 (U) Schedule Performance

7. (U) SECTION 4: OVERALL ASSESSMENT

7.1 (U) Significant Problems or Unsatisfactory Performance

7.2 (U) Exceptional Performance

7.3 (U) Future Award Recommendation

8. CERTIFICATION

9. EVALUATOR INFORMATION:

10. QUESTIONNAIRE SUBMISSION

ATTACHMENT 5 – (U) PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE TRACKING RECORD

1. (U) INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFEROR

2. (U) CONTRACT INFORMATION

3. (U) POINT OF CONTACT (POC) TRACKING TABLE (Example)

3.1 (U) POINT OF CONTACT (POC) TRACKING TABLE (Example)

4. The (U) POINT OF CONTACT (POC) TRACKING TABLE

4.1 (U) Point Of Contact (POC) Tracking Table Summary

5. BEST EFFORTS DETERMINATION

6. ALTERNATIVE DOCUMENTATION

a. Alternatives

7. CERTIFICATION

vii

UNCLASSIFIED

Tables

Table 1. (U) Proposal Organization Table 2. (U) Section L ↔ Section M Cross Reference (All Factors) Table 3. (U) Volume II Organization Table 4. (U) Example Format for Staffing Matrix Per Task Order 02 (Ground Control) Table 5. (U) Example Format for Staffing Matrix Per Task Order 03 (Jaguar) Table 6. (U) Example Format for Staffing Matrix Per Task Order 04 (Ground Support) Table 6. (U) Example Format for Staffing Matrix Per Task Order 05 (ACME) Table 6. (U) Example Format for Staffing Matrix Per Task Order 06 (Ground Systems) Table 6. (U) Example Format for Staffing Matrix Per Task Order 07 (Special Studies) Table 7. (U) Example Format for Total Staffing Matrix Rollup Table 8. (U) Example Format for Time-Based Labor Allocation Table by TO Table 9. (U) Example Format for Time-Based Labor Allocation by Position Table 10. (U) Cross-Reference Matrix (Technical, Cost/Price, Past Performance) Table 11. (U) Cost/Price Volume Organization Table 12. (U) Cost/Price Volume Organization Table 13. (U) Example Cost Element Summary Table 14. (U) Example Cost Element Summary Table 15. (U) Example Mapping of Technical Proposal to BOE Table 16. (U) Example Mapping of Technical Proposal to BOE Table 17. (U) Subcontractor/Inter-Divisional Transfers Cost/Price Analysis Table 18. (U) Timeline of Organizational Structure Changes (Example) Table 19. (U) Relevancy Matrix Overview Table 20. (U) Example Completed Relevancy Matrix Table 21. (U) Performance Metrics Summary Table Table 22. (U) Quality Ratings Table 23. (U) Summary of Section L Attachment Requirements

Figures

Figure 1. (U) Volume II Template Outline

Copy no. ____ of ____ copies Innovation and Prototyping Division Ground

SSC/SYD89/SDG

Kirtland AFB, NM

6/30/2026

HYBRID ARCHITECTURE AND DEVELOPMENT FOR

EXPERIMENTAL SYSTEMS (HADES) SERVICES

PART IV – REPRESENTATIONS AND INSTRUCTIONS

SECTION L – INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITION AND NOTICES TO OFFERORS

1. (U) PROGRAM OBJECTIVES.

1.1 (U) Overview The HADES acquisition is for a new, single Indefinite Delivery/Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) contract for follow-on services supporting the Space Systems Command System Delta 89/Innovation and Prototyping Division Ground (SSC/SYD89/SDG) at Kirtland Air Force Base, NM. This contract will provide engineering, development, integration, and sustainment services supporting the United States Space Force (USSF) Research and Development Space and Missile Operations (RDSMO) Ground System Enterprise (GSE).

This solicitation includes the HADES IDIQ contract and seven initial Task Orders:

• Task Order 01: Transition (No Separate PWS)

• Task Order 02: Ground Control (Section L, Attachment X)

• Task Order 03: JAGUAR (Section L, Attachment X)

• Task Order 04: Ground Support (Section L, Attachment X)

• Task Order 05: ACME (Section L, Attachment X)

• Task Order 06: Ground Systems (Section L, Attachment X)

• Task Order 07: Special Studies (Section L, Attachment X)

These initial Task Orders are representative of the types, scope, and complexity of work anticipated under future Task Orders issued against the IDIQ contract.

The SSC/SDG mission is to:

• Operate and sustain an affordable, multi-mission GSE supporting simultaneous Research & Development and demonstration missions across multiple classification levels.

• Develop innovative solutions to reduce Operations & Maintenance (O&M) costs.

• Provide a test bed to prove-out emerging concepts.

• Remain a viable choice for all new ground Command and Control (C2) programs.

SSC/SDG operates in a dynamic environment requiring rapid response to emerging requirements while maintaining operational continuity across developmental, test, and operational missions. SSC/SDG provides a collaborative partnership among these units to seamlessly develop and rapidly field new capabilities, standardize satellite operations, and exploit core competencies and strengths.

1.2 (U) GSE Overview The GSE represents the entire ground infrastructure that falls under the RDSMO program. The primary components of the GSE include, but are not limited to:

• Two instances of physical infrastructure hosting fully virtualized instances of core and mission-unique ground system software supporting multiple simultaneous missions across multiple classification levels.

• Core Common User Equipment (CUE) and communications equipment (COMM).

• Mission-unique software (MUS) requiring development, integration, testing, and sustainment.

• Configuration management infrastructure across ground system components, operational floors, and missions.

• Cybersecurity controls and compliance frameworks.

• Facilities that fall under the RDSMO program.

Contractors will be responsible for systems engineering, software development and integration, testing and verification, configuration management, cybersecurity support, and sustainment activities across the full system lifecycle.

1.3 (U) Proposal Evaluation The Government will evaluate proposals using a best value trade-off approach that considers three factors:

• Technical (Factor 1)

• Past Performance (Factor 2)

• Cost/Price (Factor 3)

1.3.1 (U) Relative Importance (Evaluation Factors) Relative Importance of Evaluation Factors is as follows: Technical is the most important factor. Past Performance is second in importance. Cost/Price is the least important factor. Technical and Past Performance, when combined, are significantly more important than Cost/Price.

See Section M, paragraph 2.0 (Evaluation Factors and Relative Importance) for detailed evaluation methodology and trade-off process.

1.3.2 (U) Technical Factors Within the Technical factor (Factor 1), the Government will evaluate five subfactors:

• Subfactor 1.1 – Program Management: Administrative Requirements (Pass/Fail) o See Section L 4.3.1 and Section M 4.3.1.

• Subfactor 1.2 – Program Management: Staffing/Labor Profile (Adjectival) o See Section L 4.3.2 and Section M 4.3.2.

• Subfactor 1.3 – Program Management: Emerging Requirements Response (Adjectival, Most Significant PM Subfactor) o See Section L 4.3.3 and Section M 4.3.3.

• Subfactor 1.4 – Systems Engineering: SE Approach and Methodology (Adjectival) o See Section L 4.3.4 and Section M 4.3.4.

• Subfactor 1.5 – Systems Engineering: Configuration Management (Pass/Fail) o See Section L 4.3.5 and Section M 4.3.5.

1.3.2.1 (U) The Relative Importance of Technical Subfactors:

The Program Management Subfactors (1.1–1.3), when considered together, are more important than the Systems Engineering subfactors (1.4–1.5). Subfactor 1.3 (Emerging Requirements Response) is the most significant Program Management subfactor and the primary discriminator within the Technical Factor. Subfactors 1.1 and 1.5 are Pass/Fail requirements that must ultimately be passed for a proposal to be eligible for award, but they do not serve as discriminators among otherwise acceptable proposals.

See Section M 4.0 (Factor 1 – Technical) for detailed evaluation criteria, adjectival rating definitions, and subfactor weighting.

1.4 (U) Expectations of Offerors The Offerors should demonstrate:

1. A clear understanding of the HADES multi-mission environment and its dynamic, multi-classification ground system context. See Section J, Attachment 1 – HADES IDIQ Performance Work Statement, and Section L, Attachments XX–XY – Task Order Performance Work Statements.

2. The capability to execute multiple simultaneous Task Orders with varying scopes, schedules, and technical complexities while maintaining operational continuity. Evaluated under Section M 4.3.2 – Staffing/Labor Profile and Section M 4.3.4 – SE Approach and Methodology.

3. The ability to respond effectively to emerging requirements (as evaluated under the Emerging Requirements Response subfactor, Section M 4.3.3) without degrading baseline mission performance. For the Emerging Requirements scenario, Offerors are expected to propose realistic, risk-informed schedules rather than conforming to a prescribed fixed duration, and to demonstrate how schedule risk will be managed while maintaining baseline performance. This is the most significant Program Management subfactor and the primary discriminator within the Technical Factor.

4. A coherent linkage between their Technical approach, Past Performance record, and Cost/Price proposal.

The Government will assess consistency and traceability across Volume II – Technical, Volume IV – Past Performance, and Volume III – Cost/Price during the integrated evaluation and best value trade-off process.

See Section M 7.0 – Source Selection Decision.

1.5 (U) Requirements, Proposal Instructions, and Evaluation Cross-References Offerors should carefully review the following documents to understand the full scope, complexity, and technical challenges of the HADES mission and technical requirements:

• HADES IDIQ Basic Performance Work Statement (Section J, Attachment 1)

• Task Order 01: Transition (No Separate PWS)

• Task Order 02: Ground Control (Section L, Attachment X)

• Task Order 03: JAGUAR (Section L, Attachment X)

• Task Order 04: Ground Support (Section L, Attachment X)

• Task Order 05: ACME (Section L, Attachment X)

• Task Order 06: Ground Systems (Section L, Attachment X)

• Task Order 07: Special Studies (Section L, Attachment X)

Proposal instructions for addressing these requirements are provided in:

• Section L 4.0 (Volume II – Technical):

o Section L 4.3.1 (Subfactor 1.1 – PM: Administrative Requirements) o Section L 4.3.2 (Subfactor 1.2 – PM: Staffing/Labor Profile) o Section L 4.3.3 (Subfactor 1.3 – PM: Emerging Requirements Response) o Section L 4.3.4 (Subfactor 1.4 – SE: SE Approach and Methodology) o Section L 4.3.5 (Subfactor 1.5 – SE: Configuration Management)

Evaluation criteria for these requirements are provided in:

• Section M 4.0 (Factor 1 – Technical):

o Section M 4.3.1 (Subfactor 1.1 – PM: Administrative Requirements) o Section M 4.3.2 (Subfactor 1.2 – PM: Staffing/Labor Profile) o Section M 4.3.3 (Subfactor 1.3 – PM: Emerging Requirements Response) o Section M 4.3.4 (Subfactor 1.4 – SE: SE Approach and Methodology) o Section M 4.3.5 (Subfactor 1.5 – SE: Configuration Management)

2. (U) GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS.

This section provides general instructions for preparing and submitting proposals in response to this Request for Proposal (RFP). Offerors must comply with all instructions in this Section L to ensure their proposals are complete, compliant, and eligible for evaluation.

1. The Offeror's proposal must include all data and information requested by Section L and must be submitted in accordance with these instructions. The proposal shall be compliant with the requirements stated in the HADES IDIQ Performance Work Statement (Section J, Attachment 1), Task Order Performance Work Statements (Section L, Attachments XX-XY), and Model Contract (Sections A-K). Non-conformance with the instructions provided in Section L may result in the proposal being determined non-compliant and ineligible for award in accordance with Section M, paragraph 2.2.

2. The proposal shall be clear, concise, and shall include sufficient detail for effective evaluation and for substantiating the validity of stated claims. The Government intends to make award without discussions in accordance with FAR 15.306(a)(3). Therefore, Offerors are strongly encouraged to submit their most competitive proposal initially and to include their best terms and pricing. The proposal should not simply rephrase or restate the Government's requirements but rather shall provide convincing rationale, specific details, and concrete examples demonstrating how the Offeror intends to meet these requirements. Offerors shall assume that the Government has no prior knowledge of the Offeror's facilities, experience, or capabilities and will base its evaluation solely on the information presented in the Offeror's proposal as assessed against the evaluation factors and criteria in Section M.

3. Elaborate brochures, marketing materials, detailed artwork, or other embellishments are unnecessary and are not desired. Proposals should focus on substantive content addressing the evaluation criteria in Section M.

4. The proposal validity period is 270 calendar days from the proposal due date as specified in Section A, Block 8.

The Offeror shall include a clear statement in Volume V (Contract Documentation) confirming that the proposal is valid through this date in accordance with Section L, paragraph 2.1.6.

5. In accordance with FAR Subpart 4.8 (Government Contract Files), the Government will retain one electronic copy of all unsuccessful proposals for the official contract file. Unless the Offeror requests otherwise in writing, the Government will delete additional electronic copies of unsuccessful proposals after the retention period specified in FAR 4.805.

2.1 (U) General Information

2.1.1 (U) Point of Contact The Procuring Contracting Officer (PCO) is the sole point of contact for this acquisition. All communications regarding this solicitation must be directed to the PCO identified below:

Lt Col John Purcell, PCO

SSC/SYD89/SFPEO-SCP/PK

Email: john.purcell.3@spaceforce.mil Phone: (505) 853-7664

Questions or requests for clarification must be submitted in writing via email to the address above. Telephone inquiries will not be accepted except for administrative matters (e.g., file transfer issues, SAM.gov access problems).

From the date of proposal submission until contract award, Offerors must comply with the communication restrictions in Section M, paragraph 1.5. Unauthorized communications may result in the offeror's proposal being removed from award consideration. For questions regarding SAM.gov access or technical issues with electronic file submission, contact the PCO at the email address above.

2.1.2 (U) Debriefings Offerors may request pre-award and post-award debriefings in accordance with FAR 15.505 and FAR 15.506, respectively. Detailed debriefing procedures, timelines, and content are provided in Section M, paragraph 1.6.

Debriefing requests must be submitted in writing to the PCO within the timeframes specified in FAR 15.505 (pre-award) or FAR 15.506 (post-award). Failure to request a debriefing within the specified timeframes may result in loss of the right to a debriefing and may affect protest timeliness.

2.1.3 (U) Discrepancies If an Offeror believes that the solicitation contains an error, omission, inconsistency, or ambiguity, the Offeror shall notify the PCO in writing as soon as possible, but no later than 14 calendar days before the proposal due date.

The notification must include:

a. Identification of the specific solicitation section and paragraph containing the alleged error or ambiguity

b. Detailed explanation of the issue

c. Supporting rationale

d. Proposed remedy or clarification

The Government will respond to questions through written amendments to the solicitation issued via SAM.gov.

Offerors are responsible for monitoring SAM.gov for amendments and must acknowledge all amendments in accordance with the instructions in each amendment. The Government is not bound by oral explanations or instructions. Only written amendments to the Solicitation will modify its requirements.

Offerors are reminded that the Government intends to make award without discussions in accordance with FAR 15.306(a)(3). Offerors should not rely on the opportunity to clarify or revise proposals after submission and should submit their best proposal initially.

2.1.4 (U) RFP Documents and Bidders’ Library The solicitation documents are available on SAM.gov (www.sam.gov) under Solicitation Number FA8809-26-R- B002.

The following documents are included in this solicitation:

• Solicitation, Offer and Award (SF 33) - Section A

• Supplies or Services and Prices/Costs - Section B

• Description/Specifications/Work Statement - Section C

• Packaging and Marking - Section D

• Inspection and Acceptance - Section E

• Deliveries or Performance - Section F

• Contract Administration Data - Section G

• Special Contract Requirements - Section H

• Contract Clauses - Section I

• List of Attachments - Section J

• Representations, Certifications, and Other Statements - Section K

• Instructions, Conditions, and Notices to Offerors - Section L (this document)

• Evaluation Factors for Award - Section M

Attachments to the solicitation (referenced in Section J) include:

• HADES IDIQ Performance Work Statement (Attachment 1)

• Data Rights Attachment (Attachment 9)

• HADES Technical Data Package Reference (Bidder’s Library)

• [Other attachments as applicable]

Offerors are strongly encouraged to subscribe to email notifications on SAM.gov for this solicitation to receive real-time alerts when amendments or additional information is posted, download all solicitation documents immediately and verify file integrity, monitor SAM.gov regularly for amendments throughout the solicitation period and retain all solicitation documents and amendments for reference during proposal preparation.

Offerors are responsible for obtaining all solicitation documents and amendments. Failure to acknowledge amendments may result in proposal rejection.

Note: Oral presentations will not be conducted for this acquisition. All proposal information must be submitted in writing in accordance with Section L.

http://www.sam.gov/

2.1.5 (U) Source Selection Information and Secure Communications All exchanges of source selection information between the Government and Offerors will be controlled by the PCO in accordance with FAR 2.101 and FAR 3.104. Source selection information will be transmitted to Offerors using one of the following secure methods:

a. Encrypted Email: Email may be used if both the Government and Offeror can send and receive encrypted email. All emails containing source selection information must include "Source Selection Information - See FAR 2.101 & 3.104" in the subject line.

b. DoD Safe: The Government may use DoD Safe (https://safe.apps.mil/) to transmit large files or source selection sensitive documents. Offerors will receive a download link via email (if required).

Offerors must ensure they have the capability to receive encrypted email and access DoD Safe. If an Offeror cannot receive encrypted email, the Offeror must notify the PCO immediately to arrange alternative secure transmission methods. From proposal submission to contract award, offerors must comply with the communication restrictions in Section M, paragraph 1.5. Unauthorized disclosure of source selection information may result in proposal rejection, contract termination, or other remedies.

2.1.6 (U) Proposal Validity Statement The Offeror's proposal must remain valid for 270 calendar days from the proposal’s due date specified in Section A, Block 8. This validity period allows the Government sufficient time to complete proposal evaluation, conduct discussions (if necessary), and make an award decision.

The Offeror shall include a clear statement in Volume V (Contract Documentation), Section A (SF 1449), Block 12, confirming that the proposal, including all pricing, terms, and conditions, remains valid for 270 calendar days from the proposal’s due date. An example statement is as follows: "This proposal, including all pricing, terms, and conditions, is valid for 270 calendar days from [Proposal Due Date: MM/DD/YYYY]."

If the Government requires an extension of the proposal validity period beyond 270 days, the PCO will request the extension in writing. Offerors are not obligated to grant extensions but are encouraged to do so to remain eligible for award consideration.

2.1.7 (U) Use of Non-Government Advisors The Government will use non-Government advisors to support the source selection process. Proposal information submitted in response to this solicitation will be made available to individuals working for the following organizations:

Evaluation Support (Proposal Analysis and Technical Evaluation Advisement)

The Aerospace Corporation 2350 E. El Segundo Blvd., El Segundo, CA 90245

Administrative Support (No Proposal Evaluation Role):

Reserved

2.1.7.1 (U) Roles and Responsibilities (The Aerospace Corporation) The Aerospace Corporation will provide technical evaluation support, including analysis of technical proposals against evaluation criteria in Section M, assessment of technical feasibility, risk, and capability, advisory services to the Source Selection Evaluation Board (SSEB) and analysis of evaluation findings.

2.1.7.2 (U) Nondisclosure and Conflicts of Interest All non-Government advisors have signed nondisclosure agreements (NDAs) with the Government that strictly prohibits the release or disclosure of proposal information outside the source selection team, the use of proposal information for any purpose other than supporting this source selection, and/or the disclosure of source selection sensitive information. In addition, these non-Government advisor contract(s) require the contractor to execute associate contractor agreements reasonably necessary to conduct services. Therefore, the Offeror is highly encouraged to work with these contractor(s) to secure any agreement deemed reasonably necessary as an additional safeguard.

2.1.7.3 (U) Objection Process If an Offeror objects to the release of its proposal information to any of the above-listed non-Government advisors, the Offeror must submit a written objection to the PCO no later than 15 calendar days after the date of solicitation issuance.

The Offeror’s objection must include the following:

a. Specific identification of the non-Government advisor(s) to which the Offeror objects.

b. Detailed rationale for the objection (e.g., competitive concerns, proprietary information protection, conflicts of interest).

c. Proposed alternative arrangements (if any).

The PCO will review the objection and determine whether:

a. The objection is valid, and the non-Government advisor will not have access to the Offeror's proposal, OR

b. The objection is not valid, and the non-Government advisor will have access to the Offeror's proposal as originally planned, OR

c. Alternative arrangements can be made to address the Offeror's concerns while still utilizing the non-

Government advisor.

The PCO's determination is final. Failure to object within the 15 calendar day period constitutes consent to the use of non-Government advisors as described above.

Note: Offerors should carefully consider the impact of objecting to non-Government advisor access. If an objection is sustained, the Government may have reduced capability to evaluate the technical aspects of the proposal, which could impact the proposal's competitiveness.

2.2 (U) Proposal Organization and Page Limits Offerors must organize their proposals in accordance with the structure specified in Table 1 below. Proper organization ensures efficient evaluation and enables evaluators to locate information required to assess proposals against the evaluation criteria in Section M. Page limits are strictly enforced. Pages exceeding the specified limits will not be read or evaluated. Offerors should use page limits strategically to address the most important evaluation criteria, particularly those identified as "Most Important" or "Most Significant" in Section M, including Subfactor

1.3 – Program Management: Emerging Requirements Response under the Technical factor.

Each proposal volume shall be submitted as a separate electronic file in accordance with Section L, paragraph 2.3.6 (Electronic Submission Requirements).

2.2.1 (U) Proposal Organization

2.2.1.1 (U) Proposal Organization Table Offeror shall organize the proposal in accordance with Table 1 (Proposal Organization) below. Each volume shall be submitted as a separate electronic file with the file naming convention specified in Section L, paragraph 2.3.6.3.

Requirements:

• All volumes must be submitted to be considered for award.

• Each volume shall be complete and stand-alone (minimal cross-referencing between volumes).

• Page limits are strictly enforced (see Section L, paragraph 2.2.1.2).

• Cost/Price information shall NOT be included in the Technical Volume (Volume II).

• Detailed instructions for each volume are provided in the Section L paragraph referenced in Table 1.

Table 1 identifies volume number and title, Section L paragraph containing detailed instructions for that volume, page limit (if applicable), and evaluation weight (volumes evaluated against Section M criteria are noted).

Volumes I, II, and IV are evaluated against the evaluation factors in Section M.

Volume III supports the Cost/Price evaluation.

Volume V is reviewed for compliance and completeness but is not assigned an evaluation rating.

Table 1. (U) Proposal Organization

Volume

Section L Para. Volume Title Page Limit Evaluated

I 3.0 Executive Summary 3 Yes (M 3.0)

II

4.0 Technical Proposal See Below Yes (M 4.0)

4.2 Vol II, Contractor Work Breakdown Structure (CWBS) Unlimited Not Scored

4.3 Technical Volume Narrative - -

4.3.1 -Subfactor 1.1: Program Management – Administrative 15 Yes (M 4.3.1)

4.3.1.2 4.3.1.3 4.3.1.5 4.3.1.6

- Key Personnel

- Personnel Security Requirements

- Transition Plan

- Small Business Participation

Incl. Above Incl. Above

(5) Incl. Above

Yes (Pass/Fail) Yes (Pass/Fail) Yes (Pass/Fail) Yes (Pass/Fail)

4.3.2 -Subfactor 1.2: Program Management – Staffing / Labor Profile

Yes (M 4.3.2) (Adjectival)

4.3.3 -Subfactor 1.3: Program Management – Emerging Requirements Response

Yes (M 4.3.3)

(Most Sig / Adjectival)

4.3.4 -Subfactor 1.4: Systems Engineering – SE Approach and Methodology 10 Yes (M 4.3.4)

(Adjectival)

4.3.5 -Subfactor 1.5: Systems Engineering – Configuration Management 3 Yes (M 4.3.5)

Yes (Pass/Fail)

4.3.3 Vol II, Attachment 1, Cross-Reference Matrix Unlimited Not Scored

2.3.4 Vol II, Attachment 2, Acronyms and Abbreviations Unlimited Not Scored

4.2 Vol II, Attachment 3, Contractor Work Breakdown Structure Unlimited Not Scored

VOLUME II TOTAL PAGE LIMIT:

(Narrative Only: Subfactors 1.1 – 1.5)

(Excludes CWBS and Cross-Reference Matrix) 63 -

III 5.0 Cost / Price Unlimited Yes (M 5.0)

IV

6.0 Past Performance See Below Yes (M 6.0)

6.4.1 • Section 1: Volume Introduction Unlimited Not Scored

6.5.2 • Section 2: Prime Contractor Narratives (max 5 contracts, ~4 pages each) 20 Yes

6.5.3 • Section 3: Subcontractor Narratives (major subs only, ~3 pages each) 10 Yes

VOLUME IV TOTAL PAGE LIMIT:

(Sections 2 & 3 Only) (Excludes Section 1, Matrices, Forms, & Tracking Records)

30 -

V 7.0 Contract Documentation Unlimited Compliance Review Only

Total Evaluated Narrative Page Limit (Volume I: 3 + Volume II: 63 + Volume IV: 30) 96 -

Table 1 Notes / Table Key:

1. Page limits marked with parentheses (XX) are sub-limits within the parent section. For example, the

Transition Plan under Subfactor 1.1 has a 5-page sub-limit within the overall 15-page limit for Subfactor 1.1.

2. “Evaluated” indicates the volume or section is evaluated against the criteria in Section M. “Not Scored” or “Compliance Review Only” indicates the content is reviewed for completeness and compliance but does not receive an evaluation rating.

3. Volume II Total Page Limit (63 pages) applies to the Technical narrative across Subfactors 1.1–1.5 only. It excludes Volume II attachments (CWBS, Cross-Reference Matrix, Acronyms) and Volume II cover/TOC.

4. Within Volume II, page limits for individual Technical subfactors (1.1–1.5) are planning limits. Offerors may flex pages between Technical subfactors at their discretion, provided the combined narrative page count for Subfactors 1.1–1.5 does not exceed 63 pages, and subfactor sections are clearly labeled.

5. Volumes I, II, and IV are evaluated against the Section M factors. Volume III supports the Cost/Price evaluation. Volume V is reviewed for compliance and completeness but is not assigned an evaluation rating.

6. Unlimited sections should contain only relevant, necessary information. Excessive or irrelevant material may negatively impact evaluation efficiency

2.2.1.2 (U) Page Limitations and Counting Rules Page limits are MAXIMUMS and are strictly enforced. Pages exceeding the specified limit will not be read or evaluated, which may result in the proposal being determined non-compliant or receiving a lower rating due to missing information.

Pages are counted sequentially within each volume or section as specified in Table 1. For example:

• Volume I (Executive Summary): Pages 1–3 (3 pages total).

• Volume II, Subfactor 1.1 (PM: Administrative Requirements): Pages 1–15 (15 pages total).

• Volume II, Subfactor 1.2 (PM: Staffing/Labor Profile): Pages 1–15 (15 pages total).

• Volume II, Subfactor 1.3 (PM: Emerging Requirements Response): Pages 1–20 (20 pages total).

• Volume II, Subfactor 1.4 (SE: SE Approach and Methodology): Pages 1–10 (10 pages total).

• Volume II, Subfactor 1.5 (SE: Configuration Management): Pages 1–3 (3 pages total).

• Volume IV, Sections 2 & 3 (Past Performance Narratives): As specified in Table 1.

If the Volume II Technical narrative exceeds the overall page limit, evaluators will read and evaluate only the pages within that limit. For example, if the Offeror submits 70 pages of Technical Narrative across Subfactors 1.1–1.5, only the first 63 pages of Technical Narrative will be evaluated.

The following pages are NOT counted toward page limits:

• Volume cover pages (one per volume).

• Volume table of contents (one per volume).

• Section dividers (clearly marked "DIVIDER" or "SECTION X BEGINS").

• Blank pages inserted for formatting (clearly marked "This page intentionally left blank").

• Acronym lists and glossaries (one per volume).

• Attachments specifically designated as "Unlimited" in Table 1.

All other pages containing any text, graphics, tables, or images ARE counted toward page limits.

The following ARE counted toward page limits:

• All narrative text pages.

• All tables, charts, graphs, and figures (including those embedded in narrative).

• Organizational charts, diagrams, and flowcharts.

• Sample documents, templates, or examples.

• Resumes (if included).

• Title pages for sections or subsections (e.g., "Subfactor 1: Program Management").

• Pages with headers/footers only (if they contain proposal content).

Oversized pages up to 11×17 inches are permitted for tables, charts, graphs, and figures. Each 11×17" foldout counts as one (1) page toward the page limit, regardless of the amount of information on the page. Foldouts larger than 11×17" are not permitted and will not be evaluated.

If the Government conducts discussions and issues Evaluation Notices (ENs), page limits for EN responses will be specified in each EN. EN response page limits are separate from and in addition to the initial proposal page limits.

Consequences of Exceeding Page Limits:

• If a volume or section exceeds its page limit, evaluators will read and evaluate only the pages within the limit (e.g., if Volume II is 65 pages but the limit is 60, only pages 1-60 will be evaluated).

• Information on pages beyond the limit will not be considered, which may result in:

o Evaluation criteria not being addressed, o Strengths not being identified, o Weaknesses or deficiencies being identified due to missing information, o Lower ratings or determination of non-compliance.

• The Government will not request clarifications or conduct discussions to obtain information that was excluded due to page limit violations.

Offerors should allocate pages strategically to address the most important evaluation criteria first. Per Section M:

• Technical is more important than Past Performance, and both are significantly more important than

Cost/Price.

• Within Technical, Program Management is more important than Systems Engineering.

• Within Program Management, Emerging Requirements Response is the most significant adjectival subfactor.

Flexible Allocation of Technical Subfactor Pages Within Volume II, the individual page limits for Technical subfactors (Subfactors 1.1–1.5) are established for planning purposes to help Offerors allocate narrative emphasis. However, the Government recognizes that Offerors may need flexibility in how they allocate narrative space across these Technical subfactors.

If the Offeror does not utilize all allotted pages in one Technical subfactor, the remaining pages may (at the Offeror’s discretion) be allocated to another Technical subfactor, subject to the following conditions:

• The combined narrative page count for Subfactors 1.1–1.5 shall not exceed 63 pages.

• The Offeror shall clearly label section and page breaks so evaluators can determine which pages correspond to each subfactor.

For the avoidance of doubt, the only enforceable page limit for the Volume II Technical narrative is 63 total pages across Subfactors 1.1–1.5. Pages beyond 63 will not be read or evaluated, regardless of how they are allocated among the Technical subfactors.

2.2.2 (U) Number of Copies Hard copy proposals are not required and will not be accepted. All proposals shall be submitted electronically in accordance with Section L, paragraph 2.3.6 (Electronic Submission Requirements).

Offerors shall submit ONE (1) electronic proposal package containing separate files for each volume:

• Volume I - Executive Summary

• Volume II - Technical Proposal

• Volume III - Cost/Price

• Volume IV - Past Performance

• Volume V - Contract Documentation

Each volume shall be submitted as a separate electronic file using the file naming convention specified in Section L, paragraph 2.3.6.3.

The Government does not require multiple copies of the electronic proposal. One complete electronic submission per offeror is sufficient.

2.2.3 (U) Page Size and Format

2.2.3.1 (U) Page Definition A page is defined as one side of an 8.5" × 11" sheet containing proposal content. For electronic submissions, this corresponds to one page in a PDF or Word document.

• Standard Page Size: 8.5" × 11" (portrait or landscape orientation).

• Oversized Pages (Foldouts): Up to 11" × 17" are permitted for tables, charts, graphs, and figures. Each foldout counts as one (1) page toward the page limit. Foldouts larger than 11" × 17" are not permitted.

Text Formatting Requirements:

• Font: 12-point Times New Roman (or equivalent serif font)

• Line Spacing: Single-spaced minimum (1.0 or greater)

• Margins:

o Top and Bottom: 1.0 inch minimum o Left and Right: 0.75 inch minimum

• Paragraph Spacing: At offeror's discretion (but must be consistent)

• Text Justification: At offeror's discretion (left-aligned or fully justified)

Font Adjustments:

Offerors may use standard font formatting (bold, italic, underline) and standard paragraph formatting (bullets, numbering, indentation) without restriction. However, Offerors shall NOT:

• Reduce font size below 12-point for body text.

• Compress line spacing below single-spaced (1.0).

• Reduce margins below the specified minimums.

• Use condensed or narrow font variants (e.g., "Times New Roman Narrow").

Headers, Footers, and Page Numbers:

• Headers and footers may use a minimum 10-point font.

• Page numbers are required and shall be sequential within each volume.

• Headers/footers may include page numbers, volume title, offeror name, classification markings (if applicable).

• Headers/footers are not counted toward page limits unless they contain proposal content (e.g., narrative text, evaluation responses).

Tables, Charts, and Figures:

• Font size: 10-point Times New Roman minimum (see Section L 2.2.3.2).

• Line spacing: At offeror's discretion (tables may use tighter spacing).

• Tables may use landscape orientation on portrait pages or foldouts.

Page Numbering:

Pages shall be numbered sequentially within each volume using the following format:

• Volume I: Pages 1-3 (or I-1, I-2, I-3).

• Volume II: Pages 1-60 (or II-1, II-2, ... II-60).

• Volume III: Pages 1-X (or III-1, III-2, ... III-X).

• Volume IV: Pages 1-30 (or IV-1, IV-2, ... IV-30).

• Volume V: Pages 1-X (or V-1, V-2, ... V-X).

Offerors may use section-level numbering (e.g., "Section 4.3.1, Page 1 of 50") if preferred but must ensure pages are clearly identifiable and sequential.

2.2.3.2 (U) Visual Displays and Graphics Offerors are encouraged to use tables, charts, graphs, diagrams, and figures to clearly and concisely convey information. Visual displays are particularly effective for illustrating organizational structures and reporting relationships, system architectures and interfaces, implementation schedules and timelines, workflow processes and decision frameworks, staffing matrices and resource allocation, and performance metrics and trends, Formatting Requirements for Visual Displays:

• Minimum Font Size: 10-point Times New Roman (or equivalent).

• Maximum Size: 11" × 17" (foldouts).

• Legibility: All text, labels, and data must be clearly readable.

• Displays should be clear and not overly complicated (avoid cluttered diagrams).

• Color is permitted and encouraged for clarity, but all information must also be discernible in grayscale (for printing if necessary).

• Electronic graphics should be at least 300 DPI for clarity.

Visual displays count toward page limits:

• Standard 8.5" × 11" page with graphic: 1 page

• 11" × 17" foldout: 1 page

• Multiple graphics on one page: 1 page

Best Practices:

• Use visuals to supplement, not replace, narrative explanations.

• Ensure all visuals are referenced in the narrative (e.g., "See Figure 1").

• Provide titles and labels for all visuals.

• Include legends or keys for symbols, colors, or abbreviations.

• Ensure consistency in terminology between visuals and narrative.

• Use high-contrast colors for readability.

Prohibited Visual Formats:

• Foldouts larger than 11" × 17"

• Graphics with font sizes smaller than 10-point.

• Illegible or low-resolution images.

• Overly complex diagrams that obscure information.

2.2.3.3 (U) Applicability The page size and format requirements in Section L 2.2.3 apply to:

• All proposal volumes (Volumes I-V).

• All sections within each volume.

• All attachments and appendices (unless specifically exempted).

• Responses to Evaluation Notices (ENs), if discussions are held.

• Final Proposal Revisions (FPRs), if discussions are held.

Hard copy proposals will not be accepted for initial submission. All proposals must be submitted electronically in accordance with Section L, paragraph 2.3.6. If the Government requests hard copies after initial evaluation (e.g., for final source selection review), the Government will provide specific formatting instructions at that time. Hard copy format requirements may differ from electronic submission requirements.

Externally generated documents included as attachments (e.g., CPARS reports, financial statements, third-party…