This amendment to RFQ 36C26225Q0030 shall address vendor questions and extend the time for submission of responses. Previous date: 10/10/2024 15:00 PT New Date: 10/18/2024 15:00 PT What is the current contract(s) number for this same Medical Gas Cylinder requirement and who is the current supplier? Answer: RCG of North Carolina on monthly basis. No contract is in place. As the NAICS for this RFQ is 325210 Industrial Gas Manufacturing, please confirm whether this is a Service Contract or a Supply Contract Answer: Supply and some service. ACTIVE PROTEST: PG 4 of 71 (Section 1.2) also states that The purpose of this requirement is to establish a contract vehicle for a Base period with the option to potentially execute a four-year option period to provide a source of supply for qmedical-grade cylinder gases for SAVAHCS (which will need to include Research Service Line) until the WSNC contract can be awarded after the current protests are remedied. Is there an actively pending protest(s) for this requirement? If so, what RFQ is the protest against? As the WSNC is no longer being pursued, so please clarify this statement Answer: There is no active Protest. LICENSING: The RFQ states on PGs 10 & 27 of 71 that the contractor shall maintain/comply with all federal, state, and local licenses or regulations. Additionally, the RFQ includes the 852.219.76 CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE, which requires the offeror to affirm in writing that it will take ownership or possession of the item(s) with its personnel, equipment, or facilities in a manner consistent with industry practice which in this case is a prescription drug (the FDA classifies Medical Grade Gas, such as Oxygen, as a prescription drug for human consumption). Based on the requirements and conditions of the Statement of Work, the SDVOSB Prime meets the definitional requirements of the State of Arizona  as a Distributor of Medical Gas (which the State of Arizona Board of Pharmacy requires Distribution licensure of the SDVOSB, and this, like General Liability Insurance, cannot be  delegated to a subcontractor licensing, nor construed as being synonymous with a Medical Gas Manufacturing License as identified on PGs 9-10 of 71). With the inclusion of requirements on PGs 10 (52.212-4) & 27 of 71, please confirm that the GOV is requiring that the Offeror must comply with all State of Arizona regulations (e.g., State of AZ Board of Pharmacy) in regards to Wholesale/Distribution of Prescription Drugs/Cryogenic Gases applicable to the Prime Contractor (often requires license of the offeror at the time of bid submission) and that any state-regulated compliance cannot be delegated to the subcontractor (further exemplified in the 852.219-76 Certificate of Compliance, where the offeror states in writing that they take ownership/possession of the product, which in this case is a prescription drug)? Is all applicable proof of licensure required at the time of bid submission? If not, when would proof of licensure be required to ensure compliance with FAR 52.212-4? If so, is the GOV affirming that a non-licensed offeror is in noncompliance with FAR 52.212-4, and would a noncompliant offeror be considered not technically acceptable? Answer: Specific state requirements do not apply to the Federal Government. State s does not have jurisdiction over the Veterans Affairs (VA). VA is not a reseller. ENFORCEMENT/OVERSIGHT OF MEDICAL GAS DISTRIBUTION LICENSING: The RFQ states in two sections that the Contractor must be in compliance with federal, state, and local laws/regulations. PG 10 of 71, para 9.3 (Licensing, Authorization, and Selling Permissions), states Throughout the term of this contract, Contractor shall maintain all federal, state, and local licenses applicable to the Contractor as well as any required FDA certifications & PG 27 of 71, (FAR 52.212-4) para (q), states Other compliances. The Contractor shall comply with all applicable Federal, State and local laws, executive orders, rules and regulations applicable to its performance under this contract. What GOV entity (Contracting Authority) is the enforcement authority for this contract regarding Awardee compliance/Contractor Responsibility Determination to ensure compliance with FAR 52.212-4, specifically with federal, state, and local licenses or regulations as required in the two sections of the RFQ? Answer: A government contracting officer is a designated individual responsible for executing, managing, providing, and overseeing contract is being executed in accordance with agreed upon contract on behalf of the government agency. INSURANCE: There is no mention of required liability insurance in the RFQ. How is the GOV going to validate that offerors are properly insured for NAICS 325120/221210 the actual requirement for this work to comply with the RFQ? How do offerors portray to the GOV/Evaluation Committee that they have the correct type of Liability Insurance, and does this credential need to be affirmed at the time of bid submission (if not, an awarded firm could be turned down or not be able to afford this coverage in the amounts the GOV requires, respective to NAICS 325120)? This is important because there are very few underwriters that will insure small businesses for distribution of compressed gases and why confirmation of the applicable NAICS is being requested, in accordance with paragraph (a) of FAR 52.228-5 Insurance Work on a Government Installation which is not included as a clause in this RFQ but is a standard inclusion across the majority of VA solicitations for NAICS 325120. Answer. Contractor signature is acknowledgement of compliance with all clauses and upon request of Contracting Officer contractor must provide validation. Per FAR 52.228-5 Insurance Work on a Government Installation, The Contractor shall, at its own expense, provide and maintain during the entire performance of this contract, at least the kinds and minimum amounts of insurance required in the Schedule or elsewhere in the contract. DELIVERY SCHEDULE/NEGOTIATE: Is the GOV amenable to negotiate the delivery schedule for each facility with the awardee (e.g., delivery days and times)? Answer: They can be negotiated with the understanding that Governments needs are met and have final decision. DELIVERY PROCEDURES: Please confirm if all deliveries for the VAMC & Research are to a centralized delivery point (e.g., loading/receiving dock)? Answer: Research delivery will be made to BLDG 78 and 10 at 3601 S. 6TH AVE, TUCSON, AZ 85723. 2-HOUR DELIVERY WINDOW: PG 5 of 71 in the RFQ (Section 3.1) lists 8AM-10AM as the timeframe for deliveries made Monday through Friday. Is this requirement included in the current contract, or is this a new requirement? This required delivery window is highly nonstandard and may result in an increase in costs. Will the GOV be amenable to negotiate delivery parameters with the awardee? Answer: They can be negotiated with the understanding that Governments needs are met and have final decision. ESTIMATED QTYs FOR CBOCs: What are the estimated annual usages, by CLIN, for the (7) CBOCs listed on PGs 6-7 of 71? Answer: CBOC QTY s have been rolled up and accounted for in quantities requested. ESTIMATE USAGE QTYs for RESEARCH: What are the estimated annual usages, by CLIN, for the (2) Research Buildings (BLDGs 78 & 10)? Answer: Estimated usage would be BLDGs 78 1 CY and BLDGs 10 2 CY are anticipated to be ordered. The Government may increase the quantity of supplies called for in the Schedule at the unit price specified. The Contracting Officer may exercise the option by written notice to the Contractor within. Delivery of the added items shall continue at the same rate as the like items called for under the contract unless the parties otherwise agree. DELVERY WINDOW HOURS FOR CBOCs: What are the hours of operation in which the contractor can make deliveries to the (7) CBOCs? Answer: The contractor shall be required to make deliveries on Monday through Friday between the hours of 8:00am to 10:00am. They can be negotiated with the understanding that Governments needs are met and have final decision GFE s ON VA s PROPERTY BOOKS: How many of each VA-Owned Cylinder, by CLIN, does the VA Own no it s property books? Are VA-Owned Cylinders utilized throughout the HCS or only at the VAMC? CLIN 0014: AIR USP E CGA 950 C/O CLIN 0018: CARBON DIOXIDE USP 50 LB CGA 320 C/O CLIN 0021: CARBON DIOXIDE USP E CGA 940 C/O CLIN 0036: NITROGEN MEDICAL NF 200 CGA 580 C/O CLIN 0040: NITROUS OXIDE CRYOCATH 10LB ALUM C/O CLIN 0042: NITROUS OXIDE USP 20 LB CGA 326 C/O CLIN 0048: OXYGEN USP 200 CGA 540 C/O CLIN 0051: OXYGEN USP EA CGA 870 C/O CLIN 0053: OXYGEN USP EA CGA 870 C/O Answer: CLIN 0014: AIR USP E CGA 950 C/O                                              0 CLIN 0018: CARBON DIOXIDE USP 50 LB CGA 320 C/O           13ea. CLIN 0021: CARBON DIOXIDE USP E CGA 940 C/O                  0 CLIN 0036: NITROGEN MEDICAL NF 200 CGA 580 C/O            1ea. CLIN 0040: NITROUS OXIDE CRYOCATH 10LB ALUM C/O      5ea. CLIN 0042: NITROUS OXIDE USP 20 LB CGA 326 C/O             4ea.   CLIN 0048: OXYGEN USP 200 CGA 540 C/O                                4ea. CLIN 0051: OXYGEN USP EA CGA 870 C/O                                  0 CLIN 0053: OXYGEN USP EA CGA 870 C/O                                  0 CYLINDER MANIFOLD SYSTEMS: PG 9 of 71 in the RFQ (Section 6) states that Attaching of oxygen cylinders to manifold systems, when required, shall also be performed by the Contractor at no additional cost. Will the GOV please remove this language as this is highly nonstandard and vendors cannot perform this function due to liability reasons (damaging manifold or entering facility and possibly interacting with patients)? Standard industry practice is delivering to centralized delivery point (e.g., loading dock), and distribution/hookup of cylinders within the facilities is the responsibility of GOV personnel. Vendors cannot be liable for the hook-up of cylinders to any GFE manifolds/appurtenances due to liability, risk of damaging GFE equipment, and because drivers are not certified for this type of service. This function should only be performed by VA personnel who are more familiar with and properly trained on the systems unique to the VAMC Tucson Answer: Current service provider is providing service. LOSS OF USE FOR CONTRACTOR-OWNED CYLINDERS: What are the procedures to account for Loss of Use (LOU) costs for Contractor-Owned cylinders lost while in the VA s possession? PG 8 of 71 in the RFQ (Section 5.8) provides language stating that the GOV will pay the replacement value of lost Contractor-Owned cylinders, but it does not state HOW this will be accomplished (e.g., paid for via separate purchase order?). Restated, Section 5.8 addresses paying the replacement value for Contractor-Owned Cylinders lost while in the GOV s possession, but what is unclear is how the vendor will arrive at payment procedurally and be reimbursed in a timely manner for the lost cylinders? Please note, the only way to determine Loss of Use is per a VA/Prime Contractor joint-audit and compare what is physically on hand at the facility We recommend replacing the current LOU verbiage with the VISNs 9/10 Medical Cylinders Contract verbiage that does address payment procedures (36C77623D0910 awarded in SEPT 2023): Additionally, the last sentence of Section 5.8 states that If any lost cylinder is located within 30 calendar days after payment by the Government, it may be returned to the contractor by the Government, and the contractor shall pay to the Government an amount equal to the replacement value, less rental, computed in accordance with section 8 of this statement of work. Section 8 (PG 9 of 71) has to do with Evaluation/Technical Requirement. Please clarify the reference to Section 8. Answer. For each contractor-owned cylinder lost or damaged beyond repair while in the Government's possession, the Government shall pay to the Contractor the replacement value, less the allocable rental paid for that cylinder. These cylinders shall become Government property. If any lost cylinder is located within 30 calendar days after payment by the Government, it may be returned to the Contractor by the Government, and the Contractor shall pay to the Government an amount equal to the replacement value, less rental computed in accordance with SOW. This will be a demurrage charge which will be negotiated and issued on a separate Purchase Order. CLIN CLARIFICATION: COMMENT: CLINs 0034 & 0062 are both duplicates of CLIN 0026 (each provides the same part #/local stock #) CLIN 0026: Part # NI NF180LT22 CLIN 0034: Part # NI NF180LT22 CLIN 0062: Part # NI NF180LT22 CLIN 0063 appears to be a duplicate of CLIN 0061 (both listed with EMERGENCY CALL). What is the difference between these (2) CLINs? CLIN 0046 does not include MRI in the description, but the local stock # provided states that it s MRI (0046 currently is duplicate of 0045 at least in description). CLIN 0038 (NITROGEN NF DEWAR FILL FROM BULK): What is the purpose of this CLIN when there are already (5) Dewar-Size-Specific CLINs for Liquid Nitrogen (0027/0028/0029/0030/0031/0032)? This appears to be an unnecessary duplicate especially given it s only structured for (1) Liter. DELIVERY SCHEDULE: COMMENT: PG 3 of 3 (Section 2.B.1.d) in the Solicitation Notice attachment requires offerors to submit the B.4 Delivery Schedule, however the Price/Cost Schedule is B.3 and B.4 is not for inputting pricing . See partial Delivery Schedule below for an example (PG 20 of 71): Answer: B.3 will be used to annotate pricing. EVALUATION & TECHNICAL REQUIREMENTS: The SF1449 states that the GOV will award a contract to the lowest-priced, technically acceptable offer, but PG 9 OF 71 (Section 8.1) in the RFQ states that price is the only evaluation factor.  Please confirm the basis for evaluation as LPTA & Price Only are different means of evaluation? LPTA evaluation basis per SF1449:  If this is either Price Only or LPTA, what is the GOV s rationale for evaluating on a strictly Price or LPTA basis in awarding work as critical as the distribution of Medical Grade Oxygen, a prescription drug to a veterans medical center for human consumption? How will the GOV deem an offeror is technically acceptable without a requirement of technical or past performance submission requirements as an evaluation factor? We recommend a Best Value Comparative Analysis evaluation approach to ensure the VA receives the best possible offer/service and not to just award to the offeror with the lowest price that meets the minimum technical requirement (restated the technical submission requirements are not clear). Answer:(a) 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, price and other factors considered. The following factors shall be used to evaluate offers: Price Only Technical and past performance, when combined, are equal to price. (b) Options. The Government will evaluate offers for award purposes by adding the total price for all options to the total price for the basic requirement. The Government may determine that an offer is unacceptable if the option prices are significantly unbalanced. Evaluation of options shall not obligate the Government to exercise the option(s). (c) A written notice of award or acceptance of an offer, mailed or otherwise furnished to the successful offeror within the time for acceptance specified in the offer, shall result in a binding contract without further action by either party. Before the offer's specified expiration time, the Government may accept an offer (or part of an offer), whether or not there are negotiations after its receipt, unless a written notice of withdrawal is received before award. There are no other changes to the terms and conditions of this Solicitation. All other terms and conditions remain in full force and effect.
