SF30 36C24126R0001 0009.pdf

5. PROJECT NUMBER (if applicable)

CODE 7. ADMINISTERED BY

2. AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION NUMBER

CODE

6. ISSUED BY

8. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NUMBER 3. EFFECTIVE DATE

9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NUMBER

9B. DATED

PAGE OF PAGES

10A. MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT/ORDER NUMBER

10B. DATED

BPA NO. 1. CONTRACT ID CODE

FACILITY CODE CODE

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:

The above numbered solicitation is amended as set forth in Item 14. The hour and date specified for receipt of Offers

E. IMPORTANT:

is extended,

(a) By completing Items 8 and 15, and returning __________ copies of the amendment; (b) By acknowledging receipt of this amendment on each copy of the offer submitted; or (c) By separate letter or electronic communication which includes a reference to the solicitation and amendment numbers. FAILURE OF YOUR

ACKNOWLEDGMENT TO BE RECEIVED AT THE PLACE DESIGNATED FOR THE RECEIPT OF OFFERS PRIOR TO THE HOUR AND DATE SPECIFIED MAY is not extended.

12. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA

(REV. 11/2016)

is required to sign this document and return ___________ copies to the issuing office. is not, A. THIS CHANGE ORDER IS ISSUED PURSUANT TO: (Specify authority) THE CHANGES SET FORTH IN ITEM 14 ARE MADE IN THE CONTRACT ORDER NO. IN ITEM 10A.

15C. DATE SIGNED

B. THE ABOVE NUMBERED CONTRACT/ORDER IS MODIFIED TO REFLECT THE ADMINISTRATIVE CHANGES

SET FORTH IN ITEM 14, PURSUANT TO THE AUTHORITY OF FAR 43.103(b).

RESULT IN REJECTION OF YOUR OFFER. If by virtue of this amendment you desire to change an offer already submitted, such change may be made by letter or electronic communication, provided each letter or electronic communication makes reference to the solicitation and this amendment, and is received prior to the opening hour and date specified.

C. THIS SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT IS ENTERED INTO PURSUANT TO AUTHORITY OF:

D. OTHER

Contractor

16C. DATE SIGNED

14. DESCRIPTION OF AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION

16B. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Except as provided herein, all terms and conditions of the document referenced in Item 9A or 10A, as heretofore changed, remains unchanged and in full force and effect.

15A. NAME AND TITLE OF SIGNER 16A. NAME AND TITLE OF CONTRACTING OFFICER

15B. CONTRACTOR/OFFEROR

STANDARD FORM 30 PREVIOUS EDITION NOT USABLE

Prescribed by GSA - FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

(Type or print) (Type or print)

(Organized by UCF section headings, including solicitation/contract subject matter where feasible.)

(Number, street, county, State and ZIP Code)

(If other than Item 6)

(Specify type of modification and authority)

(such as changes in paying office, appropriation date, etc.)

(If required)

(SEE ITEM 11)

(SEE ITEM 13)

(X)

CHECK

ONE

13. THIS ITEM APPLIES ONLY TO MODIFICATIONS OF CONTRACTS/ORDERS,

IT MODIFIES THE CONTRACT/ORDER NO. AS DESCRIBED IN ITEM 14.

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT

(Signature of person authorized to sign) (Signature of Contracting Officer)

1 7

0009 01-22-2026

None

Department of Veterans Affairs

Network Contracting Office 1 (NCO 1)

Contracting Officer (90C)

1 VA Center

Augusta ME 04330

Department of Veterans Affairs

Network Contracting Office 1 (NCO 1)

Contracting Officer (90C)

1 VA Center

Augusta ME 04330

To all Offerors/Bidders

36C24126R0001

11-26-2025

X

X X

** HOUR & DATE for Receipt of Offers is EXTENDED to: 02-05-2026 16:30 EST

X 1

In response to a pre-filing notice filed before the Court of Federal Claims (COFC), VA issues this amendment. The purpose of this amendment is to update the price schedule, provide historical frame usage for EG OFL sites, revise the Performance

Requirements Summary Sections 5.1 and 5.2 of the Statement of Work, clarify the use of other than certified pricing data, and provide historical use of frames for the EG Region OFL locations.

NOTE: The extension is only for the submission of proposals. The due date for submission of samples remains unchanged.

36C24126R0001 0009

Department of Veterans Affairs

National Prescription Eyeglasses Manufacturing

36C24126R0001 0009

The below listed issues were identified in a pre-filing notice filed before the COFC:

1. The Solicitation’s Attachment A Price Schedule includes 970 lines of CLINs for the solicited lenses, frames, treatments, etc. Without any noted exceptions, offerors are required to “fill-in all unit prices and totals for each CLIN.” (Sol. §E.1.19.) Certain of the CLINs, however, are for items that are not commercially available. No offeror will be able to provide pricing for these items. For instance, for CLIN 0001AE, the item as requested is a complete pair of eyeglasses with CR-39 clear lenses with executive bifocals. The CR-39 lens has an index of approximately

1.50, but the lens is not made in an executive bifocal configuration. A similar item is available with an index of 1.56, and would normally be substituted in the commercial context. PDS has asked the VA to remove the unavailable item or to allow the 1.56 substitution, but the VA has not done so. Similarly, despite repeated requests from PDS, the VA has not provided guidance regarding its preferred approach for other CLINs that are not commercially available, other than to say that if items are unavailable, other offerors will face the same issue and the VA can seek clarifications. Without a set procedure for how offerors should treat CLINs that list items that are not commercially available, offerors run the risk that the VA may find their proposals incomplete or nonresponsive, or that the VA may accept incorrect assertions that an offeror will provide an unavailable item. This creates needless uncertainty and inefficiency and deprives offerors of the ability to compete intelligently. The Agency’s decision to wait until after receiving proposals to determine whether the CR-39 clear lens with executive bifocals is commercially available also violated market research requirements in FAR Part 10.

2. The Solicitation requires pricing for three separate regions: EG Region East, EG Region

West, and EG Region OFL. While the contractor will propose its selection of frames for EG

Regions East and West, the contractor’s role for EG Region OFL is to serve as a back-up to the

VA and to provide whichever VA-selected frames the veteran has chosen. The VA-selected frames vary greatly in price. In order to intelligently price for EG Region OFL, the contractor must estimate how many of each VA-selected frame it will need to provide. If the contractor overestimates the number of higher-priced frames it will be required to provide, its offered price may appear too high. In contrast, if it overestimates the number of lower-priced fames that it will be required to provide, its offered price may appear too low. To allow for the most accurate pricing estimates for EG Region OFL, the VA must provide data regarding current/historic frame usage. The VA has declined to do so, offering instead to provide that information after award.

Respectfully, that will be too late. The lack of information deprives PDS of the ability to compete intelligently. It will also skew PDS’s evaluated ceiling price. Moreover, at least two other potential competitors already have access to OFL usage data by virtue of previous work for

OFL, thus creating an unfair information imbalance and resulting unfair competitive advantage.

PDS has raised this issue multiple times directly with the VA, but the VA has not made the requested adjustments to the Solicitation.

3. The Solicitation requires that pricing be provided in several formats. First, offerors are to complete the Attachment A Price Schedule referenced above. In addition, offerors are instructed to complete Attachment B, which calls for the provision of Other than Certified Pricing Data. For

246 line items, offers are required to include price data for frames, lenses, and manufacturing, based on the ceiling price, purportedly so that the VA can conduct a price realism analysis. (Sol.

§E.1.20.) As referenced above, the ceiling price will be skewed based on the VA’s refusal to provide usage data for EG Region OFL, and the VA has also refused to remove EG Region

OFL from the ceiling calculation. This will compromise any price realism analysis that is conducted. In addition, a requirement for the provision of pricing data is inappropriate in a commercial item procurement, per 41 USC 3503(a)(2), especially when there is adequate price competition. 41 USC 3503(a)(1). When it is requested, Other than Certified Pricing Data is only to be used for a price reasonableness assessment, not a realism assessment per 41 USC 3505 and FAR 15.403-3. The VA has full competition and years of contract data to support its pricing evaluation, and its requirement for the submission of Other than Certified Pricing Data exceeds both its needs and its authority. See also Revolutionary FAR Overhaul (“RFO”) FAR 15.403-1.

Despite PDS’s requests, the VA has not remedied this issue.

4. Finally, the Solicitation Statement of Work contains a Performance Requirement Summary

(PRS) that sets out a rubric for how contractor performance will be evaluated. Section 5 of the

PRS incudes calculations that could lead to an unrealistic basis for determining a contractor’s performance. For example Section 5.2.2 on page 36 states “Numerator & Denominator /

Standard: N = # of invoices that are correct and certified / D = # of invoices reviewed by COR or designee.” In this example, if the COR or designee chooses to only review one invoice and that one invoice has a mistake, the contractor could completely fail this metric, regardless of actual performance. It would be more appropriate for the denominator for all performance metrics to be total performance (orders, invoices, etc.), which would ensure VA is tracking true performance

(and avoiding unnecessary administrative review on a contractor performing satisfactorily). The

VA should update the calculations in the Performance Requirements accordingly.

VA will address the issues identified in numbers 1, 2, and 4 below. VA will not address the issues identified in number 3; however, see OTHER THAN CERTIFIED PRICING DATA

CLARIFICATION section for clarification on use of this data.

PRICE SCHEDULE REMOVALS

• X001AE | Executive, Bifocal (Complete Eyeglass (frames and lenses), CR-39, Clear)

• X003AE | Flat Top 8 x 35, Trifocal (Complete Eyeglass (frames and lenses), High

Index (1.60 - 1.66), Clear)

• X004AE | Flat Top 8 x 35, Trifocal (Complete Eyeglass (frames and lenses), High

Index (1.67 to 1.73), Clear)

• X005AC | Flat Top 35, Bifocal (Complete Eyeglass (frames and lenses), High Index

(1.74), Clear)

• X005AD | Flat Top 7 x 28, Trifocal (Complete Eyeglass (frames and lenses), High

Index (1.74), Clear)

• X005AE | Flat Top 8 x 35, Trifocal (Complete Eyeglass (frames and lenses), High

Index (1.74), Clear)

The removed CLINs have an updated description to reflect “REMOVED” and estimates have been updated to “0”. There have been no updates to any other CLINs or estimates as a result of this change.

Updated Instruction for Price Schedule: Complete “Attachment A - Price Schedule -

36C24126R0001 - Rev1.4”. The remaining instructions for price schedule submission remain unchanged from amendment 0006.

If an offeror determines that a CLIN is not commercially available the offeror should contact the

Contracting Officer and Contract Specialist no later than January 29, 2026.

Statement of Work Section 5.2.6 is an addition to the Statement of Work. Section 5.2.1. – 5.2.5.

provided below is unchanged and provided for reference.

5. PERFORMANCE REQUIREMENT SUMMARY (PRS)

Section 5.1 “Patient Satisfaction” is removed in its entirety.

5.2. BILLING ACCURACY

5.2.1. SOW Ref.: Section 4.5

5.2.2. Numerator & Denominator / Standard: N = # of invoices that are correct and certified / D = # of invoices reviewed by COR or designee.

5.2.3. Acceptable Quality Level: 95%

5.2.4. Surveillance Method: Random sampling of invoices to verify the invoice matches the purchase order or all invoices are reviewed and certified by designated VA staff without being returned for corrections.

5.2.5. Frequency: Monthly

5.2.6. Minimum Evaluation: VA shall evaluate at least 10% of all invoices submitted during the review period. VA may evaluate more than 10% at their discretion.

OTHER THAN CERTIFIED PRICING DATA CLARIFICATION

Revolutionary FAR Overhaul (FAR) 15.403-1:

(a) Order of preference. For acquisitions that do not require certified cost or pricing data, contracting officers must generally use the following order of preference to determine the type of data to require:

(1) No additional data from the offeror, when adequate price competition exists (see

15.403-2);

(2) Data related to prices (e.g., established catalog or market prices, sales to non-governmental and governmental entities), relying first on—

(i) Data available within the Government; then

(ii) Data obtained from sources other than the offeror; and then, if necessary,

(iii) Data obtained from the offeror; then,

(3) Cost data to the extent necessary for the contracting officer to determine a fair and reasonable price.

(b) Requirement.

(1) Contracting officers must require submission of data other than certified cost or pricing data to the extent necessary to determine a fair and reasonable price (10 U.S.C.

3705(a) and 41 U.S.C. 3505(a)). At a minimum, the data must include appropriate data on the prices at which the same item or similar items have previously been sold, adequate for determining the reasonableness of the price. This data is not required when price reasonableness is established through adequate price competition or prices set by law or regulation, unless paragraph (e) of this subsection applies.

(2) Contracting officers may require data other than certified cost or pricing data to determine the cost realism of competing offers or to evaluate competing approaches.

VA will follow the order of preference as prescribed by FAR 15.403-1. If competition is sufficient to determine fair and reasonable pricing the other than certified pricing data will not be utilized to determine price reasonableness. VA may use this data for a price realism analysis in accordance with FAR 15.403-1(b)(2). FAR 15.403-3 as cited in the pre-filing notice applies to

“Certified cost or pricing data” and does not apply to “other than certified cost or pricing data“.

Update to Additional Instructions for Proposal Submission for Other Than

Certified Pricing Data (52.212-1)

20. Other Than Certified Pricing Data: The offeror shall submit Other than Certified Pricing

Data based on the ceiling price proposed for all CLIN’s detailing, at a minimum, the following as applicable:

20.1. Breakdown of each complete eyeglasses price:

20.1.1. Frame Price. This is consolidated at the top of the spreadsheet.

20.1.2. Lens Price.

20.1.3. Manufacturing Price.

20.2. Breakdown for each add-on:

20.2.1. Add-On Price.

20.2.2. Add-On Manufacturing Price.

20.3. This information is only required for one year of proposed pricing and not required for future years. Pricing provided shall be for the ceiling price proposed.

20.4. This information may be used for a price realism analysis.

20.5. The offeror may submit on the provided attachment or in accordance with the requirements in FAR 15.403-1(c)(1) using the contractor’s format for data submission.

Additional information may be included at the offerors discretion.

Update to Additional Instructions for Proposal Submission for Capabilities

(52.212-1)

18. Factor 2 Capabilities: The offeror shall detail the following and provide, at a minimum, the following information:

18.1. Provide details on existing capabilities, including, but not limited to:

18.1.1. Daily eyeglasses manufacturing output,

18.1.2. Is the Offeror a manufacturer?

18.1.3. Provide the address for each of your manufacturing facilities.

18.1.4. If the offeror is not the manufacturer, provide the following information for each manufacturing facility:

18.1.4.1. Name

18.1.4.2. Address

18.1.4.3. UEI Number

18.1.4.4. Size Status

18.2. If an offeror’s current capabilities do not meet the minimum requirements for a specific region defined in Factor 2 – Capabilities, the offeror shall provide a narrative explaining how its capabilities will be increased to meet the minimum requirements defined in

Factor 2 – Capabilities within 60 days of award for each Region.

18.3. If the proposal includes subcontractors, the offeror shall identify its proposed subcontractors’ capabilities separately in the same format as above.

Update to 52.212-2 Basis for Award

FACTOR 2 – CAPABILITIES

The VA will evaluate an Offeror’s capabilities by assessing the Offeror’s narrative response detailing its current capabilities to meet the below minimum requirements, and, where applicable, its plan to increase its capabilities to meet the below minimum requirements within

60 days of award in accordance with the solicitation’s Instructions to Offerors.

Capabilities within 60 days of award shall be a minimum of:

• 4,350 complete eyeglasses manufactured per day to be considered for award to be eligible for an award supporting EG Region East.

• 2,550 complete eyeglasses manufactured per day to be considered for award to be eligible for an award supporting Region West.

• 600 complete eyeglasses manufactured per day to be considered for award to be eligible for an award supporting Region OFL.

The offeror shall meet a minimum of 600 complete eyeglasses per day to be considered for award.

ATTACHMENTS

See attached document: Attachment A - Price Schedule - 36C24126R0001 - Rev1.4

See attached document: Attachment D - Frame Kit VISN 10_12 and 20 – Rev1.1