36C24826Q0862_2.docx

Amendment to a Previous Combined Solicitation

Amendment to a Previous Combined Solicitation

GENERAL INFORMATION

Network Contracting Office 8 (NCO 8)

1601 SW Archer RD Gainesville FL 32608

POINT OF CONTACT*

Contracting Officer John H. Shultzaberger John.Shultzaberger@va.gov 352-214-5135

PLACE OF PERFORMANCE

North Florida/South Georgia VHS

Malcom Randall VA Medical Center

1601 SW Archer RD

Gainesville FL

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION

AGENCY’S URL

URL DESCRIPTION

AGENCY CONTACT’S EMAIL ADDRESS

EMAIL DESCRIPTION

DESCRIPTION

1. This amendment revises the evaluation criteria contained in the solicitation. The original evaluation criteria are hereby deleted and replaced in their entirety with the revised with the Evaluation Criteria attached to this amendment. The Government will evaluate quotations using a comparative analysis in accordance with FAR Part 12 commercial procedures.

2. This amendment also corrects an administrative discrepancy regarding the solicitation closing date. Although the solicitation document identified a quotation due date of July 13, 2026, the closing date displayed on SAM.gov inadvertently reflected July 10, 2026. To eliminate any ambiguity and ensure all prospective offerors are provided an equal opportunity to compete, the official quotation due date is hereby established as:

Monday, July 13, 2026, at 4:30 PM Eastern Time.

The SAM.gov posting will be updated to reflect the correct closing date.

3. Offerors shall acknowledge receipt of this amendment when submitting their quotations.

4. Except as modified herein, all other terms, conditions, and requirements of the solicitation remain unchanged.

EVALUATION CRITERIA

Basis for Award The Government intends to award a single firm-fixed-price contract to the responsible quoter whose quotation represents the best value to the Government based on a comparative analysis of quotations received.

Award will be made using the procedures of FAR Part 12 and FAR Part 8.4. The Government will evaluate quotations using a comparative analysis rather than assigning adjectival ratings, numerical scores, or conducting a tradeoff process prescribed by FAR Part 15.

The Government reserves the right to award without exchanges. Therefore, quoters are encouraged to submit their best quotation initially.

Evaluation Factors Quotations will be evaluated using the following factors:

1. Technical Capability

1. Past Performance

1. Price Technical Capability is more important than Past Performance.

When combined, the non-price factors (Technical Capability and Past Performance) are significantly more important than Price.

As quotations become more equal under the non-price factors, Price will become increasingly important in the award decision.

Technical Capability The Government will evaluate each quotation to determine the extent to which the quoter demonstrates the capability to successfully perform the requirements identified in the Performance Work Statement (PWS).

The Government’s comparative assessment may include, but is not limited to, the following:

· Demonstrated experience maintaining deionized (DI), reverse osmosis (RO), humidifier water treatment, ultraviolet (UV) sterilization, and water softening systems.

· Demonstrated understanding of the preventive maintenance requirements identified in the PWS.

· Ability to provide qualified Field Service Engineers with appropriate technical experience.

· Ability to provide required consumables, exchange vessels, replacement components, testing equipment, and contractor-furnished materials necessary to maintain uninterrupted operation.

· Ability to meet required emergency response times, corrective maintenance requirements, and preventive maintenance schedules.

· Overall completeness, technical soundness, and demonstrated understanding of the Government’s requirements.

The Government will compare quotations to determine which quotation provides the greatest confidence in the contractor’s ability to successfully perform the required services.

Past Performance The Government will evaluate recent and relevant past performance information to determine the degree of confidence that the quoter will successfully perform the required services.

Past performance information may include:

· Contract references submitted by the quoter.

· Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) evaluations.

· Other information obtained from Government databases.

· Information obtained from Government customers.

The Government will consider the relevance, quality, and recency of prior contract performance involving similar size, scope, and complexity.

A quoter without relevant past performance history will neither be evaluated favorably nor unfavorably.

Price The Government will evaluate the total evaluated price consisting of the Base Period and all Option Periods.

Price evaluation will include consideration of:

· Overall evaluated price.

· Price reasonableness.

· Completeness of pricing.

· Balance among recurring preventive maintenance services, labor rates, and any other separately priced contract line items.

The Government may determine that a quotation is unacceptable if pricing is incomplete or materially unbalanced.

Comparative Analysis Rather than evaluating quotations independently against predetermined rating definitions, the Government will perform a comparative assessment of all quotations received.

The Government will compare quotations to determine which quotation provides the best overall value considering the relative strengths, weaknesses, risks, and benefits associated with each evaluation factor.

The Government may determine that a higher-priced quotation represents the best value if its advantages under the non-price factors justify any associated price premium.

Conversely, the Government may determine that a lower-priced quotation represents the best value when quotations are comparatively equal under the non-price factors.

Award Decision Award will be made to the responsible quoter whose quotation represents the best overall value to the Government based upon the comparative analysis of Technical Capability, Past Performance, and Price.

The Contracting Officer will document the rationale supporting the award decision, including the comparative benefits associated with the selected quotation and the basis for determining that the selected quotation provides the best value to the Government.

Page 1 of

Amendment to a Previous Combined Solicitation