36C25720Q1166 0001.docx

DOCX document 38 KB Posted

Attached to
6830--NEW Medical Gases KMC
Solicitation number
36C25720Q1166
Issued by

View the file

Other files

File Type Posted
SOLICITATION for MED GAS.pdf PDF
36C25720Q1166.docx DOCX document

On GovTribe

Work with this file

  • Download the original file
  • Contacts named in this file
  • Similar government files
  • Ask GovTribe AI about this file

Text version

Contract Opportunity Amendment to a Previous Combined Solicitation

PRODUCT SERVICE CODE

SUBJECT

CONTRACTING OFFICE'S

ZIP-CODE

SOLICITATION NUMBER

BASE NOTICE TYPE

RESPONSE DATE/TIME/ZONE

ARCHIVE

DAYS AFTER THE RESPONSE DATE

RECOVERY ACT FUNDS

SET-ASIDE

NAICS CODE

CONTRACTING OFFICE

ADDRESS

POINT OF CONTACT

(POC Information Automatically Filled from User Profile Unless Entered)

DESCRIPTION

See Attachment

AGENCY'S URL

URL DESCRIPTION

AGENCY CONTACT'S EMAIL

ADDRESS

EMAIL DESCRIPTION

ADDRESS

POSTAL CODE

COUNTRY

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION

GENERAL INFORMATION

PLACE OF PERFORMANCE

* = Required Field Contract Opportunity Amendment to a Previous Combined Solicitation NEW Medical Gases KMC 78229 36C25720Q1166

COMBINE

08-14-2020

12:00PM

CENTRAL TIME, CHICAGO, USA

N 325120 Department of Veterans Affairs VISN17 Network Contracting Activity 7400 Merton Minter Blvd. (10N17/90C) San Antonio TX 78229 Contract Specialist Jesus Casiano jesus.casiano@va.gov Kerrville VA Medical Center 3600 Memorial Blvd, Kerrville

TX

78028

USA

jesus.casiano@va.gov Business

1. Do any CBOCs require direct delivery? This is for Kerrville (not a CBOC); direct delivery is required

2. Are the any VA Owned Cylinders? No

3. Does Item # 0009 infer that the VAMC requires only (1) delivery per month? The table on PG 9 of 10 lists (12) under Annual Fill # for Deliveries. If not, what is the weekly frequency of needed deliveries? This is a monthly estimate may be more or less depending on the needs.

4. PG 7 of 10, Para 5., states “Attaching of oxygen cylinders to manifold systems, when required, shall also be performed by the contractor at no additional cost.” Please note coming into the facility requires badging (multiple drivers – as the driver may not be the same for each delivery). Additionally, there is a liability in that Vendors incur (vendor employees could come into contact with patients especially with current COVID-19 national emergency). Deliveries are to the “Logistics Service” per PG 3 of 10. Can we validate this requirement or add a CLIN to account for the costs associated, as it is nonstandard for MED CYLs? If this is a requirement, what are the GOV requirements for Vendors entering the Facility – as opposed to delivering to the Loading Dock where no additional security checks, background investigations, HIPPA are required. – request removing this requirement as it is nonstandard and requires the vendor to transport several CYLs internal to the hospital and remove the empties. CYLs on a manifold are G/H Cylinders (large) and for example, manifolds are replaced in “halves” meaning if it is an (8) CYL manifold, two sets of (4) Each, meaning one side, or “half” is replaced, meaning the vendor would have to transport (4) Large Cylinders to the manifold (into an elevator that cannot have personnel in it), potential damage to the fittings on the GFE Manifold (again liability), and (in reverse) return the empties. This is a very involved process, especially given the current COVID 19 response and there is a cost for time spent accomplishing this - would a vendor be allowed in the VAMC at all? Deliveries will just be to the Warehouse dock

5.Is ITEM # 0006 for a post valve or an integrated valve cylinder? The description includes “VIPR” (Valve with Integrated Pressure Regulator) however the (2) Local Stock #’s in the description are Post Valve cylinders that do not include the VIPR (OX USPEA & OX USPE) Please use the description of what is used, not the local stock #. KD does not use the removable regulators anymore.
6.Are there any specific technical bid submission requirements? no
7.Is Past Performance an evaluation criterion? Past Performance is not mentioned at all in the RFQ Vendor/contractor should have had a minimum of Satisfactory Performance ratings on past performance evaluations

image1.emf

File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .