S06 36C25724Q0420 0004.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 12

05-14-2024

674-24-4-5166-0026

36C257

Department Of Veterans Affairs Network Contracting Office 17

5441 Babcock Road Ste. 302 San Antonio TX 78240

36C257

Department Of Veterans Affairs Network Contracting Office 17

5441 Babcock Road Ste. 302 San Antonio TX 78240

To all Offerors/Bidders

36C25724Q0420

03-15-2024

X

X X

X 1

The purpose of this amendment is to publish additional questions/answers and revised SOW (changes highlighted in yellow).

Quotes remain due by 12 PM CDT on 5/31/2024 to lorri.schoellkopf@va.gov.

mailto:lorri.schoellkopf@va.gov

RFQ 36C25724Q0420 CTVHCS Water Quality Monitoring

Amendment 0004 Questions and Answers

Q1. How does a new vendor gain access to the data being generated as this is proprietary technology?

A1. This is a Brand Name or Equal requirement in accordance with FAR 52.211-6 BRAND NAME OR EQUAL. As such, you may work with the proprietor or supply your own technological solution. See Section C – Continuous Monitoring Equipment, page 13 of the revised SOW issued in Amendment 0002.

Q2. Can the existing equipment send the data to a different “cloud”?

A2. The PDX is the only proprietary piece of equipment, all other components are compatible with other “Equal” devices.

Q3. If so, what format is it in? If incompatible with new vendor’s system, who is responsible for fixing, e.g., different data field formats, missing or extraneous data in sensor data, etc.

A3. The VA does not know the format of which other “Equal” systems use. Whatever “Equal” system is proposed needs to communicate with the surrounding system. The surrounding system is comprised of components of various manufacturers that are not proprietary to Phigenics.

Q4. If not, what is in place to require the old vendor to provide the data generated post award?

A4. The data generated is the property of the VA and will be shared with the incoming contractor.

Q5. In the latest amendment, replacing the PDX is mentioned, is there a third-party device that is compatible with the rest of the equipment that can be tailored to meet the new vendor’s data requirements?

A5. The purpose of this solicitation is to maintain the Brand Name or acquire an “Equal” to the PDX. The PDX is the only proprietary piece of equipment, and all other components should be compatible with another “Equal” device.

Q6. How do you cost out software modifications in FFP contract?

A6. There should not be any software modifications. The quote should incorporate all charges for full implementation of the proposed solution.

Q7. Is any of the historical data required from the old contract? If it is, the VA will need to provide.

A7. Yes, VA will provide historical data from the old contract.

Q8. Does the VA have access to this information which it can provide access to the new vendor?

A8. Yes, data will be shared with the new vendor.

Q9. If so, how will it be obtained?

A9. The data generated is the property of the VA and will be shared with the incoming contractor.

Q10. What format is it in?

A10. Process flow diagrams, system analyses and program control summaries.

Q11. Will that format work with the new software?

A11. Unable to answer, due to VA not knowing the details of the new software/technology.

Q12. How will it be provided to new vendor, etc.

A12. The data generated is the property of the VA and will be shared with the incoming contractor.

Q13. What does the VA require (including software system capabilities) for a government-accessible interface?

A13. A system that allows use of cloud-based computing of data acquisition, remote internet, directly linking sensors, text-based alerts when water falls out of set parameters, and measurements to an online application.

Q14. If the gov’t doesn’t like the new interface, will the VA pay for modifications?

A14. The government will not purchase a solution it is not comfortable with. Contractor selection will be based using a comparative evaluation method where each quote will be matched pairwise to determine the better overall solution for the government. Any potential modifications will require a quote from the vendor and be reviewed and approved by the Contracting Officer prior to implementation.

Q15. Does the new vendor have in-house expertise in developing data interfaces, user interfaces, maintaining any built-in software on the equipment or do have ready access to such talent to meet the time constraints of the contract?

A15. Unable to answer due to the following: This will be the responsibility of the vendor to have the resources to fulfill the contract requirements. The current contract is set to expire June 31, 2024. A Two-Month Extension for Water Monitoring and Legionella Testing Contract is set to start July 1, 2024, and end August 31, 2024. Period of Performance (POP) for the new Water Monitoring and Legionella Testing Contract will begin September 1, 2024.

Q16. What are the security requirements for the software to be used in the VA? If proposing a solution which requires the use of software and not a web-based system.

A16. The water monitoring system will be required to be cellular based and not on the VA network.

Q17. We request the VA clarify gov’t specific security standards/certifications required to allow the VA to access the software?

A17. Monitoring equipment should be web-based and will not be connected to the VA network.

Q18. Does the new vendor have software that meets those standards/certifications?

A18. This cannot be answered as we do not know what solutions will be submitted.

Monitoring equipment should be web-based and will not be connected to the VA network.

Q19. If the VA determines they need additional data or modified data reported that is generated by PWA equipment, how would that change be implemented on a proprietary system?

A19. Regardless of the proposed solution, the ability to obtain additional data or modify data reporting should be an option available to the government if the need should arise.

Q20. Is there any software on the equipment that requires access and/or modifications for maintenance?

A20. The complete monitoring system shall be maintained. There are components that may need to be configured to whatever solution is proposed.

See the following address for specifications and vendor contact information for the continuous monitors at each facility.

https://www.watts.com/our-story/brands/hf-scientific https://www.watts.com/products/water-quality-rainwater-harvesting-solutions/instrumentation-solutions/municipal-market/online-chlorine-analyzers/clx https://www.instrumart.com/products/46796/walchem-w600-series-flow-controller

See the following address for specifications and vendor contact information for the PWA Advanced Secondary Disinfection System at each facility.

https://info.phigenics.com/monitoring

Q21. If so, what system admin privileges are being provided.

https://www.watts.com/products/water-quality-rainwater-harvesting-solutions/instrumentation-solutions/municipal-market/online-chlorine-analyzers/clx https://www.watts.com/products/water-quality-rainwater-harvesting-solutions/instrumentation-solutions/municipal-market/online-chlorine-analyzers/clx https://www.watts.com/products/water-quality-rainwater-harvesting-solutions/instrumentation-solutions/municipal-market/online-chlorine-analyzers/clx

A21. This is a Brand Name or Equal requirement in accordance with FAR 52.211-6 BRAND NAME OR EQUAL. As such, you may work with the proprietor or supply your own technological solution.

Q22. Alternative, does the PWA equipment vendor offer their monitoring system as a subscription service the new vendor could use vice providing their own system? Not sure how the data from this would interface with all the other test data that is generated or if it’s viable but looking at options.

A22. This is a Brand Name or Equal requirement in accordance with FAR 52.211-6 BRAND NAME OR EQUAL. As such, you may work with the proprietor or supply your own technological solution.

Q23. Amend 0001 - Per the answer in Q13: The vendor is responsible for identifying the spare parts requirements. The VA answer did not provide a detailed answer, so how will a vendor cost out spare parts cost in a FFP contract?

A23. There is a not-to-exceed line item for parts. See Section B.2 - Price/Cost Schedule, beginning on page five of the solicitation. The contractor will submit a quote which will be reviewed and approved by the Contracting Officer prior to performance of work.

Q24. Are these replacement parts commercially available from multiple vendors or are they sole source to the PWA vendor?

A24. The PDX is the only piece proprietary to Phigenics. All other equipment can be found in the commercial marketplace.

General HW maintenance questions

Q25. Are there maintenance manuals available for all the GFE?

A25. See the following address for specifications and vendor contact information for the continuous monitors at each facility.

See the following address for specifications and vendor contact information for the PWA Advanced Secondary Disinfection System at each facility.

Q26. Is it at the appropriate level of detail for a new contractor to use to maintain the equipment?

https://www.watts.com/products/water-quality-rainwater-harvesting-solutions/instrumentation-solutions/municipal-market/online-chlorine-analyzers/clx https://www.watts.com/products/water-quality-rainwater-harvesting-solutions/instrumentation-solutions/municipal-market/online-chlorine-analyzers/clx https://www.watts.com/products/water-quality-rainwater-harvesting-solutions/instrumentation-solutions/municipal-market/online-chlorine-analyzers/clx

A26. Please see A25 above, hyperlink to standard specifications. It is expected that the offeror has experience in this field and should have the wherewithal to obtain the required information for maintaining the equipment. This is regardless of whether a Brand Name or Equal solution is proposed.

Q27. How is the monthly PM manpower, time, and equipment for FFP contract estimated?

A27. Just to be clear, this solicitation will result in a firm-fixed-price contract and will not be a time and materials contract. It is expected that the offeror will have enough experience in the field to determine what the average time is to conduct preventive maintenance on the system and provide a quote.

Q28. Does the VA have in-place a mechanism to get any required firmware and/or software upgrades to their equipment, or is that incumbent on the new contractor??

A28. Depending on the solution provided, the offeror will either partner with the incumbent for firmware/software updates or utilize their own equipment.

Q29. RFP Section E.7 – Basis for Award. The Solicitation states the Government will evaluate quotes for the award using the following factors: Technical Capability, Past Performance and Price.

A29. This is not a Request for Proposals (RFP) which aligns with FAR 15 Contracting by Negotiation. This is a Request for Quotations (RFQ) which aligns with FAR 13 Simplified Acquisition Procedures.

Q30. Technical Capability is undefined. How is Technical Capability defined?

A30. Per Offer Submittal Instructions, Offerors Capability Statement will be reviewed to validate Technical Capability. Offeror shall submit a Capability Statement that includes a description of technical approach, methodology and technique to carry out the Statement of Work promptly, skillfully, and expertly.

Q31. What is required for the offeror to be deemed Technically Capable?

A31. Offeror shall submit a Capability Statement that includes a description of technical approach, methodology and technique to carry out the Statement of Work promptly, skillfully, and expertly. The government will ensure the technical approach meets the minimum requirements of the SOW.

Q32. How will Technical Capability be evaluated?

A32. Capability Statements will first be reviewed to ensure they meet the minimum solicitation requirements. Then, quotes will be evaluated using procedures under FAR 13.106-2(b)(3) comparative evaluation of offers. “Comparative evaluation” is the act of comparing two or more offers or proposals in response to a Request for Quote (RFQ). The item-by-item comparison is performed by comparing each offer or proposal to one another to determine which provides the best benefit to the government.”

Q33. What weight does the Government give to Technical Capability in the evaluation process?

A33. Under FAR 13 procedures, the FAR states that “Solicitations are not required to state the relative importance assigned to each evaluation factor and subfactor, nor are they required to include subfactors”. Therefore, weights have not been assigned to each factor.

Contractor selection will be based using a comparative evaluation method, under FAR 13, where each quote will be matched pairwise to determine the better overall solution for the government.

Q34. Will sub-factors be considered? If so, what are the subfactors?

A34. No, sub-factors will be used.

Q35. What weight does the Government give to each factor and sub-factor, if applicable?

A35. Under FAR 13 procedures, the FAR states that “Solicitations are not required to state the relative importance assigned to each evaluation factor and subfactor, nor are they required to include subfactors.” Therefore, weights have not been assigned to each factor. No sub-factors will be used.

Q36. How will the Government evaluate “Not-to-Exceed” pricing?

A36. Not-to-Exceed pricing will be set upon award by the government. Offerors do not need to include this in the quote and those amounts will not be used in evaluating quotes.

Q37. How will the Government accurately evaluate the prices for providing services to determine if there is unbalanced pricing?

A37. This solicitation follows the guidance under FAR 13 Simplified Acquisition Procedures where a fair and reasonableness determination shall be made. It should be noted that when using the comparative evaluation method, pricing is only one factor and not the determining factor for award. It is possible that award may be made to a higher priced offeror if determined to be the better overall value for the government. As with all pricing evaluations, offers will be compared to the IGE and other competing offers to identify any unbalanced pricing.

Q38. The Solicitation provides annual quantities, but there are contradictory quantities mentioned in the document, such as CLN 001 states Legionella Sampling 250 per month/3,000 per year. However, in Amend 1, page 15 para requires the laboratory “to have the capabilities to accept and process at least 400 samples a day”. This is an astronomical difference in the requirement from 250 per month to 12,000 per month.

We request the VA clarify the quantities to reflect the actual number of samples, by sample type, required each month at each location during the last 12-month period.

A38. Standard Legionella Sampling 250 per month/3,000 per year. The laboratory shall have the capabilities to accept and process at least 400 samples a day, should emergency circumstances such as a Legionella outbreak occur. The laboratory shall be a current CDC Elite program participant.

Q39. Monitoring Equipment Parts for Repairs and Monthly Maintenance. The VA has not provided a list of parts it requires to be repaired or replaced. Therefore, without a standardized list of parts offerors will not be able to compete on a level playing field and the VA will not be able to evaluate the offers on an apples-to-apples basis. We request in the interest of fair competition the VA provide a list of parts and identify the specific monthly maintenance that will be required under this contract so offerors can bid on similar tasks.

A39. The Not-to-Exceed Line Items exist for this reason. If Not-to-Exceed Line Items are exhausted, and a legitimate need exists to increase them, the usual modification process will be adhered to under the authority of FAR 52.212-4(c) CHANGES.

See the following address for specifications:

Q40. Amend 1 – Section A – Background para 2 – states:

“2. On rare occasions, samples may be requested at our Community Based Outpatient Clinics and Vet Centers in Austin, Brownwood, Bryan-College Station, Cedar Park, Copperas Cove, Killeen, La Grange, Palestine, and Temple. The VA reserves the right to add or subtract locations as the need arises.”

The Solicitation states it will be a fixed-price contract. Under what authority can the VA issue a FFP contract and obtain services not identified or priced in the FFP contract? How will these non-contract services be priced?

A40. Any potential modifications will require a quote from the vendor and be reviewed and approved by the Contracting Officer prior to implementation. If additional facilities need to be added, the Contracting Officer will seek quotes from the contract holder to add those services. If terms for adding services with the contract holder is in the best interest of the government, a contract modification will be executed to add those services. Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 52.212-4(c) CHANGES is the authority that allows for changes in terms.

Q41. Amend 1 – Section B – Scope of Work – para 8 states:

“8. VA Central Texas Veterans Health Care System (CTVHCS) reserves the right to add additional sites within Central Texas, if water testing is needed at other locations.”

Under what authority can the VA issue a FFP contract and obtain services not identified or priced in the FFP contract? How will these non-contract services be priced?

A41. B.8. removed from SOW. See A40 above.

https://www.watts.com/products/water-quality-rainwater-harvesting-solutions/instrumentation-solutions/municipal-market/online-chlorine-analyzers/clx https://www.watts.com/products/water-quality-rainwater-harvesting-solutions/instrumentation-solutions/municipal-market/online-chlorine-analyzers/clx https://www.watts.com/products/water-quality-rainwater-harvesting-solutions/instrumentation-solutions/municipal-market/online-chlorine-analyzers/clx

Q42. Amend 1 - Section C #5 – “The contractor shall provide a quote for any necessary replacement parts/repairs prior to performing the work.” Does this mean that the VA would then issue a change order approving the replacement or repair?

A42. The Not-to-Exceed Line Items exist for this reason. If Not-to-Exceed Line Items are exhausted, and a legitimate need exists to increase them, the usual modification process will be adhered to under the authority of FAR 52.212-4(c) CHANGES.

Q43. Does the VA agree that the contractor would not be required to proceed with the replacement or repairs until the VA approves the proposal?

A43. Not-to-Exceed Line Items must be approved prior to any work performed.

Q44. How will the VA evaluate these prices if the prices are not fixed in the FFP contract?

A44. All prices will be evaluated for fair and reasonableness prior to being approved and/or incorporated into a modification.

Q45. Amend 1 – Section E par 8 – the solicitation states that the laboratory “shall store the positive samples for two years following analysis” Will the VA pay for the two-year storage period?

A45. If there is an additional cost, the cost should be included in the offerors quote. SOW updated to state “The laboratory shall store the positive samples for two years following analysis, or time remaining on the contract if less than two years.”

Q46. What are the requirements for the disposal of the positive samples?

A46. Disposal of positive samples will be determined by the partnering lab’s procedures and the time remaining on the contract.

Q47. Can the VA confirm that it owns the software for the Monitoring Equipment?

A47. VA does not own the software for the Monitoring Equipment.

Q48. If so, with the VA update and support this software? Or is the new vendor expected to do so – these are unknown costs – Will the VA reimburse the new vendor for these costs?

A48. This is a Brand Name or Equal requirement in accordance with FAR 52.211-6 BRAND NAME OR EQUAL. As such, you may work with the proprietor or supply your own technological solution.

Q49. Amend 2, page 3 of 13, VA produces a picture of the communication part of the Monitoring Equipment and states that ‘The item circled in red below is called a Phigenics Diagnostic Exchange (PDX). This is proprietary equipment and is the only piece that may need to be replaced. This is the “Brand Name or Equal” equipment.’ Can VA please provide technical specifications for PDX device including sensor input (channels, ports, types of output, example 4-20 mA, relay, switches, timing) and outputs list of all data streams used or needed to be included in database used by software?

A49. See the following address for specifications and vendor contact information for the PWA Advanced Secondary Disinfection System at each facility.

Q50. Continuous monitoring equipment transition from the current vendor to a new system will take time for installation of new communications equipment, testing, calibration, and troubleshooting. Will the VA allow at least 6 months to allow for transition to the new system? If not, what time is allowed for accomplishing this task?

A50. There will be no gap in monitoring allowed. TCEQ and VA directives both call for continuous water monitoring. Any gap will put the VA at risk and out of compliance with these policies. Any new system being installed shall have minimal transition time and will be mutually agreed upon between the VA and vendor once the solution is reviewed and accepted by the VA.

Q51. Will the VA consider removing the Phigenics continuous monitoring transition task off the RFQ?

A51. The government is not sure what is meant by this question. This is a Brand Name or Equal requirement in accordance with FAR 52.211-6 BRAND NAME OR EQUAL. As such, you may work with the proprietor or supply your own technological solution. Also, see A50 above.

Q52. Amend 2, page 3 of 13, VA produces a picture of the communication part of the Monitoring Equipment and states that ‘The item circled in red below is called a Phigenics Diagnostic Exchange (PDX). This is proprietary equipment and is the only piece that may need to be replaced. This is the “Brand Name or Equal” equipment.’ Can the VA change the wording of this statement from ‘only piece that may need to be replaced’ to ‘only piece that needs to be replaced’? If this change cannot be made, please explain why.

A52. Statement is changed to “only piece that may ‘or may not’ need to be replaced.” It is up to the offeror to decide whether the piece is replaced. This is a Brand Name or Equal requirement in accordance with FAR 52.211-6 BRAND NAME OR EQUAL. As such, you may work with the proprietor or supply your own technological solution.

Q53. Amend 2, page 3 of 13, VA states that ‘The contractor shall make at least one maintenance visit per month to each building with a continuous monitoring station.’ Are there any specific tasks that need to be accomplished during a maintenance visit?

A53. CTVHCS requires monthly maintenance for the existing equipment per the original equipment manufacturer (OEM) specifications.

Q54. About Phigenic’s continuous water monitoring system how will the VA evaluate the technical feasibility of a proposed solution without knowing that any proposed solution will work?

A54. Offeror shall submit a Capability Statement that includes a description of technical approach, methodology and technique to carry out the Statement of Work promptly, skillfully, and expertly. It is expected that any solution that is proposed will work.

Q55. Most of the work involves routine sample collection, measurements, and laboratory evaluation of water samples. A minor component is the replacement of communication devices and software associated with the Phigenic’s continuous water monitoring system. How will the VA determine a technically successful bidder given that two very different technical tasks are involved?

A55. There are different tasks involved with this requirement and offerors shall address how they will meet each task in their quote, specifically within their Capability Statement.

Q56. Will relative weights be given to each task and evaluated independently?

A56. Under FAR 13 procedures, the FAR states that “Solicitations are not required to state the relative importance assigned to each evaluation factor and subfactor, nor are they required to include subfactors.” Therefore, weights have not been assigned to each factor”. Contractor selection will be based using a comparative evaluation method, under FAR 13, where each quote will be matched pairwise to determine the better overall solution for the government.

Q57. What will VA do if an award is made and the proposed solution for the Phigenic’s continuous water monitoring system fails? In this case does the VA intend to pursue a cure and then termination with cause even if all other work performed under the contract is satisfactory?

A57. The VA will provide vendor the opportunity to correct any deficiency, then take appropriate action, as necessary.

Q58. Will the VA consider the following solution to the Phigenic’s continuous water monitoring system dilemma? Withdraw the current RFQ and replace with two RFQ’s.

RFQ, one covers routine water testing including Legionella but does not include development of a solution to the Phigenic’s equipment and software problem. This is a straightforward FFP type contract. The second RFQ is focused on finding solutions to the Phigenic’s problem only. Two or three awards would be made to vendors on a FFP basis for fixed amount ($10,000). The awardees would then be allowed 30 days to implement a solution on a single Phigenic’s monitoring system. Awardees would also have to provide a quote for cost of bringing up the other 15 systems. Awardees who can show that their solution worked (data is viewable on a web-based portal) and are at the lowest price get to replace the other 15 systems. Routine maintenance of equipment, software administrative control would be transferred upon completion to the contractor performing the routine testing task.

A58. The government will not change its requirement. The RFQ will remain as amended.

Q59. Given the many uncertainties present in the current RFQ will the VA extend submission deadline by at least 14 days after the publication of answers to this round of questions?

A59. The government has no uncertainties with the current RFQ. The RFQ will not be extended again. The current due date for the receipt of quotes is May 31, 2024 at 12PM

CDT.

Q60. How many awards including extensions and bridges have been awarded to the Incumbent contractor?

A60. The current contract has a period of performance of 7/1/2023 to 6/30/2024. A 2-month extension was executed with a new contract expiration date of 8/31/24. The new contract will begin 9/1/2024.

See attached document: P09 SOW CTVHCS Water Quality Monitoring rev 5-14-24.