Vendor Questions and Answers.docx

Vendor Questions / Request For Information (RFI):

1. While the SOW clearly explains that treatment chemicals should be included, the RFQ with the tables of line items does not clearly indicate where or even if treatment chemicals should be included in the pricing. Are chemicals included in line items ending in 001 for the first year and each option year?

Answer: Yes, treatment chemicals shall be included in the pricing for the Price/Cost Schedule line items 0001, 1001, 2001, 3001, and 4001. The RFQ Amendment 0001 updated the Description for those Line Items to: Scheduled Routine Water System Chemical Testing, Monitoring, and Preventive Maintenance (PM) Treatment Services that includes the supplies of routine Treatment Chemicals in accordance with (IAW) the Statement of Work (SOW).

2. Please verify if the Utah DOPL licensing is required for Water Chemical Treatment services.

Answer: After further review the Utah DOPL licensing is not required. The Revised Statement of Work Amendment 0001 and the RFQ Amendment 0001 reflects the removal of the Utah DOPL license requirement.

3. Section B.1.1 of the Statement of Work and item (1) of the Addendum to 52.212-1 call for active registration with the Utah Division of Occupational and Professional Licensing. Item (6) states that a proposed subcontractor performing technical work must independently meet Sections B.1.1 through B.1.4. If the prime offeror subcontracts all technical work to a firm that holds the required Utah license, will the subcontractor's license satisfy the firm licensure requirement, or must the prime offeror hold the Utah license in its own name?

Answer: The Revised Statement of Work Amendment 0001 and the RFQ Amendment 0001 does not require the Utah Division of Occupational and Professional Licensing (DOPL). If the Prime Contractor plans on subcontracting all technical work, then they must provide their subcontractor’s proof of technical qualifications in their offer for evaluation.

4. Item (6) asks offerors to delineate work self-performed by the prime versus work performed by each subcontractor. Is there a minimum portion of the work the prime offeror must self-perform, or may the prime offeror subcontract all technical services while retaining contract management, quality oversight, reporting and invoicing?

Answer: The solicitation is open market, so the Limitations on Subcontracting (LOS) is not a factor. However, for evaluation of technical qualification and capabilities, if an offeror plans on subcontracting the technical services, then the Government needs to evaluate what work is expected to be performed by the proposed subcontractor, the proposed subcontractor’s technical qualifications, and what portion of the requirement should be expected to be performed by the offeror if they were awarded the contract as the Prime Contractor.

5. Section B.3 requires a one-gallon sample of each formulation with the proposal, while quotes are accepted by email only. Please confirm the address, point of contact and deadline for delivering the physical samples.

Answer: The Revised Statement of Work Section B.3 is updated for the awarded Contactor to supply the 1-gallon sample, it is not for offerors during the RFQ solicitation process to supply the 1-gallon sample for their RFQ offer. However, the RFQ Amendment added that the offeror must provide the Safety Data Sheets (SDSs) and certificates of compliance so that % actives can be verified for all proposed water treatment chemicals intended to be used under the Price/Cost Schedule’s Line Items 0001, 1001, 2001, 3001, and 4001.

6. The SOW contains cooling towers that says the combined make-up is 10.5 million gallons a year, please verify.

Answer: The VA has determined that the approximate cooling towers’ combined make-up is around 28,000,000 gallons, so the revised Statement of Work Amendment 0001 section B.2.1 Cooling Tower (Bldg 27) table reflects the update.

7. In the RFQ the 3rd evaluation criterion is “Past Performance”. Are there any restrictions on sources of past performance? Is this something that I need to request or is this something that you will do during your RFQ review?

Answer: The RFQ does not require offerors to provide Past Performance information as part of their offer to the CO. The CO can use all available resources to review the offeror’s past performance.

8. Currently is there an incumbent? If so, who was the previous awardee, contract number, and value?

Answer: Yes, there is an incumbent contractor providing the Water System Chemical Treatment services. The information on the incumbent contractor, the previous awarded contract number and the previous contract value is irrelevant to this RFQ. We ask offerors to provide their best competitive offer that meets the RFQ and SOW requirements.

9. Please clarify the salt delivery requirements for Building 14. The Statement of Work appears to identify Building 14 as an indoor location requiring manual carrying and loading of salt, while the RFQ Performance Approach identifies Building 14 as a bulk delivery location. Please confirm whether salt for Building 14 is to be delivered in bulk or manually delivered/loaded and confirm the required delivery method for each building included in the estimated 800,000 lb annual salt requirement.

Answer: The RFQ Amendment 0001 – Performance Approach is updated to reflect the same delivery method as the Statement of Work.