VENDOR QA 2.pdf

VENDOR QA 2

# VENDOR QUESTION VA RESPONSE

1 Nitrogen, NF, Liquid, Liter ‐ Please clarify dewar size. We would be providing a per dewar price, not a per liter price. We can not fill per liter. CLIN REMOVED 2 Argon, R40 ‐ Please clarify product grade/spec (i.e., is this research grade?) CLIN REMOVED 3 Argon, E cylinder ‐ No E size available, will the government accept an Argon 20 or 40 size with a CGA 580 threaded valve? Part number is AR 20 or AR 40. YES 4 LIQ NITROGEN, LOW PRESSURE, TANK ON WHEELS, 230 LITER CYL MRI ‐ Please confirm MRI is correct. We can not provide MRI at this time as it is unavailable, Alternatively we can provide non‐MRI, part number NI NF230LT22 Removing “MRI” from description. Description should be, “LIQ NITROGEN, LOW PRESSURE, TANK ON WHEELS, 230 LITER CYL”

5 Liquid Nitrogen, (BULK) Tank Refilled at Loading Dock ‐ Please clarify dewar size. We would be providing a per dewar price, not a per liter price. Sioux Falls is the only facility that has this bulk tank that the vendor fills at the dock. The dewar is an “LN2 Storage Dewar IC‐5D” and is a 5‐liter size. Sioux Falls has has updated their estimated usage resulting in an increase from 4 liters annually (that’s what is stated on the current schedule) to 364 liters. That means that if we do a per dewar fill rate, Sioux Falls is estimating that they’ll need approximately 72 fills annually.

6 Lung Diffusion: 3% Gas Certified, 3% Carbon Monoxide, 3% Methane, 21% Oxygen, Balance Nitrogen, Size H175 Cylinder ‐ Please confirm the spec should read 0.3% not 3%.

Should be, “Lung Diffusion: 3% Gas Certified, 0.3% Carbon Monoxide, 0.3% Methane, 21% Oxygen, Balance Nitrogen, Size H175 Cylinder”

7 LUNG DF NIT‐CO .3%‐METH .3% ‐ Please confirm the spec and percentages as lung diffusion gas must contain oxygen. I think this one is a duplicate to the lung diffusion gas above in question #6. For lung diffusion that contains .3% CO and .3% methane, there is 21% O2. This is the same gas mix as the one listed above. I’m comfortable with removing this CLIN and saying that it’s a duplicate.

8 Cylinder rental Adding cylinder rental CLINS 9 Request the GOV Consider and extension of the Bid Submission Date to allow offerors sufficient time to properly evaluate/analyze the GOV’s responses? Same as question 31 10 Can the GOV please confirm the proposal’s AMENDED price submission format. The RFQ has a consolidated Gas list. AMEND 001 allows vendors to price only the

VAMCs they can competitively support. What this means materially is that the Consolidated Gas List has (64) “Gas Fill” CLINS, yet of the Individual VAMCs we are bidding on, the Facility “with the most CLINs applicable to that Facility” is only (19) CLINs. In sum, must we bid on the entire Consolidated list where clearly 70% of the CLINs do not apply to our offer (AMEND 001), which does not provide the GOV the best pricing due to having to Price (be accountable) for nonstandard usage gases, adding unpredictability to the supply chain.

It is preferred that price submission uses Attachment B. Vendors are welcome to submit their own format as long as it conforms to the recommeded items for each station.

11 Can we bid by VAMC/CBOC for each location, meaning the prices may vary by facility? If bidding on one or more VAMCs, the contractor must be able to support all CBOCs affiliated with that parent VAMC.

12 Please confirm if this is a 60 Month Award divided by (5) Ordering Period, listed on the SF1449 (5) Ordering Periods, or a listed on Page 4 of 77 Para 1.4 which states a Base Year Plus (4) Options?

This is a 5 year IDIQ with 5 ORDERING PERIODS. Paragraph 1.4 on page 4 is a typo and updated to "The Government is anticipating awarding a fixed price indefinite delivery indefinite quantity (IDIQ) contract with a base ordering period and 4 additional one year orering periods to commence from date of award."

13 What is the projected date for Ordering Period 1 to begin? Please note Para 1.5 on Page 4 of 77 identifies a (20) Day duration until the COR is identified – that is 1/3 of the allotted time for (60) Days on Page 8 of 77 Para 4.1.1, and this person is critical to getting “off to a fast start” Please note this conflicts with Page 8 of 77 Para 4.1.3 which mandates a Meeting between the Awardee and the COR NLT than (10) days after award. Can you please clarify?

A COR has already been named for this contract and will be given to the contractor immediately following award.

14 Can you please clarify Page 7 of 77, Para 3.7. CYL Rentals run consistent with a Calendar Month (as do related VA Internal Activities). Hence given the example of the 26th of the Month – we would have “a short first month” and the rentals for the Short Month (26th to the 30/31st) would be calculated as per Para 3.7.1, and begin anew on the 1st of the ensuing month – thus aligning all CYL Support respective to the Monthly Logistical Flow, vice 30 Calendar days irrespective of the Calendar month. This works very well. Is this permissible for a vendor to implement upon approval of the supported facility?

Yes

15 Page 10 of 77 requires the Incoming and outgoing contractor to coordinate transition. Respectfully, it is the GOV’s responsibility to coordinate with the outgoing contractor as the incoming Awardee has no authority to coordinate with the outgoing contractor (unless the incoming is hiring the same subcontractor as the incumbent/outgoing Contractor does) – either way the Outgoing Contractor must inventory CYL Balances to reconcile with the GOV (not the incoming Contractor). In the event the Incoming Contractor is utilizing the same subcontractor – the inventory between the GOV and the Outgoing must be conducted (between the two) – and the incoming contractor will Transfer the Assets validated by the GOV REP Signature to a new account in the Name of the Incoming contractor. This is “a good number” because it is validated by the GOV REPs signature. When the GOV asks incoming and outgoing to “coordinate” this is a nonqualifying directive, in that this is sometimes a hostile environment. Hence, the GOV’s responsibility is to “close out” the previous contract, for example When the Loss of Use (LOU) Inventory is conducted (or a Transfer of Assets Inventory). In sum, please acknowledge that this is beyond the scope of an incoming Contractor, who has no authority to affect coordination between the VA and the Outgoing. In respect to the Phase In briefing, the incoming contractor is obligated to the GOV to arrange OUR coordination milestones, as an approved by the GOV, and the GOV’s Plan approval “drives” the supporting tasks (such as GOV & Outgoing Contractor Cylinder accountability Inventory, by VAMC & CBOC). Can the GOV affirm that this questions/process review is acceptable to the GOV, to include NOT requiring the incoming contractor to do an audit of CYLINDERS they do not own – and the incoming Vendor would NOT have the “on hand balances” (i.e. what is supposed to be resident in a facility – vice what was actually counted – when the “action arm” to get that accomplished (owner of the CYLs) is the Outgoing Contractor/Subcontractor, i.e. “another vendors CYLs”, as per Para 5.1 Page 11 of 77? Can we delete this requirement for the coming Vendor?

The incoming contractor will not be responsible for the outgoing contractor's cylinder inventory. The cylinder inventory (aka cylinder audit) for the outgoing contractor will be completed by the GOV and the outgoing contractor. To clarify paragraph 4.2.7 on page 10 or 77, the coordination between the incoming and outgoing contractors is ensure there is no break in service for the GOV. The incoming contractor shall ensure that services will continue without a break once the outgoing contractor has removed their cylinders and equipment. For example, if the outgoing contractor is removing 500 cylinders on a specific date, the GOV is asking that the incoming contractor be prepared to install their 500 cylinders, so there is no shortage of cylinders during the transition.

Paragraph 5.1 on page 11 of 77 describes the requirement for the incoming contractor to audit their own cylinders (basically providing the ordering activity and COR with a base cylinder count for the start of the contract. It does not refer to the incoming contractor having to audit the outgoing contractor's cylinders.

16 Please provide the GOV’s rationale for Page 15 of 77 Para 9.71& 9.7.2 ‐ which state:

9.7.1. For any new delivery locations proposed by the Government that are further than a sixty (60) mile driving distance from the contractor’s or subcontractor’s medical gas fill station, the contractor may propose changes to the contract terms, conditions and/or pricing for the Government to consider. If the Government does not agree to the contractor’s proposed changes, the Government reserves the right to acquire medical gases from another contractor.

9.7.2. The driving distance mileage will be determined by shortest route provided by Google Maps. Additionally, these should conform to the Bilateral MOD addressed in Para 1.1.1. What calculation is the GOV using to support the relevance/Cost analysis for (60) miles please? Keep in mind that adding CBOCs predictably does not have an existing route, nor preestablished delivery days when the route is used to deliver product. In sum, this requires the vendor (Small Business) to do a predictive analysis, relegated to google maps? Pricing for CBOCs (generally rural/less populated areas – not high quantity deliveries) is a calculation based on established routes, the internal capacity of the supporting branch (distance is but one of the determinants – not the sole determinant as the GOV is suggesting), in relation to GOV requirements. The GOV is asking substantial risks, to add a delivery located, prices using existing locations by comparison, and to create a situation where delivering products quantities – and supporting over long distances (60 miles is considered long), where it costs more to delivery it, than what we must bill the GOV, hence being “upside down” on deliveries? Please remove this requirement and allow us to bid on the actual/reasonable requirements? Is this agreeable to the GOV, as it truly does place all vendors at a disadvantage to “Carte Blanche” acceptance as is stated in the RFQ? Lastly (5) of the (10) VAMCs have no CBOC requirements, yet they have multiple CBOCs subordinate under that VAMCs, rhetorically – how are they receiving their Gases? In context with the (60) mile requirements as stated in the RFQ – implementation (as written) is very risky. Especially This is especially relevant in dealing with Liquid Nitrogen requirements which have faced increased regulations by the FDA within the last couple of years.

Paragraphs 9.7.1 and 9.7.2 are sub paragraphs to 9.7 in which the GOV reserves the right to add med gas delivery and fill services to any GOV locations that are not currently on the schedule of locations as long as the added GOV location is within 60 miles from the contractor's or subcontractor's fill station and will a unilateral modification to the contract as long as the medical gases and speciality mixture already exist on the schedule of items. Para 1.1.1 does not refer to additional quantities of medical gases or specialty mixtures that currently exist on the schedule of items in the RFQ. Rather, para 1.1.1 refers to medical gases or specialty mixtures that are not currently on the schedule of items and need to be added to the schedule via modification to the contract. If this happens, a bilateral mod will need to occur. Para and subparas under 9.7 will not be removed from the requirement as the contractor must have the ability to service new GOV locations with existing (already established on the schedule of items) medical gases and specialty mixtures as long as the new GOV location is within 60 miles from the contractor's or subcontractor's fill station.

17 Page 21/22 of 77 Para 15.4 & 15.5 – can the GOV explain the rationale for this requirement? As a practical matter, our drivers to not enter the facility, i.e.

depositing Cylinders at the Loading/Receiving dock and “scanning in” the empty CYLs the GOV has in the “empties” cage/storage area? We do not have any such requirement unless an employee is required to consistently enter a GOV Facility unescorted. Please note, nearly all contracts awarded requirement the Contractor Specific Identification Badge to identify that individual as a Contractor’s employee

Para 15.4 refers to contractor employees that are to perform work on GOV installations. Simple drop offs and pick ups of "empties" are not classified as performing work on GOV installations therefore the requirements under that para do not apply to those contractor employees performing that type of work.

The wearing of contractor‐specific ID is under para 15.1. Para 15.5 refers to the contractor having to adhere to the GOV's procedures for entry requirements (i.e. contract receiving dock prior to delivery or contractor must enter through a specific entrypoint or gate), wearing of appropriate ID (i.e. in addition to contractor‐provided ID, the contractor may need a "contractor" badge that's provided by the GOV security/police service) and departure (i.e. must departure through a specific exitpoint or gate).

VENDOR QA 2

18 Will the GOV take into consideration the existing COVID 19 response in terms of contract requirements? We understand this is very difficult for the Contracting Authority to predict/project, yet the offerors, and more so the awardees are faced with many “unknowns” in the bid process, committing to contract requirements, pricing those requirements, and implementing what the GOV approves. We SDVOB vendors are bidding this requirement under National Declared Emergency requirements, of which providing Medical Oxygen and Specialty Gas Cylinders is a crucial VAMC function closely managed by all stakeholders. The salient point is we are bidding “business as usual” addressing the complexities of a Regional Support Contract, ‐‐ when Nationally – the residual and cascading effects of this Medical Emergency are not readily known, not the least of which is implementing/transitioning new requirements when we all are in the midst of

Effects from unpredictable difficulties resulting from COVID‐19 will be taken into account.

19 Could we get the Facility POCs/existing CORs listing to ‐ identify special requirements for each facility? Given the COVID 19 response negates access. The COR and ordering activity POC(s) will be given to the contractor immediately following contract award.

20 Can the GOV identify the Purchase Order Frequencies expected if awarded? Specifically, will the “FILLs” and “Rentals” be billed via an Annual Purchase Order to fund these activities, as opposed to an increased PO Frequency that is difficult to sustain/reconcile logistically?

An annual PO will be issued per station (facility/CBOC) to cover the duration of the government's fiscal year.

21 Will the ordering CBOCs have their own unique PO for orders and if so, would the PO Issuance Frequency mirror the VAMC they are under? If so, confirm this mandates a separate Invoice from the parent VAMC – approved/certified by the CBOC?

One PO will be issued per VAMC and affiliated CBOCs of that VAMC. CBOCs will not receive separate POs unless unforeseen special circumstances occur. If a CBOC is issued a separate PO from the VAMC, the contractor will be required to separate their invoices in accordance with the PO that correlates to the specific GOV location.

22 Is there a GOV QASP for this RFQ? Not a specific QASP in this RFQ. Performance measures will be used and are contained within the SOW.

23 Is there a Bulk Gas requirement for this RFQ? CLIN 0036 on the consolidated gas list is for BULK Liquid Nitrogen but only for (4) Liters annually? Is this a VA Owned

Bulk Tank and how large is the tank? Additionally, Page 7 of 77 paragraph 3.6, provides common contract language for dealing with Bulk Oxygen contracts and not for cylinders (hook up to facility‐maintained alarm system)

See response to question #5. One facility has a small GOV‐owned 5 liter size dewar that requires liquid nitrogen fills. The previous estimate was 4 liters annual; however, the usage estimate has been since updated to 364 liters annually.

24 What are the specific VA Owned Cylinder sizes/types for all locations please?

Please Note: Attachment A Spreadsheet Column Header “VA OWNED CYLs” depicts GFE CYLs “All O2, CO2, etc.” (for example, listed in the VAMC St. Cloud & CBOCs, VA Central Iowa HCS) ‐‐ yet the GOV did not provide a Specific CLIN for GFE (updated in AMEND 001 ‐ Attachment B) How does vendor bill for GFE?

Is it permissible to provide a streamlined CYL Rental pricing by Size, Type, and Functionality Groupings (listed below), consistent with the VAMC ST Cloud CLINs 0203 to 0208, yet not consistently applied to all VAMCs within VISN 23? Can a vendor use this price Grouping applied to all VAMCs we are bidding, as we are required to do at St Cloud?

GOV owned cylinders are not subject to rental cost. The contractor is to invoice for fills only and the rate to fill GOV owned cylinders will be the same as what is depicted in medical gas and specialty mixture unit costs that will be listed in the schedule of items.

25 Request the opportunity to embed LOU CLINs uniformly in the DRAFT Rental Pricing? NOTE: LOU is determined by the CYL Size, TYPE, and FUNCTIONALITY, hence one price for each grouping, as opposed to the respective LOU, as opposed to a separate document referenced on page to 9 on PG 7 of 77. Is this permissible? If note, where should a vendor depict LOU?

Monthly rental CLINS added to the schedule of items.

26 Can the GOV please identify the size/type for CLIN 0060? The description only states “Hydrogen?” Updated description to read, "Research 6.0 Grade Hydrogen, Size 300 Cylinder, CGA‐350." Removed 12 cylinder quantity for Sioux Falls. This CLIN is only need for NWI with a estimated quantity of 3 annually.

27 Can you please identify if CLIN 0068 is for Industrial Oxygen (description is just “OXYGEN K”)? ‐‐ If so, then it is a duplicate of CLIN 0043. If medical grade, this is a duplicate of CLIN 0045 (Sizes H, K, & 200 are used interchangeably)

Medical grade. If sizes H, K and 200 are used interchangeably then the quantity of 2 from "Oxygen K" can be added to the CLIN under "Oxygen Medical, size H cylinder" which will result in that CLIN's quantity increasing from 39 to 41.

28 Do usages provided in Amendment 0001 include quantities for CBOCs? If not, what are the annual usages for CBOCs? This info is critical as CBOCs can be remote causing a potentially costly logistical hurdle.

Estimated usages are listed per facility as well as a rolled up "combined" VISN requirement. The per facility usages encompass all CBOCs under the parent VAMC (i.e. Fargo's estimate usage will contain all of the requirements for the main hospital as well as all CBOCs listed under Attachment A). Specific CBOC delivery and fill requirements are not broken down.

29 Is CLIN 0004 pricing for 4,202 LITERS of Liquid Nitrogen or 4,202 FILLS of Liquid Nitrogen? If fills, then please identify Dewar Size(s) to better reflect annual usage Liters 30 Page 7 of 77 Para 3.6 states:

3.6. Each ordering activity shall provide access to an electrical power source and hook‐up to a facility‐maintained alarm system. The Contractor shall perform the hook‐up of contractor‐owned equipment to the facility‐maintained medical gas manifolds at no additional cost to the Government.

Please confirm the Government is requesting the Contractor to perform hook‐up to Government manifolds (Page 7 of 77 paragraph 3.6). This is highly irregular and is high liability risk on the part of the supplier by having CYL Contract interact with patients (to include not being capable due to COVID 19 response).

Typically, vendors do not go into the facility as this keeps the vendors on site significantly longer and affects dispatch/route planning – to include that these are “done at no additional cost,” meaning no delivery fees authorized, for a nonstandard delivery (not delivering to the loading dock, vendor liability inside the facility (a damaged Manifold attributed to the vendor, when there is “no additional charge to do this nonstandard task in the first place. Vendors deliver to the receiving dock, and coordinate with the VA REP for CYLs delivered, and returned – acknowledged by the VA REPs signature. NOTE: There may be multiple “delivery points” based on the VAMC layout (CLC)‐ but this still equates to multiple deliveries other centralized delivery point around the VA Campus.

Para 3.6 on page 7 of 77 will be removed.

31 Please consider an extension to allow us time to review the responses to our questions and finalize our proposal. Response period extended to 7/24/20 12PM CDT.