FedBizOpps banner

Login to begin searching the FBO/CBD
Home Page
CBD/FBO Online
CBD/FBO Email
About Us
Contact Us
Privacy
Categories
No. Notes
Archives
Search
Help
Login
Register

Popular Searches

Popular Categories

DESIGN FUEL OIL TANK REPLACEMENT - Attachment

General Information

Document Type:FILE
Posted Date:Jan 31, 2018
Category: Architect and Engineering Services - Construction
Set Aside:N/A

Contracting Office Address

Department of Veterans Affairs;Network Contracting Office 2;2875 Union Road, Suite 3500;Buffalo NY 14215

Description

Page 1 of 10 DESCRIPTION: This is a Sources Sought-Pre-Solicitation Notice for the establishment of an Architect-Engineering (A-E) contract with services to be performed at the Buffalo VA Medical Center, 3495 Bailey Avenue, Buffalo, NY 14215. This requirement is 100% set-aside to Small Disabled Veteran Owned Small Business (SDVOSB) firms. THIS ANNOUNCEMENT IS NOT A REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL; NO SOLICITATION PACKAGE WILL BE ISSUED UNTIL AFTER AN EVALUATION HAS BEEN MADE ON THE PROVIDED SF-330s. The SF-330 can be downloaded through the GSA Forms Library at: http://www.gsa.gov/portal/forms/type/TOP, scroll down to locate and click on the SF-330 hyperlink entitled, Architect-Engineer Qualifications. VA intends to award an Architect/Engineer contract for complete design services (preliminary concepts and layouts, program development, investigative services, preparation of contract drawings and specifications, cost estimating services, and construction period services) for the Design Fuel Tank Upgrades, Project# 528-18-110. The area of consideration is restricted to firms with offices and key personnel to be assigned to the design located within a 400-mile radius of the Buffalo VAMC site as indicated by a mapquest.com driving directions search from the prime designer s address listed in Vetbiz to the project site. The address of the prime designer will be the main office address listed in Vetbiz, not a satellite office or an office of another company or subcontractor. Written questions pertaining to this requirement should be submitted no later than 4:00 PM. Eastern Daylight Time (EDT), February 26, 2018. Interested firms should submit their current SF-330, Parts I and II, to Nicholas.Winne@va.gov. The SF-330s are due no later than 4:00 PM, EDT, March 5, 2018. SCOPE OF WORK: The intent of this effort is to remove the existing fuel tanks and replace them with appropriately sized modern tanks and to replace the monitoring/control systems to improve maintainability, meet the backup fuel supply requirements, and meet regulatory compliance requirements. The Buffalo VAMC requires a Consultant to perform the Architectural and Engineering (A/E) services necessary to accomplish this goal. All designs will follow, but not be limited to, VA Space Planning Specifications, in conjunction with the VA Master specifications as outlined in VA Handbook 7610. The design will be completed in a manner such that the estimated construction cost is within the VA budget. Buffalo VMAC has five existing tanks that are part of this scope. Table 1: Fuel Tank List Tank ID Size (gal) Construction Type Contents Status 1 40,000 Single Wall Steel UST #2 Fuel Oil Active 2 40,000 Single Wall Steel UST #2 Fuel Oil Active 3 40,000 Single Wall Steel UST #2 Fuel Oil Active 8 290 Double Wall Urethane Clad Steel UST Gasoline Active - Unknown Unknown AST Unknown Abandoned All tanks are located outside of Building 6. All systems (security, alarm, control monitoring, electrical, plumbing, mechanical, structural, civil, site work, architectural, fire protection, etc.) related to the boiler plant, the exterior faƧade of Building 6, and the surrounding grounds are within the scope of this effort and subject to renovation. Several exterior doors and windows are immediately next door to the fuel tanks and may need to be relocated and/or replaced. The existing fuel piping and controls for tanks 1, 2, and 3 (but NOT the tanks themselves) are accessible via an underground tunnel from Building 6. The replacement of this tunnel is also within the scope of this effort. The legacy boiler control and annunciator board, audible/visual alarms, and abandoned conduits are to be removed and replaced with an Engineering Control Center, boiler plant office space, and energy manager office space. Alarms, indicators, and controls located within the existing annunciator board include: Alarms: Medical gas (Building 1 and Building 20) Generator run and problems Air compressor Sewer overflow LP gas valve closed Controls Emergency Stop LP Gas Emergency Stop Natural Gas Plant Master Controller (steam) Plant feed water controller Condensate pump #1 and 2 controls Fuel oil pumps #1 and 2 controls Heat extractor shutdown bypass switch (fuel oil) South wall louver control Boiler plant HVAC controls (including rooftop exhaust fans) Indicators Compressed air City water pressure Natural gas pressure Boiler feed water pressure Fuel oil pressure Steam header pressure The main fire alarm panel and emergency backup generator remote annunciator panels are currently located in BLDG 6, RM U-14 and will also be relocated to the Engineering Control Center. Once relocated to the Engineering Control Center, repair/restore RM U-14. Install an ATS for the ECC that uses two different NFPA 70 Article 517 EES equipment branch sources. Site investigation is required under this scope to identify abandoned conduit and piping. The Engineering Control Center shall be as described in PG-18-9: SPACE PLANNING CRITERIA, CHAPTER 230: ENGINEERING SERVICE. Depending upon the final location of the Engineering Control Center, the existing mezzanine structure may need to be extended and several exterior doors and windows may need to be replaced. Existing active piping and conduits will be relocated to accommodate the new Engineering Control Center. The backup soft water supply line must also be relocated and replaced. The Engineering Control Center, boiler plant, and various mechanical rooms within Building 6 shall be accessed via the facilitys existing badge reader system. Existing alarms, indicators, and controls must be maintained during the construction process. The design drawings must show phasing of work to maintain these systems until the new Engineering Control Center is complete. At one time, there were two additional USTs located outside of Building 6 on the opposite side of the underground tunnel. There is documentation to indicate that these tanks were removed. However there is empirical evidence to suggest that these tanks were actually abandoned in place. Site investigation is required under this scope to verify the status of these tanks. If these tanks are found to have been abandoned in place then they are to be removed under the developed design. The Buffalo VMAC desires conversion from the existing UST system to a tank system using an Accessible Underground Area. Under this approach, the area above the tanks should be load rated for oversized motor vehicle and bus parking (AASHTO HL93). Although newer than the fuel oil tanks, the gasoline tank is to be replaced and relocated into the same Accessible Underground Area as the new fuel oil tanks. The associated aboveground pump is to be replaced and relocated as well. An additional diesel fuel tank will also be added to the same Accessible Underground Area as the new fuel oil tanks. This tank shall have a pump to fuel vehicles. As-Built and Record Documents Buffalo VAMC has limited as-built drawings for the existing UST system and associated subsystems. Although the VA makes every effort to keep drawings current to existing conditions, changes and updates are sometimes not recorded. It is therefore the Consultants responsibility to perform field investigation and verify of the accuracy of the drawings with the actual conditions. In fall 2016, Buffalo VAMC hired a Consultant to conduct an analysis of the existing USTs system and document their findings in a report. This report will be provided to the Consultant as source documentation. Quality Assurance/Quality Control Plan The consultant is responsible for reviewing the work done by any subcontractors that the Consultant has hired to assist with the completion of this SOW. The consultant must provide the Government with a Quality Assurance/Quality Control (QA/QC) Plan that documents the methods, processes, procedures that are going to be implemented by the Consultant to validate the work their subcontractors perform. Hazardous Materials Any remaining fuel oil in the existing tanks will need to be removed as part of the construction demolition work. However, the VA does not anticipate any asbestos or lead removal for this project. There are locations in the VA where asbestos does exist. Should there be a situation where hazardous materials do need to be removed; the design consultant and the VA will work together during design to plan for construction demolition OFFERORS WILL BE EVALUATED ON THE FOLLOWING CRITERIA: The submitted SF-330s will be evaluated on the following criteria: This acquisition will be in accordance with FAR Part 36.602-1 and VAAR Part 836.602-1. The following evaluation criteria will be used to evaluate SF-330 technical proposals: The A/E must demonstrate its qualifications with respect to the published evaluation criteria for all services. Evaluation Criteria (1) through (4) are considered most important and equal among themselves; Criteria (5) and (6) are of slightly less importance than (1) through (4), but are equal value among themselves; Criteria (7) and (8) are the least important and listed in descending order of importance. Specific evaluation criteria include: 1. Specialized experience and technical competence in the type of work required, including, where appropriate, experience in energy conservation, pollution prevention, waste reduction, and the use of recovered materials. 2. Professional Qualifications necessary for satisfactory performance of required services. 3. Capacity to accomplish the work in the required time. 4. Past Performance on contracts with Government agencies and private industry in terms of cost control, quality of work and compliance with performance schedules. 5. Specific experience and qualifications of personnel proposed for assignment to the project and their record of working together as a team. 6. Location in the general geographical area of the project and knowledge of the locality of the project; provided, that application of this criterion leaves an appropriate number of qualified firms, given the nature and size of the project. 7. Reputation and standing of the firm and its principal officials with respect to professional performance, general management, and cooperativeness. 8. Record of significant claims against the firm because of improper or incomplete architectural and engineering services. Criterion 1 - Specialized experience and technical competence in the type of work required, including, where appropriate, experience in energy conservation, pollution prevention, waste reduction, and the use of recovered materials. Offerors will be evaluated on specialized experience and technical competence in the performance of services similar to those anticipated under this contract with regard to: - Experience with design of fuel storage tanks and fuel piping/supply systems. - Experience with electrical design for healthcare facilities. - Experience with building management and control systems for boiler plant facilities. - Experience with designing concrete structures capable of supporting vehicle loads. - Experience in providing post construction award services (shop drawing review, as-built drawing and Quality Assurance Plan (QAP) preparation, construction inspection services, and Operating and Maintenance Manuals). Submission requirements: Provide up to five (5) projects completed or substantially completed within the past five (5) years that best illustrate specialized experience of the proposed team in the areas outlined above. Example projects shall note project s square footage. All projects provided in the SF-330 must be completed by the office/branch/regional office/individual team member actually proposed to manage and/or perform work under this contract. To enable verification, firms should include the DUNS number along with each firm name in the SF-330 Part 1, Section F Item 25 Firms from Section C Involved in this Project, block (1). Include a contract number or project identification number in block 21. Include an e-mail address, and phone number for the point of contact in block 23(c). Include in the project description the contract period of performance, award contract value, current contract value, a summary of the work performed that demonstrates relevance to specialized experience as outlined above. If the contractor served as a subcontractor on a project, indicate the value of the work they provided towards the performance of the overall project. If a project was performed by a joint venture, and not all joint venture partners are on the team proposed for this contract, the offeror/team should specifically address the work performed by the joint venture partner offering/teaming on this contract. Likewise, if the offeror/team member worked as a subcontractor on a project, the description should clearly describe the work actually performed by the offeror/team member and the roles and responsibilities of each on the project, rather than the work performed on the project as a whole. If the project description does not clearly delineate the work performed by the entity/entities offering/teaming on this contract, the project could be eliminated from consideration. NOTE: If the Offeror is a joint venture, information should be submitted as a joint venture; however, if there is no information for the joint venture, information should be submitted for either joint venture partner, not to exceed a total of five (5) projects for this criterion. Projects shall be submitted on the SF-330. For submittal purposes, a task order on an IDIQ contract is considered a project, as is a stand-alone contract award. Do not list an IDIQ contract as an example of a completed project. Instead, list relevant completed task orders or stand-alone contract awards that fit within the definition above. Examples of project work submitted that do not conform to this requirement will not be evaluated. Failure to provide requested data, accessible points of contact, or valid phone numbers could result in a firm being rated lower. All information for Criterion 1 should be submitted in Part 1, Section F of the SF-330. The Government WILL NOT consider information submitted in addition to Part 1, Section F in evaluating Criterion 1. Criterion 2 - Professional Qualifications necessary for satisfactory performance of required services. Offerors will be evaluated in terms of the qualifications, competence and experience of the key personnel and technical team proposed to accomplish this work. Key personnel are individuals who will have major contract or project management responsibilities and/or will provide unusual or unique expertise. Provide a balanced licensed and or certified workforce in the following disciplines Architecture, Civil, Structural, Mechanical, Electrical, Plumbing Environmental, Control System, and Fire Protection Engineering Submission requirements: Provide resumes for all proposed key personnel. Resumes are limited to one page each and should cite project specific experience and indicate proposed role in this contract. Provide professional registration, certification, licensure and/or accreditation. Indicate participation of key personnel in example projects in the SF-330 Part 1 Section G. Criterion 3 - Capacity to accomplish the work in the required time. Firms/teams will be evaluated in terms of their ability to plan for and manage work under the contract and capacity to accomplish the work in the required time. Submission requirements: Describe the firm s ability to concurrently perform and manage multiple projects in different locations to meet aggressive schedules, multiple disciplines, and control costs and the firm s capacity to accomplish multiple projects simultaneously. Criterion 4 - Past Performance Offerors will be evaluated on past performance with Government agencies and private industry in terms of work quality, compliance with schedules, cost control, and stakeholder/customer satisfaction. Evaluating past performance and experience will include information provided in Past Performance Questionnaires (PPQs) or CPARS/ACASS for Criterion 1 projects and may include other information provided by the firm, customer inquiries, Government databases, and other information available to the Government including contacts with points of contact in other criteria. Failure to provide requested data, accessible points of contact, or valid phone numbers could result in a firm being rated lower. NOTE: Past performance information for projects listed under Criterion 1. Submission requirements: SUBMIT A COMPLETED CPARS/ACASS EVALUATION FOR EACH PROJECT UNDER CRITERION 1. IF THERE IS NOT A COMPLETED CPARS/ACASS EVALUATION, the Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ) included in this notice is provided for the offeror or its team members to submit to the client for each project the offeror includes under Criterion 1. AN OFFEROR SHALL NOT SUBMIT A PPQ WHEN A COMPLETED CPARS/ACASS IS AVAILABLE. IF A CPARS/ACASS EVALUATION IS NOT AVAILABLE, ensure correct phone numbers and email addresses are provided for the client point of contact. Completed PPQs should be submitted with your SF-330. If the offeror is unable to obtain a completed PPQ from a client for a project(s) before the response date set forth in this notice, offerors should complete and submit with their responses the first page of the PPQ (Attachment), which will provide contract and client information for the respective project(s). Offerors may submit a PPQ previously submitted under a different Notice/RFP (legible copies are acceptable) as long as it is on the same form as posted with this Synopsis. Offerors should follow up with clients/references to ensure timely submittal of questionnaires. If requested by the client, questionnaires may be submitted directly to the Governments point of contact, Network Contracting Office 2 Attn: Nicholas Winne via email at Nicholas.Winne@va.gov prior to the response date. Offerors shall not incorporate by reference into their response PPQs or CPARS previously submitted in response to other A/E services procurements. However, this does not preclude the Government from utilizing previously submitted PPQ information in the past performance evaluation. Criterion 5 - Specific experience and qualifications of personnel proposed for assignment to the project and their record of working together as a team. Submission requirements: Offerors shall submit evidence of individuals experience and qualifications in their respective fields. Additionally, documentation must be provided to show these individuals have worked together as a team on previous projects and their role. (Completing Sections E, F, and G, on the SF-330 meets the documentation requirement). Furthermore, offerors shall describe the ability of the firm to manage, coordinate and work effectively with team members, both internal staff and consultants. Discuss the history of working relationships with team members, including joint venture partners where applicable. Criterion 6 - Location within a 400-mile radius to the design site (Buffalo, NY) and knowledge of the location (Buffalo, NY); provided, that application of this criterion leaves an appropriate number of qualified firms, given the nature and size of the project. Provided that the application of this criterion leaves an appropriate number of qualified firms, given the nature and size of the contract, firms/teams will be evaluated on the locations of their office or offices that will be performing the work under this contract. Submission requirements: Indicate firms/teams location, including main offices, branch offices and any subconsultants offices and demonstrate how this will be advantageous to the Government. Criterion 7 Reputation and standing of the firm and its principal officials with respect to professional performance, general management, and cooperativeness. Submission requirements: Offerors shall provide documentation (awards, certificates, publications, commendations from within the community) as evidence of reputation and standing of its firm. Criterion 8 - Record of significant claims against the firm because of improper or incomplete architectural and engineering services. Offerors with substantiated claims against the firm as a result of improper architectural and engineering services provided in the last three (3) years. Submission requirements: Records and any other documentation of substantiated claims highlighting improper or incomplete architectural engineering services against the firm within the last three (3) years. The SF-330 shall contain a statement affirming that there are no records of significant claims because of improper or incomplete architectural and engineering services. Evaluation Scoring Evaluation factors 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, and 8 will be evaluated using the following adjectival ratings as follows: Outstanding: Proposal meets requirements and indicates an exceptional approach and understanding of the requirements. Strengths far outweigh any weaknesses. Risk of unsuccessful performance is very low. Good: Proposal meets requirements and indicates a thorough approach and understanding of the requirements. Proposal contains strengths which outweigh any weaknesses. Risk of unsuccessful performance is low. Acceptable: Proposal meets requirements and indicates an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements. Strengths and weaknesses are offsetting or will have little or no impact on contract performance. Risk of unsuccessful performance is moderate. Marginal: Proposal does not clearly meet requirements and has not demonstrated an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements. The proposal has one or more weaknesses which are not offset by strengths. Risk of unsuccessful performance is high. Unacceptable: Proposal does not meet requirements and contains one or more deficiencies. Proposal is not awardable. The firm s proposal demonstrates a misunderstanding of the requirement and the approach fails to meet performance standards. The firm s proposal has major omissions and inadequate details to assure evaluators that the offeror has an understanding of requirement. The ratings identified below were used in the evaluation of Past Performance (Criterion 4): Substantial Confidence: Based on the offeror s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has a high expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort. No doubt exists based on the offeror s past performance that they can satisfy the requirements of the contract. Satisfactory Confidence: Based on the offeror s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has a reasonable expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort. Little doubt exists based on the offeror s past performance that they could satisfy the requirements of the contract. Unknown Confidence (Neutral): No recent/relevant performance record is available or the offeror s performance record is so sparse that no meaningful confidence assessment rating can be reasonably assigned. Limited Confidence: Based on the offeror s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has little expectation that the offeror will be able to successfully perform the required effort. Some doubt exists based on past performance that they could satisfy the terms and conditions of the contract. No Confidence: Based on the offeror s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has little expectations that the offeror will be able to successfully perform the required effort. Significant doubt exists based on the offeror s past performance that they can satisfy the requirements of the contract. SELECTION INTERVIEW: Interviews shall be scheduled with firms slated as the most highly qualified. Firms slated for interviews may be asked to explain or expand on information contained in the SF-330 submittal through a formal interview or a discussion questionnaire as determined by the Contracting Officer. GENERAL INFORMATION: All design and work will conform to the current edition of the VA Master Specifications and VA Design Standards as published at the following site: www.cfm.va.gov; ASME, OSHA, IBC 2009, NFPA and NEC building codes and standards. Coordinate all work through the COR of Facilities Management Service. Contractor is responsible for all cleanups and refuse disposal throughout the construction period. The A-E firm will prepare drawings and specifications in sufficient detail such that qualified outside General Contracting companies can prepare accurate and timely proposals for the desired construction work. Microsoft Project scheduling and management software will be used by both the A-E and Contractors to allow for regular tracking of schedules and work by the VA Medical Center. Schedules with MS Project will be regularly sent to the COR upon project initiation and whenever significant changes occur in the schedule. The estimated magnitude of construction is between $2,000,000 and $5,000,000. The A-E will provide an initial estimate of cost to perform the above work and will design only those items that can be provided within the cost limitation. The Medical Center must remain operational throughout the construction period and a detailed sequence of work will be provided by the A-E to minimize impact of the construction. The A-E will provide documents at each submission as indicated in the statement of work. The NAICS code for this procurement will be 541330, Engineering Services. The current small business size standard for 541330 is $15 million. Requirement for Electronic Submission Unless paper offers are specifically authorized, all responses to this pre-solicitation notice must be submitted electronically as described below.   The only acceptable paper form for this requirement is the receipt of past performance questionnaires. Failure to comply with this requirement may jeopardize the possibility of receiving an award for the contract due to non-compliance with the terms of the solicitation.   You must submit your electronic offer, and any supplemental information (such as spreadsheets, backup data, technical information), using any of the electronic formats and media described below. In addition, contractors are notified of the award via an electronic Notice of Award e-mail.   The award document will be attached to the Notice of Award e-mail. Acceptable Electronic Formats  (Software) for Submission of Offers Files readable using the current Microsoft* Office version Products: Word, Excel, PowerPoint, or Access.   Spreadsheet documents must be sent in a format that includes all formulas, macro, and format information.   Print or scan images of spreadsheets are not acceptable.     Please see security note below for caution regarding use of macros. When submitting construction drawings contractors are required to submit one set in AutoCAD and one set in Adobe PDF. (Purpose: contracting can open the PDF version and engineering can open AutoCAD files) Files in Adobe* PDF (Portable Document Format) Files:   When scanning documents scanner resolution should be set to 200 dots per inch, or greater. Other electronic format.     If you wish to submit an offer using another format than those described in these instructions, e-mail the Contracting Officer who issued the solicitation. Please submit your request at least ten (10) calendar days before the scheduled closing date of the solicitation.     Request a decision as to the format acceptability and make sure you receive approval of the alternate format before using it to send your offer. Please note that we can no longer accept.zip files due to increasing security concerns. E-mail Submission Procedures: For simplicity in this guidance, all submissions in response to a solicitation will be referred to as offers. Subject Line:   Include the solicitation number, name of company, and closing date of solicitation.   Use only one of the terms Quotation, Offer, or Bid depending on the solicitation type.   Size:   Maximum size of the e-mail message shall not exceed five (5) megabytes.  The SF330, in its entirety, shall not exceed one email of 5MB. Only one email is permitted unless otherwise stated in this paragraph or in writing by the Contract Officer submitting the solicitation. The Microsoft Outlook © Email time/date stamp will be used to date and time stamp offers for the official record of receipt for the submission. The date and time stamp in recipients inbox is the official record of receipt. Security Issues, Late Bids, Unreadable Offers Late submission of offers are outlined at FAR Parts 52.212-1(f), 52.214-7, and 52.215-1(c)(3).   Particular attention is warranted to the portion of the provision that relates to the timing of submission.     Please see FAR 15.207(c) for a description of the steps the Government shall take with regard to unreadable offers.   To avoid rejection of an offer, vendors must make every effort to ensure their electronic submission is virus-free.   Submissions or portions thereof submitted and which the automatic system detects the presence of a virus or which are otherwise unreadable will be treated as unreadable pursuant to FAR Parts 14.406 and FAR 15.207(c ). The virus scanning software used by our e-mail systems cannot always distinguish a macro from a virus. Therefore, sending a macro embedded in an e-mail message or an e-mail attachment may cause the e-mail offer to be quarantined. You may send both the spreadsheet and the spreadsheet saved in PDF format to ensure that your proposal is readable. Password protecting your offer is not permitted. The Contracting Officer will file the offer electronically which will allow access only by designated individuals. Important Notice: Apparent successful offerors must apply for and receive verification from the Department of Veterans Affairs Center for Verification and Evaluation (CVE) in accordance with 38 CFR Part 74 and VAAR 819.70 bysubmission of documentation of Veteran status, ownership and control sufficient to establish appropriate status, offerors must be both VISIBLE and VERIFIED by the Department of Veterans Affairs Center for Verification and Evaluation prior to contract award. Failure to be both VERIFIED by CVE and VISIBLE on VetBiz prior to contract award will result in the offeror s proposal being deemed non-compliant. All offerors are urged to contact the CVE and submit the aforementioned required documents to obtain CVE verification of their SDVOSB status if they have not already done so. 852.219-10      VA NOTICE OF TOTAL SERVICE-DISABLED VETERAN-OWNED SMALL BUSINESS SET-ASIDE (JUL 2016)(DEVIATION) (a) Definition. For the Department of Veterans Affairs, Service-disabled veteran-owned small business concern or SDVSOB : (1) Means a small business concern: (i) Not less than 51 percent of which is owned by one or more service-disabled veterans or, in the case of any publicly owned business, not less than 51 percent of the stock of which is owned by one or more service-disabled veterans or eligible surviving spouses (see VAAR 802.201 Surviving Spouse definition); (ii) The management and daily business operations of which are controlled by one or more service-disabled veterans (or eligible surviving spouses) or, in the case of a service-disabled veteran with permanent and severe disability, the spouse or permanent caregiver of such veteran; (iii) The business meets Federal small business size standards for the applicable North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code identified in the solicitation document; (iv) The business has been verified for ownership and control pursuant to 38 CFR 74 and is so listed in the Vendor Information Pages database, (https://www.vip.vetbiz.gov); and (v) The business will comply with subcontracting limitations in 13 CFR 125.6, as applicable (2) Service-disabled veteran means a veteran, as defined in 38 U.S.C. 101(2), with a disability that is service-connected, as defined in 38 U.S.C. 101(16). (b) General. (1) Offers are solicited only from verified service-disabled veteran-owned small business concerns. Offers received from concerns that are not verified service-disabled veteran-owned small business concerns shall not be considered. (2) Any award resulting from this solicitation shall be made to a verified service-disabled veteran-owned small business concern. (c) Agreement. A service-disabled veteran-owned small business concern agrees that in the performance of the contract, the concern will comply with the limitation on subcontracting requirements in 13 CFR §125.6. (d) A joint venture may be considered a service-disabled veteran owned small business concern if the joint venture complies with the requirements in 13 CFR 125.15, provided that any reference therein to SDVO SBC is to be construed to apply to a VA verified SDVOSB as appropriate. (e) Any service-disabled veteran-owned small business concern (non-manufacturer) must meet the requirements in FAR 19.102(f) of the Federal Acquisition Regulation to receive a benefit under this program.

Original Point of Contact

POC Nicholas Winne

Place of Performance

Address:
Department of Veterans Affairs;VA WNY Healthcare System;Buffalo;3495 Bailey Ave;Buffalo, NY
14215,
Link: FBO.gov Permalink
Link: FBO.gov Permalink
Bookmark This Notice
Print View