Inactive Service-Disabled Veteran-Owned Small Business (SDVOSB) Set-Aside (FAR 19.14)

Modification to Solicitation # 36C25623Q0537  Within the Price/Cost Schedule, ET Control is listed, but it is not within the SOW. Since the ET Control is proprietary to only one manufacturer (GE), w... Modification to Solicitation # 36C25623Q0537  Within the Price/Cost Schedule, ET Control is listed, but it is not within the SOW. Since the ET Control is proprietary to only one manufacturer (GE), we request that specification be removed from both the SOW and the Price/Cost Schedule. By removing this, you allow for equivalent vendors to provide a response to the RFQ.  If the goal is to have a mechanism for low/minimal flow capability there are other means of doing so that are non-proprietary. Overall, we ask that ET Control either be removed or replaced with more colloquial terminology that is not overly restrictive and unique to one vendor, such as Facilitates low/minimal flow capability .  Response The Government hereby remove the proprietary information from cost schedule and statement of work ET Control and replace to read- has the capability and/or facilitates decreased consumption of inhaled anesthetic via proprietary or non-proprietary alterations to gas flow rates .  The required maximum dimensions are listed as 42 inches wide x 33 in deep including GCX mounting.  Based on how anesthesia machines of all brands are used, the mounting arms can vary the footprint significantly. With the addition of the mounts, we don t believe that any of the vendors can meet this specification, while meeting the other specifications listed. Further, the current listed footprint wouldn t be achievable for any machine without the clinician swinging the vent screen in from of the anesthesia device (which is not common from an ergonomical perspective). We request replacement of these precise dimensions with a range of dimensions, based on how the machine may be used by each clinician, no matter the brand name? Also, please provide further clarification regarding exactly what the desired total footprint is to encompass (i.e. mounting with workstation/IT System/Monitoring adjoined to the mounting solution, or simply the mounting solution itself)? Response The current machines that are being used are GE, which has resulted in limited space within the OR. The Government can adjust the measurements to 45 inches wide x 33 inches deep including GCX mounting can be acceptable. The GCX mounts are currently installed. With limited available space, the vendor providing an equal product has to ensure they are quoting the required mounts to satisfy this requirement.