Amendment 01 - Vendor Q and A - 24Q0136.pdf
PDF 60 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Travis AFB Order Picker Forklifts
- Solicitation number
- FA442724Q0136
About this file
This document is a Question and Answer (Q&A) related to a Request for Quote (RFQ) for order picker forklifts for Travis Air Force Base. The RFQ, number FA442724Q0136, is seeking two Raymond model 5600K series or two Toyota 8BPUH15 model order pickers in accordance with the provided Statement of Work. The Q&A addresses vendor questions about acceptable brands, equipment details, and the procurement history. The key details are:
The government confirmed that the Toyota model is an acceptable alternative to the Raymond model, as it meets the required capabilities. The procurement has been solicited multiple times as an unfunded requirement, meaning the need is identified but not currently budgeted. Vendors are required to submit quotes valid until 30 September 2024, and must provide a pricing breakdown in addition to completing the provided pricing table. Any Requests for Information must be submitted by 8 August 2024.
View the file
Other files
On GovTribe
Work with this file
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
Question and Answer – Vendor RFI for RFQ FA442724Q0136
1. Is it possible to get either a manufacturer and model number for the “gray stock caged picking carts?
EGA products SO#529674 MD1015
2. We’ve identified Crown as a reputable brand which offers a model that meet or exceeds the capabilities of the required items and attached two documents with the salient characteristics. Is this another technically acceptable option?
It has the same capabilities, the issue is we maintain our own equipments, and they are all Raymond. All the spare parts we have are for Raymonds. The Toyota model we were told is manufactured by the same company and were assuming they share the same parts.
3. I am preparing a bid for this RFQ and was wondering if you have information about the:
a. Number of stairs and flights
b. Number of rooms per floor.
I’m not sure what you’re referring to when you mention stairs, flights, rooms, and floors. Please review the Statement of Work as it mentions the space it’s required for and the delivery dock information.
4. This RFQ #FA442724Q0136 (published 08/02/2024, due date 08/15/2024), is the same exact RFQ as #FA442724Q0098, but now you have allowed the Toyota model to be acceptable. This change - to add the Toyota model - should not be acceptable to the end user for logical, economic, financial, and legal reasons.
Are you starting over now, and void the earlier RFQ #FA442724Q0098, which was due 07/12/2024?
You know this is the fourth time you’ve tried to buy this exact equipment, and there is never any action/ no funding. How many more times do you suspect we might be doing this over & over & over some more? What’s up?
This Travis requirement has been repetitively solicitated over a fiscal year span because it is designated as an unfunded requirement. An Unfunded Requirement (UFR) is a program need that is not included and funded in the government’s annual program execution plan. Each fiscal year, all UFRs are prioritized and continually reprioritized throughout the year as the government adapts its resources to everchanging mission requirements.
In the current state, my office was informed by the requirement owners that further market research revealed both a Toyota and Raymond solution would be compatible with our existing supply management systems. Hence, the re-solicitation in Fiscal Year 2024.
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .