Attachment_3_-_Elevator_Maintenance_Solicitation_Q A.docx
DOCX document 17 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Elevator Maintenance Federal contract opportunity
- Solicitation number
- FA4801-16-T-0001
About this file
Attachment 3 - Elevator Maintenance Solicitation Q A
View the file
Other files for this federal contract opportunity
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| FA4801-16-T-0001_Elevator_Maintenance_Amendment.pdf | ||
| Attachment_1_-_PWS_Elevator_Maintenance_19JUL16.pdf | ||
| Attachment_2_-_WD_86-0117_(Rev.-36)_6-3-2016.pdf | ||
| Attachment_1_-_PWS_Elevator_Maintenance.pdf | ||
| FA4801-16-T-0001_Elevator_Maintenance.pdf |
On GovTribe
Work with this file on GovTribe
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
Elevator Maintenance Solicitation FA4801-16-T-0007 Questions and Answers 19 July 2016
During the Solocitation phase of Elevator Maintenance FA4801-16-T-0007, the following questions were submitted to the 49th Contracting Squadron concerning the potential contract. These questions were then answered by our customers at the 49th Civil Engineering Squadron.
1. Section 2.5 – There are three very old units on the unit list (one from 1957 and the others from 1987). These units are likely filled with obsolete components, would it be possible to exclude them from the obsolescence clause? Or, contract a particular timeframe for modernization?
(Answer: If parts are deemed obsolete, an alternative replacement or repair on a case by case basis would be required.)
2. Section 4.1 – At the end of the 30 day look period, in the unlikely event that we determine that the units are beyond our service capabilities, or that they are unfit to be serviced in their current condition, would the contract become void? Again, this is unlikely, but I would like to address it since we are bidding on the units sight unseen.
(Answer: Currently, all elevators are operational and serviceable, so this should not be a problem. The contract would be modificed to remove or replace any unserviceable elevators, should it be deemed necessary. The contract as a whole would not become void.)
3. Section 4.2 – It states that we as the contractor will be determining the timelines for maintenance? Would quarterly preventative maintenance be acceptable? This would allow us to be much more competitive with our pricing.
(Answer: It is stated that the timelines are dependent on the Contractor, but history shows that monthly inspections are the best method to ensure continuity, especially if the Contractor is out of state.)
4. Section 4.5 – What is a 3 year test? We are very familiar with annual and 5 year tests, but I’m not certain that we have performed 3 year tests in the past.
(Answer: The 3 year test was incorporated into the PWS from previous SOW’s and does not apply. The last sentence in section 4.5 has been removed.)
5. Section 8.4.4 – How long is the annual security/safety training that our tech will need to attend?
(Answer: This training is done at the Contract Pre-Award briefing from Security Forces and usually is not repeated during the life of the contract.)
6. Is it safe to assume that all the elevators (aside from wheelchair lifts and dumbwaiters) are hydraulic?
(Answer: Yes, all elevators are hydraulic.)
7. Will there be a site visit scheduled?
(Answer: The government will not be scheduling a site visit for this acquisition prior to the award of the contract)
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .