Charleston question set 2 (FA860423RB003).docx

DOCX document 308 KB Posted

Attached to
FA860423RB003 Charleston, SC Conveyor System MMHS Federal contract opportunity
Solicitation number
FA860423RB003
Issued by
Department of the Air Force Materiel Command Lifecycle Management Center Wright Patterson Air Force Base

About this file

This solicitation requests proposals for a conveyor system at Charleston Air Force Base in South Carolina. The Air Force Materiel Command Lifecycle Management Center is seeking the design, fabrication, installation, and testing of conveyors for Buildings 2194 and 2196 under a low price technically acceptable evaluation method. The small business set-aside has a performance period of 300 days from award date. Proposals are due by April 7, 2023. Registration in the System for Award Management is required to be eligible for award. Questions about the solicitation will only be accepted through March 31. Interested offerors must download documents and no telephone, email, or fax requests will be honored.

View the file

Other files for this federal contract opportunity

Show all 20

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

FA8604‐23‐R‐B003

Charleston AFB, SC Questions/Answers Set 2 22 March 2023 Questions/Responses:

1. Appendix A Is it possible to widen the smaller section of the ball deck by 1’ so their standard decks could be used? Is this acceptable? Attached picture shows in red where original dimensions were asked for and drawing is what they would like to propose. To keep everything even we would lengthen the shorter sections of the GRC or shorten the 10’ sections. Whichever is preferred if acceptable.

Please comply with the dimensions as specified in the RFP.

Also, can you confirm that 4’ is the minimum height required for the GRC. Paragraph 3.2.6.3 of appendix A states this but the drawing is shown as 4” and we just want to verify a higher height is acceptable.

I am assuming that first dimension in the question is 4” (inches) rather than 4’ (feet). A height greater than 4 inches is acceptable.

image1.png

File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .