FA860425RB015 Hurlburt Question Set 3.pdf
PDF 73 KB Posted
- Attached to
- FA8604, Storage Aid System at Hurlburt Air Force Base, Florida, MMHS Federal contract opportunity
- Solicitation number
- FA860425RB015
About this file
This document is a Question Set for a federal contract opportunity (FA860425RB015) at Hurlburt Field dated 7 April 2025, addressing technical specifications for a storage aid system. The document contains four specific questions and answers related to rack configuration, including: (1) adding a third beam at the top of the rack (approved), (2) using a 5x8 footplate instead of 4x4 (to be reviewed based on seismic considerations), (3) potential requirements for bolted-on post protectors in a specific row (not deemed necessary), and (4) alternative protection methods for an aisle row. The responses consistently indicate that EZPAE will review manufacturer recommendations submitted in the Technical Proposal Questionnaire and ensure that the Government's minimum requirements are met.
View the file
Other files for this federal contract opportunity
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| FA860425RB015 Hurlburt Question Set 4.pdf | ||
| FA860425RB015 Hurlburt Question Set 1 and 2.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
FA860425RB015
Hurlburt Field Question Set #3 7 April 2025
1. A beam in the back at the top of the rack (making it 3 beams instead of 2 between uprights)
A: Additional beam is acceptable.
2. A 5x8 footplate (instead of 4x4)
A: Bearing plates shall be properly sized to account for seismic levels at Hurlburt Field. A specific size is not called out in the Purchase Description;
however, EZPAE will review manufacturer’s recommendations as submitted in the Technical Proposal Questionnaire.
3. That each upright in the row will require a bolted-on post protector facing the aisle due to the seismic area and only 1 beam level.
A: Unsure the need for that row to have the bolted-on post protectors as it’s not suggested for any of the other aisles. Seismic level in that area is relatively low, however, EZPAE will review manufacturer’s recommendations as submitted in the Technical Proposal Questionnaire.
4. Would the extra beam and bolt on post protectors be acceptable (in lieu of the end of aisle protectors for that row only)?
A: Where there is an exception, it will be reviewed to ensure the Government’s minimum requirements are met.
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .