Intial_Q&A.docx
DOCX document 17 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Mobile Fitness Center
- Solicitation number
- H92257-19-Q-0161
- Issued by
-
United States Special Operations Command
About this file
Initial Q&A response
View the file
Other files
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| Statement_of_Work_Attach_000102.pdf | ||
| H92557-19-Q-0161.pdf | ||
| Statement_of_Work_Attach_0001.pdf |
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
1. Is the government sure an ISU90 is the best solution? This is one of the least functional and highest costing containers on the market. Would a Tricon or Bicon be better suited for this buy? ISU90’s are only made by one manufacturer and I have contacted them today and their current lead time is up to 90 days to even supply us with a unit that we then modify.
A: Yes- an ISU 90 is the best solution to match form, fit, and function with other shipping containers that will be shipped along with this equipment.
2. 30-day Delivery – Industry standard delivery times at end of fiscal are 90+ days for mobile fitness containers for Tricon and Bicon’s. ISU90’s have an even longer lead time.
A: 90-120 days delivery time is acceptable with delivery being factored into the evaluation.
3. NATO Air Portability – In your SOW in section 5 you state that NATO Air Portability is a requirement. It’s been proven that NATO Air Portability is not a US Military requirement.
A: NATO air portability is not a requirement. ISU-90 MILSPEC is sufficient.
File details come from the government source that posted it.