C1 N4523A26Q1403 Solicitation Q and A.pdf

Request for Quote N4523A26Q1304 Questions and Answers

Q1. Could you please confirm the name of the previous incumbent contractor performing under the prior forklift and AWP rental requirement, as well as the total award amount or estimated contract value?

A1. This is a new requirement, but a follow-on contract. The current contract number is N4523A22A1304.

Q2. Does the Government have a preference for articulating boom lifts versus straight boom lifts for the 60′, 80′, and 125′ AWP line items?

A2. The straight boom with a jib. Articulating takes additional licenses and straight seems to be preferred as the project teams need to achieve higher heights with sizable loads.

Q3. Additionally, would the Government prefer these AWPs to include outriggers for added stability, or should they be standard units only?

A3. No.

Q4. The PWS specifies a 2,500 lb lift capacity for the 39′ industrial scissor lift. Could you please confirm whether this is a firm requirement or if functionally equivalent models (e.g., 1,500–2,000 lb capacity) would be acceptable if they otherwise meet the platform size, height, and occupancy criteria?

A4. Any capacity of that size would be acceptable, if they met all other criteria.

Q5. We would like to know if this is a brand new contract OR if there is (was) an incumbent performing these services.

A5. This is a new requirement, but a follow-on contract.

Q6. If not brand new, could you please provide the current / previous contract number?

A6. The current contract number is N4523A22A1304.

Q7. Is this a new requirement? If not, can you please share the prior award number, awardee and total contract amount?

A7. This is a new requirement, but a follow-on contract. The current contract number is

N4523A22A1304.

Q8. Can you also confirm whether a 120’ or 125’ AWP is requested? There is a discrepancy between page 1 of the PWS and the ELIN pricing schedule.

A8. Either 120’ or 125’ will work.

Q9. My question is, would the following units be acceptable?

The [TABLE redacted] above units have 8-foot forks and are not interchangeable.

A9. Not sure what all this specifies. The only thought would be a three-stage mast would be better.

Q10. May I ask why there was not set-aside specified for this bid.

A10. Market research determined that there were not enough small businesses that could provide all the equipment needed for competition and that a full and open competition was most advantages for the government.

Q11. RFQ, page 2, section 12. Place of Performance: Can the Government clarify whether the Place of Performance is at the contractor's facility or at Naval Air Station North Island (NASNI)? If the Place of Performance is the contractor's facility, will the contractor also be required to deliver equipment to or perform work at NASNI?

A11. The contractor shall provide all parts, materials, labor, and transportation necessary to provide and maintain operational forklifts at Naval Air Station North Island

(NASNI).

Q12. RFQ, page 20, section 52.212-2. Evaluation-Commercial Products and Commercial Services. The RFP states: (a) The Government will award a contract resulting from this solicitation to the responsible offeror whose offer conforming to the solicitation will be most advantageous to the Government, price and other factors considered.

The following factors shall be used to evaluate offers: 1) Technical Capability; 2) Past Performance; and 3) Price. However, the instructions to offerors presented in section 52.212-1 Instructions to Offerors do not require a technical capability or past performance section. Can the government clarify what information offerors should include in their quotes for the government to evaluate technical capability and past performance?

A12. Technical capability for this requirement would be showing that you can provide the list of needed equipment being requested. This can be past contracts or equipment list.

Past performance can be shown by CPARS completed on contracts with the government.

Q13. RFQ, page 20, section 52.212-2 states that "The Government will award a contract resulting from this solicitation to the responsible offeror whose offer conforming to the solicitation will be most advantageous to the Government, price and other factors considered. The following factors shall be used to evaluate offers: 1) Technical Capability; 2) Past Performance; and 3) Price." However, on page 3, the RFQ states: Any award resulting from this RFQ will be made based on Lowest Price Technically Acceptable (LPTA) procedures. Can the Government clarify if the source selection method is best value or LPTA?

A13. The government will evaluate the orders under LPTA.

Q14. RFQ, page 20, section 52.212-2 states that "The Government will award a contract resulting from this solicitation to the responsible offeror whose offer conforming to the solicitation will be most advantageous to the Government, price and other factors considered. The following factors shall be used to evaluate offers: "1) Technical Capability; 2) Past Performance; and 3) Price." Can the government clarify the order of importance of the three evaluation factors?

A14. This requirement is being evaluated under LPTA, price would be the first factor, technical acceptability the second and past performance third.

Q15. On page 2, item 1.3.9 the PWS requires solid foam filled tires. The ELIN pricing schedule requires pneumatic foam filled tires. Can the government clarify if foam filled tires are required?

A15. Yes, foam filled tires.

Q16. 1.3.1. 60' TELESCOPIC FORKLIFT (HIGH REACH) OR EQUIVELENT (i.e. ZOOM

BOOM, FORK LIFT REACH, TELESCOPIC HANDLER, FORKLIFT SHOOTING BOOM,

ETC.), DEISEL, AND SEATBELTS AND 6 FOOT LIFTING ATTACHMENTS (FORKS),

RUNNING LIGHTS, SEATBELTS, BACKUP ALARM, AND PNEUMATIC TIRES. –

Telescoping forklifts come in 42ft , 48ft and 55ft extension, we currently have the task order with a JLG 10054 model that extends 55ft. I would be able to offer the 10,000lb telescopic forklift with a capacity to extend 55ft and not 60ft. Would we be able to use the same model we currently have on the IDIQ contract?

A16. The one we currently have works but anything with a little more capacity or longer reach would be great. We are right at the limit right now for a lot of things.

Additionally, the current IDIQ has a 60` telescopic forklift listed.

Q17. 1.3.8. 10-TON (20,000 LB) NET CAPACITY INDUSTRIAL FORKLIFT, RATING CAPACITY:

19,000 LBS (MINIMUM) TO 25,000 LBS (MAXIMUM); LOAD CENTER: 24 INCHES;

AUTOMATIC TRANSMISSION, SOLID FOAM FILLED TIRES, MAST TYPE: NESTED

CHANNELS TO PROVIDE MAXIMUM VISIBILITY OF THE ATTCHEMENT AND LOAD

WITH MINIMAL OBSTRUCTIONS (I.E. CHANS OR FLEX HOSE); MAST LOWERED

HEIGHT: 190” (MAXIMUM); MAST EXTENDED HEIGHT: 218” (MINIMUM); - 10 ton forklifts with a mast height of 18ft-20ft has to be special order from any manufacturer and would have to be a custom build. Would a 7 ton with a triple mast work for the hangar bay top racks that hold the life rafts among other storage items. I know they have used those in the past and to acquire a 10ton with the required height will take 8-12 for manufacturer to produce.

A17. A 7 ton with a triple mast height would be sufficient. Any three-stage mast is preferred over a two-stage mast. For the hangar bay as well, the 10 ton being able to raise those extra few feet makes a world of difference.

Q18. Lastly, is there a clause where there is funding set aside for damages that were done by the detachment and key replacements.

A18. There is no CLIN for funding set aside for damages. All maintenance should be covered in your proposal under CLIN 0001 as per the Solicitation and PWS.