Industry Day Whiteman AFB B21 Questions 20250514.pdf
PDF 338 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Whiteman AFB B-21 Industry Event
- Solicitation number
- W912DQ25RA005
About this file
This document is an Industry Input Invitation from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Kansas City District, seeking industry feedback on upcoming construction projects supporting the B-21 (Raider) Program at Whiteman Air Force Base, Missouri. The document solicits input on key procurement parameters, including proposal submission timelines, project experience requirements, small business participation goals, and evaluation criteria for two specific facilities: the Weapons Release System Storage (WRSS) Warehouse and Radio Frequency Hangar.
The Corps is requesting industry responses to nine specific questions by Friday, 13 June 2025, to be emailed to david.f.miller@usace.army.mil. The questions cover topics such as proposal preparation time, prime contractor project history, relevancy examples, small business subcontracting percentages, submission and evaluation criteria effectiveness, fixed-firm price (FFP) option price holding duration, potential participation concerns, and suggestions for improving the procurement process. This input will help refine the acquisition strategy for these critical B-21 program infrastructure projects.
View the file
Other files
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
Kansas City District
Industry Input Invitation for Construction to support the
B-21 (Raider) Program, Whiteman Air Force Base, Missouri
The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Kansas City District would like to continue to collaborate with industry as we prepare Weapons Release System Storage (WRSS) Warehouse and Radio Frequency Hangar requirements. Following our webinar, we are asking for industry input on the following:
• How much time do you need to submit the initial proposal based on a 100% design included in the solicitation, and why? 45 days?
• Is it realistic to ask for 3 to 5 projects completed as the prime contractor within the past 7-years?
• Are each project’s relevancy examples realistic and helpful? If not, what needs to be improved?
• What are reasonable goals for the small business participation factor (as a percent of subcontracted work)?
• Will the draft submission and evaluation criteria work as discriminators to help us award to a qualified best-value contractor? If not, what needs to be improved and why?
• What is a realistic amount of time to hold the FFP option prices?
• Do you have any concerns participating in these procurements?
• Do you plan on participating in these procurements?
• How can we make this procurement better?
Please submit your responses to david.f.miller@usace.army.mil no later than Friday, 13 June 2025.
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .