3270 _JA_Dry Dock Coating System April 15 2021_Final.pdf

Control No: CENAP-21-0010

For Official Use Only

Justification and Approval for Other Than Full and

Open Competition

1. Contracting Activity: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), Philadelphia District, 100 Penn Square East, Philadelphia, PA 19107-3390.

2. Description of Action: Approval is being requested to limit the number to five (5) brand name marine coating system (paint) vendors and product lines in the specifications for a New 1,000 Ton Dry Dock that will be delivered to the USACE Memphis District. The prime contract will be awarded to a US shipyard, and the coating system will be obtained by the prime contractor through reputable coating system suppliers. The prime contract will be procured through a Firm Fixed Price Standalone Contract.

3. Description of Supplies/Services: The five (5) brand name marine coating system vendors are:

• PPG;

• Sherwin-Williams;

• International Paint;

• Carboline; and

• Jotun.

The coating system includes epoxy marine paint applied to all interior and exterior surfaces of the dry dock. The labor to apply the coating systems will be performed by the shipyard contractor and is, therefore, not part of this request. The contract drawing identifies specific coating products from each vendor that are to be applied, depending on the surface location and service. This includes the hull below the water, the hull and superstructure above the waterline, interior of ballast tanks, interior of voids, and other locations. The prime contractor may select any one of the five (5) vendors and their specific systems identified in the specification and contract drawing. The estimated material cost of the coating system in this procurement is $350,000.00.

4. Authority Cited: 10 U.S.C. 2304(c)(1) as implemented by FAR 6.302-1(a)(2) Only one responsible source or a limited number of responsible sources and no other supplies or services will satisfy agency requirements

5. Reason for Authority Cited:

a. Background: Proper selection and application of a marine coating system is essential to minimize corrosion and ensure the service longevity of the vessel. Following several coating system failures in the 1990’s and 2000’s, the USACE Marine Design Center (MDC) coordinated closely with vendors and industry experts to identify coating systems for the specific USACE Floating Plant Fleet applications. Since then, the MDC has coordinated coating system recommendations with the major coating system vendors in the US. The various vendors and their qualified systems have been included in MDC specifications since that time. MDC continues to coordinate with the vendors on advances in coating systems, recommendations, and product availability.

b. Justification: Since the inclusion of qualified coating system vendors and their coating systems, the MDC has completed over 100 projects. Vessels have been delivered for operation on all significant inland river systems (fresh water), and coastal environments (salt water). For the workboats, the coating systems are subjected to routine impacts and wear-and-tear from equipment, wire rope, debris and more. The survey vessels require reliable anti-fouling systems to minimize marine growth and ensure high transit speeds are achieved.

Through these projects, all the listed vendors have been selected by prime contractors to supply the coating systems at one time or another. As evidence from completed projects, the coating systems identified in the specifications have had a history of meeting performance standards and holding up in the demanding and harsh marine environment. The last documented significant coating system failure on a USACE new construction project occurred in 2006. This failure was due to improper application, not a flawed coating system.

Additionally, the selection and application of a qualified system from the contract drawing reduces the technical risk to the prime contractor. With the selection of a coating system from the contract drawing, the risk to the prime contractor only resides in the proper application of the coating system, which is documented and sign-off by the paint manufacturer in accordance with contract requirement. With a qualified system from the contract drawings, the prime contractor has a lower risk of warranty claims on the coating system

c. Alternatives: The Government proposes to list the five (5) marine coating systems vendors in the contract drawing. The inclusion of five (5) qualified systems affords competition between the listed vendors and offers the prime contractor an opportunity to competitively select a system. In addition to the five (5) marine coating vendors and systems, the Government intends to allow the prime contractor to propose any coating vendor and system that is not listed in the contract drawing, provided the product(s) have properties and performance equal to the listed systems.

6. Efforts to Obtain Competition: The intent is to allow the prime contractor to request and obtain competitive proposals from the qualified marine coating vendor list.

a. Effective competition. Based on the market research the five (5) brand name vendors included in the contract drawing account for the majority of the top manufacturers of marine protective coating systems for commercial vessels available in the US. Further, since the Government will allow the prime contractor to propose coating vendors and systems not listed in the contract drawing provided they comply with the specification requirements for equal properties and performance, this allows for competition among all marine coating system suppliers known in the U.S. market..

b. Subcontracting competition. In accordance with FAR part 5.3 Synopses of Contract

Actions, the Contract award information will be posted to beta.SAM.gov. A subcontracting plan will not be required per FAR 19.702(b)(1) since the prime contract will be advertised as a small business set-aside.

7. Actions to Increase Competition: The J&A offers five (5) brand name marine coating system vendors and their qualified systems. The prime contractor is within their right to request consideration of a vendor and system outside of those identified on the contract drawing. This J&A supports marine coating systems that have a history of proven service. In the past, the MDC has received requests for product substitutions, and with demonstration of proven product properties and performance, approved requests. The MDC will continue to consider all requests on their performance and application merits.

8. Market Research: MDC has conducted informal market research through industry professionals, prime contractors (shipyards), Architect/Engineer firms, reviewed U.S. Coast Guard Surface Force Logistics Center (USCG SFLC) Standard Specifications, Military Specification’s (MIL-SPEC) qualified product lists (QPL), and public information available on the internet. The five (5) brand name vendors that are included on the contract drawing include:

PPG, Sherwin-Williams, International Paint, Carboline and Jotun. These vendors comprise the majority of the marine coating system (complete) companies with availability in the US. The following are the top ten manufacturers of coatings systems in 2020 according to coatingsworld.com:

1. PPG – included in the MDC Coating System Contract Drawing

2. Sherwin-Williams - included in the MDC Coating System Contract Drawing

3. AkzoNobel – they are the parent company for International Paint, which is included in the MDC Coating System Contract Drawing

4. Nippon Paint – not included in the MDC Coating System Contract Drawing because the products are not available in the US.

5. RPM – they are the parent company for Carboline, which is included in the MDC

Coating System Contract Drawing

6. Axalta – not included in the MDC Coating System Contract Drawing because they do not manufacture marine protective coating systems.

7. BASF not included in the MDC Coating System Contract Drawing because they do not manufacture marine protective coating systems, only additives for marine coatings.

8. Kansai Paint - not included in the MDC Coating System Contract Drawing because the products are not available in the US.

9. Asian Paint - not included in the MDC Coating System Contract Drawing because they do not manufacture marine protective coating systems.

10. Masco - not included in the MDC Coating System Contract Drawing because they do not manufacture marine protective coating systems.

Further research into USCG SFLC Standard Specification 6310 (Requirements for Preservation of Ship Structures) and various MIL-SPEC coating system QPLs found the five (5) vendors identified on the MDC Coating System Contract Drawing are consistent with approved products from other federal US maritime agencies. The research found other marine coating system vendors/products listed, but they were generally for special application areas, and not having a complete and comprehensive approved product line to coat all areas of a vessel.

9. Interested Sources: To date, no other sources have expressed any interest (written or verbally) in this acquisition. If other marine coating vendors propose other product(s) and have properties and performance equal to the listed systems, they will be considered by the MDC Technical Team.

10. Other Facts: All relevant information supporting the marine coating systems included in this procurement is set forth above.

11. Technical Certification: Include the following statement:

I certify that the supporting data under my cognizance, which are included in the justification are accurate and complete to the best of my knowledge and belief.

Name: Timothy Keyser, Chief Design Branch Date:

Signature: _______________________________

12. Requirements Certification: Include the following statement:

I certify that the supporting data under my cognizance, which are included in the justification are accurate and complete to the best of my knowledge and belief.

Name: Keith Bromke, Project Manager Date:

Signature: ______________________

13. Fair and Reasonable Cost Determination: Include the following determination:

I hereby determine that the anticipated cost to the Government for this contract action will be fair and reasonable. Certified cost or pricing data will be required.

Robert Hutcheon, Chief Civil Work Branch Date:

14. Contracting Officer Certification: This certification shall be made by the contracting officer who will sign the contract resulting from this justification and approval. Include the following statement:

I certify that this justification is accurate and complete to the best of my knowledge and belief.

Robert Hutcheon, Chief, Civil Works Branch Date:

Approval

Based on the foregoing justification, I hereby approve the procurement to limit the number of sources to Five (5) Brand Name Vendors for the Marine Coating System and Product Line in the procurement of the New 1,000 Ton Dry Dock that will be delivered to the USACE Memphis District on an other than full and open competition basis pursuant to the authority FAR 6.302- 1(a)(2) Only one responsible source or a limited number of responsible sources and no other supplies or services will satisfy agency requirements, subject to availability of funds, and provided that the services and property herein described have otherwise been authorized for acquisition.

Date: ___________________ Signature: ___________________

Robert Hutcheon Chief, Civil Works Branch Contracting Officer US Army Corps of Engineers