The file's text, extracted by GovTribe without its formatting.
U.S. Coast Guard Trailerable Aids to Navigation Boat, 2nd Generation (TANB II) Responses to Comments Received on Draft Request for Proposal (RFP) Notice 70Z02324R00090001
| # |
| Document |
| RFP Section or Page |
| Comment |
| Response |
| 1 |
| General |
| General |
| Will the government consider an economic price adjustment? |
| An economic price adjustment will not be included in the contract. |
| 2 |
| General |
| General |
| Can the Coast Guard provide detailed characteristics for the buoys and other equipment that are included in the requirements? |
| Yes, a document with the technical details of the ATON equipment is included with this response and will be provided as part of the final RFP. |
| 3 |
| General |
| General |
| The SAM announcement indicated this will be a small business set aside, however the solicitation cover page (Form 1449) states "unrestricted". |
| This will be a small business set-aside, and the form will be corrected in the final RFP. |
| 4 |
| Draft RFP |
| General |
| Will the Government provide contract financing? |
| No, the contract financing will not be included, however, the Government is reconsidering the billing structure to allow more incremental payments, and this will be reflected in the solicitation. |
| 5 |
| Draft RFP |
| P.23 of 99 |
| Will the delivery schedule for the First Article be based on the date of the delivery order or based on the date of the Critical Design Review (CDR)? |
| The First Article delivery date will be based on the CDR, this will be clarified in the final RFP. |
| 6 |
| Draft RFP |
| P.23 of 99 |
| There appear to be inconsistencies with the required delivery timelines related to CLINS #00202 and #00203. |
| These are being addressed and will be corrected in the final RFP. |
| 7 |
| Draft RFP |
| P. 24 of 99 |
| Section 3 makes reference to Specification 080, which does not appear to exist. |
| This will be corrected in the final RFP. |
| 8 |
| Draft RFP |
| P. 86 of 99 |
| The "Instructions for Proposal Content" mentions a compliance matrix, but not details are given. |
| A compliance matrix will not be required. This will be corrected in the final RFP. |
| 9 |
| Draft RFP |
| P. 91 of 99 |
| The "Instructions for Proposal Content" mentions five appendices but only three are described. |
| This will be corrected in the final RFP. |
| 10 |
| Draft RFP |
| P. 93 of 99 |
| The pricing worksheet tabs indicated do not match the spreadsheet provided. |
| This will be corrected in the final RFP. |
| 11 |
| Draft RFP |
| P. 94 of 99 |
| The number of subsections listed for Volume 1 and Volume 2 in the proposal instructions (draft RFP page 94) does not match the sub-sections listed in in a prior section (draft RFP page 86). |
| This will be corrected in the final RFP. |
| 12 |
| Draft RFP |
| P. 98 of 99 |
| The relative merits of the technical features for the Best Value Continuum Tradeoff Process do not align with prior sections. |
| This will be corrected in the final RFP. |
| 13 |
| Draft RFP |
| P. 89 of 99 |
| What are the expectations for providing information for seakeeping capabilities? |
| The Offeror may address this issue in several ways including comparisons to the parent craft, testing results, model tests, and computer-based simulations. |
| 14 |
| Draft SOW |
| General |
| There does not appear to be sufficient time allocated for the activities leading up to the start of construction of the First Article to allow it to be produced in the time allotted. |
| The Government is re-assessing the requirements and will make changes to the solicitation if necessary. |
| 15 |
| Draft SOW |
| General |
| There are inconsistencies with how the SOW sections align with the CLIN structure. |
| These will be corrected in the final RFP. |
| 16 |
| Draft SOW |
| 4.1.1.6.3.1 |
| Will the Government provide the review/approval timeline for deliverables to permit proper scheduling? |
| Government review timelines will be clarified in the final RFP. |
| 17 |
| Draft SOW |
| 4.2 |
| The draft Pricing Worksheet has the warranty (SLIN #00206) listed separately but with a note saying, "included w/ boat". Please explain. |
| The price of the warranty is to be included in the price of the items. This SLIN will be removed in the final RFP. |
| 18 |
| Draft SOW |
| 4.2.4 |
| The delivery requirements for trailers are unclear. |
| Trailers ordered with boats will be expected to be delivered with the boat. This, along with a timeline for trailers not ordered with a boat, will be clarified in final RFP. |
| 19 |
| Draft SOW |
| 4.2.5 |
| The delivery schedule and acceptance of initial maintenance parts could not be found. |
| These will be delivered with the associated boats. This will be clarified in the final RFP. |
| 20 |
| Draft SOW |
| 4.3.1.2 |
| For CLIN #003 the delivery location is not specified. |
| The delivery locations will be specified when an order is placed. This will clarified in the final RFP. |
| 21 |
| Draft SOW |
| 4.5.3.5 |
| Does the Production Readiness Review (PRR) relate to the construction of the First Article? |
| No, the PRR relates to follow-on boats. The Critical Design Review (CDR, draft SOW 4.5.3.4) precedes First Article construction. |
| 22 |
| Draft SOW |
| 4.5.4 |
| Are the mockups deliverables? |
| No, the Government does not intend to take delivery of the mockups. This will be clarified in the final RFP. |
| 23 |
| Draft SOW |
| 4.6.1 |
| Are the Test Plans to include the special tests? Are they to be prepared for First Article Testing? |
| Yes, Test Plans are required for special tests as well as other tests and need to be available for the First Article testing. |
| 24 |
| Draft SOW |
| 4.6.3 |
| Please confirm that Special Tests will only be performed if ordered under this SLIN. |
| This is correct. |
| 25 |
| Draft SOW |
| 4.7.5 |
| Will the contractor be able to specify a standard Material Handling Fee for parts and materials ordered separate from those including in other SLINs? |
| Yes, this will be clarified in the final RFP. |
| 26 |
| Draft SOW |
| 4.7.9 |
| The Materials SLIN is listed differently on the draft Pricing Worksheet. |
| This will be corrected in the final RFP. |
| 27 |
| Draft SOW |
| 4.8.4 |
| A cross-deck winch is included in the draft Pricing Worksheet, but not shown in the draft SOW. |
| A cross-deck winch is not required, this will be corrected in the final RFP. |
| 28 |
| Draft SOW |
| 5.1 |
| The draft SOW indicates 10 order periods, but only 7 are listed. |
| Only 7 periods are required, this will be corrected in the final RFP. |
| 29 |
| Draft Specifications |
| 040.3 |
| Should FMIS warranty management be priced with the boat CLIN or with the program management CLIN? |
| Overall management of the warranty program should be priced with Program Management; however, the Offeror may elect to include costs for per item warranty management with the cost of the item (for example, including boat warranty costs in the cost of the boat). |
| 30 |
| Draft Specifications |
| 045 |
| Can a minimum davit height (above deck and above waterline) and bow buoy port width be specified? |
| Yes, this height and buoy port opening minimum dimensions will be provided in the final RFP. |
| 31 |
| Draft Specifications |
| 045 |
| Can the davit swing be restricted? |
| Yes, it is common practice for the crew to control the swing of the davit on the existing TANBs and we expect this on the TANB II. This will be clarified in the final RFP. |
| 32 |
| Draft Specifications |
| 045 |
| Is there a hull form preference for a catamaran, monohull, or other type? |
| There is no requirement in the specification for a specific hull type. |
| 33 |
| Draft Specifications |
| 045 |
| The design appears to not carry buoys or sinkers while being towed on the trailer. Would the USCG be open to consider a design that can transform after launching to provide sufficient transverse stability to meet/perform the operational requirements? |
| The TANB will be required to carry loads while being trailered (see draft Specification 042.1.8 and 573.1.3). A parent craft with modifications in material, arrangements, or dimensions could satisfy the requirement of the specification. |
| 34 |
| Draft Specifications |
| 045.1 |
| Does the "mature, proven design" have to be built by the Contractor or can the design be a modification of a typical craft this is specifically designed to meet mission requirements? |
| The design does not have to have been built by the Contractor, however, the Contractor must have the rights to use the design. A design that is "typical craft" is not specific enough to meet the requirement. |
| 35 |
| Draft Specifications |
| 045.1 |
| The J2 Technical Data Package specifications appear to have incorrect SWBS numbering for drawings and technical manuals. |
| This will be corrected in the final RFP. |
| 36 |
| Draft Specifications |
| 045.12 |
| Can a folding trailer tongue be used to meet the trailer length requirement of draft specification 045.12.1.1? |
| No, folding trailers will not be allowed. This will be clarified in the final RFP. |
| 37 |
| Draft Specifications |
| 045.13 |
| What is the intent of having the bow door panel be removeable instead of using a hinged ramp? |
| The concern with using a hinged door is that the ATON buoys, chain and sinkers may drag across the sill of the opening, where the hinge would be located, and damage the hinge as well as deposit marine growth and rust from the ATON gear into the hinge. However, recognizing that there might be innovative solutions, this section has been expanded to allow alternate solutions. |
| 38 |
| Draft Specifications |
| 045.13 |
| Does the cabin need to be full width? If not, can side doors be provided? |
| The requirement is to have a partially enclosed covered cabin, open to the stern with windows along the side. The requirement is that a door to provide access to the working deck shall be provided. A full width cabin is not required, and side door(s) may be utilized as long as there is sufficient space to access the working deck. |
| 39 |
| Draft Specifications |
| 045.5.1 |
| When assessing motions and accelerations; will accelerations from ISO 12215-5 be sufficient for analysis? |
| Yes, accelerations from ISO 12215-5 will be sufficient. |
| 40 |
| Draft Specifications |
| 045.5.1 |
| The references to other specification sections do not appear to be correct. |
| The references will be corrected in the final RFP. |
| 41 |
| Draft Specifications |
| 045.7.1.1 |
| What is meant by "sounding a piling”? |
| The ANT crews use the TANB to push against pilings ("sounding them") to make sure they are safe prior to having someone climb them for maintenance. This will be further clarified in the final RFP. |
| 42 |
| Draft Specifications |
| 073.1.1 |
| Is there a deliverable associated with a vibration analysis or survey? |
| There is not a specific deliverable associated with a vibration analysis; however, the Contractor shall develop a test plan to verify the boat meets the requirements of the specification, and that includes the requirements in section 073 of the Specification. |
| 43 |
| Draft Specifications |
| 079 |
| Can the interpretation of the stability requirements, the “total area under the righting arm curve” and “reserve righting energy” be verified? |
| The total area under the righting arm curve is the total area under the righting arm curve regardless of a heeling arm curve. The reserve righting energy is the area under the righting arm curve less the area under the heeling arm curve. Areas and righting energies shall be taken from the angle of heel at equilibrium to the lesser of (1) the downflooding angle or (2) 40 degrees. |
| 44 |
| Draft Specifications |
| 079 |
| Can the stability requirements for lifting over the side be met with counterweights or floodable ballast? |
| There is no stated requirement to lift ATON equipment over the side while underway, just while on the trailer. The Government intends to derive the maximum allowable hoisting weight over the side as an operational limit but is not imposing a design requirement at this time. Counterweights or floodable ballast cannot be used to meet stability requirements. |
| 45 |
| Draft Specifications |
| 079 |
| Will the bow door panel always be removed while hoisting at sea? |
| A bow buoy port closure will typically be removed or open for hoisting buoys and sinkers and replaced if required for transit. A removable door panel's stowed location should be figured into the weight distribution when determining the stability limits for conditions involving lifting from the bow. This will be clarified in the final RFP. |
| 46 |
| Draft Specifications |
| 079 |
| Has the Government verified that the lifting stability requirements are feasible? |
| The Government has conducted design studies and believes the requirements are feasible. |
| 47 |
| Draft Specifications |
| 079 |
| Does the Government have a standard for towing stability? |
| Towing stability is not considered separately but is addressed as part of the overall boat stability and through operational guidance imposed based on evaluations. |
| 48 |
| Draft Specifications |
| 079.1 |
| Do the scuppers need to meet ISO 11812 Category C have to have positive nonreturn closures? |
| The scuppers shall meet requirements of a "quick draining recess" in accordance with ISO 11812, Design Category A. Scuppers shall be fitted with a means to ensure that water does not back flow into the cockpit. |
| 49 |
| Draft Specifications |
| 079.1.2 |
| If the cockpit deck is watertight to the interior of the hull, is submerging the gunwale considered "down flooding”? |
| Yes, this would be considered downflooding. |
| 50 |
| Draft Specifications |
| 089.1 |
| Should quality management be priced with the boat CLIN or with the program management CLIN? |
| Overall management of the assurance program related to the TANB II production should be priced with Program Management, however, the Offeror may elect to include costs for quality assurance of an item with the cost of that item. (for example, the quality assurance costs for a boat may be included with the cost of that boat). |
| 51 |
| Draft Specifications |
| 096.3.2 |
| Can the boat and trailer be weighed together? |
| For the First Article and the first production boat, the boat and trailer must be weighed separately. For subsequent production boats, the boat and trailer may be weighed together. This will be clarified in the final RFP. |
| 52 |
| Draft Specifications |
| 100.2.3 |
| Is it the USCG’s reference to Annex D specific to Section 6.2 Hull Girder strength? |
| Yes. This will be clarified in the final RFP. |
| 53 |
| Draft Specifications |
| 114.1 |
| Is a beaching plate required in addition to the protective keel? |
| No, these are the same, and this will be clarified in the final RFP. |
| 54 |
| Draft Specifications |
| 114.2.3 |
| Would the Government consider alternative fender mounting scenarios? |
| No, at this time the Government is not considering other means of fendering attachment. |
| 55 |
| Draft Specifications |
| 300.2 |
| Would the Government consider an isolation transformer in lieu of a polarization transformer and a galvanic isolator? |
| No, at this time the Government is not considering use of an isolation transformer in lieu of a polarization transformer and a galvanic isolator. |
| 56 |
| Draft Specifications |
| 561.1.1 |
| Will the Government allow an electric / hydraulic steering system as long as it meets the engine manufacturer's specifications? |
| No, the Government's preference is for traditional hydraulic steering. |
| 57 |
| Draft Specifications |
| 573.1.3 |
| There appears to be a conflict between the ability to load and unload cargo from the ground while the vessel is on the trailer (draft Specification 573.1.3) and the requirement to have a removable bow door panel (draft Specification 045.13.3) and a ladder to access the boat from the trailer via the bow (draft Specification 910.1.4). |
| The intent is to have primary buoy handling via the bow to allow for the greatest stability. Since the trailer tongue will be in the way when the boat is on the trailer, the davit should allow for hoisting ATON equipment onboard from the side when the boat is secured to the trailer. The bow buoy port will normally be closed when the boat is on the trailer, and for launch and recovery, and the trailer ladder should take this into account. This will be clarified in the final RFP. |
| 58 |
| Draft Specifications |
| 573.1.6 |
| Can the USCG provide details of pulling operations and any differentiations between the lifting and pulling requirements? |
| Lifting operations are those of the davit in lifting the ATON equipment. Pulling operations apply to deck fittings, such as cleats and tie-down points, that are used to secure loads to secure a line when pulling on a load. This will be clarified in the final RFP. |
| 59 |
| Draft Specifications |
| 612.1 |
| Is the requirement for ABYC H-41 compliant handholds applicable to the cabin top and other provided platforms? |
| Requirements for the handholds on the topside deck of the console will be incorporated in the final RFP. |
| 60 |
| Draft Specifications |
| 660.1 |
| Are shock mitigating seats required? |
| Shock mitigating seats are not required. |
| 61 |
| Draft Deliverables |
| General |
| There appear to be errors in the cross referencing of the deliverables in J-4 List of Deliverables and the draft SOW. |
| These will be corrected in the final RFP. |
04 Oct 2024 1 of 11
