Attachment_4f,_Request_for_Clarification_WTGB_response.docx
DOCX document 29 KB Posted
- Solicitation number
- 70Z085-19-Q-P45C6200
About this file
This document contains a request for clarification response regarding Solicitation Number 70Z085-19-Q-P45C6200 for the Coast Guard's WTGB 140 Foot Cutter propulsion control modification. Specifically, the request for clarification response clarifies that the solicitation seeks to retrofit obsolete ADDvantage-32 Classic drives to ADDvantage-32 Plus drives, and upgrade the existing Performance View diagnostic system to Performance View 2.0, as previously recommended by Nidec-Avtron. Questions regarding the solicitation were required to be submitted by July 15, 2019 to Andrew G. Jacobs at the provided email address.
Attachment 4, providing question & answer
View the file
Other files
Show all 29
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
Offeror’s questions will be answered by an Amendment.
1. Offeror’s questions concerning this solicitation shall be submitted in writing, and must be submitted on the attached “Request for Clarification” form. One question should be submitted per form. Each form should indicate the name of the offeror’s firm.
2. Questions should be submitted via email to Andrew.G.Jacobs@uscg.mil.
REQUEST FOR CLARIFICATION
Submit requests not later than 15 July 2019
Offeror’s Name:
Date:
Question No.
WTGB 140 Foot Propulsion Controller Modification
| RFQ Number: |
| 70Z085-19-Q-P45C6200 |
| SOLICITATION SECTION: |
| 3. |
| PARA NO. |
DEFINITE/OPTIONAL ITEM NO.
PARA NO.
TITLE:
QUESTION: 3.6.1 – We believe that there may be a mistake in the text of this item. There are two areas of obsolescence to be addressed. The first regards the obsolete boards on the ADDVantage-32 Classic drives that control the motors and generators. A board replacement updates the Classic drives to the ADDVantage-32 Plus drives. The second regards the obsolete Performance View diagnostic system. This has been replaced by the Performance View 2.0 system which is referenced in Item 3.6.1. We believe that this is what the USCG is asking for. Is this correct?
RESPONSE:
Replace, “Specifically, the ADD-32 shall be upgraded to PerformanceView2.0 as recommended by Nidec-Avtron.”
With, “Specifically, the ADD-32 shall be retrofitted, as previously recommended by Nidec-Avtron, to the ADDvantage-32 Plus, and the existing Performance View upgraded to the Performance View 2.0 .”
Attachment 4
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .