Amendment 001 USCGC POLAR STAR HUB ASSYS FY25 20 Nov 2024.pdf

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT 1 2

2. AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION NO. 3. EFFECTIVE DATE 4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO. 5. PROJECT NO. (If applicable) Amendment 001 20 NOV 2024

6. ISSUED BY CODE 70Z085 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than Item 6) CODE 70Z085 USCG Surface Forces Logistics Center U.S. Coast Guard Island, Building 55 Alameda CA 94501

USCG Surface Forces Logistics Center U.S. Coast Guard Island, Building 55 Alameda CA 94501

8. NAME AND ADRESS OF CONTRACTOR (no., street, county, State and ZIP Code) √ 9.A AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NO.

70Z08524QLREP0021

X 9B. DATE (SEE ITEM 11)

10A. MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT/ORDER

NO. ?

10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 13)

CODE FACILITY CODE

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

The above numbered solicitation is amended as set forth in Item 14. The hour and date specified for receipt of Offers is extended, is not extended. Offers must acknowledge receipt of this amendment prior to the hour and date specified in the solicitation or as amended, by one of the following methods: (a) By completing Items 8 and 15, and returning 1 copies of the amendment; (b) By acknowledging receipt of this amendment on each copy of the Offer submitted: or (c) By separate letter or telegram which includes a reference to the solicitation and amendment numbers. FAILURE OF YOUR ACKNOWLEGEMENT TO BE RECEIVED AT THE PLACE DESIGNATED FOR THE RECEIPT OF OFFERS PRIOR TO THE HOUR AND DATE SPECIFIED MAY RESULT IN REJECTION OF YOUR OFFER. If by virtue of this amendment you desire to change an offer already submitted, such change may be made by telegram or letter, provided each telegram or letter makes reference to the solicitation and this amendment, and is received prior to the opening hour and date specified.

12. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA (If required)

13. THIS ITEM APPLIES ONLY TO MODIFICATIONS OF CONTRACTS/ORDERS,

IT MODIFIES THE CONTRACT/ORDER NO. AS DESCRIBED IN ITEM 14.

A. THIS CHANGE ORDER IS ISSUED PURSUANT TO: (Specify authority) THE CHANGES SET FORTH IN ITEM 14 ARE MADE IN THE CONTRACT/.ORDER NO. IN ITEM 10A.

B. THE ABOVE NUMBERED CONTRACT/ORDER IS MODIFIED TO REFLECT THE ADMINISTRATIVE CHANGES (such as changes in paying office, appropriation data, etc) SET FORTH IN ITEM 14, PURSUANT TO AUTHORITY OF FAR 43.103(b).

√ C. THIS SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT IS ENTERED INTO PURSUANT TO AUTHORITY OF:

D. OTHER (Specify type of modification and authority).

Contract Clause, H.4 Option Item; FAR 17.207©

E. IMPORTANT: Contractor is not, is required to sign this document and return 1 copy to the issuing office.

14. DESCRIPTION OF AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION (Organized by UCF section headings, including solicitation/contract subject matter where feasible.)

USCGC POLAR CLASS ICEBREAKER (POLAR STAR WAGB-11) FY25 Solicitation

The purpose of this amendment is to:

1. Provide the following responses to vendors questions:

Except as provided herein, all terms and conditions of the document referenced in Item 9A or 10A, as heretofore changed, remains unchanged and in full force and effect.

15A. NAME AND TITLE OF SIGNER (Type or print) 16A NAME AND TITLE OF CONTRACTING OFFICER (Type or print)

Robin B. Kloeppel, Contracting Officer 15B. CONTRACTOR/OFFEROR 15C. DATE SIGNED 16B. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 16C. DATE SIGNED

BY

(Signature of person authorized to sign)

(Signature of Contracting Officer)

NSN 7540-01-152-8070 30-105 STANDARD FORM 30 (REV. 10-83) PREVIOUS

EDITION UNUSABLE Prescribed by GSA, FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

Standard Form 30 Continued

USCGC POLAR CLASS ICEBREAKER (POLAR STAR WAGB-11) FY25:

1. Question: It states that the Contractor’s Facility and Equipment states that the Contractors Facility shall be located on the West Coast (WA, OR, CA). We have Facilities that meet this requirement but was wondering where the Hubs are shipped from historically from the previous Contract.

(Specification Paragraph Reference: Attachment 5; Factor 2 – Technical Capability Proposal; Sub-factor A –.)

Coast Guard Response: The hubs that are removed from the ship in FY25 will be shipped from Mare Island Drydock LLC, Vallejo CA. The location for the options years is TBD but will be on the West Coast as mentioned in the solicitation. Vendors can look in Sam.gov for past contracts for this work.

2. Question: The Offeror must also submit the following detailed information to support the pricing offer if requested, in addition to completing the Price Schedule of the solicitation. Offerors may use their own format for the information required below but it must be easily read, comprehended, and identified by individual work item (eg. D-01, D- 02). Breakdown for each work item: a. Direct labor cost by labor hours and proposed hourly rate(s); b. Materials; Subcontracts; Equipment; Other Direct Costs; and c. Profit, if listed separately -- individually identifying any items which are $500 or greater. The above both states “Offeror must also submit” but then states “if required”. Is the above additional detailed cost breakouts required with the initial proposal submission?

(Specification Paragraph Reference: Attachment 5; Factor 1 – Price Proposal; Part’s (2) and (3))

Coast Guard Response: Should questions arise concerning the price schedule submitted, the government would like to review the data mentioned. It is not required in the initial proposal except for pricing the “Additional Work” line item.

3. Question: Can Redacted previous inspection reports & pictures be provided to show historically the typical damage/repairs that are needed to be performed?

(Specification Paragraph Reference: Attachment-2+Specification)

Coast Guard Response: No, this information cannot be shared.

4. Question: Per each task order of the contract, Vendor receives the following:

• (3) hubs, each hub includes:

• (4) blades (trunnions)

• (4) locknuts

• (4) cranks

• (4) sets of bushings

• (4) link arms

• (4) Link Pins

• (4) Drive Pins

• Vendor requests clarification regarding the quantities requested for several CLIN items.

• The current RFP requests the following with Vendor’s questions shown in RED:

• D-001 – Qty 3 - The cost to test/disassemble/inspect/reassemble/test/ the (3) hubs

• D-002 – Qty 4 - The cost to over haul the (4) trunnions on (1) hub.

• This line item would then be charged for each hub individually if it is needed?

• D-003 – Qty 2 - The cost to repair (2) of the (4) cranks on (1) hub.

• Typically, Vendor restores all 4 cranks on the hub – would this mean that if all 4 were repaired Vendor would be charging this line item twice for each hub in which it applies?

• D-004 – Qty 6- The cost to make (6) new lock nuts.

• This would be lock nuts for 1.5 hubs, unless the customer is asking to make (4) new lock nuts and provide 2 spares for each hub?

• D-005 – Qty 6 – The cost to restore Adjusting Crank Drive Pin Bores, there is a max of (4) drive pin renewals per hub.

Please clarify the quantity, Vendor believes it should either be

• Qty 4 – for a full set for 1 hub

• Qty 1 – individual units charged multiple times to a hub if more than 1 is required.

• D-006 – Qty 1 - Replace (1) of the (4) link pins on a hub.

• This line item would be charged for each link multiple times per hub if more than (1) link pin per hub is needed?

• Or is this one full hubs worth of pins which would be a set of (4)

• D-007 – Qty 6 - Hub Trunnion Bushing Renew (6)

• There is a max of (4) bushing renewals per hub which must be done in sets of (1). The quantity 6 gives you 1.5 sets. Please clarify the quantity:

• Qty 1 – Each bushing set individually priced and 4 would be charged for each hub as they must be done in sets of 1.

• Qty 4 – This would be a set for a single hub

• D-008 – Qty 3 – There are 4 ports per hub requiring O-Rings, does the quantity of (3):

• Want Vendor to quote restoring all (3) hubs (12 ports) as a single price?

• OR would the preference be for either a per hub (4) price?

• OR a per port (1) which would then be charged multiple times per hub if more than 1 port required repair in a single hub?

• D-009 – Qty 2 - the cost to repair (2) of the (4) trunnions by machining only.

Please clarify if there are 4 trunnions per hub, and all 4 trunnions on a hub need repaired, this line would be charged twice for a single hub.

D-010- Hub Testing & Transport Equipment, Maintain – routine maintenance of the test stand and individual shipping stand

Please clarify if Qty 1 is per hub or for a set of 3.

(Specification Paragraph Reference Attachment 1+Price+Schedule+of+Services+POLAR+STAR+HUB+OVHL+IDIQ_FY25-29)

Coast Guard Response:

D-001 – Qty 3 - The cost to test/disassemble/inspect/reassemble/test/ the (3) hubs D-002 through D-009 should all be priced on a per unit basis. Quantalities listed in the Schedule of Services should be amended to read TBD based on conditions found in the executing of D-001.

D-010- Hub Testing & Transport Equipment, Maintain – routine maintenance of the test stand and individual shipping stand Please clarify if Qty 1 is per hub or for a set of 3.

This WI is for the maintenance of all items listed under para 1.2. The items listed are not dependent on the number of hubs being overhauled. This work item will only be awarded with QTY1 regardless of how many hubs are overhauled, although 3 hubs will be overhauled per year as shown for D-001 on the SoS.

5. Question: Vendor notes that MT is a significant change to the requirements. Vendor recognizes that CA6NM / ER410NiMo is ‘ferromagnetic’ as we use induction heater with good success. We believe there could be a path to using MT however this would require specialized equipment. We also recognize that we have an overlay procedure. This overlay procedure uses ER308L (austenitic) filler metal. Any location that has residual ER308L will not be magnetic and will cause a “false” indication around the non-magnetic filler metal. Vendor believes using MT is less than optimum in finding indications because of the mixed microstructure in CA6NM which should contain tempered martensite, delta ferrite and retained austenite along with the residual overlay austenitic. Vendor requests an explanation for the change in NDE along with the expectations for the qualification of the NDE Process for less than fully magnetic materials and acceptance criteria.

(Specification Paragraph Reference: Attachment 2 Specification 3.2.2.4. The Contractor must complete Magnetic Particle (MT) examinations in accordance with Paragraph B2.7.7 of SFLC Std Spec 0740 on all surfaces that have received overlay both before and after final machining.

PT substitution is not acceptable. Submit a CFR with results.)

Coast Guard Response: The USCG agrees that MT is not necessary or appropriate for this application.

While researching this issue, we also found a problem with another related paragraph. Please make the following changes: Work Item 2, Paragraph 3.2.2.2 should read the following. 3.2.2.2 All welding must be in accordance with the requirements in “American Bureau of Shipping Generic Rules for Classification, Materials and Welding and Survey After Construction” Part 2, Chapter 3 Section 15 following the guidance for CA-15. Work Item 2, Paragraph 3.2.2.4 should read the following: The Contractor must complete PT examination of overlayed surfaces in accordance with C2.3.4 of SFLC Std Spec 0740 both before and after final machining. Acceptance/rejection criteria must be based on Table 3 of “American Bureau of Shipping Generic Rules for Classification, Materials and Welding and Survey After Construction” Part 2, Chapter 3, Section 14. Submit a CFR with results.

6. Question: Table 1 of ABS MVR Part 2 Chapter 3, Section 14 is for Chemical Composition of Bronze Alloy Castings for ABS Grade Propellers and Blades. Should the reference be to table 3 which is “Acceptance Criteria for surface inspection of Bronze and Stainless-Steel Propellers”?

(Specification Paragraph Reference: SPECIFICAITON TO REPAIR POLAR CLASS

ICEBREAKER CONTROLLABLE PITCH PROPELLER (CPP) HUB ASSEMBLY – 2024

Paragraph 3.6.8.1)

Coast Guard Response: Yes, Table 3 “Acceptance Criteria for Surface Inspection of Bronze and Stainless-Steel Propellers” is the appropriate table to use. Thank you for catching this error.