RESPONSE_TO_BIDDER_QUESTIONS_5-23-18.docx

80KSC018R0016

QUESTION & ANSWERS 5/23/18

RESPONSE TO BIDDER QUESTIONS:

1. REFERENCE: Amendment 1, Page 3, Item b.

QUESTION: Will “alternates” be accepted if the dewar supplier proposes 13 or 14 columns?

ANSWER: Page 3 of Amendment 1 was included for the change to Clause L.23, as noted in a question response. The reference should be to 80KSC018R0016 SF1442 Continuation Clause L.22 for this question. Specification 79K40362 Section 43 42 41.99 Subpart 2.1.5 a) states, "The outer sphere shall be supported by 15 equally spaced tabular columns, on a monolithic type concrete foundation that is provided by other sections of this contract. See dwg. MC801." This is the specification section for the LH2 Dewar. When referring to other sections of this contract, the reference is to the structural (S) and Civil (C) drawing sheets in 79K40361 and associated specification sections (for example, Section 05 12 00). 15 is considered the minimum number of intended columns by design. Alternates of 13 or 14 columns will not be considered. Routing designs of piping and placement of other equipment required the number of columns to be identified as 15.

1. REFERENCE: Specification 43 42 41.99 Sub section 1.2 QUESTION: Can the reference to the three ASME standards be changed to the “latest” version in lieu of 2010? We plan to follow the 2017 ASME Code.

ANSWER: Yes, the 2017 editions for references to ASME BPVC and BPVC Section VIII codes can be applied. The reference for ASME B31.3 is the 2016 edition, as that is the latest edition.

1. REFERENCE: Specification 43 42 41.99 Sub section 1.2

QUESTION: No codes for wind or seismic design are listed for the dewar. Is ASCE 7-10 acceptable?

ANSWER: Refer to Specification 79K40362 Section 43 42 41.99 Subpart 2.1.1, which states, "Live and wind load requirements are indicated on the structural drawings." Refer to Drawing 79K40361 Sheet S-001 Design Criteria.

1. REFERENCE: Specification 43 42 41.99 Sub section 2.1.3 and 2.1.5 QUESTION: Can the size and support configuration of the outer sphere be adjusted by the dewar supplier to optimize design, or does the size and number of columns need to conform to references given above (size on drawing S-402 and columns in Par 2.1.5.)?

ANSWER: As identified by the drawing and specification, 15 is the minimum number of intended columns by design.

1. REFERENCE: Specification 43 42 41.99 Sub section 2.1.3

QUESTION: Please confirm the annular space dimension is the responsibility of the dewar design engineer.

ANSWER: Yes, the annular space dimension is engineering delegated to the contractor.

1. REFERENCE: Specification 43 42 41.99 Sub section 2.1.2.1 (d)

QUESTION: Please provide the percent expansion to we used for the liquid hydrogen. Expansion needs to be added to the 7% ullage to determine tank capacity.

ANSWER: The minimum ullage volume required is 7%. Other design parameters constraining expansion are given in Specification 79K40362 Section 43 42 41.99. For example, the other inner sphere design criteria in Subpart 2.1.2.1 and the maximum allowable boil-off constraint at full-rated capacity and maximum operating environment in Subpart 2.1.8.1. Therefore, any additional capacity for expansion can be defined by the contractor per their typical design practices as part of the delegated engineering.

1. REFERENCE: Specification 79K40362; Section 09 97 13.00 98; Part 3.1.1 & Part 3.4

QUESTION: Please confirm that the containment requirements of Part 3.1.1 are not required for the mechanical methods of surface preparation outlined in Part 3.4 used for the coating of field weld seams and repairs ANSWER: Containment requirements of Subpart 3.1.1 are also required for the mechanical methods described in Subpart 3.4.

1. REFERENCE: Specification 79K40362; Section 09 97 13.00 98; Part 3.4

QUESTION: After preparing the surface of a repair location to SSPC-SP11 is it permissible to use a surface tolerant epoxy in lieu of the inorganic zinc primer to get better adhesion of the coating system to the steel?

ANSWER: No. The repair coating must be an IOZ primer first, as specified in the coating schedule.

1. REFERENCE: Specification 79K40362; Section 09 97 13.00 98; Part 2.3.1

QUESTION: Please confirm if a coating system is required on the inside surface of the outer sphere.

ANSWER: A coating system is not required on the inside surface of the outer sphere.

1. REFERENCE: Specification 79K40362; Section 09 97 13.00 98; Part 2.3.1 QUESTION: Please confirm if the inside & outside surfaces of the inner sphere and internal stainless steel structural components are required to be coated with coating system #2.

ANSWER: A coating system is not required for the inner/outer surfaces of the stainless steel inner vessel. A coating system is not required for the internal stainless steel structural components.

1. REFERENCE: In the inspection plan, (09 97 13.00 98 page 241 paragraph 1)

QUESTION: It states that following each coat of paint, a Holiday test shall be performed. Typically, Holiday Testing is only done for interior immersion areas of water, fuel, other steel storage tanks, not on the exterior of a sphere out in the middle of nowhere. Is this applicable for inspection after each exterior coat is applied? If so it adds cost and schedule to the project for something that would be very rarely if ever performed for other painted structures.

ANSWER: Yes, it is applicable. This is an LH2 tank in the LC 39B perimeter at the Kennedy Space Center. This is a salt air environment where heavier than normal corrosion is expected. No pin holes are acceptable in this aggressive environment. Therefore, holiday testing as specified is required.

1. REFERENCE: Specification 79K40362; Section 43 42 41.99; Par 3.5.2 QUESTION: Can the Inner Sphere and Internal Pipe Cold Shock Test be performed after the annular space insulation has been installed?

ANSWER: No. Once the insulation is added, there would be no opportunity to make repairs due to a failed cold shock test. Vessel testing and insulation fill shall be sequenced as specified.

1. REFERENCE: Drawings S‐401 (Sheet 41), S‐302 (Sheet 37), C‐141 (Sheet 15), C‐301 (Sheet 21), and S‐001 (Sheet 5) QUESTION: The Dewar foundation (Design criteria/loading as per drawing S‐001) is indicated to be a consistent 3’‐0” thickness as per details on S‐302 (Top of footing 7’‐1”) with a cap slab of varying thicknesses (6 ½” to 13” as dictated by drawing C‐141 and profiled by in detail A on drawing C‐301). Drawing S‐401 has a flag note A, where a “3’‐0” thick minimum reinforced concrete foundation” is called out for at the Dewar. Please confirm that the footing/foundation shall be 3’‐0” with the overall assembly of slab and footing being a maximum thickness of 4’‐1”, where the flag note on S‐401 is more reflective of the overall assembly. Please advise.

ANSWER: The dewar mat foundation shall be 3'-0" thick throughout with a top of mat elevation at 7.08' (7'-1"). The overlying concrete slab shall be of varying thickness (6" minimum) to provide the finished top of pad elevations, as shown on Drawing C-141.

1. REFERENCE: Drawing C‐002 (Sheet 5) QUESTION: Note 57 Addresses removal of unsuitable soils. Please confirm where these soils would be removed to or disposed of. Previous contracts at pad 39B have had limitations regarding this subject. If there will be a designated location within the perimeter fence where these soils will be staged, please designate that location. In the event there are suitable soils in surplus, will those soils be segregated from the unsuitable in another location, or will they be gathered in one location? Please advise.

ANSWER: Refer to the Geotechnical Report for subsurface conditions at the project site. Refer to specification Section 31 23 00.00 20 for disposition of surplus material. Note #57 on Drawing C-002 is intended to address small, isolated pockets of construction debris or other deleterious materials that may be encountered during earth moving operations.

1. REFERENCE: Spec: 79K40362; Sec: 43 42 41.99; Par: 3.1.5 QUESTION: Paragraph 3.1.5 requires radiography in accordance with ASME BPVC Section VIII paragraph UW-51. Please confirm ultrasonic examination in accordance with Section VIII Div 2 paragraph 7.5.5 may be used in lieu of radiography for both inner and outer spheres.

ANSWER: Full radiography is the requirement. On a case-by-case basis, NASA will consider the substitution to be conditional on the demonstrated inability to obtain a satisfactory radiograph based on joint configuration through the deviation waiver process.

1. REFERENCE: Spec: 79K40362; Sec: 43 42 41.99; Par: 3.5.4 QUESTION: The sixth paragraph requires an envelope test of outer sphere fittings and areas of likely leaks. Does the owner expect all outer vessel welds to be enveloped?

ANSWER: Yes. All weld joints are considered likely leak paths.

1. REFERENCE: Spec: 79K40362; Sec: 43 42 41.99; Par: 3.5.4 QUESTION: Can a helium tracer probe test be used in lieu of enveloping for testing the vessel welds that require a helium mass spectrometer leak test?

ANSWER: No. The method specified is to achieve a closed volume via enveloping the test area, then introducing the test gas while monitoring the annulus space with mass spectrometer leak detection. During performance of the construction contract, the contractor is required to formulate and submit a detailed leak test procedure for NASA approval.

1. REFERENCE: Drawings M-001 thru M-504 and Specification Section 40 99 00 QUESTION: Drawings M-001 thru M-504 shows various interconnecting tubing runs. M-501 reflects Table 1 for Tube Flared Assy and Table 2 for Welded Flare Assy. Section 40 99 00, page 854, 3.1.1 General, second to last paragraph only states KC145 (weld spud adapters) may be used due to difficulty of flaring above .065 wall. Please clarify the following

• Which tube assemble configuration, Table 1 or Table 2 is to be used for all of the interconnecting tubing shown on M-001 thru M-504?

• Is Table 2 only to be used for the GN-XX -XXXX 11/4” x .134? Note: .134 wall tubing is not recommended for form flaring per KSC-SPEC-0008

• Is table 2 only to be used for the HE-XX-XXXX 1”x .095 and GN-XX-XXXX 1” x .095 tube runs shown on M-001 thru M-504 at the discretion of the contractor?

ANSWER: All tubing with a wall thickness less than .109” shall be fabricated per Table 1. Tubing with wall thickness .109” or greater shall be fabricated per Table 2. If the contractor has difficultly flaring tubing with a wall thickness less than .109” (e.g., 1” x .095”), then they may request consideration from NASA to use welded adapters per the deviation waiver process.

1. REFERENCE: Drawing C‐002 (Sheet 5) QUESTION: Note 57 Addresses a report dated 1/30/17 for a geotechnical survey by Ardaman and Associates. Please provide a copy of this report so that impact of unsuitable soils can be adequately reviewed and bid.

ANSWER: Please refer to "PCN 98985 Geotechnical Report.pdf" uploaded to the Solicitation 80KSC018R0016 on 5/23/18.

1. REFERENCE: Drawing 79K40361, Pneumatic Tubing Specification 40 99 00 & Cryogenic Piping and Components Specification 40 29 98 QUESTION: All panel Bill of Materials shown in the drawing 79K40361 call for tubing per KSC-SPEC-P-0027 (AL6XN), Specification Section 40 29 98 Cryogenic Piping and Components (non-cryogenic) para. 2.2.1 Piping, calls for tubing per ASTM A269, Type 316 Stainless Steel, Specification 40 99 00 Pneumatic Tubing Sections 2.2.1 Piping, calls for tubing per KSC-SPEC-P-0027 (AL6XN). What is the type of tubing to be used for all interconnecting tubing shown on M-001 thru M-504, M-601, M-602, and MC100 thru MC803? Note: Historically AL6XN tubing has long lead times 22 to 26 weeks with minimum millruns.

ANSWER: All tubing referenced in the question shall be AL6XN per KSC-SPEC-P-0027.

1. REFERENCE: Reference section 31 23 00.00 20 Excavation and Fill, part 1.5, paragraph f.

QUESTION: The specification states the geotechnical report is included in the Appendix. However, the appendix was not included with the bid documents. Please provide the geotechnical report.

ANSWER: Please refer to "PCN 98985 Geotechnical Report.pdf" uploaded to the Solicitation 80KSC018R0016 on 5/23/18.

1. REFERENCE: Reference plan ENV-101, note f states that a copy of the environmental report is included as a supplement to the environmental specification.

QUESTION: However, this report was not included with the specifications. Please provide the environmental report.

ANSWER: Please refer to "PCN 98985 Environmental Report.pdf" uploaded to the Solicitation 80KSC018R0016 on 5/23/18.

1. REFERENCE: DWG: 79K40361; Sheet 9, 11, 25, & 26 (drawings C-101 / C-103 Detail 2 / ENV-100 / ENV-101) and Spec. 01 57 19 Par: 3.5.1 and 02 41 00 Par. 3.3.1 QUESTION: Note F on drawing ENV-101 references a copy of an environmental report. Can we obtain a copy of that report? Specifically, we are concerned as to whether any of the railroad steel rails were sampled as levels of heavy metals are sometimes contained in railway rails, and it would be necessary to have that information to determine means and methods for demolition as well as reprocessing for recycling or disposal. Please advise.

ANSWER: Please refer to "PCN 98985 Environmental Report.pdf" uploaded to the Solicitation 80KSC018R0016 on 5/23/18.