Question_and_Answer_Report_HSCG23_15_R_FRCPII.xls
XLS spreadsheet 171 KB Posted
- Attached to
- United States Coast Guard Phase II Fast Response Cutter (FRC) Request for Proposals (RFP)
- Solicitation number
- HSCG23-15-R-FRCPII
About this file
Question and Answer Report dated May 8 2015 A00008
View the file
Other files
Show 40 more
Latest 50 of 88 listed here. See the rest on GovTribe.
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
Cover Page
| USCG PHASE II FAST RESPONSE CUTTER (FRC) |
| QUESTIONS & ANSWERS (Q&A) REPORT |
| Prepared by: |
| Commandant (CG-9125) |
| United States Coast Guard |
| 2703 Martin Luther King Junior Avenue, SE |
| Washington, DC. 20593-7828 |
| 08 MAY 2015 (A00008) |
| Solicitation Number: HSCG23-15-R-FRCPII |
| Distribution Statement A: Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited. |
Phase II FRC Q and A's
| Question Number | Reference | Industry Question | Government Answer |
| Q-1 | Part IV, Section L.6. | Would the Government amend the RFP to pay bid and proposal expenses for the incumbent and each qualified bidder? | The United States Coast Guard will not pay bid and proposal costs associated with this RFP. |
| Q-2 | Part IV, Section L | In order for competitors to bid properly and for the USCG to have the lowest overall price, would the Coast Guard identify items already paid for under the existing contract to the incumbent that would be transferred to a winning bidder (e.g.jigs , tools, etc)? | The USCG will provide the licenses for the hulls and the data package, which contains information concerning the incumbent’s current use of jigs and tools. The USCG will not be providing equipment outside of the Government Furnished Equipment list, which is incorporated in Section J, Attachment #7. |
The USCG will provide the licenses for the hulls and the data package, which contains information concerning the incumbent’s current use of jigs and tools. The USCG will not be providing equipment outside of the Government Furnished Equipment list, which is incorporated in Section J, Attachment #7.
| Q-3 | Part IV, Section L | The incumbent has developed a relationship with suppliers that should have resulted in overall reduced cost since the start of the program through the production and ordering of 30+ ships. What are the plans and provisions for these suppliers to (1) Have non-exclusive contracts with the incumbent so that they are available to all competitors; and, (2) Does the USCG have an relationships with these suppliers regarding their product availability and costs for competitors? | The USCG has not made any arrangements with any current suppliers under the Phase I Fast Response Cutter contract. |
| Q-4 | Part IV, Section L-6 | Section L-6 indicates that the Government reserves the right to make multiple awards if, after considering the additional administrative costs, it is in the Government's best interest to do so. Given that the administrative costs of a dual shipbuilder contract are already known and that such costs can be ameliorated by having one yard serve as the prime and manage both facilities (as was done for the RBM program) does this mean that the USCG would consider splitting the award between the incumbent and a second shipyard? Another option would be to have two primes, similar to the Navy DDG-51 and LCS Programs in order to achieve more competition and greater price savings. | At this time, the USCG has made a determination to to not make multiple awards, however retains the right to do so. |
| Q-5 | Section A, Page 2/Section L.14.1.3, Page L-9 | There is a disconnect between the number of vessels being procured; is it 26 per Section A, page 2, or is it 22 vessels per section L.14.1.3, page L-9? | This number of vessels to be procured under any resulting contract is up to 26. At a minimum, the USCG will order four cutters in the base period. This purchase of four in the base period leaves the remaining 22 to be ordered under options periods. Section B notes the number of cutters that can be ordered in each option year until the requisite 26 are purchased. |
| Q-6 | Part IV, M.3 | What is the USCG plan for a competition if only one proposal is received in response to this RFP? | Market research conducted by the USCG indicates that multiple US shipyards have the capability to produce Fast Response Cutters. With this information, the USCG anticipates competition. |
Market research conducted by the USCG indicates that multiple US shipyards have the capability to produce Fast Response Cutters. With this information, the USCG anticipates competition.
| Q-7 | Section L.6(d) | How long should a submitted proposal be valid? | Any submitted proposal shall be valid for a period of 180 days. The SF-33 has been updated to reflect this requirement. |
| Q-8 | Section L.20 Administrative Volume | Section L.20 states that "This volume shall also include all necessary Non Disclosure Agreements with Advisory contractors as required in Section L.14.1.15. The Final RFP no longer references Advisory contractors in Section | The USCG will not be using contractors to provide advisory services. Section L has been updated to remove this requirement. |
| Q-9 | Section L.18.2.2.1; Section M.4 Factor 2, para.c | Section L instructs the offeror to provide past performance questionnaires and narratives for five similar contracts in which they have participated over the past three years. | The Government will consider contracts performed within the last five years. Section L has been updated to incorporate this change. |
| Q-10 | Part I, Section H.9.4.6, Page H-12 | RFP states EPA base period index values are those final published values for May 2017. To price in current dollars, should the EPA baseline month be changed to May 2015? | The EPA is applied based on when the USCG anticipates payments being issued. |
| Q-11 | L.19 PROPOSAL CONTENTS, PRICE VOLUME | L.19.1. The Offeror shall complete the spreadsheet provided as Attachment J-17. QUESTION - Please provide attachment J-17 spreadsheet. | The pricing spreadsheet is included as Section J, Attachment #18. Section L language has been updated to reflect this change. |
| Q-12 | H.16 Prevention of the Discharge of Oil and Hazardous Substances | Section H.16 regarding Prevention of the Discharge of Oil and Hazardous Substances states "The provisions of paragraphs H.20.2, H.20.3, and H.20.4, are intended to implement that policy with respect to the cutter(s) constructed under this contract." |
| RFP does not contain section H.20.4. Please clarify section applicability as stated | The references within this paragraph have been updated to H.16.2, H.16.3, and H.16.4. | ||
| Q-13 | Part 3, Section J, Attachment 2, COR 042-3.1.1 | A drawing identified as a Contract Drawing which delineates design features of the ship. The current revision in effect for each Contract Drawing will be defined in the contract. No departure from a Contract Drawing is permitted without specific written authorization from the Contracting Officer. |
In some instances, the requirements in COR may conflict with the referenced drawing. In such cases, which takes precedence, the drawing or the COR?
A drawing identified as a Contract Drawing which delineates design features of the ship. The current revision in effect for each Contract Drawing will be defined in the contract. No departure from a Contract Drawing is permitted without specific written authorization from the Contracting Officer.
| In some instances, the requirements in COR may conflict with the referenced drawing. In such cases, which takes precedence, the drawing or the COR? | Please identify specific design features or data which you believe to be in conflict individually so that they can be researched and addressed clearly. | |||
| Q-14 | FRC Attachment J Secure Attachments #9 | The file names for Attachment J drawings provided on FBO include DRAFT in the name. Is the Government issuing FINAL Attachment J drawings? | The drawings that have been included in the Final RFP package should be considered final documents, irrespective of the file naming conventions. | |
| Q-15 | Section J,Attachment 9, Contract Drawing Exceptions | Many of the Exception Notes cells have been cut off. Please provide a revised copy. | An updated copy of Section J, Attachment 9, Contract Drawings Exceptions is incorporated into the RFP with Amendment A00003. | |
| Q-16 | COR 410-2.2.2 | COR 410-2.2.2. Two mock-ups of the SEAWATCH-FRC C2 suite (including the equipment/connections required by COR Section 425-1.1 shall be provided with all of the hardware and connected sensors necessary to simulate operation and demonstrate the proper integration of all of the equipment with the GFE software. One will be retained at the contractor’s (or subcontractor’s) facility and one will be delivered to the USCG C3CEN in Portsmouth, VA for engineering/software development. Each mock-up shall be identical to the other. Once a successful demonstration has been achieved, the mock-up at the contractor’s (or sub-contractor’s) facility will remain intact as a training aid for crew and support personnel. |
| Mock-ups were provided in the original contract (Phase I). Is it acceptable to modify the existing mock-ups? | It is not acceptable to modify the existing mock-ups. New mock-ups for the Phase II FRC are required. | ||
| Q-17 | COR 410-2.2.1.2 | The RDF, specified in COR Section 423-3.1.1.3.1. |
| The SEAWATCH to VEGA-ECS interface is still required in Section 410-5.3.8, is this intended to be removed or does this represent a unidirectional connection? | The SEAWATCH to VEGA-ECS interface requirement in Section 410-5.3.8 has been removed. | ||
| Q-18 | COR 079-4.1 | COR 079-4.1 states: “Values for VCG, LCG and TCG will be based on inclining experiment preformed in accordance with COR section 041.” |
| COR 041 is Configuration Management. COR 094 is the Inclining Experiment section. Was COR 094 the intended reference? | The correct COR Section reference for the Inclining Experiment is COR Section 097. The RFP will be amended to reflect this correction. | ||
| Q-19 | COR 440-19.1.1 (440-19.1.2) | Signal and power cabling for all encryption devices shall be provided so that the Government installed crypto equipment can be installed post delivery without any need for additional shelf, cable, or connector work. |
| COR number appears to be incorrect. Should it be 440-19.1.2? | The correct paragraph number is 440-19.1.2. This change has been incorporated in to the RFP. | ||
| Q-20 | COR 401-5.1; 437-601 | COR 401-5.1 requires a fluxgate compass in the Control Console and COR section 437-6.1 requires a fluxgate compass in the MCMS console. |
| Is it the intent of the Government to have two fluxgate compasses? | There is only one fluxgate compass. COR Section 401-5.1.4 should read the "Fluxgate Magnetic Compass Display." This change has been incorporated into the RFP. | |||
| Q-21 | Section 081, Paragraph 081-5.1, Page 76 | FRCII changes the standards for RCM analysis to MIL-STD-3034 and SAE JA1011/12. Please confirm that only new systems that deviate from the base contract e.g., HVAC system, Rudder, Fuel System, will require an analysis using these new standards? | The USCG confirms that systems which deviate from the Phase I FRC design will require a new RCM analysis conducted IAW MIL-STD-3034 and SAE JA1001/12. This is clarified in amended language for COR Section 081-5.1." | |
| Q-22 | COR section 562-1.1 | FRC II RFP COR section 562-1.1 requires rudders to be constructed as shown in drawing 154R-WPC-562-201 Rev- Rudder Details and requires flow-adapted (twisted) rudders. Drawing 154R-WPC-562-201 Rev and COR section 562-1.1 is not a flow-adapted (twisted) rudder; it is a conventional rudder. In this case, which takes precedence, the drawing or the COR? | In COR Section 562-1.1, the reference to flow-adapted rudders has been removed. | |
| Q-23 | COR 425-2.2.4.2 | The Dell R620 is obsolete and no longer available. Please define new requirements. | The requirements of the RFP are amended to address the obsolescent equipment issue. The Coast Guard has identified the Dell PowerEdge R630 as the replacement for the Dell PowerEdge R620. | |
| Q-24 | COR 440-1.1 | The capacity needed to support a 30 minute hold time requires the definition of the expected transmit duty cycle. What is the expected transmission duty cycle for each radio? | RFP COR Sections 400-2.5 and 400-3.8 list the requirements for the use of power by the electronic equipment. Each radio provided, including the transmission duty cycle for each radio, is required to operate within its specified parameters using power specified in COR Section 300. This is clarified in amendments to the COR. | |
| Q-25 | COR 440-11.1.3 | Off-the-shelf compliant solutions for KWR-46 do not appear to be available, except for the DMR radio, which is too large and wouldn't be cost effective for this platform. Is this algorithm required? | The KWR-46 algorithm is not required and is removed in this amendment. | |
| Q-26 | Section J, Attachment 9, Contract Drawing Exceptions | Item Number A9.8 (154R-WPC-202-301, MCMS Cable Block Diagram) and A9.9 (154R-WPC-202-302, MCMS I/O Schedule): Exception note is left blank so it is unclear whether we are to have exceptions to the document. Please confirm if there are any exceptions for these items. | Exception notes are added to Section J, Attachment 9, Contract Drawing Exceptions as follows: A9.8 MCMS Cable Block Diagram, 154R-WPC-202-301: 1. Non-MTU Manufacturer and Model numbers identified in the Materials List or throughout the drawing are provided for informational purpose only. Offerors may substitute or change manufacturers and model numbers, however any changes shall meet the requirements of the contract. A9.9 MCMS I/O Schedule, 154R-WPC-202-302: 1. No exceptions | |
| Q-27 | Section J, Attachment 9 vs COR | J-9 attachment lists referenced drawing 154R-WPC-601 as “Rev A” but the COR says “Rev –”. RDLP drawings provided are “Rev A”. Section J, Attachment 9 list and associated drawings provided in the RFP package do not match the requirements in the COR. In some sections of the COR (e.g. 071-5.1, 071-6.1, 071-7.1, and 583-3.1) the drawings are called out as Revision “-“, but the actual drawings provided are Revision “A”. Please clarify which revision of the drawing is to be used when the COR and the provided drawings do not match. | The drawing revisions documented in Section J, Attachment 9, Contract Drawing List are correct. The COR will is amended to reflect drawing revisions as follows: |
A9.1 Hull Lines and Offsets, 154R-WPC-085-301 Rev ""A"" A9.19 Generator and Switchboard Drawing, 154R-WPC-324-301 Rev ""A"" A9.29 Lube Oil Service and Transfer System Diagram, 154R-WPC-540-301 Rev ""A"" A9.32 Fixed Fire Extinguishing System Diagram, 154R-WPC-555-301 Rev ""A"" A9.44 General Arrangement Drawing, 154R-WPC-601-302 Rev ""A"" A9.45 Life Saving Equipment A&D, 154R-WPC-610-201 Rev ""A"" A9.48 Machine Gun Control System, 154R-WPC-700-301 Rev ""A"" Q-28 Attachment J-4 Reference List The COR includes the following references that are not included in Attachment J-4 Reference List.
MIL-STD-1521B
MIL-STD-129
MIL-STD-188-141B
| Please confirm these references are applicable to this contract? | The references cited in the question are applicable to this RFP. Attachment J-4, Reference List, will be changed to include MIL-STD-1521B, MIL-STD-188-141B, and MIL-STD-129 in a future amendment. | ||
| Q-29 | COR 078-2.1.5.1; 581-3.2 | 078-2.1.5.1 States, "CRES ASTM Stainless steel 316L shall be used for fittings, couplings etc. on all exterior applications of the FRC above and below the waterline on the hull that are exposed directly to sea water or spray and for all applications on the weather decks unless stated elsewhere in this COR. Use of 302 or 304 is restricted to interior, non-welded applications where exposure to sea water is not anticipated." 581-3.2 States, "The anchor chain shall comply with the ABS HSNC with exception that wire rope and synthetic fiber rope are not permitted." |
| ABS HSNC only specifies stud link anchor chain, but COR section 078 Materials requires the fittings, couplings, etc. on all exterior items exposed to the weather shall be stainless steel 316L. Is it acceptable to use stud link anchor chain as specified in HSNC or is the anchor chain required to be CRES in accordance with COR section 078? If the chain is required to be CRES, is it acceptable to use the ABS HSNC equipment number to size the minimum breaking strength of the chain? | Stud link chain is required per ABS HSNC (COR Section 581-3.2). See COR Section 078-1.1 for clarification on the order of precedence for material requirements. | ||
| Q-30 | COR 583-3.1 | "COR 583-3.1 [RFP] states: ""Inflatable life rafts (25-person Navy MKVII, white case) with hydrostatic releases and nylon covered CRES cable tie-downs shall be provided as part of outfit under the Supply Support CLIN for each FRC. Two life rafts shall be provided, one each port and starboard. These shall be USCG approved inflatable life rafts and shall be stowed in white cylindrical containers and secured on the main deck or 01 deck with USCG approved hydrostatic releases and nylon-covered CRES cable tie-downs. The life rafts shall be stowed in separate cradle foundations, capable of being launched by gravity. The life rafts shall not be stowed as shown on drawing 154R-WPC-601-302 Rev “-” General |
Arrangements.""
COR Section 583-3.1 states that the inflatable liferafts 'shall not' be installed in the same location as shown on the General Arrangements drawing.
| Please confirm that the use of 'shall not' was in error and that the USCG intends to keep the liferafts in the same location as shown on the General Arrangement drawing." | "This is a typographical error. The life rafts shall be stowed as shown on the General Arrangement drawing. This is corrected in this amendment. | ||
| Q-31 | COR 440-3.7.3 | "COR 440-3.7.3 directs procurement of two DVP-200 by the contractor. Part III, Section J, Attachment 7 (GFE/GFI) identifies one DVP-200 as GFE. |
| Will the USCG modify Part III, Section J, Attachment 7 to remove the GFE reference for compliance with COR 440-3.7.3?" | COR 440-3.7.3 directs procurement of two DVP-200 by the contractor. Part III, Section J, Attachment 7 (GFE/GFI) identifies one DVP-200 as GFE. | |||
| Q-32 | Part IV Section L | Will the USCG extend the deadline associated with the submission of the Management, Technical, and Price volumes to July 31, 2015? | The USCG is extending the deadline for proposal receipt. Section L has been updated accordingly. | |
| Q-33 | L.20 Proposal Contents - Administrative Volume | Does the Government require the completed Section B CLINs included in Volume V - Administrative Volume as well as in Volume IV - Price Volume? | No. The Government does not require pricing information to be included in the Administrative Volume. | |
| Q-34 | Section I, FAR Clause 52.246-19 | FAR 52.246-19 has six blank lines where duration of warranties and deadlines are established. |
| Does the Contracting Officer intend to amend the solicitation to complete the blanks at 52.246-19 (b)(1), 52.246-19 (b)(3) (NOTE: there are 2 blank spaces here), 52.246-19 (b)(6), and 52.246-19 (c)(2) (NOTE: there are also 2 blank spaces here) prior to offerors submitting pricing volumes? Completion of this clause is required for pricing associated with warranties. | This amendment updates the clause to include the fill-in information. | |||
| Q-35 | Section K | Does the USCG intend to insert or substitute a certification requirement outside of SAM for offerors to address in the Administrative Volume? | No, the USCG does not intend to insert certification requirements outside of all representations and certifications included in SAM, which must be updated. | |
| Q-36 | COR 070-2.1 Table 70-1, 593-1.3.1 | COR 070-2.1 Table 70-1 states: "Independent Operations: Endurance for 5 days. Crew Size: 20 enlisted personnel and 4 officers. 593-1.3.1: Capacity. The sewage (black water) system shall have a threshold holding capacity sized for 11.3 liters (3 gal) per day per permanent berthing accommodation, for the entire Independent Operations duration, in accordance with COR Section 070 plus 25% to equal 95% of holding capacity. The sewage holding tank active volume shall be no less than 1,500 liters (396 gal)." |
The COR 070-2.1 Table 70-1 requires an increase in permanent crew size of two additional personnel, which will affect the capacity requirements for the Sewage Tank. The current Sewage Tank does not meet increased capacity requirements outlined in COR 593-1.3.1.
| Will the USCG consider reducing the threshold holding capacity to 10.33 liters/day (2.73 gal/day) in order to use the existing tank? | The sewage holding tank active volume shall be no less than 1,500 liters (396 gal). This is clarified in the COR. | ||
| Q-37 | COR 070-2.1 Table 70-1, 100-1.1, 593-2.2 | COR 070-2.1 Table 70-1 states: "Independent Operations: Endurance for 5 days. Crew Size: 20 enlisted personnel and 4 officers." COR 593-2.2 states: "The waste water (grey water) system shall have a threshold holding capacity sized for 75.82 liters (19.5 gal) per day per permanent berthing accommodation for the Independent Operations endurance required in COR Section 070-2; plus 15% of holding to equal 98% of capacity." |
The COR 070-2.1 Table 70-1 requires an increase in permanent crew size of two additional personnel, which will affect the capacity requirements for the Grey Water Tank. The COR 100-1.1 states the Phase II FRC shall be constructed as shown in the provided structural drawings; however, the current integral grey water tank does not meet the increased capacity requirements outlined in COR 593-2.2.
| Will the USCG consider reducing the threshold holding capacity to 69.12 liters/day (18.26 gal/day) in order to use the existing tank? | The waste water (grey water) system shall have a threshold holding capacity of 9,739 liter (2,573 gal). This is clarified in the COR. | ||
| Q-38 | COR 070-2.1 Table 70-1, 651-1.1, 651-1.3 | COR 070-2.1 Table 70-1 states: "Independent Operations: Endurance for 5 days. Crew Size: 20 enlisted personnel and 4 officers."COR 651-1.1 states: "Commissary compartments arrangement (consisting of galley, mess deck, and food storage area) shall be the same as the Phase I FRC as shown in drawing 154R-WPC-601-302 Rev “-“ General Arrangement..." |
COR 651-1.3 states: "Adequate food storage areas consisting of 18.4L (0.65 ft3)/day/permanent berthing for dry stores shall be provided in or immediately adjacent to the galley. All food storage areas were sized to meet the FRC endurance requirements of COR Section 070-2."
The COR 070-2.1 Table 70-1 requires an increase in permanent crew size of two additional personnel, which will affect the capacity requirements for the food storage areas. COR 651-1.1 requires the food storage areas to be the same as the Phase I FRC; however, the current food storage areas do not meet increased capacity requirements outlined in COR 651-1.3.
| Will the USCG consider reducing the food storage area requirement to 17.84 liters/day (0.63 ft3/day) in order to use the existing arrangement? | COR Section 651-1.3: The requirement is changed from "Adequate food storage areas consisting of 18.4L (0.65 ft3)/day/permanent berthing for dry stores shall be provided in or immediately adjacent to the galley," to "Adequate food storage areas consisting of 2,024L (71.5 ft3) for dry stores shall be provided in or immediately adjacent to the galley." | ||
| Q-39 | COR 700-2.2.5.1 | "Section 700-2.2.5.1 lists NAVSEA drawing 8180368, Rev E. Section 700-2.3.11 lists NAVSEA drawing 8180368, Rev G. |
| Please clarify the correct NAVSEA drawing revision." | NAVSEA drawing 8180368 Rev H is the correct revision. This is corrected in the applicable COR Sections. | ||
| Q-40 | COR 568-1.8 | "The Section J Attachment 4 Reference List includes references that are not included in the COR: |
SNAME T&R Bulletin 2-29A
ANSI S2.25
A-A-50435 ropes
MIL-DTL-24640B
40 CFR part 94
DOMDTINST M16672.2
American Boat and Yacht Council publications
ASTM A276-06
Marpol 73/78
Please confirm these references are, in fact, applicable to this contract." The following references are cited in the COR (paragraphs shown):
SNAME T&R Bulletin 2-29A (COR 073-4, 200-2) ANSI S2.25 (COR 073-4, 200-2) A-A-50435 ropes (COR 582-4)
MIL-DTL-24640B (COR 304-2, 304-3, 400-3)
40 CFR part 94 (COR 070-1) COMDTINST M16672.2E (COR 070-1, 421-3, 422-2, 422-3, 443-1, 443-2) MARPOL 73/78 (COR 593)
The American Boat & Yacht Council (ABYC) Standards and Technical Information Reports for Small Craft AND astm A276-06 are not applicable and are removed from the list of references.
Q-41 COR 700-2.2.6 Section 700-2.2.6 lists NAVSEA drawing 8180348, Rev C. Section 700-2.3.7 lists NAVSEA drawing 8180348, Rev D.
| Please clarify the correct NAVSEA drawing revision. | NAVSEA drawing 8180348 Rev E is the correct revision. This is corrected in the applicable COR Sections. | ||
| Q-42 | COR 233-3.1 | "COR 233-3.1 states ""The FRC class diesel engines shall be certified to meet, at a minimum, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Tier 2 exhaust emissions requirements."" |
| Will the USCG file for a national security exemption with the EPA to allow the MTU 20V4000M93L main propulsion engines to only meet the EPA Tier 2 exhaust emissions requirements for the vessels procured through the FRC II contract?" | Yes, the Coast Guard is requesting National Security Exemption for MTU 20V4000M93L main propulsion engines. There are no changes to the RFP as a result of this response. | ||
| Q-43 | COR 100-1.7 | "COR 100-1.7 states ""Structure not specifically addressed by the ABS HSNC Guide shall withstand the loads expected in service including the effects of ship motions and environmental loads, using allowable stresses of no more than two-thirds of the material yield stress and the buckling criteria of COR Section 100-1.2.1.1. In no case shall the yield stress be used as an allowable stress in conjunction with working loading. Loads shall be combined as appropriate to represent worst case loading conditions. The structure shall withstand loads due to docking, towing, cutter boat launch and recovery, side impacts, (fendering), dry docking, replenishment operations, heavy seas and other operational loads."" |
| COR 100-1.7 states that for structure not covered by ABS HSNC, we are to limit our allowable stress to no more than two-thirds the yield stress and the buckling criteria. Please clarify that this requirement will only apply to structure that has to be changed, and does not apply to existing structure, foundations, etc. as designed on the existing FRC." | COR Section 100-1.7 applies to structure that is an exception to the contract drawings. There are no changes to the RFP as a result of this response. | ||
| Q-44 | COR 533-7.3 | COR 533-7.3 states "Expansion Tank – A nonferrous expansion tank shall be provided and sized for a water capacity to accommodate the thermal expansion of the total volume of coolant in the system through a temperature gradient from 0°C (32°F) to 49°C (120°F) plus a reserve equal to 10 seconds pumping capacity of the chilled water pumps. The expansion tank when charged, shall maintain a minimum pressure of 0.35 bar (5 psi) throughout the system under all operating conditions. The expansion tank shall be provided with a vacuum relief valve and a liquid level sensor that shall provide a low level alarm when the tank is at the 5 second reserve capacity. The use of a bladder type tank or diaphragm type tank configuration requires the approval of the Contracting Officer." |
In closed-loop systems the expansion tank will see no system flow. The expansion tank is in place to allow for liquid thermal expansion only. Therefore, the requirement to size the expansion tank for a reserve of 10 seconds pumping capacity for the chilled water pumps is unnecessary.
| Space for new equipment on FRC is limited and tight, making this a difficult change to incorporate. In consideration of space constraints and cost impacts, will the Coast Guard consider removing this requirement? | No, the requirement will not be removed. However, the expansion tank sizing will be modified to accommodate the thermal expansion of the total volume of coolant in the system through a temperature gradient from 0°C (32°F) to 49°C (120°F). | ||
| Q-45 | COR 505-2.1.2.7 | COR 505-2.1.2.7 states "Potable water piping and fittings shall comply with ASTM F1155 Table 8. Potable water systems shall be fabricated of Type K or L Copper tubing meeting ASTM B88. Potable water system design, component selection, installation and testing shall comply with 46 CFR Part 56, except that takedown joints, fittings, and valves shall be lead- free, meeting the requirements of Section 1417 of the Safe Drinking Water Act (42 USC 300g-6); Prohibition on Use of Lead Pipes, Solder, and Flux." |
The Safe Drinking Water Act defines "lead-free" as "not more than a weighted average of 0.25 percent lead when used with respect to the wetted surfaces of pipes, pipe fittings, plumbing fittings, and fixtures."
| Please confirm that piping and valves in the potable water system that cannot be used for human consumption (e.g., piping and valves downstream of backflow preventers to toilets, washers, etc.) are not included in any "lead-free" determination or requirement. | All fittings and piping in the potable water system shall be Safe Drinking Water Act (42 USC 300g-6) complaint. There are no changes to the RFP as a result of this response. | ||
| Q-46 | COR 502-1.2.2 | The RFP states: 502-1.2.2 [RFP] The Emergency Diesel Generator engine shall be the same as that installed in the Phase I FRC. This is the Cummins model 6BTA5.9-DM diesel engine. |
| The COR 502-1.2.2 requires the Emergency Diesel Generator engine be the Cummins model 6BTA5.9-DM, which is a Tier II engine. Cummins will not be able to provide this engine for the Phase II contract. Will the USCG accept a substitute Tier III Cummins prime mover that meets the required power in lieu of the 6BTA5.9-DM? | Yes, the Government will accept a substitute Tier 3 compliant prime mover for the emergency generator that meets the salient characteristics of power/rpm, weight, and space of the existing 6BTA5.9-DM engine. | ||
| Q-47 | COR 070-8.11, 079-3.1, 079-3.1.5 | COR 070-8.11 requires the awning and its support structure to be considered in the stability analysis. COR 079-3.1 requires the intact and damage stability to meet the Procedures Manual for Stability Analyses of U.S. Navy Small Craft, NAVSEACOMBATSYSENGSTA Report No. 6660-99 Rev A. Report 6660-99 Rev A specifies "Masts, lifelines, fittings, etc. are neglected" with regards to topside icing. |
| Please confirm that the awning frame and fabric should not be considered in the intact stability icing calculation per NAVSEA Report 6660-99 Rev A. | The Intact Stability analysis to include topside icing shall be performed for three scenarios: the awning and its support structure; only the awning support structure but not the awning installed; and the FRC with neither the awning nor its support structure installed. Inclusion of the awning and its support structure in the Intact Stability analysis is for informational purposes. This is clarified in the COR. | |||
| Q-48 | COR and Attachment 9, Contract Drawing List | Some of the drawings identified in Contract Drawing List are not cited in the COR. Please clarify the order of precedence between the COR and the Contract Drawings cited in Attachment 9. | The only allowed departures from the contract drawings are those noted in exceptions in Attachment 9 and those explicitly stated in the COR. The callouts for the following contract drawings have been added to the COR: 154R-WPC-562-202 Rev A - Added to COR Section 562-1.1; 154R-WPC-562-402 - Added to COR Section 562-1.1; 154R-WPC-582-201 - Added to COR Section 582-1.1; 154R-WPC-640-201 Rev A - Added to COR Sections 070-8.4, 640-1.1. | |
| Q-49 | COR 581-1.4, 581-2.1, 581-3.1.1 | COR 581-1.4 states “The arrangement of the anchoring system and the windlass shall handle chain without manual intervention.” |
COR 581-2.1 states : “The anchoring equipment shall include a capstan with wildcat (chainwheel) sized to fit the FRC anchor chain, as well as a warping capstan to support mooring operations. The system shall be capable of dropping anchor in a dead ship condition, with no power to the capstan.”
COR 581-3.1.1 states: “The anchor shall comply with the material handling weight requirements of ASTM F1166 for lifting and carrying by two persons. Disassembly of the anchor into two parts, such that both parts comply with the material handling weight requirements of ASTM F1166 for lifting and carrying by one person, is permitted.”
Preliminary analysis of an anchoring arrangement that would comply with COR 581, including using an anchor that complies with ASTM F1166 (as cited in COR 581-3.1.1), shows that the anchor may not be heavy enough to meet the free-fall requirement of COR 581-2.1. In order to meet the free-fall requirement, the anchor may need to be substantially heavier, causing it to exceed the maximum allowable weight requirement in ASTM F1166. With all of the new components of the anchor handling system taken into account, including the windlass, capstan, chain locker, chain and anchor, the anchor can either meet the requirements of COR 581-3.1.1 or COR 581-2.1, but not both.
Adhering to ASTM F1166 standard cited in COR 581-3.1.1, the anchor will not self deploy by simply releasing the brake.
| Will the Coast Guard consider deleting the requirement for deployment of the anchor without manual intervention? | No, the Government will not delete the requirement for deployment of the anchor without manual intervention. However, the Government will reconsider the ASTM F1166 requirements for the anchor. | ||
| Q-50 | COR 581, 582, 154R-WPC-582-201 | COR 581-3.5 [RFP] states:" Pad eyes, pelican hooks and Ulster, or equal, type chain stoppers shall be provided. They shall be designed to take chain anchoring forces, and to lock the anchor in the pocket and shall not interfere with the running of a bridle to tow the vessel via the bow chocks or bullnose (mooring eye) and mooring bitts. Padeyes, pelican hooks, and stoppers shall be fabricated out of 316 CRES, or 316L for welded applications." |
COR 582-3.2.2 [RFP] states: "The towing arrangement shall be in accordance with NAVSEA Dwg. 804-4759441 Rev A. Cutters which anchor using synthetic line shall be provided with a suitable length of loose anchor chain for being towed. The chain shall be stronger than the hawser."
COR 581-3.5 states that the vessel shall be capable of being towed by a bridle that is run through the bullnose. COR 582-3.2.2 states that the towing arrangement be in accordance with NAVSEA Dwg. 804-4759441 Rev A, which depicts a vessel being towed through the bullnose via the anchoring chain.
Section J Attachment 9 exceptions list shows no exceptions to the current towing arrangement, 154R-WPC-581-201, except equipment brand substitution. Drawing 154R-WPC-582-201 does not use a towing bridle or anchoring chain through the bullnose, but instead shows the towing bridle run outboard of the bulwark and through the chocks attaching to the bitts between FR 2 and FR 3. Utilizing this arrangement, the towing bridle will not interfere with any deck equipment or obstructions.
There are three conflicting requirements for the towing arrangement: 1. through the bullnose with a bridle, 2. through the bullnose with the anchoring chain, and 3. with a bridle through the port and starboard mooring chocks.
| Please confirm the Coast Guard intends to use the towing arrangement in 154R-WPC-582-201, Mooring and Towing A&D. | The towing arrangement shall comply with 154R-WPC-582-201. This is clarified in the COR. | |||
| Q-51 | COR 433-2.1.1.4 | References are to COR 433-2.2.4 & COR 433-2.3.1 that does not exist. Please provide clarification. | The correct COR references are COR Section 433-2.1.1.5 and COR Section 433-2.1.2, respectively. | |
| Q-52 | Section E.1.1 | Section E.1.1 incorporates FAR clause 52.246-11 HIGHER-LEVEL CONTRACT QUALITY REQUIREMENT FEB 1999 into the RFP by reference. Clause 52.246-11 (a) indicates that the “Contracting Officer [will] insert the title, number (if any), date, and tailoring (if any) of the higher-level quality standards.” The application of this clause may have a direct effect upon pricing. |
| What title, number, date, and tailoring of the higher-level quality standards should prospective bidders anticipate as a Contracting Officer insertion to complete this FAR clause? | Section E has been updated to include the fill-in, ISO 9001. | |||
| Q-53 | Section J, Attachment 3 | The Phase I CDRLs provided in the technical data package are numbered differently than those in the Phase II RFP. For instance, COTS technical manuals are CDRL 086-001 in the technical data package and are CDRL 086-005 in the Phase II RFP. In the Phase II RFP, CDRL 086-001 is the Technical Data Organization Plan. Will the Coast Guard consider renumbering the FRC Phase II RFP CDRLs to match those in the technical data package? | No. Please see COR Section 042-6.5.1.5 for handling of Phase I CDRL deliverables submitted to satisfy Phase II CDRL deliverable requirements. There is no change to the RFP as a result of this response. | |
| Q-54 | COR 457-1.1.2.3 | Low Light Camera. The low light camera sensor shall have a resolution of no less than 1280 x 720 with a 36X continuous optical zoom having a field of vision from 59°-1.4° and a 3X electronic zoom having a field of vision of 0.5°. |
| Based on market research there is no compliant equipment available. Please verify the requirement. | The low light camera sensor shall have a field of vision from 52°-1.4°. This is clarified in the COR. | |||
| Q-55 | COR 457-1.1.2.1 | Thermal Imager. The thermal imager sensor shall have an operating wavelength between 3‐5 μm, a resolution of no less than 1,280 x 720 with a 20X optical zoom with a field of vision from 40°-2° and a 4X electronic zoom (640x480 resolution for electronic zoom) with a field of vision of 0.5°. Is the resolution for the 4X electronic zoom required at 640x480? | The electronic zoom resolution requirement is removed. | |
| Q-56 | Section 083 Paragraph Numbers 083-5.2.4 and 083-6.2 Page 86 | RFP states that AELs shall be provided under CDRL 083-007. Outfitting Operations Plan also has this CDRL. This is a duplicate CDRL number. Will the Coast Guard correct the CDRL numbering? | The CDRL number for the Outfitting Operations Plan should be CDRL 083-008. This is corrected in the COR. | |
| Q-57 | L.17.2.1 Development of Final Design | Is it the Government's intention that all offerors compare the RDLP COR to the Final RFP COR, in their entirety? | The Government's intention is for all offerors to describe how they plan to meet the requirements of the RFP given the data provided, understanding that there are some differences between the Phase I FRC (RDLP) data and the Phase II FRC requirements, as well as opportunities for change within the stated requirements. There is no change to the RFP as a result of this response. | |
| Q-58 | COR 100-1.1, 100-1.3, 100-1.6 & Section J Attachment 9 | COR 100-1.6 states “In cases where the Phase I FRC uses metric plates and shapes, equivalent U.S. standard plates and shapes may be substituted. For plates, equivalent means equal or greater thickness. For shapes, equivalent means equal or greater shear area and section modulus. Section J Attachment 9 “Contract Drawing List” states that there can be “No exceptions” made for the drawings listed in COR 100-1.1, as well as drawing 154R-WPC-151-301 Scantlings Superstructure. |
There are inconsistencies between Section J Attachment 2, COR, and Section J Attachment 9, Contract Drawing List. COR 100-1.3 and 100-1.6 state that the structural arrangements may be modified, but the “Contract Drawing List” says “no exceptions” are allowed on the structural drawings.
| Which takes precedence, the requirements in Section J Attachment 2, COR, or the requirements in Section J Attachment 9, Contract Drawing List? | Structural Contract Drawings may be modified as described in COR Section 100-1.3. This is clarified in the COR. | ||
| Q-59 | COR 505-2.1.2.7 | Table 8. Potable water systems shall be fabricated of Type K or L Copper tubing meeting ASTM B88. Potable water system design, component selection, installation and testing shall comply with 46 CFR Part 56, except that takedown joints, fittings, and valves shall be lead- free, meeting the requirements of Section 1417 of the Safe Drinking Water Act (42 USC 300g-6); Prohibition on Use of Lead Pipes, Solder, and Flux." |
The Safe Drinking Water Act defines "lead-free" as "not more than a weighted average of 0.25 percent lead when used with respect to the wetted surfaces of pipes, pipe fittings, plumbing fittings, and fixtures."
ASTM F1155 Table 8 requires use of ASTM B61 & B62 valves. These valves contain 4 to 6% lead. If the total weighted average of pipes and valves in the potable water system exceeds 0.25% lead, then the required ASTM B61& B62 valves will result in the system not complying with the Safe Drinking Water Act.
May the Offeror substitute materials for the valves, as needed, in the potable water system to meet the "lead-free" requirement? Examples of substitutions include:
1. Stainless steel valves with copper and copper nickel piping.
| 2. Stainless steel valves with stainless steel piping. | Where bronze components using non-SDWA compliant alloys are specified on Table 8, these components shall be substituted with equivalent lead-free bronze components certified to NSF/ANSI Standard 61. This is clarified in the COR. | ||
| Q-60 | COR 505-2.1.2.7 | COR 505-2.1.2.7 states "Potable water piping and fittings shall comply with ASTM F1155 Table 8. Potable water systems shall be fabricated of Type K or L Copper tubing meeting ASTM B88. Potable water system design, component selection, installation and testing shall comply with 46 CFR Part 56, except that takedown joints, fittings, and valves shall be lead- free, meeting the requirements of Section 1417 of the Safe Drinking Water Act (42 USC 300g-6); Prohibition on Use of Lead Pipes, Solder, and Flux." |
The Safe Drinking Water Act defines "lead-free" as "not more than a weighted average of 0.25 percent lead when used with respect to the wetted surfaces of pipes, pipe fittings, plumbing fittings, and fixtures".
| Are the reverse osmosis (RO) water makers, brominator, and potable water pumps included in the "lead-free" determination calculation for 0.25% lead within the potable water system? | Yes. There is no change to the RFP as a result of this response | ||
| Q-61 | COR 562-2.5 | COR 562-2.2 states, "Rudder stock mechanical seals shall be provided." |
COR 562-2.5 states, " The rudder stock seal shall be leak free. For shaft sizes 203mm (8in) or less, leak rate shall not exceed 0.7ml/mm (0.6 fl oz/in) shaft diameter/hour."
COR 562-2.2 states that rudder stock seals are to be mechanical seals. COR 562-2.5 states that rudder stock seals shall not leak but also establishes a maximum leak rate based on shaft size.
| Because mechanical seals are not leak free, was it the USCG's intention for the Offeror to adhere to the maximum allowable leak rate as defined in COR 562-2.5, regardless of shaft size? | The maximum allowable leak rate requirement has been clarified in COR Section 562-2.5. | ||
| Q-62 | COR 568-1.11 | COR 568-1.11 for the thruster reads “Gratings shall be designed and constructed to minimize vibrations when the FRC moves in the water, either with or without the thruster operating.” |
| Please confirm that USCG intends that the gratings are to be built and installed according to the A and D drawing titled 154R-WPC-568-201-Bow Thruster System AandD.dwg supplied with the RFP package. | Drawing 154R-WPC-568-201 Rev "-" Bow Thruster System A&D is not a contract drawing and is provided as information about the Phase I design. The offeror is responsible for meeting the requirements of the COR. There is no change to the RFP as a result of this response. | ||
| Q-63 | COR 300-1.3, 300-2.4.7, 300-3.1.1, 512-4.20 | COR 300-1.3 states "The electric power generation equipment, distribution, and arrangement shall be identical to the Phase I FRC." |
COR 300-2.4.7 states "Each ship service generator shall be suitable to support the complete FRC electrical load requirements per the Electric Plant Load Analysis with one generator online and the other on stand-by to ensure the availability of electric power during emergency conditions."
COR 300-3.1.1 states "Two independent ship service generator sets shall be provided as shown in drawing 154R-WPC-200-301 Rev “-” Machinery Arrangement Drawings. The ship service generator sets shall be capable of being operated in parallel with both power (KW) and reactive power (KVAR) load sharing. Each ship service generator shall be a Stamford model HCM434E, rated at 215kW, 450VAC, 60Hz, 3-Phase, 0.8 PF, 345A. The generator prime mover shall be a Cummins QSM11-DM diesel engine."
COR 512-4.20 states "The air conditioning plants shall be a chilled water plant."
Due to the use of a chilled water HVAC plant and other changes, the results of the EPLA (Electrical Plant Load Analysis) with the required margins may exceed the rating of the generators.
| Please confirm that USCG will allow the Offeror to maintain the same kW size generators as currently installed on FRC Phase I and consume the EPLA margin as needed, rather than resizing the generators. | The ship service generator sets specified in COR Section 300-3.1.1 shall be provided. There is no change to the RFP as a result of this response. | ||
| Q-64 | COR 233-10.1, 233-10.2, 233-10.3 | 233-10.1 states "The engines are provided with an emergency shutdown device which complies with ABS NVR 2-2-1." |
233-10.2 states "Each engine shall be provided with an emergency shutdown device, operable by a pull cable, which will shut off combustion air to the engine. The pull cable shall be operable from both the pilothouse and a location adjacent to the primary access to the engine compartment. The pull cable shall have a maximum pull tension of 44N (10 lbf). The device shall require manual reset before the engine can be restarted. The emergency shutdown shall be independent of the normal stop mechanism."
233-10.3 states "An electronic emergency shutdown device may be installed but it may not take the place of the mechanism required in COR Section 233-10.2 above."
An air shutoff valve is not an available option on the MTU engines currently used on Phase I FRC and is not considered necessary for the manufacturer’s engine design arrangement for use as an emergency shutdown device. On Phase I FRC, special consideration was given to the equivalent alternative arrangement (a shutdown signal to the ECM) installed on the MTU engines and a justification for technical determination (JTD) was submitted to ABS and approved.
| Will the USCG allow the ABS-approved JTD to be used? | As long as the Phase I configuration with an air shutoff valve and fusible link is maintained, the ABS-approved JTD is applicable and the Government will allow its application. There is no change to the RFP as a result of this response. | ||
| Q-65 | COR 440-6.1 | A Military VHF-FM (Military-VHF) and Air Band VHF-AM Civil Aviation (AirBand-VHF) Transceiver sub-system shall be installed. The Military-VHF and AirBand-VHF requirements shall be met by a single transceiver; it is not a simultaneous capability requirement. The operator shall be capable of selecting the appropriate frequency and other modes of operation based on configuration programming conducted by Coast Guard technical support personnel. This shall be the same model transceiver, similarly optioned and collocated with the 225- 399.99 MHz MILSATCOM/ UHF-LOS Sub-System (COR Section 440-11) Transceivers. |
| Upper frequency referenced in 440-11 is 2.5 Ghz which limits the radio options. Other competing solutions spec a maximum of 2 Ghz (MUOS). What is the the maximum frequency the USCG expects to use? | The frequency spectrum that is set aside for USCG use is up to 420 MHz. However, the maximum frequency the USCG currently uses is 400MHz. The upper frequency requirement is changed to allow for greater options to meet the requirement. | ||
| Q-66 | COR Table 440-1 | UHF Military LOS |
UHF Military SATCOM (225.00 MHz-2.5 GHz) 2 Transceivers (Military-VHF/UHF #2) (Military-VHF/UHF #3) 440-11
| Upper frequency referenced in 440-11 is 2.5 Ghz which reflects a DMR radio. Other competing solutions spec a maximum of 2 Ghz (MUOS). What is the the maximum frequency the USCG expects to use? | The frequency spectrum that is set aside for USCG use is up to 420 MHz. However, the maximum frequency the USCG currently uses is 400MHz. The upper frequency requirement is changed to allow for greater options to meet the requirement. | |||
| Q-67 | COR 098-2.1 | Please further define what is meant by the terms “SEAWATCH FRC Command and Control (C2) Suite.” | The SEAWATCH-FRC Command and Control (C2) Suite is described in COR Section 410. This is clarified in the COR. | |
| Q-68 | COR 433-2.1.1.4 | COR 410-2.2.2 requires Seawatch sensors connected. Connection of actual sensors would require radar, depth, speed, and other equipment. Is it acceptable to provide simulated sensor data? | Yes, the mock-ups required in COR Section 410-2.2.2 can be equipped with real sensor or simulated sensor inputs to simulate operation and demonstrate the proper integration of all of the equipment with the GFE software. The two mock-ups of the SEAWATCH-FRC C2 suite, including the equipment/connections required by COR Section 425-1.1, shall be provided with all of the hardware and connected sensors necessary to simulate operation and demonstrate the proper integration of all of the equipment with the GFE software. This is clarified in the COR. | |
| Q-69 | COR 440-11.1.1 | The new requirement for MUOS adds significant complexity to the system design. The combination of the extended frequency range to 512MHz from 399.99 MHz, 100 watts output, RF switching, and MUOS will require a nonstandard system. Will the USCG consider lowering the output power to 50W to accommodate a standard system? | Yes, the output power requirement is lowered to 50W to accommodate a standard system. This is clarified in the COR. | |
| Q-70 | Section F.6.3 | “Initial binning shall take place at the Contractor's facility. Custody transfer shall take place at the cutter's homeport. Per COR Section 083-6.4.6, all allowance material received by the Contractor after cutter delivery and prior to departure from the Contractor's facility shall be turned over to the cutter. Contractor furnished onboard allowance material received after cutter departure shall be packaged and shipped, at Contractor's expense, in accordance with instructions provided by the Coast Guard.” |
Section F.6.3 is written similarly to the Phase I FRC contract in which “custody transfer shall take place at the cutter’s homeport.
This is the start of the file's text. The full file is on GovTribe.
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .