July_6th_Questions_PXC002kw.doc

HSCG23-16-R-PXC002

July 6th Questions and Answers

1. Given the short time frame in which the new system is to be constructed and installed, what will be the mechanism to allow work hours outside of the advertised period between 0700 and 1700? Will this also apply to holidays and weekends?

Contractors may work during weekends and holidays with at least a 3 business day notification to the COR. Contractors may expand the core work hours of a weekday by a total of 4 hours. COR notification is required at least 1 business day ahead of individual work day extensions, or 3 business days ahead of a 2 or more day consecutive extension.

2. Will the successful contractor be expected to provide all SCANTS related technical data and computer software, including but not limited to the delivered configuration of hardware and software documentation, to the Government with Unlimited or Government Purpose Rights?

The PWS requires documentation in 5.12.4, and additional licenses/permissions in 5.11 for system tasks beyond simple operation.

3. In order to properly estimate the building modifications required by the Performance Work Statement, please provide the plans for the building as it now exists.

See the drawing Design Documents (“As Built”) provided in the PWS.

4. Several building modifications are required, such as modifications to the ceiling and raised floors as well as removal and installation of trainer bulkheads. Modifications to the building’s electrical distributions system will also be required. What construction, safety and other requirements must be complied with when making building modifications?

PWS 1.1 limits the scope of any modifications to those specifically described in the PWS as related to system installation. Specifically, those changes annotated in Design Documents (“Changes to Existing”). Any other modification proposed by an offeror must be limited to resolving an interference for individual pieces of equipment. Additionally, 5.2.9 provides general guidance, and 6.0 outlines standards as they pertain to contractor performed work.

5. We are concerned that there is no fire suppression system in the SCANTS spaces, will one be required under this contract? If yes, what codes and standards must be met?

Fire suppression is beyond the scope of the PWS as outlined in 1.1.

6. For building modifications, will the services of an architect and/or professional engineer be required?

See answer 4 for requirements as they pertain to the facility.

7. What are the requirements for trainer sound systems? This is only mentioned briefly in PWS 5.8; what sounds are to be provided? What fidelity?

Offerors are only required to provide their Commercial Off The Shelf (COTS) sound solution. Sounds provided by the simulation should meet the COTS standard described in 1.18.

8. For the CCTV system, how many cameras and in what locations are they to be installed?

5.10 requires offerors to provide at least 2 pan/tilt/zoom cameras on each bridge, configured so as to view both chart work and the overall bridge scene simultaneously.

9. What will be the exact status of the building at the start of the 2-month installation period?

The system will be non-operational/not used for training. All equipment used currently for simulation will be removed except that provided as GFP. Work on the facility will be taking place for part of the performance period. That work is limited to: HVAC upgrade, flat roof repair/replacement and downspout repair.

10. Please provide the dimensions and access details for all exterior building openings as they will exist at occupancy.

Southern Exit 1st floor: 34”x71”

Elevator Door 36”x83” (Inside dimension 48”X62”, total capacity 2000lbs)

Front Door SCANTS 36”x78”

North side basement door 33”x81”

11. PWS: 1.6 – Period of Performance: If one or more bridges are awarded and required by 1 June - what can the contractor expect for building availability to install the systems prior to June 1?

See question 1. Contractors may access the facility between award of contract and the beginning of the installation period on weekdays with 1 week notice to COR, subject to the training schedule.

12. PWS 1.8 – Hours of Operation: Based upon the short installation period will the CG allow for the expansion of the Hours of Operation during the week and even the weekend?

See question 1.

13. PWS 1.9 – Travel: What does this mean? Will the GC not recognize any travel costs as part of any offerors proposal?

It is understood that contractors’ price proposal includes the total cost to the government to execute each CLIN.

14. PWS 1.13 – Status Meetings: Can monthly status meeting be held by video conference?

Yes.

15. PWS 1.15 – Protection of Information: This states “Databases, scenarios and models created from Government information or property will be for the sole use of the USCG at this facility and will not be disseminated without approval.” Is the Government Furnished information "Export Controlled" such that it cannot be given to non US persons without export approval?

No; the purpose of 1.15 is to prohibit contractors from providing databases and models created specifically for this facility to other simulation companies and customers.

16. PWS 1.18 – Performance Requirements Summary: Will Past Performance be assessed for the SCANT solicitation based on both Prime’s performances and COTS product performance and qualities?

Past Performance is defined in the Request for Proposals letter under Factor 5.

17. PWS 2.4 – Ready to Train: Will the Coast Guard provide the OPEN FLIGHT models of existing ships and databases at contract award to the awardee? If yes, please provide the list of the models that will be made available.

No.

18. PWS 3.1 Government Furnished Information (GFI): Regarding Ship’s Hydrodynamic Data, can offeror request that the Government furnish a representative set of Ship's Hydrodynamic data (one ship) for use in the proposal response to allow the offeror to demonstrate and quantify the "Model Fidelity" section of the proposal response?

No; offerors shall demonstrate fidelity based on existing COTS models for bid purposes.

19. PWS 3.2 – Government Furnished Property (GFP): Are video and USB extenders used by existing VEGA and radar part of GFP?

Yes.

20. PWS 3.2.2 – AN/SPS-78 Radar: With respect to GFP SPS-78 radars, has CG successfully integrated the SPS-78 processor with SPS-73 deck stand consoles, keyboard and trackball?

Yes.

21. PWS 3.2.3 – USCG VEGA ECDIS: Are VEGA monitors and mounting arms part of GFP and to be reused?

No.

22. PWS 3.2.4 – Selected existing scenarios for conversion: What is the format of existing GFP scenarios? Can they be exported to a common file format such as text, Excel, CSV, etc.?

The existing scenarios will be exported as a .pdf document.

23. PWS 3.2.4 – Selected existing scenarios for conversion: How many scenarios are expected to need conversion?

The price sheet attached to the RFP indicates a maximum of 30 conversions per option year.

24. PWS 5.2.2 – General Requirements: What is meant by “The bridge design enables a complete blackout condition to be achieved”?

The total amount of ambient light present is suitable to a nighttime simulation.

25. PWS 5.2.4 – Bridge Radar Stimulation: Each bridge has two radars (either SPS-50 or SPS-78), are both radars run from a single simulated antenna as a Master/Slave configuration, or are they set up as one each X-Band and S-Band antenna?

The two radars are required to operate from a single simulated antenna.

26. PWS 5.2.8.2 – External Communications: Lists Ship’s Intercom (1MC) as external communications, please clarify what external communication the 1MC is to provide?

The Ship’s Intercom (1MC) is a general PA announcing system that is meant to simulate interaction with the crew onboard the ship, and should be monitored by the instructor at the ICS.

27. PWS 5.2.8.2 – External Communications: Lists Loudhailer as external communications, please clarify what features are expected from the loudhailer?

The Loudhailer is meant to simulate communications external to the ship, and should be monitored by the instructor at the ICS.

28. PWS 5.2.9 – General Construction Standards: For all electrical and carpentry work, what specifically does “applicable codes” refer to (ie. Local codes, CG Engineering codes, national standards)?

See question 4.

29. PWS 5.2.9.1 – Electrical Modifications: There is 60KW of conditioned power available, but how is it currently allocated per room?

60 KW is distributed through each space currently used for simulation/ instructor control stations. Each space has a combination of the following:

-Dedicated 30 AMP outlet (wall mount and/or under floor mount)

- 20 AMP outlets (wall mount and/or under floor mount)

-Overhead mounted 15 AMP outlets (1 for each currently used projector)

*Note: Under floor outlets are not hard mounted. Circuitry assembled with flex conduit and has considerable slack /service loops).

Additionally, there is dedicated 30 AMP service immediately adjacent to both the preferred and acceptable server locations (notes 6, 7, 8 on Design Documents “Changes to Existing”) with (2) 30 AMP outlets immediately adjacent to the preferred full-height server rack location (Note 7, Design Documents, “changes to existing”).

30. PWS.8.3 – Exercise Area Fidelity: What IOS chart format does the CG desire: DNC or ENC?

There is no requirement to use a specific chart format when developing an exercise area database. In the operation of installed simulators, the USCG will manage the chart inventory of the GFP ECDIS system.

31. PWS 5.9.1 – Instructor Control Stations Specific Requirements: Can Radar, ECDIS and CCTV display be a single monitor with video switch?

No; PWS 5.9.1 requires each output to be displayed on dedicated displays simultaneously.

32. PWS 5.9.1 – Instructor Control Stations Specific Requirements: What is meant by “Target RADAR image can be toggled on and off”?

Enables an instructor to turn on/off a radar return for specific target ship models either before or during a simulation.

33. PWS 5.10 – Monitoring and Debriefing: Is the monitoring and debrief capability in this section is only played back on the respective bridge it was recorded on?

No; 5.10 requires central PC based audio/video recording, which can be played back on either the respective bridge / instructor control station, or in a debriefing room.

34. PWS 5.10.1 – Debriefing Room 1 (Optional): Please provide a description of the GFE A/V equipment?

(1) COTS HD projector with standard HDMI connections.

35. PWS 5.10.3 – Debriefing Room 2 (Optional): Please provide a description of the GFE A/V equipment?

(1) COTS HD projector with standard HDMI connections.

36. PWS 5.12.1 – Scenario Conversion (Optional): Please provide a copy of the ENC and other descriptive information on the Pennsport exercise area so that the proposer has a basis to make an estimate of the conversion effort required.

Specific information about Pennsport will be made available upon award. In order to understand the scope of the requirement, the following information is provided:

Pennsport is a 15x10 NM exercise area with basic land features and a 4x4 NM city scene with 7 discernible navigation objects within the city scene. Pennsport has basic land and bathymetric topography, three channels, 1 pier, 2 terrestrial ranges, 16 total prominent fixed objects used for visual or radar navigation, and 26 floating aids to navigation.

37. PWS 5.12.1 – Scenario Conversion (Optional): Can the CG please provide a copy of an existing scenario and the scenario description so that the proposer has a basis to make an estimate of the conversion effort required.

See question 22. Scenarios for conversion will be provided when the option for scenario conversion is exercised. For the purposes of understanding the scope of conversion, a typical scenario is anywhere from 45-90 minutes, and would include general traffic within the exercise area for the purposes of creating a realistic environment, as well as 1-10 discrete, planned interactions with specific vessels.

38. PWS 5.12.8.1 – IT Security: Does DHS security requirements mandate using an IA operating system?

5.12.8 describes overarching government IT security standards. As these standards apply to systems running the Windows operating system, Windows 10 currently meets the standard.

39. Site survey: What demolition and removal of old components with the current systems will the USCG be responsible for?

The USCG will remove all existing hardware, enclosures, and support systems for the current SCANTS simulators before the start of the 2 month installation period, with the exception of any items being provided as GFP.

40. Site survey: What items must the contractor account for in the demolition?

Only those items specifically identified in the Design Documents (Changes to Existing).

41. Site survey: At the site visit the CG said they would provide some additional measurements - What are the largest and smallest openings for entering the spaces or bringing in material into the building and each bridge?

See question 10.

42. Are offerors required to bid to all options on the price spreadsheet?

Yes.

43. Can the Coast guard describe the 'use cases' for each bridge? Particular interest is in how many students use each bridge simultaneously and their roles in the training scenarios.

Typical scenarios involve 6-8 students formed into a navigation team, which may include any combination of the following:

Officer of the Deck

Conning Officer

Helmsman

Plotter (s)

Bearing Taker

Radar Operator

Navigation Evaluator

44. What are the student stations or manned stations - required at each bridge?

See question 43. However, each radar, ECDIS console, and helm station should be positioned so as to allow direct access to individual student operators.

45. Is it possible to receive accurate width and height measurements for all doors from outside of building through to each simulator room?

See question 10.

46. Is it possible to receive existing power distribution diagram to all simulator room?

See question 29.

47. Reference the RFQ_PXC002_PWS_SCANTS Performance Work Statement Para 3.0 Government-Furnished Property (GFP)…….in Para 3.2 it is listed all the equipment (property) is “To be provided upon award”. Does this mean that all the equipment including Radar units and ECDIS Computers will be removed from the SCANTS simulator and turned over to the Contractor?

See revised PWS Section 3.2.

48. Can we expect night training with the main simulator (either 240 deg or 270 deg - with options)?

Yes, see question 24.

49. PWS Section 1.6 - The performance work statement. Period of Performance to be completed within 2 months "to be installed during the summer". However, the initial install "must be fully functional by 6/1/17. This does not make sense. Could this be a typo? Maybe they meant 8/1/17?

See revised PWS Section 1.6.

50. GFP (Government Furnished Property) - USCG expects to repurpose existing De-Briefing room A/V equipment? Assume Monitors, projectors speakers/audio. Do not have scope of "A/V Equipment".

See questions 34 and 35.

51. “Installation of a new system shall be completed within two (2) months and must be installed during the summer.” Does this mean the on-site installation must happen during April and May 2017? If so, is this because of scheduled training activities are anticipated to be stopped during that timeframe?

See question 49.

52. Is it correct to assume that contract award is expected around Nov 2016 and installation to begin Apr 2017?

See question 49.

53. We presume USCG will provide the data for modeling of vessels (GFI) after award of contract. Is it your expectation that all the vessels to be modeled will be available at the time of installation?

The PWS (2.4 and 5.12) defines a “Ready to Train” requirement.

54. Can we have access to a sample of the ship models in advance? If not, can we have a sample or know the format and parameters for the data that will be provided?

Readily accessible ship’s characteristics will be provided such as: Length, beam, mast head height, draft, displacement, control systems, horsepower and imagery.

Hydrodynamic data will include acceleration/deceleration tables and advance/transfer tables.

55. Can we have access to the sea trial data? If not, can we have a sample or parameters and format of data?

See question 54.

56. Can the amount of model data and sea trial be characterized? How many pages of data will be provided, Is it 2 pages or a substantial data set?

The Coast Guard intends to provide basic sea trial data as described in question 54.

57. Will CAD drawings of the building be provided?

Provided as Design Documents in the PWS.

58. What are the constraints on power, heat, cooling?

The “As Built” drawing in PWS Design Documents describes the installed 60KW conditioned power system. The HVAC/heating are beyond the scope described in PWS 1.1. The installed HVAC is designed for a 28-Ton Cooling load.

59. Is there a fire suppression requirement?

See Question 5.

60. Confirm that the intent is to provide the vendor with a “blank slate” except for raised floor and any identified refurbished / reuse equipment?

The scope is described in PWS 1.1 and further addressed in question 4 above. This is not a “blank slate”. Interferences for individual pieces of equipment discussed in question 4 are very limited in scope to the immediate area of that piece of equipment. Entire wall/ceiling sections or entire mechanical/electrical systems cannot be described as interferences.

61. The design / plans imply Bridge 1 is Curved wall projection, but we want to confirm if Bridge 1 is expected to be an LED video wall type (section 5.3) and projected visual scene is an option (5.3.1)?

The 10% Design provided in PWS design documents is representational and only generally describes locations and very basic layouts of spaces. PWS section 5.3 is accurate.

62. Bridge 2 proposed plan indicates 17 LED displays: Confirm these are expected to be deployed in ‘Portrait’ mode?

See question 61. The government does not require that 17 portrait mounted displays be specifically utilized. Section 1.1 requires offerors to provide their COTS solution to PWS requirements. PWS section 5.2 requires that monitors/projectors be configured to maximize fixed vertical FOV given each space’s available overhead clearance.

63. Bridge 2 proposed plan indicates 17 LED displays: What is the size of displays expected? Is it permitted to alter the size / number combination to achieve the required 240 degree HFOV?

See question 62. Yes, it is expected that offerors will provide their COTS solution.

64. Bridge 2 proposed plan indicates 17 LED displays: Can the displays be ‘embedded’ in the bulkhead? (the drawing appears to indicate a gap between bulkhead and displays)

See question 62. PWS section 5.4 requires an “out the window” visual scene which would ideally provide a gap between a bridge bulkhead and the displays as indicated in the 10% design. The bulkhead that provides the “out the window” scene for bridges 1 & 2 is described in PWS 5.2.9.3. Displays may be embedded in order to meet requirements with a COTS solution.

65. Same questions in #12 but for Bridges 3, 4, 5 – Is it permitted to alter size / number of displays to achieve 120 degree HFOV?

Yes.

66. Where will the power cabinets behind Bridge 2 be moved to?

The power conditioner will move completely out of the SCANTS facility. Only a wall mounted distribution panel will remain in the current location.

67. Radar location:

See question 61. Generally the government intends to use one (1) radar for shipping (near the front of the bridge) and the other radar for navigation (near the back of the bridge or chart table).

68. Confirm access to radars for winning vendor. Will the radar ‘manufacturer’ provide the necessary cooperation to perform integration work?

See question 47. Vendors will have access to government owned radars as GFP. Cooperation between radar manufacturers and the government is beyond the scope of this contract.

69. Please confirm when it will be provided.

See question 47.

70. Is there anything ITAR in the facility? Will this be a secure facility?

SCANTS is not used for classified work.

71. Can the existing equipment be refurbished and re-used as part of vendor proposal?

Offerors may propose to re-use/refurbish property already in use at SCANTS in addition to the GFP provided in PWS section 3.2. The government will make available for use as GFP any electronic equipment enclosures currently used in bridges 3, 4, 5 and instructor control stations if identified in a proposal.

72. 5.10.1 Debriefing Room 1(Optional); 5.10.2 Debriefing Room 1 Upgrade (Optional) – We’d like to confirm if “Optional” means the contractor’s choice to use existing A/V equipment or to provide new A/V equipment?

See question 34. It is the government’s option to exercise this contract line item which utilizes existing equipment.

73. Same question #12, but for Debrief Room #2.

See question 72.

74. We presume two Debriefing rooms is not an option, and is in fact mandatory to be provided?

CLIN 00019 on the price proposal has been revised. Debriefing rooms are listed as optional CLINS.

75. Initial Year Support Services (Optional) – Assuming Warranty is expected for 1-year post installation (5.12.2), why is Initial Year Support Services Optional?

The scope of 5.12.6 goes beyond the repair scope of typical warranties required in 5.12.2. Offerors are required to provide their standard warranties and standard maintenance plans that meet the government’s technical requirements. If a standard initial year maintenance plan is duplicative for an individual offeror because of the warranty program please indicate in the proposal.

74. Can you confirm if there are any hazardous materials on site that will need to be managed or resolved by winning vendor?

Hazardous materials are not expected to be encountered within the scope of the PWS.

75. Does CLIN 0001 incorporate the PWS requirements for Section 5.2 (and including 5.2 through 5.2.9.3)? If not please clarify all requirements for CLIN 0001.

Yes, the requirements of section 5.2 apply to all bridges.

76. Please clarify or issue specifications for the definition of “LED video wall technology” in Section 5.3.

Offerors are asked to provide the required visual scene for Bridge 1 utilizing LED monitors instead of a projected visual scene.

77. a. Is CLIN 0004 meant to offer a price for the substitution of a 240 degree “curved wall” for the “LED video wall” specified in CLIN 0001?

b. What is the specification and/or definition for “curved wall”?

c. Is the price to be offered for CLIN 0004 only the difference between the cost for the LED Video Wall” proposed as a part of CLIN 0001 and the cost of the “Curved wall”?

d. [What is the intent of PWS 5.3.1] Is this the intent of PWS 5.3.1?

ANSWERS

A. Yes B. Offerors are required to provide their COTS solution for a projected visual scene on a curved screen/wall. PWS section 5.2 discusses the fixed visual FOV required of any projected or monitor delivered scene for all bridges.

C. Yes.

D. 5.3.1 is an optional change to 5.3 (which calls for a 240 degree LED video wall).

5.3.1 correlates to CLIN 00004

5.3.2 correlates to CLIN 00005

5.3.3 correlates to CLIN 00006

78. Is CLIN 0006 only meant to include the price difference between the 240 degree “curved screen” proposed as a part of CLIN 0004 and the added cost of expanding it to 270 degrees? Is this the intent of PWS 5.3.3?

Yes.

79. What is the definition of “existing” own ship model, target ship model, object model and exercise area as set forth in PWS 5.8.5? “Existing” other than the requirements of 5.8.1 through 5.8.5? Existing where? In contractor’s inventory? Does this correlate to CLIN’s 00011 through 00014?

Yes. “Existing” describes a COTS model ready in the company’s inventory.

80. What is the definition of “Developed” ” own ship model, target ship model, object model and exercise area as set forth in CLIN’s 00015 through 00018 and apparently correlating to PWS 5.8.5? Who chooses the required targets, ownships, objects and exercise areas? If not chosen by the contractor how are these to be priced in advance of knowing the particulars?

Yes. “Developed” describes models and databases needing to be built from scratch to meet future needs and exercised at the Government’s option. Offerors should describe the limits of future development when providing a proposal. Additionally, as offerors estimate the scope of anticipated future models/databases those models and databases indicated as (optional) on page 17 of the PWS in “List of Required ports, objects and ships” provide a good indicator of future government need.

81. PWS 3.2.4 and 5.12.1: What format will the existing scenarios be delivered on?

See question 22.

82. May the contractor propose milestone payments with the Proposal?

83. Are there any construction permits, licenses, or certifications required to perform the facility modifications outlined in the PWS?

See question 4.

84. PWS Section 1.5 Security – “Contractors will not be allowed access to the SCANTS facility without USCG personnel on site. All material equipment shall be secured and monitored by alarm when work is not being performed.” We assume the second sentence refers to GFE in contractor possession at a contractor facility and that the second sentence (Starting “All material”) is unrelated to the first, as securing/alarming on a USCG facility is not a contractor function. Please clarify and/or elaborate if this is not the case.

The site will be secured and alarmed when work is complete for the day. This is for your information. Government personnel will secure the facility at night and open it in the morning.

85. PWS Section 1.6 – states: “initial installation must be fully functional as early as 01 June 2017”. It also states “…must be installed during the summer” (of 2017). These two statements appear to be contradictory. Please clarify.

See question 49.

86. PWS Section 5.2.9.2 states: “Structural modifications are limited to those detailed in the attached design documents.” Is it permissible to propose one or more structural modifications if doing so will improve performance of the SCANTS?

See question 4. Additional modifications to improve performance are beyond the scope of the PWS. Only individual interferences may be proposed/identified/resolved.

87. PWS 8.0: Are the deliverable documents specified acceptable in contractor’s format? If not please specify required format.

89. Can the USCGA provide an example of an existing scenario, preferably one of the more complex scenarios for analysis? (as specified in section 3.2.4)

See question 37.

90. Can you please further elaborate on what the requirements are for the two (bridge wing) alidades as specified in section 5.2.5? Section 5.2 indicates that this requirement be considered for all bridges, however the sizes of Bridges 3,4 and 5 do not lend themselves to alidade placement. Would a virtual bearing display, incorporated into the navigation consoles, be acceptable to the USCGA faculty? Most commercial simulation systems now are utilizing such an arrangement as electronic alidades are significantly more expensive.

Bridge wing electronic alidades are intended as an elegant way to display the remainder of the visual scene and to take visual bearings on all five bridges. Offerors may propose a different COTS solution than an electronic alidade. However, any solution must be a dedicated visual channel and located at or near the side of the bridge and mounted to the bulkhead or the deck. Some COTS offerors may describe this as a dedicated “binocular” channel displayed on a small, flat monitor with a dedicated joy stick. Proposals integrating bridge wing alidades/additional visual channels into the navigation console are not in line with 5.2.5 and the general layout/location of alidades indicated on the 10% design in the PWS design documents.

91. What is the intention/objective for simulation of the Loudhailer capability as specified in section 5.2.8.2?

See question 27.

92. Room Modifications: Tt is unclear as to whether the USCGA will perform the necessary and/or desired room modifications as specified by a vendor’s demolition/design plan. Can the USCGA clarify the areas of responsibility for such modifications (i.e. removal of existing drop ceiling and re-working the associated HVAC ductwork and lighting in Bridge 1 projection arena). Is this included in the USCGA scope of work in the event that a projection option is chosen for Bridge 1 or will this be the responsibility of the vendor?

See questions 4 and 60 above. These modifications within the scope of the PWS and proposed interferences are the responsibility of the contractor. Removal of the entire ceiling and ductwork in bridge 1 is outside the scope of the PWS.

93. Room Modifications: Is it the expectation of the USCGA to receive modification/demolition drawings from a licensed State of Connecticut architect or will design/demolition drawings from the vendor in suitable detail to perform these modifications be sufficient? If licensed architectural drawings are required, will they be required at the 80% design submittal or after the award?

Vendor’s detailed drawings are acceptable. As discussed in questions 4 and 60 as well as 1.1 of the PWS and the PWS design documents, the scope of modifications in this PWS is very limited and is focused only on those modifications necessary to install a 240 HFOV system in a spaces that currently do not house 240 degree systems.

94. Room Modifications: Is there a requirement for the simulation space to be ADA (Americans with Disabilities Act) compliant?

No.

95. Room Modifications: Will any potential Asbestos mitigation for any required modifications be the responsibility of the USCGA?

Asbestos is not expected to be encountered within the scope of this PWS. The government will have the areas impacted by required modifications tested for asbestos. If asbestos is present in an area affected by an offerors proposal the government will notify that contractor during the 80% design feedback period following award.

96. Room Modifications: Are there further local requirements for Fire suppression within the simulation complex?

No. See question 5.

97. Room Modifications: How is HVAC zoned within the proposed spaces housing the simulation complex? It is understood that the USCGA intends to replace the existing HVAC within the complex, will the USCGA be responsible for AC changes to meet contractor requirements as per the 100% design drawings as agreed with USCGA, or will such changes be the responsibility of the contractor?

See question 58. Contractor requirements with respect to interferences with individual portions of ducting or equipment are the contractor’s responsibility to propose/resolve in the 80% design submission. Upon concurrence on the 80% design the government will work to resolve interferences with planned equipment/ducts before a new system would interfere with the concurred upon 100% design. Changes to the capacity/zoning of the HVAC system are beyond the scope of the PWS.

Is this the expected location for 2nd Radar?

(Similarly for all bridges)

Page 15 of 15 Posted 7/11/2016