HSCG40-16-Q-P30G21_A00002_(continued).pdf

PDF 15 KB Posted

Attached to
CGSTA ANT MOBILE (643502) ANB 2016 DRYDOCK REPIAIRS
Solicitation number
HSCG40-16-Q-P30G21
Issued by

About this file

A00002 (cont'd)

View the file

Other files

Show all 16

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

HSCG40-16-Q-P30G21

Amendment Number A00002

14. (cont’d)

Note: Included are PDF copies of the full excel spreadsheet IRT question 6. Also included is a Rev-1 of the Repair Specification (with WI 4 Note removed as stated in answer 7) and available for download. Please see below:

Question 1: As I read it, Tables 1 and 2 are Gladd Solutions (Contractor) recommendations and tables 3,4,5,6 are CG NAV ARCH opinion (recommendations) for starboard and port sides, How do the “NAV ARCH opinions” tables differ from Gladd Solution recommendations tables of 881 sq ft of hull plate replacement?

Is it 100sf less? [37+63] so 781SQFT?

Answer: For all measurements listed in various Tables, CG is looking for bids on "Nav Arch recommendations".

Question 2: . KTR interprets the “Discussion” section as , for informational purposes only, and not part of the SOW, Based on comments like “should be” and “need to be”. Does the Gov. concur?

Answer: Yes, the "discussion" section is for informational purposes only.

Question 3: Can the Government provide a clarified conclusion to the CG NAV ARCH opinion in the form of defined quantity?

“x” amount of sq ft clad welding

“x” amount of Sq Ft plate renewal

Otherwise it seems up for individual KTR interpretation and could clash with CG PE and /or CG

NAV ARCH)

Answer: Total sq ft of plate renewal: approximately 780 sq ft total Total sq in of clad weld: 108

HSCG40-16-Q-P30G21

Amendment Number A00002

Question 4: KTR considers docking blocks to be an interference and to be treated under the “Notes” section of WI para 3.1.4.

Because reference is made in comments section of NA opinion as “relocate OR modify block as required”

Does Gov. concur? How should KTR bid these Repair ID’s?

Answer: Hull blocks are not considered an interference. However, if blocks need to be relocated to facilitate repairs, submit CFR/CR.

Question 5: Will the CG Nav Arch provide the plate renewal sequence for the KTR?

Answer: The Coast Guard cannot tell the Contractor how to renew the plate. The "plate renewal sequence" must ensure that structural integrity and proper support of the vessel is maintained throughout the availability.

Question 6: In the Summary, CG recommends KTR to renew plate adjacent to recommended sections that were Contractor (Gladd Solutions) identified.

The full Gladd Solutions report is not supplied to verify those “adjacent” areas. [Eg. 1s and 1s1] .

How does KTR identify “caution or warning areas” referenced in the summary?

Answer: The warning areas referenced are denoted by blue ovals on the Gladd Solutions color scan. For additional scan info, please see attached excel spreadsheets

Question 7: Ktr understands comments like “recommended renewing plate in sections due to presence of interferences/structure … to be treated as per 3.1.4 note

Does Gov. Concur?

Answer: Note 3.1.4 will be removed because it conflicts with Para 3.3.5 of SFLC Std Spec 0000

All other terms and conditions remain unchanged.

(END OF AMENDMENT NUMBER A00002)

File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .