SINS-2_Questions_and_Answers_P00003.docx

P00003

Questions and Answers HSCG44-16-R-001000 SINS-2

Questions pertaining to Attachment -2- SINS-2 Specifications Final

1. Question: 1.1.1.2.4.1(a) and (b) Citation:” Small Open Boats (15 to 20 feet in length):

(a) A single small MFD integrated with GPS, depth sounder, heading sensors and receive inputs from AIS and DSC systems.

(b) A single small MFD with internal GPS configured for bracketed surface and flush mount. In the bracket mounted configuration, the unit may be frequently removed from the boat when not in use.”

Question: Can USCG confirm the small open boats do not require/will not require a radar. Radar capability is not included in the (a) or (b) line items.

Answer: The specific radar requirements for each hull are contained on the tabs corresponding to each hull type in Attachment 1.

2. Question: Is the expectation that this MFD “shall be” identical to all other SINS-2 MFD, or is an alternate, lower-cost alternative acceptable?

Answer: The parts listing tab and required equipment per hull have been updated to clarify. Now “Remote Information Displays” are enumerated to correspond to 2.1.8. This is a separate component from “plotter”, which corresponds to the “Multi Function Display” described in the specification. Additionally, the specification has been edited to correctly convey the three notional sizes for MFDs.

3. Question: 1.1.1.2.4.5 (a) Citation: “(a) A single large MFD (or source processor unit with separate display and controller), GPS, radar, depth and heading. SINS-2 will integrate with external AIS and DSC to obtain target data.”

Question: With regards to “source processor unit with separate display and controller”, will USCG specify any size and specification limitation for the “separate display”?

Answer: The “separate display” will need to be of nominal size 4-5”, 7-8” or 10-12”, as it will serve as the presentation interface of the MFD. Furthermore, as the existing equipment’s functionality is a MFD of the stated size with integrated controls, the display cannot occupy the entirety of the existing equipment footprint, as the controls and interface mechanisms would need to be co-located. The power requirements are the same as the rest of the SINS-2 specification.

4. Question: Is it proposed that this “separate display” would be a video display for SINS-2 sensor video sources and/or non-SINS-2 video sources?

Answer: The only non-SINS-2 video source is addressed in 2.1.11.15. A vendor’s design may potentially utilize a “separate display” that might also serve as a non-SINS-2 video display, but this is not an evaluation criteria.

5. Question: Does USCG have a nominal video aspect ratio requirement (i.e. 4:3, 16:9 or 16:10 or other) and/or a screen resolution specification (i.e. SVGA, XGA, UXGA or other), or, are “separate display” specifications to be IAW all remaining SINS-2 specifications? This question also applies to 2.1.11.1.5.1.

Answer: The aspect ratio of chart data presented in the Operational Display Area must be preserved, but otherwise, no. If a separate display and source processor are used to meet the MFD requirement, then the separate display must meet all display specifications required of the MFD.

6. Question: 1.1.3.1 Citation: “Up to three additional MFDs.”

Question: Can USCG confirm that by this requirement there may be USCG platforms requiring up to 7 (seven) MFD?

Answer: The specification has been edited to clarify this requirement.

7. Question: 1.1.3.3 Citation: “SINS-2 shall have sufficient input/output ports to allow up to twelve sensors or external systems to be integrated”.

Question: Shall contractors simply infer which twelve sensors are required or can USCG provide a list of min/max sensor inputs by type?

Answer: An arbitrary combination of the following sensors (with parenthetical min/max) is required:

GPS/GNSS (1/3)

AIS (1/1)

Depth (1/2) Weather Station (1/1) Radar Array (1/1) Radar/Arpa target source (1/1) Heading Sensor (1/2) CCTV/EOIR video feeds (1/4) Autopilot interface (1/1) DSC Radio (1/2)

8. Question: 1.1.3.4 SINS-2 shall have sufficient video input/output ports to allow up to four external video feeds (EO/IR camera, video cameras). Are these video feeds analogue or digital? If they are analog cameras, will all MFDs need to be able to display all cameras (without using an analog)?

Answer: All cameras will use analog video. There is no requirement to display video data on all MFDs.

9. Question: 2.1.2 Motions and Accelerations: SINS-2 shall be capable of withstanding the motions and accelerations associated with high speed planing boats operating in severe marine environment. Please specify what is meant by severe marine environment (is IEC 60945 sufficient?)

Answer: Yes, IEC 60945 is sufficient.

10. Question: 2.1.4.1 / 2.1.4.2 IP55 / IP56 Are both dust and water ingress ratings required, or is water ingress only sufficient?

Answer: Water ingress is sufficient.

11. Question: 2.1.5.1 Citation: “System Voltage: 12 volts to 30 Volts Direct Current (VDC).”

Question: Can USCG clarify what the original power source is, by platform? Is boat or ship’s power 12-30 VDC or Alternating Current (AC) requiring external power supply, or some combination?

Answer: The USCG does not believe clarifying this is germane to meeting performance specification. The specification clearly conveys the input power requirements for SINS-2.

12. Question: 2.1.6.1.2 Citation: “The communication between devices within the SINS-2 system shall be a NMEA 2000 backbone. All devices incapable of communicating on a NMEA 2000 backbone must therefore include a method (gateway, interface converter of direct MFD connection) in the overall system design.”

Question: Is NMEA2000 understood to be the only communication protocol between MFD or are other standards acceptable? Specifically, is TCP/IP Ethernet networking allowed and if so, shall there be a requirement for the IEC 61162-450 Ethernet standard?

Answer: All IPv4/IPv6 networking solutions must meet stringent Department of Homeland Security Information Assurance and Network Security requirements. For this reason, NMEA2000 is the only communications protocol envisioned for SINS-2.

13. Question: 2.1.6.1.5 SINS-2 must have a single vacant maintenance NMEA 0183 communication port that will be used periodically by an external laptop or other device to send/retrieve navigation, waypoint and route data. Please advise connection specification, connector type,wiring etc.

Answer: This requirement has been removed.

14. Question: 2.1.7.2 SINS-2 must interface with existing AIS transponders, which are presently incapable of communicating on a NMEA 2000 backbone. All vessels will require a method (gateway, interface converter, direct MFD connection) to receive AIS data except: AB-SKF, CB-M, AB-S and LCM. Please provide specifications, make and model number of existing AIS transceivers. Is it assumed that the AIS is only communicating over 0183, if so can a full list of sentences that need bridging to NMEA 2000 be provided?

Answer: The EAIS IDD contains all pertinent information regarding the required AIS sentences. The current transponders used in the USCG are the L3 Protec-M AIS A1 and A3.

15. Question: 2.1.8.1 - Does this refer to NMEA 2000 DSC radios?

Answer: Yes.

16. Question: 2.1.9.3.1 Position Only Lat / Long or other supporting data (COG / SOG etc...) and if so please specify Answer: Position only (Lat/Long).

17. Question: 2.1.9.3.5 Man over-board How many targets are desired?

Answer: At minimum (based on 2.1.14.1), one. At most, five.

18. Question: 2.1.9.3.6 AIS Targets. How many AIS targets are required and what data is required?

Answer: Five nearest AIS targets, including target name, MMSI, position, heading and speed. Specification has been modified to reflect this change.

19. Question: 2.1.10.1.1 Citation: “SINS-2 shall remain otherwise fully functional when wireless is disabled.”

Question/Statement: This requirement seems to conflict with requirements under 2.1.11.16.2, 2.1.11.16.1, and 2.1.11.16.3, the “wireless keyboard” requirements. How does USCG propose to use a wireless keyboard if wireless capability is disabled?

Answer: The referenced requirement, 2.1.11.16.1, requires remote entry, with further clarification that said remote data entry device shall allow alpha-numeric data input. This is the minimum specification, which can be met a number of ways. As an objective requirement, the other referenced specification, 2.1.11.16.2, requires a wireless keyboard as additional data entry method. This does not contradict or obviate requirement 2.1.11.16.1, as 2.1.11.16.1 must still be met, even with wireless disabled. The final reference specification, 2.1.11.16.3, does not pertain to wireless communications.

20. Question: 2.1.11.1.2 Citation: “SINS-2 shall allow for an external controller (keyboard/ keyboard with integrated cursor control) (or other similar remote data entry device) to be connected that can be placed closer to the operator.”

Question: Shall this controller be wired, wireless, or at the discretion of the contractor?

Answer: See answer to 2.1.10.1.1.This controller shall be wired.

21. Question: 2.1.11.1.5.1 Citation: “Objective: SINS-2 shall include an option for a maritime monitor capable of displaying video output from the source processor.”

Question: Will USCG specify any size and specification limitation for the “maritime monitor”?

Answer: The “separate display” will need to be of nominal size 4-5”, 7-8” or 10-12”, as it will serve as the presentation interface of the MFD. Furthermore, as the existing equipment’s functionality is a MFD of the stated size with integrated controls, the display cannot occupy the entirety of the existing equipment footprint, as the controls and interface mechanisms would need to be co-located. The power requirements are the same as the rest of the SINS-2 specification.

22. Question: Is it proposed that this would be a video display for SINS-2 sensor video sources and/or non-SINS-2 video sources?

Answer: The only non-SINS-2 video source is addressed in 2.1.11.15. A vendor’s design may potentially utilize a “separate display” that might also serve as a non-SINS-2 video display, but this is not an evaluation criteria.

23. Question: Does USCG have a nominal video aspect ratio requirement (i.e. 4:3, 16:9 or 16:10 or other) and/or a screen resolution specification (i.e. SVGA, XGA, UXGA or other), or, are “maritime monitor” specifications to be IAW all remaining SINS-2 specifications?

Answer: The aspect ratio of chart data presented in the Operational Display Area must be preserved, but otherwise, no. If a separate display and source processor are used to meet the MFD requirement, then the separate display must meet all display specifications required of the MFD.

24. Question: 2.1.11.3.1.5 Does the radar data need to be displayed on the RIDs or only MFDs. If so please specify what data needs to be displayed.

Answer: No radar data need be displayed on the RIDs.

25. Question: 2.1.11.3.1.6 Is this a video, if so please describe format, if not please specify further.

Answer: This item refers to the radome/array provided with SINS-2, and is external from the MFD. There is no requirement for a SINS-2 MFD to receive/process/display third party radar images from a radome/array not included as part of SINS-2.

26. Question: 2.1.11.4 Charting data derived from Official Hydrographic Office navigational data. Can you please provide regional information where chart data must be available. i.e. US Coastal and US Inland Waterways, Caribbean, Canada. Will charting data be required for other countries (continents).

Answer: Chart data must be provided as part of SINS-2 for US Coastal and Inland waterways, included Hawaii and Alaska, Coastal Canada, as well as Caribbean (Mesoamerica). Chart data must be available (a la carte, included on price list) to support global operations. Specification has been modified to reflect specifics.

27. Question: 2.1.11.5.1 Citation: “SINS-2 shall allow Radar to be overlaid on the navigational chart in the operational display area” Question: This requirement potentially conflicts with the question above with regards to use of radar (or lack thereof) on open boats. If no radar is required on small open boats, is it further understood this requirement shall apply only partially, i.e. not apply to those vessel types operating without radar?

Answer: For vessels equipped with SINS-2 radar, SINS-2 shall allow radar to be overlaid on the navigational chart in the operational display area. Specification has been modified to reflect this.

28. Question: The following question applies to the following items of the specification:

2.1.11.11.5.2 And .3, also 2.1.11.12.3.2 and .3

The requirement in 2.1.11.11.5.2 and 2.1.11.12.3.2 seems to conflict with 2.1.6.1.2, which is the requirement that SINS-2 communication be via NMEA2000. Can USCG clarify?

Answer: Specification 2.1.6.1.2 requires that inter-device communications must utilize NMEA 2000 on the data bus. It is understood that not all devices natively communicate using NMEA 2000, and in these cases, a gateway devices will be necessary. However, all required sensors data must be available on the NMEA2000 bus.

29. Question: Additionally, it is vital to note that waypoints and routes may be transmitted via NMEA0183 or NMEA2000 communication protocol, but waypoints and routes are not formatted by either protocol. See additional questions below.

Answer: The USCG believes that specifying the particular NMEA 0183 sentence or NMEA2000 PGN to be used provides both protocol and formatting information sufficient for the vendors to meet the performance specification.

30. Question: 2.1.11.14 Distressed Digital Selective Calling (DSC) Targets. What is the requested number of targets?

Answer: NOTE: Originally submitted question referred to 2.1.11.4 – corrected based on subject. A maximum of 5 targets.

31. Question: 2.1.11.15 Objective: SINS-2 shall allow the operator to drop multiple, event-based, position markers in sequence as “bread-crumbs” during operations.

Are the event position markers placed by the operator manually or periodically?

Answer: Event Markers are placed manually.

Please confirm this is at the MFDs location or at another boats location?

Answer: Event Markers are placed at MFDs location(s).

32. Question: 2.1.11.15.1 Citation: “Paragraph 2.1.11.15 applies only to the RM-M, SPC-LE-33, RBS-II and CB-OTH-MKIV platforms.“ Question: Is “RM-M” a typo error? Is this RB-M repeat RB-M, “Response Boat-Medium”?

Answer: The specification has been corrected. It should be RB-M.

33. Question: 2.1.11.15.1 states SINS-2 shall support Class RM-M vessels. However, Attachment 1 SINS-2 Proposed Pricing Schedule, has no reference of supporting this class vessel. Is the RM-M to be included in Attachment 1 SINS-2 Proposed Pricing Schedule?

Answer: That is a typo. It should be RB-M, and the spec has been changed to reflect the change.

34. Question: 2.1.11.15.1.1 Citation: “SINS-2 shall be capable of full camera control (i.e. Pan, Tilt, Zoom, EO/IR toggle, tracking, etc.”

Question: In order for the contractor to respond, we must understand what cameras are being controlled. Can USCG please specify what camera types are being used by platform or shall contractor assume one common camera?

Answer: The RB-M has the FLIR Navigator II. The SPC-LE-33 has the SeaFlir-II. The CB-OTH-MKIV has the FLIR M series. The RBS-II does not have a camera capable of pan/tilt/zoom controls.

35. Question: 2.1.11.15.1.1 Is the CG asking for full control of just the EO/IR camera or all cameras? Answer: Full control is only required for the EO/IR cameras to meet this element of the specification.

36. Question: 2.1.11.16.2 Citation: “Objective: SINS-2 shall include a wireless keyboard with integrated cursor control (or other similar remote data entry device).”

Question : With reference to a previous question, how shall the contractor be in compliance with the objective or future requirement for a wireless keyboard, if wireless capability is to be disabled on the SINS-2 MFD?

Answer: Compliance with the requirement to disable wireless indicates that the wireless keyboard must be supplied in addition to a wired keyboard, or have the capability of conversion from wireless to wired.

37. Question: Is USCG specifying a particular communications protocol i.e. RF or Bluetooth or proprietary or is this up to contractor preference?

Answer: This is left as a contractor preference.

38. Question: 2.1.12.2.2.1 Citation: “SINS-2 radome shall have less than a 4 degree horizontal beam width” Question for clarification: Shall the SINS-2 radome antenna have “less than a 4-degree Beamwidth” or “4-degree Beamwidth or less”?

Answer: 4-degree Beamwidth or less

39. Question: 2.1.12.2.4.1 Similar to question immediately above: Shall the SINS-2 open array antenna have “less than a 2.3-degree Beamwidth” or “2.3-degree Beamwidth or less”?

Answer: 2.3-degree Beamwidth or less

40. Question: 2.1.12.10 National Telecommunications and Information Administration Certification (NTIA).

Is FCC certification adequate to meet the NTIA certification.

Answer: No.

2.1.12.10.1 Citation: “SINS-2 radars shall achieve Spectrum Certification through NTIA within 10 months of contract award. NOTE: Government Testing will include NTIA Spectrum Certification. “ Question: Shall any costs for NTIA certification be borne by USCG or by the contractor?

Answer: These costs shall be borne by the contractor.

41. Question: Question: If not, can the extra specifications be made known?

Answer: Yes, NTIA Regulations will be provided.

NOTE: NTIA certification manual can be found:

https://www.ntia.doc.gov/page/2011/manual-regulations-and-procedures-federal-radio-frequency-management-redbook.

42. Question: 2.1.14.1 SINS-2 shall allow the operator to drop a minimum of one man overboard marker. Is this a physical marker (such as a PLB) or marks on the MFD Answer: Marks on the MFD.

43. Question: 2.1.15 Event Markers operator can drop multiple, event-based, position markers in sequence as “bread-crumbs” during operations. Is the requirement use-case to be a combination of a Track Line and placing waypoints (position markers) whereby the operator can "mark" waypoints along the vessels track leaving behind the described "bread-crumb". Waypoints along a Track Line are unique and can be assigned a unique symbol from wpt symbol library and also numbers. If additional use case information is available, could create a more specific user interface to ensure simplest operation.

Answer: While the implementation described above may be a way to meet this requirement, Event Markers are not necessarily associated with a particular route or track line. The “bread crumb” feature is to allow boat crews to mark the location during operations, either for archiving or subsequent return, but in arbitrary order. Examples might be to mark debris or other hazards, mark where equipment/items went overboard, mark the assigned position of ATON, or where a unit was when a particular radio call was received.

44. Question: 2.1.16 Single-Frequency GPS (Navigation) Is a GNSS system allowed (GPS + GLONASS) or only GPS?

Answer: This requirement represents a minimum - GNSS system is acceptable.

45. Question: 2.1.16.1.1.2 Standard Positioning System (SPS). Please explain this requirement.

Answer: This is the normal positioning mechanism used by civilian GPS receivers. The military version is referred to as the Precise Positioning Service, and utilizes the P(Y) code.

46. Question: 2.1.17.2.1 Makes reference to boat classes WPC, WAGB-399 and WAGB-420 which do not appear in the kit lists. Are these classes encompassed by other classes or do we need to make allowances for this?

Answer: The WAGB-399 and WAGB-420 are both encompassed by the WAGB kit. WPC is synonymous with FRC from the kit list.

47. Question: 2.1.17.4 Citation: “SINS-2 Depth Sounder shall remain accurate up to 30 knots.”

Question: Is this accuracy standard to be assumed under all sea states, or IAW pitch and roll conditions stated in 2.1.17.1.1 and .2?

Answer: The SINS-2 Depth Sounder shall remain accurate IAW pitch and roll conditions stated in 2.1.17.1.1 and .2.

48. Question: 2.1.17.11 Transducer configurations With regards to transducer configurations, is USCG specifying solely flush-mount transducers for all vessel platforms, or is the contractor free to propose alternative transducer options?

Answer: Attachment 1 conveys the existing transducer configuration for each platform. The contractor may propose alternate transducer options.

49. Question: 2.1.20.2.3 and .3 NMEA2000 PGN 130310 and 130311 “Environmental Parameters” Statement and Question: These NMEA2000 Parameter Group Numbers are composite data carriers. Can USCG provide any additional information on this requirement, that is, what specific parameters in these composites are desired?

Answer: 130310 – Air temperature, Water Temperature, Atmospheric pressure.

130311 – Air temperature, Humidity, Atmospheric pressure.

50. Question: 2.1.21 (Autopilot) discusses converting NMEA 2000 to NMEA 0183 for the existing Autopilots on three platforms, BUSL, MLB and RBM. Attachment 1, SINS-2 Proposed Pricing Schedule, only shows Autopilot quantities for the BUSL (26). No Autopilot quantities are listed for the MLB and RBM of which there are 117 and 174 respectively. Is this intention to only interface the SINS-2 to the Autopilot on the BUSL or on all platforms (BUSL, MLB and RBM) listed in 2.1.21 for a total of 317 vessels?

Answer: The intention is to interface with all platforms in 2.1.21. Attachment 1 has been corrected.

51. Question: 2.1.21.2.1 127237 – Heading/Track Control As this PGN can be used for reporting status and commanding autopilots, please can the USCG specify which of the 2 roles it is asking this PGN to fulfill.

Answer: SINS-2 will report status to autopilots/track controllers, but will not command the rudder. Existing autopilots/track controllers will command the rudder.

52. Question: If it is to command autopilots, please provide a full break down of which fields are needed, and for which autopilot systems.

Answer: Data fields which support heading control system must be populated, while data fields which support direct rudder control remain null. SINS-2 is not required to fill the role of autopilot or track controller.

53. Question: 2.1.22.1.1 Citation: “SINS-2 shall utilize power supplies and converters that comply with shipboard environmental and technical requirements contained in NAVSO P-3641A Sections 1-3.”

Question: As above, can USCG clarify what the original power source is, by platform? Is boat or ship’s power 12-30 VDC or Alternating Current (AC) requiring external power supply, or some combination?

Answer: The USCG does not believe clarifying this is germane to meeting performance specification. The specification clearly conveys the input power requirements for SINS-2.

54. Question: 2.1.25.1 Citation: “SINS-2 component Mean Time Between Failure (MTBF) shall be 16,000 hours minimum.”

Question: What methodology or standard is USCG using for calculation of MTBF?

Answer: The calculation for Mean Time Between Failures will be calculated at the component level by summing the ratio of hours between failures to the number of failures. This calculation will be made independent of the system’s power status.

55. Question: 3.1.1 Information Density - The layout of information prescriptive for " critical task Sequences" What constitutes a " Critical task Sequence" Do "Critical Task Sequences" refer to warning and alarm messages.

Answer: This requirement has been removed from the specification. Offerors will not be evaluated against it.

56. Question: 3.1.20 Displays shall be viewable by crew members wearing Personal protective equipment that covers the head. Please clarify what this protective equipment is and how it may affect the vision of displays.

Answer: This requirement has been removed from the specification. Offerors will not be evaluated against it.

57. Question: 3.4.2 Citation: “Objective: SINS-2 shall be usable by operators wearing electro optical/infrared vision devices, and displays shall utilize proper colored lighting to facilitate this.”

Question: Can USCG specify which night vision devices are in use in the USCG fleet, whether type, make or model?

Answer: The Coast Guard uses the AN/PVS-14 pocketscope.

58. Question: Coast Guard Specific Implementation - How does the USCG intend to conduct testing? Will the CG complete a FAT (Factory Acceptance Test) or an SIT (Site Installation Test)?

Answer: The USCG will conduct a Site Installation Test to ensure that the systems conform to all asserted capabilities are consistent with proposed specifications.

59. Question: 5.2.1.1 and .2 Citations: “5.2.1.1 SINS-2 shall allow the user to import SAR patterns containing up to 250 waypoints in NMEA 0183 format. And 5.2.1.2 SINS-2 shall allow the user to import SAR patterns containing up to 250 waypoints in NMEA 2000 format.”

Statement and questions: The requirement for import using NMEA0183 appears to conflict with the system requirement to use NMEA2000, although 5.2.1.2 includes NMEA2000 as well. In any case, NMEA0183 and NMEA200 are data protocols and not file formats.

Answer: The requirement of SINS-2 to use NMEA 2000 between devices does not obviate the requirement to receive NMEA0183 inputs. The formatting of the routes and waypoints shall use existing NMEA0183 and NMEA2000 message formats.

60. Question: Can USCG clarify the file format type for waypoint and route storage type. Examples would be GPX, comma-delimited (CSV) or other.

Answer: The route and waypoint storage mechanics are left to the contractor’, but must be consistent across SINS-2, to include compatibility between MFDs of different sizes

61. Question: Is contractor proprietary file formatting acceptable, so long as proprietary file formatting may be converted to a more generic standard format using onboard or external tools for conversion?

Answer: Yes.

62. Question: 5.2.1.3 Citation: “SINS-2 shall allow the user to import SAR patterns using industry standard removable media.”

Question: can USCG confirm if standard removable data shall be understood to be consistent throughout the specification, i.e. USB/micro USB, SD or micro SD, external HDD, etc.?

Answer: Yes.

63. Question: Citation: Cell A23 of the “Parts List” (third) tab of “Attachment_1-_SINS-2_Proposed_Pricing_Schedule” states “Autopilot” Question: No marine autopilot is included in the specification document, only interfaces to an autopilot. How are Offerors to interpret this item?

Answer: Document corrected. Item relabeled more accurately as “Autopilot Interface.”

64. Question: Citation: Cell A25 of the “Parts List” (third) tab of “Attachment_1-_SINS-2_Proposed_Pricing_Schedule” states “DC Power Supplies, Converters, & Cables” Question: How are Offerors to construe “cables”? “Cables” could be broadly interpreted to include any/all cables necessary for the installation on board numerous and varied USCG vessel platforms. Question: Absent an installation Statement of Work specifying all cables and their lengths, can USCG provide any clarity on this item?

Answer: Proposal shall include information for all currently offered standard cable options plus information regarding availability of special order custom built cables.

65. Question: Question : Attachment 1 SINS-2 Proposed Pricing Schedule, there is a tab for the vessel classes “SPC-SV, SPC-TTB, and CB-S” but there is no line for them on tab “Kit Pricing Exhibit” Should they be in the Kit Pricing Exhibit?

Answer: Yes. Attachment 1 has been corrected.

66. Question: No autopilot requested on 2030 out of 2056 boats. Please clarify the split between 0183 pilots, N2K pilots and no pilots on the 2030 other boats.

Answer: Parts list was corrected to refer to part as “Autopilot interface,” and target platforms updated to reflect those currently equipped with autopilot.

67. Question: Several companies offer a 4-5” MFD capable of chart and radar data and there is also a 4-5” Remote Information display available capable of just data. Please clarify 4-5”MFD or 4-5”RID. Will the price list be corrected to reflect this?

Yes. RID is now a separate item on the parts list.

68. Question:. (AB-SKF, CB-S, CB-M) For these 3 classes of boats where only displays of 4-5" are requested, can a 6" unit be allowed in order to meet requirements associated with MFD not RID.

Answer: The 4-5” display refers to the notional screen size, based on the existing equipment. These platforms will accommodate a 6” screen size. The spec has been modified to reflect this.

69. Question: CB-ATON-L and WLB haven't requested any Radar, when all other boats have. Is this correct?

Answer: Yes.

70. Question: If so does this class have a radar fitted?

Answer: The WLB has two independent, redundant radar systems. The CB-ATON-L mast configuration does not permit the installation of radar.

71. Question: If so is the USCG implying we need to interact with this radar?

Answer: No. If so can the USCG provide a full set of details (including all communication protocols)

72. Question: WLB and WLM haven't requested any GPS, when all other boats have. Is this correct?

Answer: Yes. If so does this class have a GPS fitted?

Answer: Yes.

If so are the USCG implying we need to interact with this GPS?

Answer: Yes. If so can the USCG provide a full set of details (including all communication protocols).

Answer: The USCG will ensure the necessary NMEA2000 PGNS (as listed in 2.1.16.6.1) are available on the backbone.

73. Question: WLI-65(2), WLIC-75, WPB-87, WLIC-100, WLI-100(1), WPB-110, WTGB, WLM, WMEC-210, WLB, WMEC-270, WMEC-282, WIX, WHEC, WAGB, and WMSL haven't requested a Heading sensor, but have requested radars. Is this correct?

Answer: Yes.

74. Question: If so how does the USCG envision heading data to tie in with radar? Does this class have a heading sensor fitted?

Answer: Yes, these vessels have a gyro, fluxgate or satellite compass.

75. Question: Is the USCG implying a requirement to interact with heading sensor radar?

Answer: Yes.

76. Question: Will the USCG provide a full set of details (including all communication protocols) Answer: The USCG will ensure the necessary NMEA2000 PGNs (as listed in 2.1.19.3) are available on the backbone.

77. Question: Will the USCG provide a full set of details (including all communication protocols) Answer: The USCG will ensure the necessary NMEA2000 PGNs (as listed in 2.1.19.3) are available on the backbone.

78. Question: WPB-87, FRC, WMEC-210, WMEC-270, WMEC-282, WIX, WHEC and WMSL have requested 2x GPS receivers and antennas. Is this correct?

Answer: Yes.

79. Question: If so, please provide details on the purpose behind 2x GPS sensors – we would want to make sure that the 2 position sources we propose are fit for purpose.

Answer: These vessels require redundant positioning sensors for fault tolerance.

80. Question: RB-M, MLB and SPC-HWX are the only classes that are requesting an autopilot. Is this correct?

Answer: The USCG assumes this question is actually regarding weather stations. Yes, it is correct.

81. Question: If so do the any of the other classes have weather stations fitted already?

Answer: No.

82. Question: If so, is there a requirement to interact with these weather stations? If so can the USCG provide a full set of details (including all communication protocols)

83. Question: BUSL is the only class that is requesting an autopilot. Is this correct?

Answer: No. No autopilots will be procured as part of this acquisition. Furthermore, the classes with existing autopilots have had their kits contents corrected to match the specification.

84. Question: If so do the any of the other classes have autopilots fitted already?

Answer: See paragraph 2.1.21. The requirement is for an autopilot interface.

85. Question: If so, is there a requirement to interact with these autopilots?

Answer: Yes, see paragraph 2.1.21.

86.Question: If so can the USCG provide a full set of details (including all communication protocols).

87. Question: Are any established autopilots DBW/S (drive by wire / steer) enabled?

Answer: No.

88. Question: If so can a full set of details (including all communication protocols) be provided

89. Question: FRC is the only boat class that has requested a "Display/Control Head" (see solicitation attachment “Attachment_1-_SINS-2_Proposed_Pricing_Schedule.xlsx”, sheet: FRC, cell: A16). Would the CG please provide more detail as to what this item is, its use and how it connects into the system. I.e. It is a Display/Control Head for what? (Possibly the autopilot?)

Answer: This was an error in the document. Both the item name and FRC quantities have been corrected.

90. Question: RB-M, MLB and SPC-HWX have requested weather stations . Will these classes (or any other classes) have multiple weather stations on the same vessel?

Answer: No. Only a single weather station is listed per hull.

91. Question: If so can the USCG provide a full set of details (including all communication protocols) for any existing weather stations we need to interact with.

92. Question: No request for Day & Night or Thermal Cameras. The specification mentions we should integrate with cameras, the kit lists do not request any. Is this correct?

Answer: Yes.

93. Question: If so do the any of the classes have cameras fitted already? Yes, see 2.1.11.15.1.1.

94. Question: If so is there a requirement to interact with these cameras?

Answer: Yes, there is an objective requirement. The RB-M has the FLIR Navigator II. The SPC-LE-33 has the SeaFlir-II. The CB-OTH-MKIV has the FLIR M series. The RBS-II does not have a camera capable of pan/tilt/zoom controls.

95. Question: Will the USCG provide a full set of details (including all communication protocols) Answer: Details are available from existing equipment vendor documentation.

96. Question: All classes have requested that converters and adaptors be provided. Which converters are needed? For what products is conversion expected (including a full list of message conversions between busses) Answer: This is a generic line item to address common components across all kits. The source power requirement, for example, may necessitate a rectifier for a particular piece of equipment that cannot run on 12-30VDC. Similarly, the known interfaces (AIS, autopilot) have their interfaces defined by either the EAIS IDD or the specific manufacturer (in the case of autopilot).

97. Question: No line item exists to state what mounting options are needed. Should external mounting (trunion) brackets be supplied with all MFDs?

Answer: No. The parts list shall include a trunion mount for each MFD, but it need not be included within each kit.

98. Question: The specification mentions that keypads located next to the controllers seating are preferable. Will the USCG identify which boat classes require external keypads (along with quantity per class) Answer: No. The parts list shall include the appropriate hardware for such a feature, but it need not be included within each kit.

99. Question: There are going to be more than 4 transducer options (based on depth, sounder type, hull material, mounting position and size of boat). Please clarify the dead rise angle of the hulls for each boat class? This information determines which transducer is needed based on hull design.

Answer: Yes. Hull deadrise data is updated in Attachment 1.

100. Question: Please clarify which regional waters the supplied cartography is to be used in.

Answer: Charts must be provided for US. coastal and inland waters, including Alaska and Hawaii, costal Canada, and Caribbean (Mesoamerica). Charts must be available for global operations, with associated pricing information provided with proposal.

Request for Proposal Questions:

101. Question: Can the CG provide a forecast of which boat kits would be ordered first?

Answer: The USCG is not providing a forecast of which boat kits will be ordered first. The boat kits and quantity will depend on the stepladder pricing provided and what is determined to be the best fit for the Coast Guard after review of the proposals and available funding.

102. Question: Please confirm the CG will conduct system replacements with in house technicians or will there be a requirement for the contractor to support and perform retro-fit?

Answer: This acquisition is for the purchase of the SINS-2 systems and spare parts only. System Replacements and/or retro-fit will be performed by the USCG or under a separate contract.

103. Question: Will orders primarily be shipped to CG Inventory Control Point at CG Yard?

Answer: The orders will primarily be shipped to the locations shown in Attachment 3, “Surface Forces Logistics Center 2401 Hawkins Point Road Receiving Bldg 88 Baltimore, MD 21226”

104. Question: What is the sparing philosophy?

Answer: The sparing philosophy is based on 10% sparing of quantity.

105. Question: The RFP refers to Past Performance Questionnaire (Attachment A) and Attachment 7- SINS-2 Past Performance Questionnaire. However, Attachment A is not provided with the solicitation documents. Please confirm that there is no Attachment A, rather only Attachment 7 in which offerors should provide their past performance information.

Answer: The Solicitation is updated to correct the reference to Attachment A. Attachment 7 is where offerors are to provide past performance information.

106. Question: According to the RFP, all content is limited to 40 pages. Are product specifications, brochures, etc. that define how equipment meet the Government's requirements included in the page count?

Answer: Commercial brochures to include product specifications, that define how equipment meets the Government’s requirement is not covered in the page count. The location of the content location must be called out in the Proposal crosswalk or it may not be considered.

107. Question: Will the Government accept 11x17 size charts or graphics in the proposal? If so, would an 11x17 page count as 1 or 2 pages in the proposal page count?

Answer: 11x17 size charts will not be accepted. Tables , charts or graphs may be submitted on legal size 8.5 x 14 paper.

108. Question: Please clarify Volume Structure detailed in Solicitation HSCG44-16-R-001000 Proposal Submittal Instructions, Instructions to Offerors (reference text below): Specifically,

a) Is the Technical Volume 1 or Volume 2?

Answer: Technical is Volume 2

b) In what Volume does Past Performance belong and are the Past Performance Questionnaires (Attachment 7) excluded from the 40 page limit?

Answer: Past Performance is included in Volume 3. Attachment 7 is excluded from the 40 page limit. The Solicitation has been corrected.

Volume 1: Cover Letter shall include the Offeror's name and address; USCG solicitation number; DUNS number; CAGE number; Offeror's point of contact including their phone number and e-mail address, and the date the Offeror's proposal expires and acknowledgment of solicitation Amendments if applicable.

Volume 2: Shall include A technical description of the items being offered in sufficient detail to evaluate compliance with the solicitation (Note: This may include product literature or other documents as necessary.), a logistics plan that addresses the evolution criteria detail, proposed warranty terms and conditions and the completed Attachment 6- SINS-2 Proposal Crosswalk.

Volume 3: Shall include Proposed pricing Schedule with Stepladder pricing and any proposed discount terms. Attachment 1- SINS-2 Proposed Pricing Schedule.

However, in the paragraph below the aforementioned instructions, the Technical Volume is referred to a 1 (not 2) and Past Performance is referred to as Volume 2.

Offerors shall fill out clause 52.211-9 -- Desired and Required Time of Delivery. Alt III (April 1994) and provide details of delivery times for purchase of installation kits, spares and repair items.

Volume 1: Technical Capability Section Volume 1 shall include 3 sub-factors under Technical Capability Section.

Volume 2: Past Performance Offerors shall submit at least three (3) relevant past performance references for contracts with the private industry or government instrumentalities (Federal, state, or local) utilizing the Past Performance Questionnaire (Attachment A). The Offeror shall complete Attachment 7- SINS-2 Past Performance Questionnaire and return to the Government. The Offeror shall NOT complete Section B. It is the Offeror's responsibility to ensure valid customer POC information is provided in Section A of the Past Performance Questionnaire. If the customer POC is invalid, the Past Performance Questionnaire will not be considered. The past performance services must have been performed within the past three years. If there is no relevant past performance, submit a statement to that effect

109. Question: Citation: “The Contractor shall provide notification of 18 months prior to canceling manufacturing of a product and or notification of manufacture plans of making a product no longer available for purchase.”Question: What protections shall be afforded to any contractor who may be forced to discontinue proposed SINS-2 products or components under force majeure circumstances? Is force majeure protection afforded under general CFR terms and conditions, or, could or would USCG consider a force majeure addendum to a resulting SINS-2 contract?

109. Answer: The intent of the 18 month notification is to allow the USCG adequate time to perform testing and follow mandatory configuration change processes, under normal circumstances. Under "force majeure" situations, the USCG requires the offeror to notify the USCG within 14 days after becoming aware of such a situation. This notification will include full documentation to support the offeror's claim of a true "force majeure" circumstance.

110. Question: What penalties, if any, are provided for in the case of failure to provide sufficient notification of discontinuation of product or manufacture thereof?

Answer: The USCG requires the 18 month notification in order to follow the mandatory USCG engineering change processes. If an offeror cannot meet the 18 month notification, then their proposal will need to document their inability to meet the notification window. In addition, their proposal must provide details or alternatives as part of the logistics plan. The logistics plan will become part of the awarded contract and if the offeror is unable to meet the contract performance requirements then lack of performance will be noted as part of the past performance reporting on the contract.

111. Question: Citation: “DESIRED DELIVERY SCHEDULE” Question: Shall delivery date and deadline requirements apply in any and all cases, including any negotiated deliveries over and above the $6,000,000 maximum threshold, or, shall USCG make allowances for longer lead times in the case of extraordinary order quantities?

Citation: “(b) Maximum order. The Contractor is not obligated to honor:

(1) Any order for a single item in excess of $6,000,000.00;

(2) Any order for a combination of items in excess of $6,000,000.00; or

(3) A series of orders from the same ordering office within 30 days that together call for quantities exceeding the limitation in subparagraph (1) or (2) above.”

Question: As above, if the contractor negotiates and accepts an order in excess of the $6,000,000 order maximum threshold, will USCG consider alternate delivery terms and dates if the contractor is unable to adhere to the nominal contractual delivery terms and dates?

111. Answer: If an order is above the order maximum threshold, the USCG would consider alternate delivery terms and dates.

112. Question: Citation: “The Offeror shall provide copies of their current published commercial pricing.”Question: Does the Offeror’s current published commercial pricing count towards the page count of the Offeror’s submission?

Answer: The published pricing does not count towards the page count of the Offeror’s submission.

113. Question: The combined synopsis/solicitation states: “All proposals shall be limited to 40 pages (all volumes/all documents) with page numbers in sequential order, per volume.” Does this mean that each of the 3 required proposal volumes has a 40 page limit, or is the limit for all volumes/all documents combined 40 pages? Please clarify.

Answer: The 40 page count includes the cover letter and the Technical Capability Section. The 40 page count does not include the following:

· Attachment 1: Proposed pricing schedule

· Attachment 6 SINS-2 Proposal Crosswalk

· Attachment 7 SINS-2 Past Performance Questionnaire

· Commercial price lists

· Commercial Product Literature and Specifications

· Representations and Certifications

· Completed clause 52.211-9 Desired and Required Time of Delivery Alt III

115. Question: There are over one hundred (100) individual items in the Proposal Crosswalk for Factor 1: Technical Approach and Understanding. How is an offeror to address each of these items in a written proposal with a 40 page limit? Is it the Government’s intention that an offeror indicate in Column C of the Proposal Crosswalk that the proposed product meets, exceeds or does not meet specification requirements, with an explanation of how the product meets, exceeds or does not meet requirements in Column D? Please clarify.

Answer: The offeror shall indicate where in the proposal that the specification can be found, whether it is in the proposal, or commercial literature. If the crosswalk does not identify where the specification demonstrates how the offeror meets the requirements, it may not be considered. Column D is limited to providing information where in the documentation page section or in the 40 pages the specifications can be found.

116. Question: Will the CG provide the current ILSP for SINS I, so that we may understand CG maintenance and reparability requirements?

Answer: The CG will not provide the current ILSP for SINS I, the ILSP for SINS -2 will change based on offeror’s warranty terms provided and the system that is chosen for SINS-2. The CG feels that the current ILSP is not required in order to meet the SINS-2 specifications.