N00024-18-R-2210_Amendment_0009.pdf

N0002417MR02574

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT

Except as provided herein, all terms and conditions of the document referenced in Item 9A or 10A, as heretofore changed, remains unchanged and in full force and effect.

15A. NAME AND TITLE OF SIGNER (Type or print)

30-105-04EXCEPTION TO SF 30

APPROVED BY OIRM 11-84

STANDARD FORM 30 (Rev. 10-83)

Prescribed by GSA

FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

The purpose of this Amendment is to 1) Respond to Bidders' Questions for the N00024-18-R-2210 HPIB DD&C RFP, and 2) provide Exhibit A

CDRL Attachments A005-1, A091-1, and A091-2.

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

L 1 6

16A. NAME AND TITLE OF CONTRACTING OFFICER (Type or print)

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 25-Jun-2018

16B. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA15C. DATE SIGNED15B. CONTRACTOR/OFFEROR

(Signature of Contracting Officer)(Signature of person authorized to sign)

8. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR (No., Street, County, State and Zip Code) X N0002418R2210

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

02-Mar-2018

10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 13)

9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NO.

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

X The above numbered solicitation is amended as set forth in Item 14. The hour and date specified for receipt of Offer is extended, X is not extended.

Offer must acknowledge receipt of this amendment prior to the hour and date specified in the solicitation or as amended by one of the following methods:

(a) By completing Items 8 and 15, and returning copies of the amendment; (b) By acknowledging receipt of this amendment on each copy of the offer submitted;

or (c) By separate letter or telegram which includes a reference to the solicitation and amendment numbers. FAILURE OF YOUR ACKNOWLEDGMENT TO BE

RECEIVED AT THE PLACE DESIGNATED FOR THE RECEIPT OF OFFERS PRIOR TO THE HOUR AND DATE SPECIFIED MAY RESULT IN

REJECTION OF YOUR OFFER. If by virtue of this amendment you desire to change an offer already submitted, such change may be made by telegram or letter, provided each telegram or letter makes reference to the solicitation and this amendment, and is received prior to the opening hour and date specified.

12. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA (If required)

13. THIS ITEM APPLIES ONLY TO MODIFICATIONS OF CONTRACTS/ORDERS.

IT MODIFIES THE CONTRACT/ORDER NO. AS DESCRIBED IN ITEM 14.

A. THIS CHANGE ORDER IS ISSUED PURSUANT TO: (Specify authority) THE CHANGES SET FORTH IN ITEM 14 ARE MADE IN THE

CONTRACT ORDER NO. IN ITEM 10A.

B. THE ABOVE NUMBERED CONTRACT/ORDER IS MODIFIED TO REFLECT THE ADMINISTRATIVE CHANGES (such as changes in paying office, appropriation date, etc.) SET FORTH IN ITEM 14, PURSUANT TO THE AUTHORITY OF FAR 43.103(B).

C. THIS SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT IS ENTERED INTO PURSUANT TO AUTHORITY OF:

D. OTHER (Specify type of modification and authority)

E. IMPORTANT: Contractor is not, is required to sign this document and return copies to the issuing office.

14. DESCRIPTION OF AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION (Organized by UCF section headings, including solicitation/contract subject matter where feasible.)

10A. MOD. OF CONTRACT/ORDER NO.

2. AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION NO. 5. PROJECT NO.(If applicable)

6. ISSUED BY

3. EFFECTIVE DATE

25-Jun-2018

CODE

NAVAL SEA SYSTEMS COMMAND (HQ)

1333 ISAAC HULL AVE SE

WASHINGTON NAVY YARD DC 20376-2020

N00024 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than item 6)

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

N0002418R2210

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

The following items are applicable to this modification:

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

The following have been added by full text:

Responses to Bidders’ Questions:

162. QUESTION: As referenced in Attachment J-3 Supplemental Test Requirements Section 095-235 Electric propulsion systems and testing, Full power and full torque tests, vibration tests, inclination tests and other related tests of equipment's, mentioned in the specifications, are not feasible as part of factory testing. The testing requirements in the specifications are extremely demanding as compare to standards routine factory test. Will the

Government be open to discussing this requirement?

RESPONSE: As indicated in Attachment J-3 Supplemental Test Requirements section 095-235, first article testing must be conducted in accordance with ABS type approval testing. For clarification, the Government notes that testing satisfying the requirements that was performed on prior units would be acceptable for submission, and first article testing is not required to be completed at the manufacturer's facility.

163. QUESTION: As referenced in Attachment J-1 System Specification Table 078-1 Materials, the use of other international standards together with ABS SVR Part 2 is requested.

Azipod components manufacturing in Europe can be very difficult with MIL- and ASTM-standards. Finland and

Europe are basically applying ISO, EN, and other international standards for materials. Some MIL-standards are classified and for companies outside US it can be impossible to compare MIL with international standards.

RESPONSE: Attachment J-1 System Specification Section 042.2.4 allows the contractor to propose substitutions for primary references, such as alternative standards. The Attachment J-1 System Specification referenced in the question remains unchanged.

164. QUESTION: Attachment J-1 System Specification Section 202.3.1.1.2.3 states “the network layer shall exist on its own private network with secure and defined boundaries, independent of other networks outside of machinery controls.” Please clarify is it expected that MCS networks are completely isolated from other vessel networks?

RESPONSE: The MCS HM&E Networks shall not have IP-based communications with other networks, as described in Attachment J-1 System Specification Section 202.3.5.1.1. The MCS HM&E networks shall have limited communication with each other per Attachment J-1 System Specification Section 202.2.3.

165. QUESTION: Attachment J-1 System Specification Section 202.3.1.4 states “The time between a manual or automated command input and the display of that input on an MCS workstation shall not exceed 500 ms.” Would the Government consider the suggested wording of “The time between a manual or automated command input and the display of that input on an MCS workstation shall not exceed 2000 ms?”

RESPONSE: This requirement does not apply to equipment feedback time or latency. It applies to System Human

Machine Interface command input and response. The Attachment J-1 System Specification section 202.3.1.4 referenced in the question remains unchanged.

166. QUESTION: Attachment J-1 System Specification Section 501.2.3.3 states “there shall be an ACS HMI installed in each Repair Locker.” Please clarify what kind information is to be shown on HMI?

RESPONSE: Amendment 0008 to the Solicitation revised the Attachment J-1 System Specification to delete the referenced requirement from section 501.2.3.3. The updated Attachment J-1 System Specification Section

202.3.14.4.9 clarifies that repair lockers are required to have one ACS workstation and one M&DC workstation.

167. QUESTION: Attachment J-3 Supplemental Test Requirements Sections 095-235.31 through 095-235.33 and

095-314.11.1 and .2 state “Electromagnetic interference (EMI) control. The complete transformer or filter shall meet the EMI control requirements in accordance with part 5 or part 6 of MIL-STD-461. Any power line filters or capacitors installed for the control or reduction of EMI shall conform to the requirements of MIL-STD-461 part 1 and approval for the use of such devices is required. Other commercial standards such as IEC 61800-3 suggested by

ABS 4-8-3/8.5 can be proposed for testing.

The transformer or filter shall be tested to be in compliance with test methods CE101, CE102, CS101, CS106, CS114, CS116, RE101, RE102, RS101 & RS103 for below deck equipment.”

According to IEC60076-11 “Dry-type transformer”, defining transformers as EMC passive elements

4.3 Electromagnetic compatibility (EMC)

Transformers shall be considered as passive elements in respect to emission and immunity to electromagnetic disturbances.

Therefore, all EMC requirements are not valid for RESIBLOC Dry type transformers.

Referred test methods not available and thus not applicable.

RESPONSE: Amendment 0008 to the Solicitation revised the Attachment J-3 Supplemental Test Requirements to update the requirements for EMC testing in section 095-235 to reference IEC 61800 in addition to MIL-STD-461.

168. QUESTION: As referenced in Attachment J-1 System Specification Section 410.3.3.3.2 OPCEN MLS Watch

Stations, how many SeaWatch clients are provided? In the turnkey SeaWatch solution, does it include a dedicated

SeaWatch client server for each Work Station / Watch Station? If not a one to one ratio, how many SeaWatch client servers are provided?

RESPONSE: SeaWatch Turnkey solution will provide virtual clients for each workstation/watch station.

169. QUESTION: Attachment J-1 System Specification, Table 070-4: Loading Conditions, in item description column, under Cargo states the following:

“Includes all items of aircraft, ammunition, stores, provisions, fuel, water, etc. that are normally carried for issue to other activities. “

It is not clear as to what is intended by “other activities”. We request USCG to provide weight, volume and center of gravity for such items to ensure vessel is capable of supporting “other activities”.

RESPONSE: The requirement for "all items of aircraft, ammunition, stores, provisions, fuel, water, etc. that are normally carried for issue to other activities” refers to the required buoys and containers/vans.

170. QUESTION: Attachment J-1 System Specification Table 070-4: Loading Conditions does not have a load item for “Container and Buoy Stowage”, which is required by Attachment J-1 System Specification Section 070.5.21.

Can USCG confirm the weight and CG of containers and buoys which have to be considered in the loading conditions? Additionally, would the USCG revise Table 070-4 to include a separate line for these items?

RESPONSE: Yes, containers and buoys have to be considered in the loading conditions. They should be included in the line for "cargo" in Attachment J-1 System Specification Table 070-4. Container and Buoy load and CG information is described in Attachment J-1 System Specification Sections 070.5.21.1 and 070.5.21.5. The center of gravity may be assumed to be at the centroid of the containers/buoys. Because buoys and containers are not required to be stowed simultaneously, the full load displacement condition shall include the worst case load.

171. QUESTION: Attachment J-1 System Specification Section 672.3.2 states:

“The Engineer Storeroom shall have a minimum gross deck area of 2,500 ft2 and outfitted to house materiel support for the installed equipment and systems. Two Engineer Storerooms with a combined gross deck area meeting this requirement may be provided.”

Is it acceptable to have more than two (2) Engineer Storerooms that when added together meet the minimum gross deck area requirement? If so, we request the requirement to be changed to read as follows:

“The Engineer Storeroom shall have a minimum gross deck area of 2,500 ft2 and outfitted to house materiel support for the installed equipment and systems. A minimum of two Engineer Storerooms, with a minimum of 450 ft2 each, and a combined gross deck area meeting this requirement may be provided.”

RESPONSE: The Government concurs that multiple storerooms may be used to provide the required space.

Amendment 0008 to the Solicitation revised the Attachment J-1 System Specification Section 672.3.2 to allow multiple storerooms, with a minimum of 625 ft2 each.

172. QUESTION: Attachment J-1A - USCG HPIB Vessel Classification & Certification Guide (PPD 070-01) states the following:

“…Classing shall be based on cargo ship standards unless otherwise specified in the HPIB specification.”

Attachment J-1 System Specification Section 070.3.4 and 070.3.4.4 state the following, respectively:

“The cutter shall comply with the requirements and achieve necessary certifications for the following:”

“Transit through International waters in accordance with international regulations for which the United States is a signatory.”

As such, these requirements imply compliance with international regulations, including SOLAS/MARPOL for cargo ships (unless otherwise specified) in their entirety in order to obtain certification. This will introduce several additional areas of consideration (for example Probabilistic Damage Stability, lifeboats, etc.) which may lead to major design and operational impacts. During the design studies, the USCG clarified that it was not the USCG’s intention to comply with these international requirements and the specification would clarify this. For instance, SOLAS does not apply to “Ships of war or troopships”. Is it the USCG’s intention to be exempt under.

Can USCG clarify the whether the government’s intent is indeed complete compliance with international regulations or if this is perhaps a requirement that has been overlooked in previous versions of the HPIB Specification.

It is recommended that USCG remove section 070.3.4.4 or, alternatively, specify the anticipated necessary portions of international regulations compliance with any desired modifications to the existing requirements in said regulations.

RESPONSE: For purposes of the Attachment J-1 System Specification Section 070.3.4 requirement to transit international waters in accordance with international regulations, HPIB is not required to be classed as a cargo ship.

Certifications in SOW Table 070-1 and ABS notations required by the Specification and 070-1 HPIB Classification and Certification Guide PPD define the primary regulatory requirements for the vessel.

173. QUESTION: Attachment J-1 System Specification Section 235.4.1.2 Propulsion Motors states “The main motors shall have slip rings for excitation of the rotor winding and shall be excited by static exciters. The exciters shall provide zero speed excitation control over the motor operating speed range ahead and astern. One static exciter field supply shall be provided for each main motor. One installed standby static exciter field supply that can supply any main motor shall also be provided.”

Will the Government accept motors, particularly for Azi-Pods, with brushless exciters and with rotating rectifiers

(without slip rings)?

Instead of one common standby static exciter for all motors, will two standby transformers feeding one brushless exciter for each motor be acceptable for Azi-pod?

Recommended change: “The main motors shall have either brushless exciter with rotating rectifier or rotor winding slip rings for excitation by static exciters. The exciters shall provide zero speed excitation control over the motor operating speed range ahead and astern. Each main motor shall have two separate standby source of power for excitation.”

RESPONSE: Amendment 0008 to the Solicitation revised the Attachment J-1 System Specification to require brushless exciters and delete the requirement for static exciters with slip rings.

174. QUESTION: Attachment J-1 System Specification Section 235.5.2.2 Propulsion Motor Drives states “The drive shall provide reactive power (VAR) compensation while controlling the motor parameters within tight tolerances.”

The Contractor interprets this requirement as the ability of the Drive to generate reactive power into the electric plant. Can the Government confirm if this will still be required if a design has multiple main diesel generators that will provide reactive power to meet the demand of the system?

RESPONSE: Amendment 0008 to the Solicitation revised the Attachment J-1 System Specification Section

235.5.2.2 Propulsion Motor Drives.

175. QUESTION: Attachment J-1 System Specification Section 235.5.2.2 Propulsion Motor Drives states “The propulsion motor drive shall utilize active front end and high pulse count to meet system power quality requirements unless analysis can show clear advantages and low risk of not meeting requirements.”

Will high pulse count Diode Front End (DFE) Drive instead of Active Front End Drive be acceptable if analysis can show clear advantages and low risk of not meeting power quality requirements. Note that DFE drive does not regenerate reactive power as required by section 235.5.2.2.

RESPONSE: Amendment 0008 to the Solicitation revised the Attachment J-1 System Specification Section

235.5.2.2 Propulsion Motor Drives.

176. QUESTION: As referenced in Attachment J-1 System Specification Section 303.2.7 and 320.5 Shore

Connection Stations, do the shore connection stations have to be supplied with 15 % spare circuit breakers and two blank spaces in addition to the 20% spares already required by 320.5.3 or is the extra capacity required by 320.5.3 sufficient to comply with 303.2.7?

RESPONSE: Amendment 0008 to the Solicitation revised the Attachment J-1 System Specification to require one spare circuit breaker for shore connection station(s) and switchboards.

177. QUESTION: Attachment J-3 Supplemental Test Requirements Sections 095-235.29 and 095-314.10.1 Output

Voltage Balance and Phase Angle Accuracy Test states “The phase angle shall be determined in accordance with

IEEE Std 115, Section 10.8.2.”

Will the Government please clarify the requirement? According to our understanding this part is related to Oil type transformers and not relevant for Dry type transformers.

RESPONSE: The noted references to IEEE Std 115 have been deleted, and the Output Voltage Balance and Phase

Angle Accuracy tests are now required to be conducted in accordance with IEEE Std C57. These changes were made to Attachment J-1 System Specification Sections 095-235.21.4, 095-235.21.5, 095-314.1.4, and 095.314.1.5 by Amendment 0008 to the Solicitation.

178. QUESTION: As required in Section L.1.2.2.4.1. Prime and Major Subcontractors, if an Offeror provides evidence of its purchasing system to NAVSEA now, would NAVSEA provide approval of the Offeror's purchasing system prior to award?

RESPONSE: No, NAVSEA does not perform reviews of Purchasing Systems. Section L the HPIB Section

L.1.2.2.4.1 requires that an Offeror provide for both prime and subcontractor substantiation of Government approval of the Offeror's purchasing system, if the Offeror has such substantiation. The Section L Solicitation requirement seeks to provide the Government an understanding of the status of the Contractor's purchasing systems. If the

Offeror does not have an approved purchasing system, then the Offeror should indicate in its proposal that its system has not been reviewed. The awardee's purchasing system would be reviewed for approval by either DCMA or a

SUPSHIP / USCG PRO. Please note however that prior to approval of its Purchasing System, the awardee would be required to process certain subcontractor consent packages which would have to be approved by the Administrative

Contracting Officer in accordance with the FAR 52.244-2 SUBCONTRACTS clause.

(End of Summary of Changes)