Q_AND_A_Responses_5.pdf

MILITARY SEALIFT COMMAND

N32205-17-R-4207

QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS #5

The following are answers to questions received from potential offerors. The answers provide clarification only and DO NOT constitute an amendment to the solicitation.

QUESTION #1:

For Work Item 460 Paragraph 7.10.2, states “Establish a contract with General Electric Corporation to accomplish programing for Main Alarms input to VDR System from the Bridge Alert Management System per requirements of IMO Resolution A.1021(26), Code of Alerts and Indicators, 2009, table 10.1.1”.

• Contractor notes that General Electric Corporation has stated that they will “No Bid” this Work item specification as written based on their response below that it is not capturing the complete scope of work required per pervious discussions with the customer MSC.

• GE engineering need to hold technical discussions directly with MSC and also NavTech Marine Electronics and NG Sperry Marine, so it can clearly identify the entire scope of supply required for this effort.

Work Item 460 mentions IMO 2009 and mandates new signals that are not currently programmed in the MCCS, as well as NMEA protocol that the current T-AKE DAU’s do not support.

GE was previously in discussions directly with MSC on a potential order for the installation of a gateway between the old DAU’s and the new VDR.

This would require a significant engineering effort (develop BOM, drawings, install plan, software & testing).

This work would need to commence well before the shipyard period, and be finished no later than the first few weeks of ROH.

Question (1): Will the Customer provide clarification regarding the disparity identified above?

Question (2): Will the Customer provide a revised Specification or delete this Work Item in a future Amendment?

ANSWER:

A new rev has been written (Rev1) to delete this Paragraph and the involvement of GE. Please review the new revision which will be delivered via ARMDEC.

QUESTION #2:

Paragraph 7.12.1, states Provide the services of GE Power representative to test and verify the operation and configuration of the modified switch.

• Contractor notes that General Electric Corporation has stated that they will “No Bid” this Work item specification as written based on other T-AKE ships that have had this same modification, there was no involvement by a GE engineer.

Question (1): Will the Customer provide clarification regarding the disparity identified above?

Question (2): Will the Customer provide a revised Specification for this Work Item in a future Amendment?

ANSWER:

Rev 2 has been written to remove GE as the OEM and replaced them with a Wartsila rep and will be provided via ARMDEC.