N3904024Q0044 Attachment 5 Questions and Answers.pdf
PDF 403 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Manufacture Weld Mockup Blocks For PNS
- Solicitation number
- N3904024Q0044
About this file
This document is a set of Questions and Answers related to a federal contract opportunity issued by the Department of the Navy Naval Sea Systems Command. The solicitation number is N3904024Q0044 for the "Manufacture Weld Mockup Blocks For PNS".
The key details include:
- The contract requires the supply of 100 each, 18" Long Base Blocks in accordance with the Statement of Work and drawing requirements.
- The contract has a CLIN for the base blocks and a CLIN for the associated Contract Data Requirements List.
- The place of delivery is the Portsmouth Naval Shipyard in Kittery, Maine, with a request for soonest delivery.
- The contracting officer may make the award based on fastest delivery.
- Vendors must provide applicable procedures and technical information for evaluation, and PPIRS/CPARS information will be used to evaluate past performance.
- The contract will be awarded to the responsible vendor whose quote is the Lowest Price Technically Acceptable.
View the file
Other files
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
Q: Attachment 3- 1.4 - PROVIDE SUPPLIER MATERIAL TEST REPORTS (CHEMICAL AND MECHANICAL) FOR BOTH THE BASE MATERIAL (ASTM A515-17) AND WELD FILLER (MIL-E-21562E) . If weld wire is supplied by PSNY, would material test reports still need to be provided?
A: That’s an interesting question. PNSY should have certified paperwork from the manufacturer which would have been reviewed during R/I process. I should think we would be obligated to provide those test reports to the block vendor so that they can verify that we are providing proper weld wire. They would then (as strange as it sounds) provide the same testing documents back to us with the completed product.
Q: After reading all of the penetrant testing standards, I did not see anything about the use of aerosol-applied solvent-based visible dye penetrant. Do you know if using aerosol for penetrant and developer applications is permissible?
A: There is nothing in Tech Pub 271 that precludes the use of aerosol dye penetrant / developer (aerosol based developer is pretty standard for USN inspections). As long as the inspection materials fit “Type 2, Method C, Form e” and are specified in the vendor’s approved procedure, they are acceptable.
Q: What are the packaging requirements for shipments? Do they need to be individually packaged?
Palletized? Strapped and/or plastic wrapped? Specific shipping vendor required?
A: I would say that each block should be individually wrapped / packaged to the extent that it is protected from damage. Any scratches or gouges to the critical clad surface significantly restricts what we can use the block for. I would imagine, given the quantity of blocks ordered, palletized would be a wise choice. Beyond that, Code 138 does not really have additional input with regard to shipping.
Q: I am having a tough time locating an American source for the A515-G60 or A516 (50, 60, or 70). A local source has A572-G50 or A514 grade F, are these acceptable replacements?
A: In accordance with our relevant technical publication, A572-G50 would be an acceptable substitute.
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .