A001-Attachment A - Question Submittal Form.pdf

PDF 89 KB Posted

Attached to
Magnet Coil Replacement Federal contract opportunity
Solicitation number
NB688000-22-00716
Issued by
Department of Commerce National Institute of Standards and Technology

View the file

Other files for this federal contract opportunity

Other files attached to Magnet Coil Replacement, newest first.
File Type Posted
A001 - Picture Drawing.pdf PDF
Attachment B - Experience Submittal.pdf PDF
22-00716 Requirements and Specifications_Penning magnet.pdf PDF
Combined Synopsis-Solicitation -SB Set Aside-BV.pdf PDF
Instructions and Evalation Criteria - Basis for Award.pdf PDF
Attachment A - Question Submittal Form.pdf PDF

On GovTribe

Work with this file on GovTribe

  • Download the original file
  • Contacts named in this file
  • Similar government files
  • Ask GovTribe AI about this file

Text version

Question No.

QUESTION GOVERNMENT RESPONSE

1 Is NIST open to alternative offers (for reduced or enhanced specification)? NIST is open to alternate offers with enhanced specifications, but not reduced specifications.

2 Regarding the Net30 terms, is there flexibility for milestone payments? Ex., upon drawing acceptance or upon factory acceptance testing? Recommend providing payment terms with quotations for performance payments; otherwise, payment terms are Net30.

3 The Combined Synopsis document discussed delivery FOB Destination; in the Requirements and Specifications it is listed as DAP (Incoterms 2010). Will DAP be acceptable? FOB Destination is Preffered. DAP10 is Acceptable for

International Shipments. Provide country of origin and pricing shall include all customs and duty fees associated. NIST has it's own broker for customs - Lang International.

4 What flexibility is available in the required delivery schedule? Can this be specified as manufacture time after customer approval of design? We note that 8 months is an unreasonable turnaround for completion of this custom system?

As provided in the RFQ, NIST will consider other quotations with soonest delivery being more favorable during evaluation if there are no vendors which can deliver on or before 8 months ARO.

The dimensions listed in the evaluation criteria are repeated below. Lower limits are listed for the bore diameter and the clearance between the “helium stacks”. For the other dimensions a close match of less than 10 cm, if possible, is desirable. By the term “helium stacks” we mean the exhaust turrets for the 4 K liquid helium dewar.

1. room temperature bore diameter: 127 mm (5.00”); this is a lower limit

2. cryostat height: 94.2 cm (37.10”)

3. cryostat diameter: 76.2 cm (30.0”)

4. clearance between helium stacks: 24.1 cm (9.50”); this is a lower limit

5. distance from bottom of the cryostat to the center of the magnet: 37.1 cm (14.625”)

Please provide the brand name or any drawing for this magnet.

The superconducting magnet that we are looking to replace or repair is a Nalorac superconducting magnet purchased in the early 90s. The company Nalorac no longer exists. It was bought out in the early 2000’s. Nolrac is no longer in business and has not been for some time. THIS IS NOT A NAME BRAND REQUIREMENT. See attached picture for reference, there are no drawings.

Regarding the dimensions for the existing system provided in the Instructions and Evaluation Criteria document, can you provide indication of the critical requirements? Which measurements are upper limits, lower limits, or a specific required range? Can you also clarify the "helium stacks" included in this list; are these the exhaust turrets?

Table 1

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