A Study on Vessel Design Challenge

The purpose for this amendment is to respond to the following questions: Question-1. Domestic Applicant Definition: Section D.1 of the RFP states the Challenge is "open to all types of domestic applicants other than individuals." Our company is a U.S.-registered entity, though its ultimate parents are in Canada and Europe. Could you confirm whether an entity with this ownership structure qualifies as a "domestic applicant" for purposes of serving as the lead applicant/Recipient of a cooperative agreement under this RFP? Response-1. For the purposes of this project, a U.S. registered entity will be evaluated as a domestic applicant. Question-2. Citizenship-Based Funding Restriction: We understand that MARAD/META cooperative agreements may include a restriction on using award funds for "work to be done or done in a facility owned by someone other than a Citizen of the United States (as defined in 46 C.F.R. 315.3(b))." Could you confirm whether this restriction, or an equivalent, will apply to cooperative agreements resulting from this RFP, and if so, how it would apply to a design team whose naval architecture/engineering firm is U.S.-registered and performs all work domestically, but has foreign parent ownership? Response-2. For the purposes of this project, a design team located in the U.S. working at a U.S.-registered firm and performing all work domestically would not fall under the restriction. Question-3. Team Lead Eligibility vs. Preference: Section B notes a preference for "team leads represented by U.S. companies, those with U.S. headquarters, and those operating under the U.S. flag." Could you confirm whether this operates solely as an evaluative preference, or whether it functions as a disqualifying eligibility criterion for a team lead whose ultimate parent is a foreign entity? Response-3. The preference for "team leads represented by U.S. companies, those with U.S. headquarters, and those operating under the U.S. flag" is an evaluative preference. A U.S. registered entity with U.S. offices and staff performing work domestically, would fall under consideration as a domestic applicant for this project. ======================================================================= U.S. Maritime Administration (MARAD) A Study on Vessel Design Challenge RFP No. 693JF726R000016 REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS (RFP): The Maritime Administration s (MARAD) Maritime Environmental and Technical Assistance (META) program is issuing a request for proposals (RFP) for a Vessel Design Challenge (Challenge). This Challenge intends to fund multiple design teams willing to undertake integrated design work to improve fuel efficiency and reduce vessel underwater radiated noise (URN) to create the next generation of U.S. vessels. Individual awards depend on number of designs proposed for the package. Awards are intended to be for not less than $150k and likely not more than $450k. Project completion timeline is 12-18 months. Total funding available is up to $1.25 million. PROGRAM DESCRIPTION: The META program (46 U.S.C. 50307) is investigating the interconnections between broader fuel efficiency, reducing URN from vessels, and exploring potential co-benefits. It is the policy of the United States to revitalize and rebuild domestic maritime industries and workforce to promote national security and economic prosperity. Accomplishing this requires making United States-flagged and built vessels commercially competitive in international commerce, rebuilding America s maritime manufacturing capabilities, and expanding and strengthening the recruitment, training, and retention of the relevant workforce. The most promising opportunities for optimizing fuel efficiency gains and achieving URN reductions are in the early ship design stage, using a systems approach. This requires intentional and integrated ship designs that prioritize fuel efficiency while simultaneously reducing URN. Advanced fluid dynamic modeling enables comparison among hull, engine, and propeller design and arrangement, providing valuable information to the industry about the return on investment (ROI) for various technology and design optimizations at the design phase. Individual technologies claim to provide efficiency and noise reduction benefits, but the additive cost-savings have not been quantified for applying technologies in series and demonstrating increased efficiencies across multiple areas. Recently published studies summarized the state of knowledge and availability of technologies that can be applied to vessels to improve energy efficiency while reducing vessel generated URN. Those reports crosswalk not only the interoperability of technologies and design elements, but the potential reductions, costs, and return on investment. The next phase is to demonstrate, through modeling, the benefits that can be realized through a systematic design approach integrating technologies with input from naval architects, shipyards, and technology suppliers on the efficacy of these approaches. By using this approach, Teams will begin at the drawing table to quantify the benefits of innovative technology integration into the design phase for application on new vessels. The Vessel Design Challenge is intended to facilitate the demonstration of novel vessel designs that meet or exceed international benchmarks for fuel efficiency and URN source levels. This Challenge is intended to fund multiple Design Teams willing to undertake this kind of integrated design work to create the next generation of U.S. vessels. PROPOSAL CONTENT Proposed Vessel Design: Design proposals can include: Existing projects that would be redesigned, Forthcoming projects that are just beginning the design specification phase, and Designs that are theoretical or more experimental which aim to create a new approach or design. There are no restrictions on eligible vessels, however, given the mission of the Maritime Administration, vessels should be commercially useful and generally would not include small watercraft, recreational vessels, or fisheries vessels. Eligible designs include vessels operating in coastal or inland waterways as well as the Great Lakes. Ideal proposals will be for new design approaches or design modifications that couple hull-machinery-propulsion approaches to maximize fuel efficiency, URN reduction, and ROI. Technologies should be centered around performance and demonstrating the feasibility and economic achievability of these combined approaches and should be dictated by capacity needs set by industry requirements (tug capacity, crew capacity, operations support, range, TEU, cargo etc.). Designs should note specifically the technology readiness level and the commercial availability of any technologies used. Design Team: The approach to the Challenge will include a design team. Teams should include description of partnerships, collaborations, and/or processes that will ensure success of the proposal. Further, proposals should identify the Team s capabilities, related experience, techniques, or unique combinations of these that are integral factors for achieving the Challenge objectives to include experience that supports ability to successfully manage and achieve project goals and objectives of similar type and scope. Development of an ideal team should represent the concept of a design-build approach and include: Naval architect(s) Marine Engineer(s) Shipyard(s) Owner/operator/buyer (can be more than one) Technology provider(s) (including fuel supplier, as needed) May include operator/charter party, BCO, logistics partners, port/city/public entity, private financing partner. Teams may submit one or more vessel designs to the Challenge. Funding amounts will be based on: the number of vessel designs proposed their technology innovation, or a combination thereof One or all proposed designs may be funded depending on proposals. There is no limit to number of teams an organization can participate in, however, an organization may only lead one team/proposal. No identical teams with rotating leads will be permitted. Preference will be given to proposals with team leads represented by U.S. companies, those with U.S. headquarters, and those operating under the U.S. flag Methods: Proposals must include a detailed description of the design and modeling approaches that will be used to meet the Design Challenge Parameters as noted below, including those for fuel burn estimates and URN source level as well as modeling for return on investment and similar economic estimates and valuations. Timeline: The proposed plan should include the expected timeline (not to exceed 18 months) inclusive of kick off meetings with MARAD, design and technology integration and assessment, interim progress report detailing vessel design and technology application progress, data collection and analysis, and final report deliverables. Budget: All proposals must include a compete, detailed, and justifiable budget with general line items for…