A Study on Vessel Design Challenge

The purpose of amendment no. 6 is to respond to the following questions. Question-13. Are resumes and letters of support count towards the 20-page limit? Response-13. Yes, the limit is inclusive of all documents. Documents submitted outside that limit will not be reviewed. Question-14. Does MARAD anticipate establishing a deadline for proposer questions prior to the January 10, 2027 proposal closing date? Response-14. There is no deadline for proposer questions Question-15. Does MARAD have an anticipated timeframe for notification of successful applicants and execution of the resulting cooperative agreements? Response-15. Timelines vary, but generally successful applicants are notified within a month after selection, and the contracting process has begun Question-16. Where a proposal includes multiple organizations as part of the Design Team, does MARAD expect letters of commitment or other confirmation of participation from proposed team members at the proposal stage? If so, would these letters count toward the 20-page proposal limit? Response-16. MARAD does not expect letters of commitment. However, the assumption is that there is some level of commitment among the team members. Submissions are evaluated based on the team per the review criteria; therefore, the expectation is that the proposed team will be the project team, if selected. =============================================================================== The purpose of amendment no. 5 is to respond to the following question. Question-12. Could you please clarify whether the reference to fisheries vessels applies only to small fishing vessels or to all fishing vessels, including large commercial fishing vessels? Response-12. Fishing vessels, even large commercial vessels, fall outside the general purview of the Maritime Administration and thus are not the specific focus of this RFP. ===================================================================== The purpose of amendment no. 4 is to respond to the following question. Question-11. Would a U.S.-flagged, USCG-inspected passenger catamaran used for paid whale-watching trips fit the program? Response-11. Unfortunately, that type of vessel falls outside the purview of this project and generally outside the purview of the Maritime Administration. While there is no prohibition on submitting a proposal, it falls outside the preferred vessel types identified in the RFP. ====================================================================== The purpose of amendment no. 3 is to respond to the following questions. Question-9. Is MARAD primarily looking for design-stage studies in which fuel efficiency and URN are predicted through fluid dynamic modeling? Response-9. Yes. The goal 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. There is no limitation on the type of modeling - approaches should be used as needed. Question-10. Is there any room for measurements within the Challenge? Response-10. This is a design stage challenge and does not include an expectation of direct measurement. ================================================== The purpose of amendment no. 2 is to respond to the following questions. Question-4. Is MARAD open to all forms of propulsion to gain fuel efficiencies - for example, hybrid diesel-electric equipment with electric motors and batteries? Response-4. There are no limits or specific requirements for the type of propulsion or fuel. Technologies, including fuels and propulsion, 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. Question-5. Under the Eligibility Information section of the subject notice, it states that the opportunity is "open to all types of domestic applicants other than individuals." In reviewing the statutory definition of a "domestic source" under 50 U.S.C. § 4555(7), "the term "domestic source" means a business concern- (A) that performs in the United States or Canada substantially all of the research and development, engineering, manufacturing, and production activities required of such business concern under a contract with the United States relating to a critical component or a critical technology item." Based on this definition, which appears to include qualifying Canadian businesses as domestic sources for certain USG Response-5. For the purposes of this RFP a domestic applicant is considered to be a contractor organized or existing under the laws of the United States. Keep in mind that the RFP states 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; the RFP does not exclude those with team leads or team members outside the U.S. " Question-6. Confidentiality of design information: Our understanding is that the final report and presentation will be publicly shared, while sensitive supporting information, such as calculations, design plans and drawings, modeling results, technology details, and cost information, can be provided to MARAD without being made public. The terms and conditions, however, grant MARAD broad rights to reproduce, distribute, and display project materials. Could you clarify whether sensitive design information submitted during the project can be designated and maintained as confidential, and whether MARAD's rights to distribute it would be limited? Response-6. Confidential business information or sensitive design information will not be shared publicly without permission. Prior to publication, MARAD and the project team will discuss the extent and limits of the information that will be shared. Question-7. Subcontracting limits: Are there any restrictions on the value or proportion of work that may be subcontracted to organizations outside the named project team, such as model testing facilities or noise specialists? Response-7. The proposed project team should include all intended team members including those that would be subcontracted such as testing facilities or noise specialists. The specifics of subcontract awards are not determined by the MARAD project manager. Question-8. Work outside the United States: May project funds be used to subcontract specialized work outside the United States? If so, are there limits on the type or value of that work? Response-8. The proposed project team should include all proposed team members. Preference will be given to those team leads represented by U.S. companies, those with U.S. headquarters, and those operating under the U.S. flag. There is no specific requirement for subcontractors. ========================================================= 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 ...