DS 01_ QA Spreadsheet_LSCMP DRAFT SOL.xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 35 KB Posted
- Solicitation number
- N3220524R4105-RFP
About this file
This document is a Questions and Answers spreadsheet related to a draft Request for Proposal (RFP) from the Military Sealift Command (MSC) for Logistics and Continuous Monitoring Program Services. The key details are:
The RFP is for a firm-fixed price contract to provide food service, cargo fuel management, and continuous monitoring program training support analysis services for MSC ships. The contract includes a phase-in period and a base period with four one-year option periods. The solicitation uses a Lowest Price Technically Acceptable source selection process. Key personnel qualifications and travel requirements for the various training support analyst roles are outlined in detail. The government provided responses to multiple questions from offerors regarding staffing, training, data access, travel, and other performance work statement requirements. The offerors are instructed to submit any additional questions in the provided format by June 20, 2024.
View the file
Other files
Show 40 more
Latest 50 of 75 listed here. See the rest on GovTribe.
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
Attachment 9
Questions and Answers Spreadsheet Draft RFP N3220524R4105
| Reference (ie: Attachment # or PWS paragraph) | Comment/Question | Answers | Column1 | Column2 |
| Draft Solicitation |
PWS 1.2 Backgroumd Please provide the number of ships required for the various FS, CMP, and CMFA elements. How many ships are included in the FS TSA tasks, the CMP tasks, and the CFMA tasks? Can these numbers change over the Period of Performance? For Government-owned Contractor-operatored (GOCO) ships, is all the information required from those ships provided by MSC or is the Contractor required to coordinate with the other Contractors?
Request the number of ships for each category:
Food Service TSA - # of ships CMP TSA - # of ships CFMA Instructor - # of ships SMART inspection - stated at 30 per year max
Provide any known plans for the fleet to increase or decrease over the period of performance. ALL Food Service TSA - 60 ships (GOGO) CMP - 60 ships (GOGO) CFMA - 50 ships (GOGO/GOCO) SMART inspection - stated at 30 per year max As of now, there are no plans to increase/decrease fleet over Period of Performance. If this happens, a modification to the contract would need to be made. For CMP tasks - the number of ships can change. Dependent on decommissioning of ships and new delivery of commissioned ships. Information for CMP tasks wil be either provided by MSC through CMP, CMLS, ShipCLIP, One Touch, or other DOD Logistics systems.
Attachment 14 A
| Afloat Supply Continuous Monitoring Program - paragraph 3.2 | This paragraph states, "Applicability: All MSC GOGO shipboard supply functional areas. These procedures will be expanded to include Government-owned Contract-operated (GOCO) ships in the future." Is there an implementation plan when the CMP requirements will expand to GOCO ships? Please provide available details and advise how the Contractor should propose appropriately. | No, it is not expanding. Updates have been made to Attachment 14A to address this. |
| Draft Solicitation |
PWS 1.5 Staffing Plan The Staffing Plan is not approved by the Government until after the contract is awarded (the delivery date is no later than the last day of the Phase-In period per the referenced paragraph).
a. What course of action will be taken if the Government does not approve the plan? Is the contract terminated?
b. If during the Phase-In Period the Awarded Contractor realizes their proposed solution is insufficient and need to increase their staffing and price; is the contract terminated?
c. If the Government permits the contract to continue and allows the Awarded Contractor to modify their Staffing Plan and adjust their price, this essentially invalidates the selection evaluation.
d. Recommend the Staffing Plan be included in the Technical Proposal requirement and the plan must be acceptable to the Government as part of the award criteria. a. The Contractor is required to meet the requirements of the PWS. If the staffing plan is not approved, the Government has the option to allow the contractor to cure the deficiency, or terminate the contract.
b. This will be a performance based, firm-fixed price contract. The Contractor is required to perfom the PWS sucessfully. MSC is not hiring a certain number of contractor employees, we are contracting for the work detailed in the performance work statement to be completed sucessfully.
c. There is no question being asked, instead this is a statement. No response to the statement.
d. Resumes provided for key personnel will continue to be used for technical evaluation. A staffing plan will not be evaluated during proposal but is required to be submitted to the Government at the end of the Phase-In period after contract award.
Draft Solicitation
| PWS 1.5.3 | This paragraph states "The Contractor shall describe the processes and procedures for cross-training personnel to support/conduct multiple events, some simultaneously in different locations. |
| This plan should allow for a quick response to multiple activities." Please specify the maximum number of simultaneous events, including SMART inspections, ship assist visits, and training events that may occur concurrently or overlap within the same timeframe for FS TSAs and CMP TSA. The Staffing Plan requires the contractor to discuss how they will manage this requirement but does not provide the sufficient details to develop the plan. | Paragraph 5.2.2.11 states the specifics for FS TSAs- "FS TSAs providing world-wide, often short-fuse notice, support of subject events as identified by MSC's Engineering Directorate (N7) schedule for all GOGO and GOCO ships in two (2) different locations, simultaneously, possibly in different theaters." |
CMP TSAs - None. Assist visits by CMP-TSAs are not expected to overlap.
Draft Solicitation
PWS 1.5.4 and 1.13.3 There is a requirement for the FS TSA to possess and maintain SERVSAFE Manager and Instructor certification. There are no tasks associated with SERVSAFE in the PWS. Please define the tasks that require this certification or remove the requirement from the qualifications (1.13.3) and paragraph 1.5.4 and the sub paragraph also marked 1.5.4. SERVSAFE tasks have been added to paragraph 5.
Chisholm, James M CIV USN COMSC NORFOLK VA (USA): Chisholm, James M CIV USN COMSC NORFOLK VA (USA):
Why is Part 5 separate from Part 1. There are task associated with Part 1 and then there are task in Part 5. It reads better if the were together. Draft Solicitation
| PWS 1.7.4 Places of Performance | Since each shipyard is privately owned and has their own safety requirements for visitors, they may require additional insurance policies. Request the Government provide a list of all potential shipyards along with a POC and contact information to permit the offerors to determine the visit requirements and to include the cost in the price proposal. | This information has been added to Paragraph 1.7.4. Specific POC info will be given post-award. |
| Draft Solicitation |
PWS 1.7.5, 1.13.6, 1.13.6.4, 5.2.2.6, 5.2.2.12, 5.3.1.5 1, 5.4.12 Paragraph 1.7.5 states this is a Firm Fixed Price (FFP) contract. The other paragraphs all identify travel requirements without identifying where, how long and how many contract employees are required to travel. The details of the travel are important since the proposal evaluation is Lowest Price Technically Acceptable (LPTA). For LPTA evaluation the requirements need to be defined so all offorers are being evaluated against the same standard. For example, if one contractor assumes 75% of the travel will be CONUS while another assumes 25% in each of the four AORs, the first will have a lower price than the second.
The travel is based on the ship's schedule and is defined as much as possible.
Regarding Food Service Training Support Analysts’ Travel requirements, Attachments 6A and 11A are provided to show the travel performed during the contract over the previous five to eight years. For the Cargo Fuels Management Accounting Training Support Analysts’ travel requirements, the PWS states the specific number of travel expected is 20 visits per year. For the Continuous Monitoring Program Training Support Analysts’, the projected number is 16 times each year. This information combined with the provided information regarding previous travel locations, should be utilized to provide a FFP proposal price.
Draft Solicitation
| PWS 1.7.6.4 Physical Security | Is the Contractor required to store classified material at their own facility? | No; Paragraph 4.2 has been updated to reflect this. |
| Draft Solicitation |
| PWS 1.12.1 Phase In Period | Is the Awarded Contractor responsible to be fully staffed for the Phase In Period? If not, how will the Incumbent Contractor be able to complete the required transition tasks as stated in the PWS? If the Awarded Contractor is not fully staffed until day one of the base period, what is the objective of the phase-in? | The contractor is not required to be fully staffed during the phase-in period. The objective of the phase-in period is to allow time for the awardee to get turnover from the incumbent contractor and get all employees onboard so they are ready for full performance on day 1 of the PoP. It is up to the awardee how many people they will have onboard during the phase-in period to allow for proper turnover. |
| Draft Solicitation |
PWS 1.13.3 This paragraph makes reference to readiness indicators for Navy Working Capital Fund (NWCF) Commodities. Is it intended for Contractor to provide CMP functions for these commodities such as Cargo HULL/FILL/DECKLOAD/9M PROVISIONS carried on Combat Logistics Force (CLF) Platforms under this solicitation? If yes, please provide the Readiness Indicators and available documentation on the procedures for commodities. No. CMP-TSAs tasks is strictly End-use material. Updated para PWS 1.13.3. Removed task involving NWCF or CARGO material.
Draft Solicitation
| PWS 1.13.2.2 | This paragraph states "A minimum of six (6) years of operational experience as a Leading Culinary Specialist E7 or above, while serving afloat, is required." It appears that this requirement pertains specifically to experience within the U.S. Navy. It is recommended to include equivalent experience within MSC or other afloat operations as an alternative qualification to the six years of Leading Culinary Specialist experience in the U.S. Navy. Is MSC or other experience deemed acceptable? If yes, what are the specific requirements for MSC or other experience? | 1.13.2.2 has been updated to allow. |
| Draft Solicitation |
| PWS 1.13.2 Food Service Training Support Analyst | This section is discussing qualification for key personnel. Subparagraphs 1.13.2.1 and 1.13.2.2 are not qualifications and should be removed from this section. Recommend these paragrahs be placed in Section 5.2.2.11. | This information has been condensed and/or moved into Section 5.2.2.11. |
| Draft Solicitation |
| PWS 1.13.3 and 5.3 | All the paragraphs under paragrah 1.13.3 should be removed. This paragraph pertains to the required qualifications. The available office space should be included in Part 3, there is no need for history in this section, and tasks do not belong in the qualifications paragraphs. | Para 1.13.3. has been adjusted and describes only required CMP-TSAs brief job description and qualifications, no tasks. |
| Draft Solicitation |
| PWS 1.13.3 and 5.3 | Paragraphs 1.13.3 and 5.3 discuss the history of the CMP project and specifically state "Historically, the Contractor provided two (2) CMP TSAs to complete the tasks…" This statement is misleading. The scope of effort for this contract is significantly different than the present CMP program and associated analysis. Recommend that the reference to present staffing levels be removed from these paragraphs. | Specific recommendations in the PWS referencing specifically how many CMP TSAs to provide to perform the work has been removed. |
| Draft Solicitation |
PWS 1.13.6 Travel and 5.3.1.5.1 The reference paragraphs have conflicting information for ship assist visits in Hampton Roads area.
1.13.6 "Projected assist visits to ships that are located in Hampton Roads’ area, VA will be no less than three (3) per quarter for up to twelve (12) per contract year."
5.3.1.5.1 "Projected assist visits to ships that are located in Hampton Roads’ area, VA will be no less than six (6) per quarter."
How many assist visits to ships located in the Hampton Roads area are projected? Are these assist visits the same length as a ship visit outside of Hampton Roads area (five days in length)? Local travel has per diem associated with it depending on the length of the day and the number travel miles. How many visits will require travel greater than 50 miles? For Firm Fixed Price (FFP), the exact number of visits in the Hampton Roads area is required.
The requirement for visits outside of Hampton Roads area is also conflicting in these paragraphs.
1.13.6 states "out of Hampton Roads' area will be four (4) per year with one (1) assist visit per quarter for each Area of Responsibility..." and 5.3.1.5.1 states "Projected travel will be no more than one (1) assist visit per quarter for each AOR...The total number of trips out of area will be appoximately four (4) per year." Is the requirement to visit each AOR once a year or every quarter? Are there a total of four (4) per year or 16 trips? The PWS implies visiting multiple ships in an AOR; is each visit five (5) days and how many ships would be visited?
1. CMP TSA's assist visits in Hampton Road area. Removed 1.13.6 and added the information to section 5.3.1.5.1.
-"Projected travel will be no more than one (1) assist visit per quarter for each AOR in C3F, C5F, C6F, and C7F AORs. The total number of trips out of area will be approximately four (4) per year and locations are subject to change. Projected assist visits to ships that are located in Hampton Roads’ area, VA will be no less than four (4) per quarter resulting in 16 per year."
- 3-5 hours per visits
- no travel greater than 50 miles.
2. Outside of Hampton Road area. 4 per year total. Assist visits will involve multiple ships in each AOR. The number of ships per AOR is dependent on ships availabilty. Removed 1.13.6 and added the information to section 5.3.1.5.1 Draft Solicitation
PWS 1.13.6.1, 1.13.6.2 AND 5.4.6 These paragraphs discuss travel requirements for the CFMA. Request paragraph 1.13.6.1 remove any reference to CFMA travel; the entire paragraph is associated with CMP TSA travel.
Of the 12 CFMA training sessions, how many will be in the Hampton Roads area and how many outside of Hampton Roads? What is the location of travel and duration the CFMA will be on the ship to perform the assessment and provide the training?
| Paragraph 5.4.6 states Ad Hoc training worldwide. Are these the same requirements as stated in 5.4.12? How many training events does this include? Please provide location and duration. Does the Contractor propose 12 additional trips of seven (7) days in addition to the 12 events already stated? Are the 12 trips states in 5.4.12 all outside of the Hampton Roads' area? | The PWS has been updated to provide more details regarding these questions. Section 1.13.6.1 has been moved to 5.3.1.5. |
| Draft Solicitation |
| PWS 1.13.2, 1.13.6.4, 5.2.2.11, 5.2.2.12 | Please specify the maximum number of simultaneous FS TSA events, including SMART inspections and ship assist visits, that may occur concurrently or overlap within the same timeframe. This information is essential for Contractor staffing analysis, considering the daily, weekly, and monthly FS requirements that must also be completed on an ongoing basis. | Paragraph 5.2.2.11 states the specifics for FS TSAs- "FS TSAs providing world-wide, often short-fuse notice, support of subject events as identified by MSC's Engineering Directorate (N7) schedule for all GOGO and GOCO ships in two (2) different locations, simultaneously, possibly in different theaters." |
| Draft Solicitation |
| PWS 5.1.1 and 5.2.1.4 | The reference paragaphs define the timeline to notify the MSC Government FS personnel "within one (1) day of ship's communication". Is this one business day or calendar day (other requirements state business days)? Request these paragraphs are changed to "the next business day." | 5.1.1 and 5.2.1.4. - added "business". |
| Draft Solicitation |
| PWS 5.2.1.7 | Does this requirement involve only the 4 FS TSAs that are collocated with MSC in Norfolk and San Diego? Also recommend the wording be changed from "three times a week" to "as needed." | Yes, the outliers would not have access. Retain language for telework- we will keep three days a week for FS. |
| Draft Solicitation |
| PWS 5.2.2.11 | The solicitation includes several attachments and CDRLs for SMART inspections but does not include specific requirements for the Final Contract Trial (FCTs). Request further information concerning FCTs. Are there specific FS TSA qualification requirements associated with FCTs? How many FCTs will be conducted per period of performance? Please provide the location(s) and duration of the FCTs. This information is required for pricing. | Took out MREs/FCTs language from PWS. |
| Draft Solicitation |
| PWS 5.2.2.12 | Ad Hoc Training and Assist Visits is open-ended and is mentioned several times in this solicitation. Recommend MSC provide specific number of Ad Hoc visits to Norfolk, VA based vessels, number of Ad Hoc visits to vessels in CONUS but outside Norfolk, VA area, and number of Ad Hoc visits to OCONUS vessels and projected AORs to allow offerer to have a clear picture of the travel requirements. Is this particular Ad Hoc requirement not already covered in 5.2.1.5 and 5.2.2.3? | Ad Hoc visits have been removed in regards to training. |
| Draft Solicitation |
| PWS 5.1.3 | The reference paragraphs state, "Provide technical and system training to shipboard personnel when deficiencies…" Are these two referenced paragraphs the same requirements or different requirements? Please provide the following information: the expected number of training events per period of performance, the location, the length of the visits, and the number of FS TSA personnel expected to support the training. If these requirements are different, please provide the requested information for each paragraph. As presently written, the requirements are open ended. This information is required for staffing analysis and developing the price. | The PWS has been updated to provide more detailed information regarding these requirements. It can be found in sections 5.3.1.5.2; and 5.2.2.6 of the PWS. These are different requirements. |
| Draft Solicitation |
| PWS 5.3.1.2 | Does the CMP program briefing requirement extend to San Diego or other locations besides Norfolk, VA? If so, how many classes are typically conducted in San Diego and other locations? Is the briefing required to be conducted in-person, or is a virtual briefing acceptable/achievable (such as live video via Teams)? | Currently primary training location is in Norfolk, VA for classroom. Temporarily San Diego for Spring 2024 during REHAB of Norfolk classroom. Once a year in SD in person and remainder, if audience in SD, by MS TEAMS. CMP -TSAs will perform briefing via MS Teams. |
| Draft Solicitation |
| PWS 5.3.1.3 | Please quantify the additional meetings, conferences, training, and assessments the CMP TSA will be required to support above and beyond shipboard visits already addressed. Information requested in the number of events, the length to include travel time, and locations. | PWS para 5.3.1.2 has been updated to provide this information. |
| Draft Solicitation |
| PWS 5.3.2.4 and 5.3.3.1.1 | Will Contractor have full direct access rights to CMLS (Master Data) for all vessels in order to effectively accomplish requirements identified in these referenced paragraphs? Reference - Attachment 7 - MSC Data Exploitation Plan. | Yes, CMP-TSAs will have full access to data that are available in CMLS and CMP to perform their tasks. Access to CMLS and CMP will be tailored based on CMP-TSAs tasks. |
| Draft Solicitation |
PWS 5.4.6 and 5.4.12 Is the requirement defined in 5.4.6 and 5.4.12 the same requirement or different? Is the requirement to provide 24 training events?
| 5.4.6 adds the requirement for Ad Hoc. This is a firm fixed price effort, please state the maximum number of training events this would include and state how many in the Hampton Roads area and how many outside. | This information has been updated in the PWS. The requirement is for approximately 20 per year. |
| Draft Solicitation |
| PWS 5.4.11 and 5.4.12 | The reference paragraphs state the CFMA is required to attend training courses and conferences throughout the year. How many courses/conferences is the CFMA expected to attend and what is the duration and location for each? This information is required to support the staffing analysis and price. | CFMA - NPO/MSC monthly sync via MS Teams. CFMA - yearly conference/NPO-DLAEHQ visit - Fort Belovoir, VA. Conference will include any training that is needed. PWS language has been updated to reflect this. |
| Draft Solicitation |
52.212-2 EVALUATION--COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS AND COMMERCIAL SERVICES (NOV 2021)
| How will the government assess if offeror understands and meets the requirements of the Performance Work Statement based only on Resumes and Past Performance? The Pricing Worksheet only has total labor for the Base and each Option Period; there is no way of assessing the proposed staffing to determine if the Contractor understands the scope of the effort. The technical volume requirements in the previous solicitations required the offeror to demonstrate an understanding of the requirements, propose their staffing with sufficient justification, and provide resumes. Recommend the evaluation criteria include the understanding of the requirements and the staffing plan along with analysis. | This acquisition is utilizing lowest price technically acceptable source selection procedures. Because of this, proposals exceeding the minimum requirements detailed in the PWS will not be rated higher than those that simply meet the requirements. Resumes provided for key personnel will continue to be used for technical evaluation. A staffing plan will not be evaluated during proposal but is required to be submitted to the Government at the end of the Phase-In period after contract award. By submitting a proposal, the contractor is stating that they have the ability to perform the work detailed in the PWS for the price they propose. This will be a Firm-Fixed Price contract so the burden to perform within those price constraints falls on the contractor. |
| Draft Solicitation |
| VOLUME II Technical | Is there a page limitation for the Volume II Technical? | Each resume submitted should be a maximum of five (5) pages in length. |
| Draft Solicitation |
CLIN Structure
Part 4
5.2.2.11 The contractor structure includes CLINS for Labor, Travel and Material. Based on our review of the PWS, there appears to be no Material requirements identified other than the SMART Testing Kits, five (5) kits. Part 4 and paragraph 5.2.2.11 states "The Contractor is responsible for buying, maintaining, and inventorying all SMART Testing kits [five (5) kits...". Is there other material requirements not explicitly stated, such as material for shipboard training? Also, are the SMART Testing Kits Government Owned Property or Contractor Owned Property. The Contractor is responsible for buying all SMART inspection materials; everything that is listed in attachment 6A.
In regards to training materials, the CFMA TSA may print course materials on board the ship as necessary. This is stated in the PWS.
Draft Solicitation
| 52.212-2 EVALUATION--COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS AND COMMERCIAL SERVICES (NOV 2021) | Lowest Price Technically Acceptable (LPTA) contracting makes it essential that the government award the contract to a contractor who can perform all aspects and is completely technically acceptable. Recommend additional factors or subfactors to ensure proper evaluation of proposals. Some options to consider adding are: 1) Understanding of need. Does the proposal fully answer the solicitation requirements? 2) Management approach. Does the proposal have, or can the contractor be reasonably expected to develop, management processes and procedures to ensure a successful project? 3) Technical approach. Do the proposed technical methodologies, techniques, solutions, and services meet the procurement documents requirements? | Resumes provided for key personnel will continue to be used for technical evaluation. A staffing plan will not be evaluated during proposal but is required to be submitted to the Government at the end of the Phase-In period after contract award. | |
| Volume II - Technical | Under this section, this solicitation is only asking for Resumes of Personnel. How will the proposed contractor be graded on ability to execute the work effectively and fulfill the requirements of the PWS as addressed in 1.1, 1.4, 1.4.1, 1.4.2 based on resumes alone? | Resumes provided for key personnel will continue to be used for technical evaluation. A staffing plan will not be evaluated during proposal but is required to be submitted to the Government at the end of the Phase-In period after contract award. | |
| Para 1.2 | Can contractor assume CMP Support is only targeted at Government Owned, Government Operated vessels. How many total vessels are included in this support? | Yes, GOGO only. 60 GOGO ships. | |
| Para 1.4 | Should this read "The Contractor shall provide an effective, accessible, responsible, and high-qualifty Logistics Services and CMP program ISO MSC's mission to maintain the "CIVMAR" professional knowledge and skills required to effectively operate afloat supply departments run by MSC's workforce. | No, retain language. That would exclude CONMARs/GOCO ships. | |
| Para 1.5 | Staffing plan is required last day of the phase-in period. Same question applies as above - how will the proposing contractor be graded on ability to fulfill the requirements of this PWS if Staffing Plan is not provided as part of their original proposal? | Resumes provided for key personnel will continue to be used for technical evaluation. A staffing plan will not be evaluated during proposal but is required to be submitted to the Government at the end of the Phase-In period after contract award. By submitting a proposal, the contractor is stating that they have the ability to perform the work detailed in the PWS for the price they propose. This will be a Firm-Fixed Price contract so the burden to perform within those price constraints falls on the contractor. | |
| Para 1.13.3 | This paragraph states that PWS duties have historically been provided/executed by two (2) CMP TSA's. Are these personnel executing the same range of duties as identified in this DRAFT PWS? If not, what percentage of this work is currently being performed by current CMP TSAs? | No, current CMP TSAs are only performing tasks based on the current contract. The solicitation PWS includes an increase to the current workload. See PWS 1.13.4. | |
| Para 1.13.3 | This paragraph refers to (End-Use and NWCF) CMP Duties. Is this implying the NWCF HULL, FILL, DECKLOAD and 9M Commodities carried on the Combat Logistics Force (CLF) platforms and currently managed by N46 support contractor fall under the CMP Functions in this solicitation? Are the same Readiness Indicators used for these Commodities? Is this not duplication of efforts? These commodities are also identified in some of the CDRLs. If these are not to be included in this PWS, recommend removing NWCF Terminology thru-out this solicitation as it could lead to confusion on this requirement. | CMP TSAs tasks are strictly on End-Use. N46 CLF CMP functions do NOT fall under this contract. | |
| Para 1.13.3 | Under Specific Goals Paragraph RI's the following are mentioned "Storeroom/Hold management, Consolidated Afloat Requisitioning Guide Overseas (CARGO) load out and order fulfillment, Replenishment at Sea/Underway Replenishment (RAS/UNREP) coordination - all of which are controlled and measured by different entities/contracts and/or shipboard day-to-day unique operations. How would the contractor be able to measure/report on these factors? | CMP TSAs tasks are strictly on End-Use. We removed CARGO, RAS/UNREP and it now indicates it's only for end use. | |
| Para 1.13.3.1 | Would this paragraph make more sense worded "All CMP TSAs shall have afloat supply experience totaling a minimum of seven (7) years on | ||
| either Navy or MSC vessels or a combination of both or an MSC Afloat employee having a minimum of five (5) years direct MSC experience". Rationale - An MSC afloat logistics CMP TSA would be more knowledgeable and aligned with MSC shipboard operations, MSC business model and MSC logistics automation systems if their past five years experience has all been on MSC vessels. | Retain the verbiage. | ||
| Para 1.13.6, 1.13.6.1, 1.13.6.2, 1.13.6.3, 1.13.6.4 | These travel requirements are duplicated in 5.3.1.3, 5.3.1.5.1, 5.3.1.5.2, 5.4.6, 5.4.12, 5.2.2.11, 5.2.2.12 - Recommend deleting section 1.13.6 and list all travel requirements in three separate functional areas in section 5 such as: 1) CMP Food Service travel, 2) CMP Logistics Operations travel, 3) CFMA CMP/Course Travel for clarity in this document. | All has been changed and moved to their appropriate paragraphs. | |
| Para 1.13.6.1 and 1.13.6.2 | Assist visits list time on station per vessel as (5) days. Is this realistic considering ship's operating schedules and availability of Civmar personnel who have to continue to do their job on a daily basis. This is also very costly to the Government when traveling. Is 2 days per vessel a more realistic time on station number? | Yes, five days is realistic. All of this has been clarified in the PWS. | |
| Para 1.13.6.1 and 1.13.6.2 | These two paragraphs comingle CMP TSA and CFMA TSA travel, but these two TSA positions have different objectives and periodicities in the execution of their duties. Recommend devoting one paragraph to CMP TSA travel requirements and separate paragraph to CFMA TSA travel requirements for clarity. See note above related to duplication of travel paragraphs. | Retain the verbiage. | |
| Para 1.13.6.1 and 1.13.6.2 | Travel requirements are not clearly defined for offeror to make a realistic calculated estimate. What is the defined travel requirements for these paragraphs defined as Local Hampton Roads visits, CONUS, but outside of Hampton Roads visits and OCONUS - Specific AOR Visits. See note above related to duplication of travel paragraphs. | Removed 1.13.6 subparagraphs. This information has been moved to the appropriate paragraphs. | |
| Para 5.3.1 | 1) Does the Web CMP and Tableau CMP Dashboards provide the CMP TSAs with all the data necessary to analyze ship performance RIs- if not, what percentage of data do these systems provide to support the PWS Readiness Indicator Requirements? Will Contractor get training from MSC on these dashboards? 2) ShipCLIP is an afloat automation system - will contractor be provided a ShipCLIP database that resides on their government laptops to emulate erroneous issues being executed in the fleet? | Deleted Tableau in the entire document. CMP will not be provided with ShipCLIP account. | |
| Para XXX and 5.3.1.5.1 | CMP TSA Travel is identified as no more than one assist visit per quarter per each AOR (C3F, C5F, C6F, C7F). Can it be assumed this means four total visits outside the local Hampton Roads area. Will contractor be expected to visit only one ship or multiple ships in that AOR? Is the number of visits to local Hampton Roads based ships realistic at 6 visits per quarter or 24 per year. Are there that many MSC ships assigned to the Hampton Roads area without duplicating visits? | Yes, four total visits outside the local Hampton Roads area. CMP TSAs are expected to visit multiple ships per AOR. 24 ships total is realistic. Ships visits can be conducted to the same ships. | |
| Para 5.4.6 | CFMA TSA Travel is identified as 12 Visits annually. How many of these 12 visits are defined as Hampton Roads area, how many CONUS, but outside Hampton Roads area (Other East/West Coast locations, etc.) and how many OCONUS and to what AORs? | PWS has been updated to 20 visits annually: (12) OCONUS; (8) CONUS - AORs C3F, C5F, C6F, and C7F. | |
| Part 3 - Government Furnished Equipment | Will the Government be providing NMCI Laptop Computers and NMCI Email accounts for all contractor personnel required to access Government systems? | Yes only colocated FS; if they come to an office, they get a computer. PWS Para 3.2- only for 4 FS TSAs that we have office space for. | |
| ADHOC Rqmts such as in 5.2.2.12 and other areas of this solicitation. | Ad hoc assist, training, assessment visits are addressed throughout this document in support of FS, CMP, CFMA. Can MSC clarify the number of ADHOC visits, locations, time on station to allow offeror clarity on the true ADHOC travel requirements to facilitate submitting a fair and reasonable offer for travel. | Number of visits in Norfolk, CONUS not Norfolk, OCONUS, etc. For CMP TSAs, Ad Hoc assist visit will accounted as regular visits. Ad hoc taken out as it referred to travel. | |
| Terminology | This solicitation uses shipboard Assessments, Inspections, Evaluations, Assist Visits, Training, Technical and System Training and Other Logistics Services with no consistency across various areas of this document. This is a broad range of terminology that could be interpreted in different ways as to what is required and for length of time to execute. Recommend consistent use of terminology across all areas. | Terminology has been adjusted and clarified in the PWS. | |
| Other General Comments: | |||
| Level of Effort Considerations: As stated above, the PRS criteria includes 100% on-time delivery. This essentially dictates that the Contractor must have significant staff to perform all day-to-day activities, support simultaneous events worldwide, and deliver all products on time. Also, the 100% means that the Contractor can only meet the requirements, never exceed the requirements. Changing the requirements to 90 or 95% permits the Contractor to trade-off staff (reduce staffing) and still meet the PRS. Propose the PRS be modified to have different levels of meet and exceed – meeting the requirements would be 100% accuracy and delivery greater than 90% of the time, exceeding the requirements would be 100% accuracy and delivery greater than 95% of the time. | Adjustments have been made to the percentages provided in the PRS. |
Labor Categories: The requirements state that all positions are Key Personnel who must meet all the qualifications. This does not permit an Offeror to propose different levels of experience to meet the requirements. Is an Offeror permitted to utilize different labor categories in developing their proposed staffing and not be key personnel? No, the offeror is not permitted to utilize different labor categories.
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .