USC-7 Q As 27 FEB 12.pdf

# RFP Page # RFP Para # Industry Questions/Comments US Government Response

4 32 of 72

Exhibit 3, (PWS) 3.H.6.3, 3.H.7.3

Recommend replace with following language:"The Contractor may choose where to perform the [rinsing or washing] service, however the payment shall be based on the POE."

Amendment 6 - Revised the titles of 3.H.6 and 3.H.7 to "Exterior Cargo Rinsing Service" and "Exterior Cargo Washing Service."

After considering Industry's recommendation, the current language meets the US Government's intent and language will remain as written.

12 N/A

General Questions In Care “cargo crating” requirements are requested. The service area defined under cargo concealment where the “the US Government can request specific material….” Materials and their eventual disposal are a significant cost to this assessorial. i.e. steal, oak, pine other. Can we clarify?

3.H.3.2 was revised in Amendment 7 to "Concealment material may include tarps, wood crates, and any other material deemed necessary, by mutual agreement between the Contractor and the Ordering Officer. The US Government shall advise Contractor of any modifications to requested service location at time of booking."

24 53 of 72 Exhibit 3, (PWS) 6.F What about driver wait time for various issues associated with retro/redeployment moves? This is an issue the US Government will continue to review; however, at this time there is no method for tracking and validating Driver Wait Time.

31 47 of 72

Exhibit 3, (PWS) 6.C.2.1 To avoid confusion, this section should state when free time/detention ceases to accrue since the start and stop dates are different than non-exigency areas. Recommend the following language:

Daily detention charges will continue to accrue from the expiration of free time until 2400 hours on the day that one of the following occurs:

(1) the date the Contractor is notified in writing or via the U.S. Government designated system that the container is available for pick up at the Contractor’s point of delivery and the container is actually available when the Contractor arrives for pick up; or

(2) the date the U.S. Government executes a purchase modification pursuant to 6.C.3.1 or notifies the carrier that a particular container is lost, destroyed or impracticable to return pursuant to 6.C.3.3;

(3) the date that daily detention charges have accrued for 350 days on a dry container or 700 days for a reefer.

Amendment 7 - Clarified the language in 3.G.4.1.4. #1, 2, 3 and 4 are applicable to Exigency Areas and #1, 2 and 3 are applicable to Non Exigency Areas.

36 25-26 of 72

Exhibit 3 (PWS) 3.G.4.1.4, 3.G.4.1.6.1

These two provisions conflict with respect to the cessation of detention. Recommend moving the language in 3.G.4.1.6.1 (beginning with “Daily detention charges will continue to accrue”) to replace the language in 3.G.4.1.4, except that “4” should be deleted because automatic purchase does not apply in non-exigency areas.

Amendment 4 - Language in 3.G.4.1.6.1 "Daily detention charges will continue to accrue from the expiration of free time until 2359 hours on the day that the earliest on of the following occurs" along with four bullet points were moved to 3.G.4.1.4.

Amendment 7 clarified 3.G.4.1.4 #4 applies only to Exigency Areas.

49 16 of 72 Exhibit 3, (PWS) 3.A.17 and 3.A.19.2

Chassis Requirements- 3.A.17 and 3.A.19.2 these two sections have slightly different language regarding when chassis requirement is waived. Both sections should use the language in 3.A.19.2, which recognizes the custom of the trade.

3.A.17 applies to Contractor Furnished Containers, and 3.A.19 applies to US Government Furnished Containers.

96 3 of 9

Exhibit 1 Addenda to FAR Provisions, page 3 of 9, Para (iv). “Offerors shall provide a plan that describes the offerors strategy for implementation of Information Assurance and Industrial Security requirements specified in the Performance Work Statement throughout the life of the contract”. Please provide further clarification as to what is required and under which section in the PWS can we find the requirements? Is this related to a facility clearance? This requirement was not included in Draft 4 or previous USC-7 discussions.

Amendment 4, Exhibit 1, Addenda to FAR Provisions, provided clarification as to what the offerors are required to submit with their proposal. Amendment 6, Exhibit 3, Section 3.J, incorporated the Information Assurance and Cyber Security language. This does not relate to Facility Clearance.

101 8 of 10 Exhibit 2 The IPT discussed the need to have PKI certificates for foreign nationals, and a waiver of the requirement was requested until we can accommodate this requirement. There is no such waiver in the RFP. Please advise how this is to be addressed.

PKI Certificates will be waived until 31 Aug 2012 for foreign nationals who are on the current exempt list. We are diligently working to determine what the Government's intent is beyond 31 Aug 2012.

133 10 of 72

Exhibit 3, (PWS) 3.A.10.3 24-Hour EDI Requirement

It was discussed at the EDI summit to change the X1 reporting requirement in Afghanistan from 24-hours a to-be-defined time frame. The carriers propose 3 days to allow for POD and/or delivery confirmation from the driver.

Please confirm the language will be changed accordingly through an amendment to the PWS.

Although this was discussed at the EDI Summit, the US Government stated they needed to further discuss internally. After further review, this requirement is important to the US Government as they will begin measuring timeliness of EDI submissions in USC-7.

135 10 of 72

Exhibit 3, (PWS) 3.A.10 3. A.10 Electronic Commerce / EDI (Exhibit 3, PWS, Page 10) First paragraph states: The Contractor shall use Electronic Data Interchange (EDI) or IBS Ocean Carrier Interface (OCI) module (or successor system) as the primary means for interfacing with SDDC for all bookings. (A) Can a carrier use both systems, or is it better to work with just one system? (B) 3.A.10.1, How does a carrier obtain access to Defense Transportation Electronic Data Interchange (DTEDI)? (C) Is DTEDI required for both EDI and OCI systems?

It is recommended that Carriers work with one system. To obtain access, please contact Rose McLeod at rose.mcleod@us.army.mil.

138 10-13 of 72

Exhibit 3, (PWS) 3.A.10 EDI -- There are many unknowns regarding the implementation/execution of changes to EDI provisions (e.g.,, HG/HR, SD/BD, etc.). At Industry's requested, TRANSCOM has agreed to host an EDI meeting, which is scheduled for the last week in October. The Carriers have submitted various comments and questions in different forums, and look forward to receiving clarification on many important points. To the extent that questions/comments remain after the EDI meeting, the Carriers will submit these to the Contracting Officer for consideration in the USC-7 RFP.

Amendment 4 - Made several revisions to the PWS, Section 3.A.10. The next amendment will provide further clarification. EDI Code TBD will be removed, and Code RD will replace EC. The definition for RD will be revised to "Return of empty container to Contractor".

141 18 of 72 Exhibit 3, (PWS) 3.C.1.1.1 Origin Services - It was agreed at the 14-October meeting that this clause would be removed. Please confirm this was an oversight and an amendment to the PWS will be received removing this clause.

Detention at origin will not be paid. Notes from the 14 Oct 11 IPT telecon confirm that the Government stated clearly there would be no change to the language in Exhibit 3, PWS 3.C.1.1.1., and detention does not apply to origin.

150 52 of 72

Exhibit 3, (PWS) 6.E.3.1 & Attachment 6, D.6

6.E.3.1 - Why was the change made to cease CY rate when a call forward received? Not only is it unreasonable, but there would not be an associated EDI transaction to support the stoppage. The paragraph should read that the CY rate shall cease when the cargo out-gates the CY (HR/BD). Per 6.E.1.3, the contractor must commence with on-carriage within 3 days of receiving the call forward from the COR, and carriers will do their best to deliver the cargo as quickly as possible but in accordance with cargo priorities (i.e. Unit Cargo vs. FMS vs. sustainment). Ceasing Container Yard billing on the Out Gate transaction was agreed to by all parties at the EDI Summit.

6.E.3.1 Carrier holding yard rates will only apply to import/export cargo when a Staging Request has been received from the cognizant COR. Carrier holding yard rates will cease when a call forward request is received from the cognizant COR or SDDC Battalion.

Related to the above - In Attachment 6, D.6 CHY Staging Line 2, delete the words from "hence will not be assessed...not been dispatched." Replace with "CY charges will continue to accrue until all containers/cargo are out-gated from CY."

Amendment 4 - Revised Carrier Holding Yards and Staging Language to provide clarification.

161 3 of 8

Attachment 6, C.3 Container Detention: Container detention is covered in section 3.G.4 in non-Exigent Areas and section 6.C.2 for Exigency Areas. Container detention charges shall be billed upon the termination of detention, except when incurred in areas described in Section D, which shall be billed as directed in that section. A standard detention billing format shall be used when submitting an invoice for container detention. Invoices with proper documentation should be submitted no later than 30 days from the date charges occur.

i. Why only container detention? 90 days is probably more reasonable.

Question is unclear; however, C.3 was revised in Amendment 6 to add the following sentence, "However, the Government will consider and process invoices submitted after 30 days so long as they are properly supported and the claimed services can be verified.

172 5 of 8

Attachment 6; C.9 Futile Trip- Recommend that C.9 (b) be deleted be modified to bill for the agreed Linehaul rate established and remove Pass-Through charge requirement

Linehaul infers movement from a port to FOB or vice versa. For futile trips, trucks may be originating from a container holding yard or a location other than the port.

Therefore, the language will remain as written and carriers should submit costs on a pass through basis.

182 30 of 72 Exhibit 3, (PWS) 3.G.10.2 Tariff might not be the only component of these reimbursable costs- will the government allow for this?

The US Government realizes the port tariff may not be the only reimbursable cost.

208 N/A General Question In CARE, there's an Assessorial for Agriculture Clearance at Japan, Korea and Okinawa. It's a "per container" charge (no breakbulk). We cannot find any mention of this requirement in the Solicitation, PWS or Rate Rules.

Please advise what this Assessorial charge covers.

Removed accessorial in Amendment 4.

218 Pg 16 - 17 of 63

Exhibit 3, Table 3.E.1 & 3.E.1.2

Kuwait is listed in Table 3.E.1 as a country where Cargo Clearance is not payable. But, it is also specifically listed in 3.E.1.2 as a country where Cargo Clearance shall be paid if ordered. Can you please remove Kuwait from Table 3.E.1 to eliminate any confusion?

Revised language in Amendment 4. Kuwait was not removed from Table 3.E.1;

however, language was clarified in 3.E.1.1 to, "Table 3.E.1 identifies a list of locations where the US Government typically has principal responsibility for cargo clearance.

Unless ordered in the booking, Contractor-Arranged Cargo Clearance is not payable at these locations."

Clause 52.216-19 52.216-19 “Ordering Limitations” – There is no mention of the Caribbean in Section 1 or 2. Does this apply to just USCENTCOM, USEUCOM, and USPACOM? Please confirm. 52.16-19(b)(1) and (2) only applies to Outbound Routes/Zones listed.

Clause 5552.204-9001 5552.204.9001 “Facility Clearance” – This section references a DD Form 254 that is attached to the solicitation but I can not find this form. Where is this form located? Does this apply to just USCENTCOM? This is still being reviewed internally and will be posted to FedBizOpps at a later date.

Exhibit 3, (PWS) 3.A.6 Section 3.A.6 “Space Commitments” – There is no mention of the Caribbean in this section. Does this apply to just USCENTCOM, USEUCOM, and USPACOM? Please confirm. 3.A.6 is only applicable to the Routes/Zones listed.

Exhibit 3, (PWS) 3.A.18 Section 3.A.18 “Equipment Pools” – There is no mention of the Caribbean in this section. Does this mean that no container pools are required for the US to Caribbean trade? As of this time, there are no container pools in the Caribbean.

Exhibit 3, (PWS) 3.A.21.2 Section 3.A.21.2 “Bulk Liquids” – This section states that when the government does not provide a furnished tank that the Contractor shall provide the tank. What if the Contractor does not have tanks to provide? If the Contractor does not have the required equipment, they should not accept the booking.

Exhibit 3, (PWS) 3.C.1.3.2 Section 3.C.1.3.2 “Drop and Pick Service” – This section states that when requested by the Contracting Officer, the Contractor shall provide drop and pick service and be compensated $300 per container. What happens when the cost incurred by the Contractor exceeds $300? Can the difference be billed back to the Military? No, the Drop and Pick service rate is a Government set rate.

Exhibit 3, (PWS) 3.H.1.4 Section 3.H.1.4 “Stop-Off Service in Transit” – This section references the Defense Table of Official Distances shall be the system of record for calculating distances between locations. Where can this table be found?

The Defense Table of Official Distances can be found at URL:

https://dtod.sddc.army.mil/.

231 Exhibit 3, (PWS) 3.H.3 Section 3.H.3 “Cargo Concealment” – Does this apply to the Caribbean/Domestic Trade? Yes, cargo concealment applies to the Caribbean/Domestic Trade.

232 Exhibit 3, (PWS) 3.H.6 Section 3.H.6 “Cargo Rinsing” – Does this apply to the Caribbean/Domestic Trade? Yes, cargo washing applies to the Caribbean/Domestic Trade.

233 Exhibit 3, (PWS) 3.H.7 Section 3.H.3 “Cargo Washing” – Does this apply to the Caribbean/Domestic Trade? Yes, cargo rinsing applies to the Caribbean/Domestic Trade.

Attachment 5 Attachment 5 “Route Information” – What does note “c” and “d” mean? "C" includes zones that are off-shore domestic; not in scope.

"D" includes zones that are covered by other USTRANSCOM contracts.

Exhibit 3, 3.A.10 Electronic Data Interchange - EDI - Per EDI summit in St. Louis SDDC agreed to remove event type 'EC' and replace with 'RD' revisions shows the opposite it is replacing 'RD' with 'EC'. EC is not a standard EDI code. • TBD - In-Transit position report - this is not an EDI standard code - nor does it indicate EDI requirement and should be remove from table or modified with proper 2 digit code sructure • Row 133 of Q&A from TRANSCOM dated 27 Jan 12 on final review comments: PWS, 3.A.10.3.1 24 hour Requirement request to change to 3 days – There is no reference to this item in the revised document.

1) Concur - Amendment 7 removed ED and replaced with RD. The definition for RD was revised to "Return of empty container to Contractor".

2) Concur - TBD was removed in Amendment 7.

3) Although this was discussed at the EDI Summit, the US Government stated they needed to further discuss internally. After further review, this requirement is important to the US Government as they will begin measuring timeliness of EDI submissions in

USC-7.

Exhibit 2, Additional Clauses 3. Various

War Risk -- Section 3.4 should be deleted. It is non-commercial and adds no value. Justification for deletion has been previously provided to TRANSCOM counsel.

Deleted 3.4 in Amendment 6.

Exhibit 3, (PWS) 3.B.2, 3.B.3, 3.B.4

USC-07 RFP Amendment # 4: Response Times to Bookings // Section 3.B.3 directly conflicts with Sections 3.B.2 and 3.B.4. Industry recommends that Section 3.B.3 either be removed, or updated to allow Carriers with the same provisions as in 3.B.4 stating "Contractors shall have 1 business day to counteroffer any booking processed automatically."

PWS, 3.B.4 will be revised to Contractors shall implement an automated booking capability via EDI or OCI with the IBS within 30 business days after award of contract.

EDI transaction sets shall comply with standards identified in this contract. Contractor shall respond to all cargo offerings, including changes to previous offerings, in accordance with the timelines established in 3.B.3 above. Automated booking capability shall be maintained 24 hours per day, 7 days per week, throughout the period of the contract. Contractors shall have 1 business day to counteroffer any booking processed automatically. For hazardous cargo, Contractor shall respond to cargo offerings within 48 hours after shipper has provided relevant hazardous information to Contractor for determination of acceptance/rejection of cargo offering" in the next amendment.

5 of 8 Exhibit 3, (PWS) 3.G.11 Futile Trip- Recommend that C.9 be modified to provide that the applicable Linehaul rate be payable for futile trips rather than be treated as a pass through charge. Futile Trip requires the same operational commitment as a standard linehaul. Request that the fee charged for Futile Trips be based on the USC agreed linehaul rate for that Futile Trip

Linehaul infers movement from a port to FOB or vice versa. For futile trips, trucks may be originating from a container holding yard or a location other than the port.

Therefore, the language will remain as written and carriers should submit costs on a pass through basis.

3.F.3 Live Unload Exhibit 3, (PWS) 3.F.3 PWS 3.F.3.2 provides that "Shipments delivered with evidence of tampering or loss shall be investigated by base security and drivers may be detained for questioning by base security. If investigation determines no tampering occurred, applicable wait time rates will be paid. If the investigation determines that tampering/pilferage has occurred, wait time will not be payable. Any incidents of this nature will be subsequently reported to HQ SDDC G2 and USTRANSCOM Force Protection by the contract company upon notification by their employees of their detention or by base security." It is impractical to impose the reporting requirement on the Contractor because the driver would not be inclined to report the incident to the trucking company if pilferage is found. Base security should be responsible for reporting its investigation findings to the Contractor. Accordingly, recommend deleting the last three sentences of 3.F.3.2. This is new language. Contractor requests that Base Security and SDDC provide USC-07 Contractors with a list of Containers transiting the Base Gates, Equipment Interchange Report notating the general condition of the container/cargo, reports of any Seal Discrepancies, and investigative reports of cargo pilferage.

Amendment 7 - Removed the last sentence 3.F.3.2, which was the new language added in Amendment 4.

Exhibit 3, 6.D.1.1.2 Exhibit 3, 6.D.1.1.2 Section 6.D.1.1.2 should be deleted per prior agreement between Industry and the Government. If SDDC is entitled to access to the plans under USCG regulations, then SDDC should go directly to the USCG to obtain the plans. It was agreed between industry and the Government that this paragraph be removed form the contract. In RFPdated 22 Dec 11 the paragraph was removed. Why was this put back? It was further agreed that if the Government needed this information it was readily available by the USCG Marine Safety Center.

Amendment 7 - Revised 6.D.1.1.2 language to "Upon demonstrating a need to know to the plan owner, in accordance with 49 CFR 1520, ocean carriers transporting classified/sensitive and SRC I and II shipments through high risk waters will provide a copy of the ship's vessel security plan (VSP) with Piracy Annex to SDDC-G2. Plans will be provided by email attachments to distribution as provided by SDDC-G2. VSPs will be copied to SDDC-G2 after the plan is approved by the USCG Marine Safety Center".

Attachment 11 Attachment 11 POWERTRACK: The references to PowerTrack should be removed throughout USC-07 since our understanding is that the official Legal Name is now Syncada. Please update throughout the entirety of USC-07. Amendment 6, Attachment 11 - All PowerTrack references were revised to Syncada.

Exhibit 3, 3.A.10.3 Exhibit 3, 3.A.10.3 3.A.10.3 (Shipment Status Reporting) should be revised to allow for 72 hours in accordance with prior agreement between the Government and Industry. Per USC-07 Response to Industry Comments as of 27-January-2012, TCAQ advised this would be modified to allow for 72 hours after accomplishment. Please refer to Line # 133 in Governmant Q&A dated 27 Jan 12.

Although this was discussed at the EDI Summit, the US Government stated they needed to further discuss internally. After further review, this requirement is important to the US Government as they will begin measuring timeliness of EDI submissions in USC-7.

(page 17 of 75) Exhibit 3, (PWS) 3.C.1.1.1 Please confirm that the Government has a contractual obligation to return to the carrier any containers that the carrier spotted in response to a Government booking but that the Government does not load within a reasonable period of time, and to compensate the carrier for the futile spot of such containers.

The Contractor may submit an invoice as a Pass Through.

(page 45 of 75) PWS 6.C.1, 6.C.2 Please confirm that the clock for free time/detention in Afghanistan begins to run in accordance with 6.C.1.1, and will continue to run DURING ALL PERIODS until the clock is stopped by one of the 4 enumerated events identified in PWS 3.G.4.1.4. Recommend adding the following language to eliminate the potential conflict/ambiguity between Exigency and Non-Exigency area detention provisions: “Daily detention charges will continue to accrue during all periods from the expiration of free time until 2359 hours on the day that the earliest one of the following occurs:

1. The date the Contractor regains physical possession of the container.

2. The date the Contract is notified in writing or via the US Government designated system that the container is available for pick up at the Contractor’s point of delivery or other mutually agreed location and the container is available when the Contractor arrives for pick up;

3. The date the Contracting Officer issues a not-to-exceed delivery order under 6.C.3.1 to purchase the container;

4. The date the daily detention charges have accrued for 350 days on a dry container or 700 days for a reefer in accordance with 6.C.3.2; or

5. The date the Contracting Officer notifies the Contractor in writing that the US Government is purchasing the container under Section 6.C.3.3.” Unlike in non-exigency areas, the intent of exigency area detention is that it will run from vessel discharge on a “no fault” basis – meaning that free-time/detention will run during all periods, including inland transit, customs delays, force majeure delays, etc. – since the free time period was extended significantly. Additional language in Section 6.C.1.1 is necessary to clarify this point because Section 6.B provides that “All other terms and conditions of this contract not in conflict with this section shall apply to Exigency Areas.

Amendment 4 - Language in 3.G.4.1.6.1 "Daily detention charges will continue to accrue from the expiration of free time until 2359 hours on the day that the earliest on of the following occurs" along with four bullet points were moved to 3.G.4.1.4.

Amendment 7 - Clarified 3.G.4.1.4 #4 applies only to Exigency Areas.

(page 46 of 72) – Exhibit 3, (PWS) 6.C.3.1 Please confirm that the Contractor is entitled to submit an invoice with respect to the not-to-exceed delivery order to purchase containers, and that Prompt Payment Act interest will apply if that invoice is not paid within 30 days.

Recommend the revised language below to clarify the optional purchase process.

6.C.3.1 Optional Purchase – The US Government may opt to purchase a container at the Container Purchase Prices set forth in 3.G.9.1 after that container has accrued a minimum of 60 days of daily detention charges and provided that the container has not been returned to the Contractor. The first 60 days of detention shall not include any credit to be applied to the purchase price. The Contracting Officer will issue to the Contractor a delivery order to purchase the container(s) with a not-to-exceed price and detention will cease to accrue on that date. Within 60 days of the delivery order, the Contractor will verify against its records whether the container is eligible for purchase and, if so, will provide the Contracting Officer with an invoice based on its calculation of the amount due (i.e., accrued detention from the expiration of free time to the earlier of 2 or 3 specified in 6.C.2.1, less paid detention, plus the applicable purchase price). Payment will be due on the 30th day after the Contracting Officer receives the invoice and will be subject to interest under the Prompt Payment Act. The Contracting Officer will issue a contract modification to identify the verified containers and the applicable charges. If the US Government does not issue a contract modification within 60 days of the date the Contractor submits its invoice, then the delivery order will be void and detention will be payable as if the delivery order was never issued.

Amendment 7 - Revised 6.C.3.1.

(page 52 of 75) Exhibit 3, (PWS) 6.E.2.5 Recommend adding at the end of 6.E.2.5 the following language: “or when the cargo is constructively staged pursuant to 6.E.1.6.” Section 6.E.2.5 is inconsistent with 6.E.1.2 because it does not recognize that CHY rates apply to constructive staging that occurs when no response is received from the COR.

Amendment 7 - Added the following language to the last sentence in 6.E.2.5 "or when the cargo is constructively staged in accordance with 6.E.1.6. "

(page 52 of 75) – Exhibit 3, (PWS) 6.F.2.1 The formula in 6.F.2.1 conflicts with the free time provision in Table 6.F.3.1. If the AV is on July 1 and the X1 is on July 4, then the carrier is entitled to 3 days of driver wait time because free time expires at 2359 on July 1 and DWT runs for July 2, 3 and 4. Thus, the correct formula is (X1 – AV) vice (X1 – AV – 1 day free time). Please correct formula to be (X1 – AV).

AV to be submitted upon arrival at final gate which will run during free time. Formula in 6.F.2.1 is correct and will remain as written.

page 2 of 10 Exhibit 2, Clause 2.1 In the January 27th Q&A (#50), the question asked TRANSCOM to clarify its intent regarding how the COGSA limitation of liability applies to cargo booked as breakbulk. TRANSCOM answered "Liability will be in accordance with the second paragraph of 2.1. " The question was raised, however, because that paragraph is ambiguous. Accordingly, please advise whether it is TRANSCOM intent that the COGSA limitation for all USC-7 cargo booked as breakbulk should be based on measurement tons as opposed to "packages" (e.g., number of MTs times $500).

The COGSA limitation of liability will be valued by the measurement ton for all cargo booked as breakbulk. The last sentence in paragraph 2 was revised in Amendment 7 to provide clarification on how COGSA limitation of liability will be valued for cargo booked as breakbulk.

General One of the changes came with Amendment # 4 was the addition of an accessorial “dry container trucking”, of which Riga is the required origin. Yet there’s no destination or container size information. Could you please provide definition of the accessorial

Amendment 6 - Deleted the existing Dry Container Trucking CLIN which only had an origin and added three Dry Trucking CLINs that have an origin and a destination. Also, added language in Exhibit 3, 3.H.13.6.