Pre-Proposal_Meeting_Minutes.pdf

MEETING MINUTES FOR UNIVERSAL SERVICE CONTRACT – 8 (USC-8)

4 JUNE 2015

0900-1200

SCOTT AFB, IL

OPENING REMARKS:

Mr. J.R. Oliver (TCAQ-I/Contracting Officer) welcomed and thanked the representatives of the sealift industry to the pre-proposal conference. He began by outlining the purpose of the meeting was to discuss the USC-8 proposal requirements and address any questions or concerns contractors had prior to proposal submission. Industry was encouraged to engage with TCAQ to ensure they understand the proposal requirements. It was also stated that TCAQ intended to award to all Carriers who submitted an acceptable proposal. Finally, Mr. Oliver introduced Mrs.

Lisa Cahill (TCAQ-I/Contract Specialist) as the lead facilitator for the pre-proposal conference.

BRIEFINGS:

Lisa Cahill – Pre-Proposal Conference Slides (Attachment 1) Mrs. Cahill began introducing members of the Government team from TCAQ, SDDC (G3/G6/G8/G9), TCJA, TCJ6, and the Enterprise Readiness Center.

She continued by giving an overview of the Request for Proposal (RFP). Mrs. Cahill explained each section of the RFP to include all Exhibits and Attachments. She then focused on the five volumes which make up the written proposal. It was stated that all Contractors shall sign and return all amendments and that all current documents could be found on the Federal Business Opportunities website. She went on to explain the requirements for submitting pricing electronically via the Carrier Analysis and Rate Evaluation System, Service Module (CARE II

SM).

Mrs. Cahill then explained the required executed RFP documents that must be included in each Contractor’s proposal. She followed this discussion by outlining the requirements of the technical proposal. It was explained that each Carrier must provide a vessel profile and proof of owning and/or operating one vessel. For Contractors operating in the Jones Act Trade (domestic shipping), a U.S. Domestic Shipyard Report must also be included in their proposal. In addition, Carriers must demonstrate they are capable of exchanging electronic data interchange (EDI) transactions as well as identify any specific NIST Special Publication 800-53, Security and Privacy Controls for Federal Information Systems and Organizations, standard identified in Attachment 1 of Exhibit 1, that they do not intend to implement.

Volume III of the RPF was covered next. Contractors were instructed to submit no more than 2 past performance references and send past performance questionnaires to those references. The requirements for the Small Business Subcontracting Plan (applicable to large businesses only) and Small Business Utilization Plan (applicable to small businesses only) were briefed followed by directions on submitting pricing proposals.

Mrs. Cahill then explained the evaluation process so the Contractors would have a better understanding of how proposals would be evaluated. The Government will utilize best value source selection procedures with no tradeoffs. This means that if a Contractor submits the required documentation, a technically acceptable proposal, has acceptable past performance, an acceptable small business proposal, and at least one fair and reasonable rate, an award will be given. It was noted that preferences for U.S. Flag service, enrollment in the Voluntary Intermodal Sealift Agreement (VISA), and U.S. Domestic Shipyard Preference (applicable to Jones Act trade only) would be applied at the time of issuing a Task Order (booking).

It was explained that the Period of Performance for this contract was a base year with two option years. The option years will not be priced at time of contract award and will be priced prior to the execution of each option year. The proposal due date of 13 Jul 15 was given with an approximate contract award date of 28 Oct 15 and a contract start date of 1 Dec 15.

Throughout Mrs. Cahill’s briefing, various questions were asked by Contractors in the audience.

Below is a synopsis of those questions with the answers provided by the Government:

For the written technical proposal, is anything else required that is not listed in the RFP?

ANSWER: No.

Should the vessel profile be written or submitted in CARE?

ANSWER: Contractors may provide the vessel profile in any format as long as it contains the information required in the solicitation.

Does the Carrier need to list the specific routes they service as part of the technical proposal?

ANSWER: No. This is not a requirement for USC-8.

Does the U.S. Domestic Shipyard Report need to cover all applicable vessels in a Contractor’s fleet?

ANSWER: Yes.

How many iterations will be held for the pricing proposal?

ANSWER: Two iterations of pricing will be held followed by a very brief (1 day) Final Proposal Revision (FPR). Discussions will be held with Carriers individually between the first and second iteration.

How will the changes to the Bunker Adjustment Formula affect the fair and reasonable determination of the pricing proposal?

ANSWER: Fair and reasonable will be based on the competitive range of the rates submitted or utilization of any other price analysis technique identified in FAR 15.404- 1(b)(2).

Will Jones Act Carriers be compared against Jones Act Carriers only? It is unfair to compare Domestic and International Carriers equally.

ANSWER: The competitive range for each rate category will based on Carriers who provide service to that area. In addition, the discussions held between rate iteration one and two is the time to bring up concerns about the rate evaluation.

Michael Jenkins – Cyber-Defense Contract Language Update (Attachment 2)

Mr. Michael Jenkins (TCJ6) gave a brief overview of the history of the cyber-defense language included in USTRANSCOM contracts and then went to explain the changes from the previous USC-7 requirements to the current USC-8 requirements. During the presentation, several questions were asked regarding the new cyber-security requirements. These questions are provided below:

How much detail needs to be provided for the 51 subsets identified in the NIST standards?

ANSWER: Carriers only need to identify those subsets they cannot comply with.

Will this slide deck be provided?

ANSWER: Yes

The law enforcement/counterintelligence language seems ‘heavy-handed’ considering the Contractors involved with the USC program have international ties. Can the language be changed from ‘shall’ to ‘best effort’?

ANSWER: The Government will take that under advisement.

J.R Oliver – Bunker Adjustment Formula (BAF) Baselines (Attachment 1) The pre-proposal conference concluded with Mr. J.R. Oliver giving an overview of the BAF baseline for the base year. The baseline was derived using fuel prices from Norfolk and Los Angeles. A back-up slide was briefed showing a break-out of how the numbers were calculated.

Several questions were asked about the BAF baseline. These questions are provided below with answers:

The use of the 70/%/30% methodology to arrive at the baseline does not seem consistent with the ECA shares on a per lane basis. Can this methodology be reevaluated?

ANSWER: Yes, this methodology can be reconsidered and a per lane baseline will be looked at as an alternative.

Why did the technical factors go down?

ANSWER: The technical factors were changed based on the most recent Volpe Study.

The decimal point seems to be in the wrong place for the technical factors.

ANSWER: The technical factors will be reviewed to ensure they are correct based on the Volpe Study.

The use of direct routes in the technical factors skews the data in relation to the U.S. Flag fleet.

ANSWER: The Volpe Team is re-looking at the technical factors with additional data received from the Carriers.

Following the BAF presentation the floor was open to any additional questions. Below are the questions asked and the answers given:

Voluntary Intermodal Sealift Agreement (VISA) and Jones Act Carriers should be the only Contractors allowed in USC-8.

ANSWER: SDDC has a requirement to maximize capacity under USC-8. In addition, VISA participants are given a preference at the time of ordering in accordance Exhibit 4 of the RFP.

Will a third party pay system be used in this contract?

ANSWER: Only for Direct Bookings.

Carriers would like the ability to invoice accessorials upon delivery in an exigency area.

ANSWER: Carriers may invoice for services at any time. However, the payment terms allow the Carrier to invoice on vessel departure if the Carrier chooses.

There are a lot of new payment portals and systems. Will training be provided?

ANSWER: Yes.

The surcharge for shipping Government Furnished Containers over the amount of 200 is very low. Can this be changed?

ANSWER: SDDC will look at that requirement.

Customers continue to be an issue in South America based charges for customs being on a per PCFN basis.

ANSWER: TCAQ will consider changing the customs fees in a distinct part of the world based on actual processes; however, the Carriers must provide this information to the Contracting Officer in writing with some sort of proof or validation.

The chassis requirement for port-to-port moves continues to be an issue because Carriers do not have chassis to provide.

ANSWER: SDDC will take a look at the chassis requirement and discuss with their customers.

The pre-proposal conference concluded by Mr. Oliver thanking everyone for attending.

Attachments:

1. USC-8 Pre-Proposal Conference Slides

2. Cyber-Defense Contract Language Update