The file's text, extracted by GovTribe without its formatting.
All-Terrain Crane Service Life Extension Program (ATC SLEP) Questions and Answers to Solicitation M6785418R5015
| Document/Section |
| Paragraph |
| Question/ Issue / Concern |
| USMC Response |
| Due to the recent flooding caused by Hurricane Florence in North Carolina, including Camp Lejeune, we are concerned about any unusual or additional damage to the MAC 50 Cranes located there. Does the USMC have any information about the condition of the approximate 15 cranes located at Camp Lejeune which may impact the cost and scope of the SLEP project? |
| Pending report from II MEF, expect a response late next week. |
| 2 |
| Solicitation |
| Section F Deliveries or Performance |
| Does the USMC have a planned order or preferred schedule related to the various locations of the ATCs? |
| Deliveries will be based on the following factors, seed pool Qty, funding, production and the need in the operating forces. Cranes will most likely be fielded horizontally. |
| 3 |
| Solicitation |
| Section F Deliveries |
| The Contractor is required to pick up and deliver the ATCs to the locations listed in the Solicitation. Some of these locations are OCONUS. Will the USMC consider bringing these units back to a CONUS location or should the Contractor price include pick up and delivery to OCONUS locations as described? |
| The contractor will not be responsible for OCONUS shipping. OCONUS units will be shipped back to a conus location / port, for pick up by the vendor. |
Contractor will be responsible for shipping from and to a designated port location example Port Hueneme CA or Blount Island FL
| 4 |
| SOW |
| 3.2.4 |
| Will the Government return OCONUS - ATCs listed in Section F of the solicitation to a CONUS location for contractor pick-up and return delivery as required in SOW paragraph 3.2.4? |
| See answer to question #3. |
| 5 |
| Solicitation |
| Section F Deliveries or Performance |
| Will the contractor deplete and return all ATCs from a given location before moving to the next location or will the USMC prefer that the contractor is pulling assets from many locations at the same time? |
| The seed pool will be provided to the contractor from Albany and Barstow initially. From that point forward delivery and pick up will be on a one for one basis. |
Section 3 Requirements,
3.1 Operational Requirements
| 3.1 requires that the crane meet all applicable requirements, including EPA, for highway travel. The current engine is tier3 and it is anticipated that it will remain tier3 to burn JP8 fuel. Does the USMC assure the contractor that they have and will continue to have the applicable emissions waivers to allow the contractor to supply new tier3 engines as needed? |
| Yes. The USMC will assure the contractor will continue to have the applicable emissions waivers to allow the contractor to supply new Tier 3 engines, as needed |
Section 3 requirements, Section3.3 clamshell and bucket operation
| Will the USMC require the contractor to test bucket and clamshell operations? If yes, will the USMC provide the attachments? |
| Yes. A clamshell and reel will be provided after contract award as GFE to evaluate the operation. |
4.2 Methods of verification
Table 2 test and Inspection Schedule
| Does the USMC require the Contractor to run tests and provide data on all items listed in Table 2 as “Contractor certification” or only those items that may have been directly impacted by the modernization or design changes related to SLEP |
| Certification is only required for the items that may have been directly impacted by the modernization, and structural components that need repair during the SLEP. Crane and Boom Load Testing are required per the SOW. |
SOW
CLIN0003
SOW 7.2.1
| Will the contractor be responsible for developing the training materials for the entire crane, only those items modified or changed as part of the SLEP program, or merely to support DSS development of the training materials? |
| The contractor will not be responsible for training package development. However, the contractor will provide improved / changed items data to DSS to incorporate into the training package. |
The contractor will provide the instructor to execute the training.
SOW
| CLIN 0001, 10001, 2001, 3001 and sequence for later years |
| Requirements in DFARS 252.211-7003 Item Identification and Valuation are included in the SOW and in the cost of these CLINS. Will the USMC clarify the current items that are labeled? How many items are separately labeled on the current ATC? What data from those existing labels is contained in the IUID Registry? |
| The current IUID plan will be updated. The current items listed in the IUID plan dtd 25 Apr 2010 are as follows: |
-Vehicle -Engine -Axles -Transmission -Clam Shell -Concrete Bucket
SOW
| CLIN 0001, 10001, 2001, 3001 and sequence for later years |
| For the items that are currently labeled, is there a mother daughter relationship between parts and assemblies or between a serialized ATC that must be maintained? |
Can the contractor relabel each required part with a new identifier as part of the SLEP Program?
No. There is no relationship.
Yes the contractor can and is encouraged to re-label the parts that will be IUID label recipients.
Solicitation Section E Inspection Acceptance terms
| The current Section E notes that for the CLINS related to delivery of the completed ATCs (such as CLIN 0001, 10001, 20001, 3001 and sequence) acceptance is at Destination. Would the USMC consider amending to allow acceptance at Origin for all ATCs? For OCONUS deliveries? The longer delivery times will have a negative impact upon cash flow. |
| No. The Government will accept at destination. There are no OCONUS deliveries. |
Solicitation Section E General CLIN structure
| The current structure combines freight (a service) with the SLEP of the ATCs. Will the USMC consider a separate CLIN for freight so that we can inspect and accept the crane at Origin and improve cash flow? The separate CLIN will allow for the acceptance and inspection of the freight service to be at destination after completion of the delivery without making the Contractor wait for payment for the SLEP. |
| No. The cost of freight shall be included in the unit price of each ATC SLEP. |
Solicitation Section E Inspection Acceptance terms
| Can the USMC clarify that a Contractor will be expected to produce at least 3 cranes per month for inspection at the Contractor facility? This will be clear and will not include a wide variance of shipping times. |
| Yes, inspection of the ATCs will be at origin (the contractor’s facility). 3 per month is the minimum production rate upon attainment of a fielding decision. |
The contractor will not ship any ATCs until the government has attained a fielding decision. Upon doing so; the government and contractor will work together in horizontally fielding the assets. This will include shipping cranes to multiple locations coast to coast.
| 15 |
| Solicitation |
| Section M-2.4 Small Business Participation |
Section L-2.2. Part III Participation Goals
| Will the USMC consider reviewing and amending the Participation Goals to recognize that this is a SLEP Program rather than a new equipment procurement? A target of 32.5% by dollar value will be very difficult to attain considering the limited supply chain involved in this SLEP program and the high percentage of GFE equipment. We will seek opportunities to involve small business but with a small quantity of purchased parts and services the stated goals will be difficult to attain. |
| No. These are target goals. Offerors/contractors are encouraged to include small businesses in the supply chain as much as possible. The acceptance of a SB subcontracting plan is pass/fail based on participation goals and/or adequate justification/explanation for the lack of SB participation. |
PSPEC
| General |
| Will the USMC certify to bidders that the ATC had passed all requirements upon initial fielding which are now contained in the PSPEC? |
| Based on data provided in original contract Test Report, the legacy ATC met the original P-Spec requirements. The modifications required from this scope of work should not affect the legacy system. If a modification does affect a legacy system, re-verification will be required for that system. |
PSPEC
| General |
| The contractor will be responsible to not degrade the original performance – Will the USMC provide a copy of all Test Reports for the ATC? |
| Test Reports will not be provided. |
| 18 |
| SOW |
| 3.4.2.1 |
| Requires a Roll Over Protection System (ROPS) and Falling Objects Protection System (FOPS) design analysis and certification. Is this a requirement of commercial cranes? Was this requirement met upon the initial fielding? Will the USMC consider removing this requirement from the SOW? If it remains and no part of the SLEP SOW modifies the cab structures will the USMC expect some level of testing? |
| ISO 3471 – Earth Moving Machinery – Roll-over Protective Structures – Laboratory Tests & Performance Requirements is a referenced standard for the original P-Spec. We can assume, the legacy system meets this Standard. |
If modifications made to the ATC affect the ROPS and FOPS of the ATC, the contractor will be required to maintain compliance to the above mentioned standard. If there are no modifications to the cab structure, no level of testing of the ROPS and FOPS is expected.
| 19 |
| SOW |
| 3.9.1 |
| Configuration Management Practices. Clarification of the scope of this requirement is required. Will the USMC clarify that these configuration management practices apply to the modifications made to the ATC as part of the modernization and not to the whole crane? Will the USMC clarify that the Contractor will not be required to create a technical data package and related drawings of the entire ATC? |
| The configuration management practices apply only to the modifications made to the ATC and parts affected by the ATC as part of the modernization. The practices do not apply to the whole crane. |
| 20 |
| SOW |
| 6.1.4.4 |
| Basic Issue Items (BII) Will the USMC provide a list of the current items that make up the ATC BII? Will the ATCs have all the BII items when we the Contractor receives the ATCs? |
| Yes. The MAC-50 has a supply listing SL-3 that is hereby provided. |
The vendor will receive items one through 19 with the ATC. The remaining SL-3 items will remain with the USMC unit
| 21 |
| SOW |
| 6.1.4.5 |
| Common and Bulk Items List (CBII). Will the USMC share the current CBII? |
| Yes. The MAC 50 common and bulk item list is attached. |
| 22 |
| SOW |
| 6.1.4.4, 6.1.4.5 |
| BII and CBII – Will the USMC be responsible for assuring that each crane has complete BII and CBII when the Contractor picks up each ATC or will the USMC expect the Contractor to be responsible to fill out any shortages as part of the offering? |
| No. The vendor shall responsible to replace any missing or unserviceable items from 1-19 of the SL3. This will ensure each crane is a complete “ready for fielding” asset. |
| 23 |
| SOW |
| 6.1.4.7 |
| LSA-036. Contractor will assist DSS to complete the LSA-036. Will the USMC confirm that Contractor’s role will be limited to providing information related to new parts and items added by modernization or due to obsolescence rather than the whole ATC? |
| The contractor’s role will be to assist DSS in during the provisioning effort as required/needed. Both SLEP parts and parts not associated to the SLEP. |
| 24 |
| SOW |
| 6.1.4.8 |
| Engineering Data For Provisioning (EDFP) - Contractor will provide EDFP to the government and to DSS. Will the USMC confirm that Contractor’s role will be limited to providing information related to new parts and items added by modernization or due to obsolescence rather than the whole ATC? |
| The contractor’s role will be to assist DSS in the entire provisioning effort as required/needed to complete the effort. Both SLEP parts and parts not associated to the SLEP. |
| 25 |
| SOW |
| 6.1.4.8.1 |
| Detail Drawings – The final sentence reads “Existing CAGE code and part number shall be used.” Will the USMC amend the RFP to delete that sentence and confirm that if the SLEP program is awarded to a party other than the existing CAGE code entity, the USMC will work with the awardee to re-provision so that the Contractor’s CAGE code is listed as a source of supply and they are able to supply parts in sustainment? This is required in order to be compliant to SOW paragraphs 6.2 and 6.2.1 |
| Yes. The Government will update section 6.1.4.8.1 of the SOW. It is the Government’s intent for each part to be provisioned to the appropriate OEM CAGE code. The supply part(s) will reflect the CAGE code of the MANUFACTURER of the part(s), not merely the SLEP contractor’s CAGE unless they are one in the same. |
| 26 |
| SOW |
| 7.2.2, 7.2.3 |
| NET training – will the USMC clarify that the NET training which will be conducted at the government’s location and which will require the Contractor to bring the required equipment will have at least one ATC and that the Contractor will not be required to bring an ATC? |
| NET will be conducted at gaining commands during fielding. The contractor will not be required to bring an ATC for NET. The contractor will be required to supply trainers, training aids and training materials. |
| 27 |
| General |
| N/A |
| Would MARCORSYSCOM provide two additional weeks for |
submission of questions (through 12Oct18)?
Yes. Questions may be submitted through 12 October 2018.
| 28 |
| General |
| N/A |
| When can MARCORSYSCOM hold an interactive Question and |
Answer conference call so that vendor questions can be shared, discussed and resolved in real-time?
The Government will not hold interactive Q&A conference calls. Questions with answers are published on the FBO.GOV site through an amendment to the solicitation.
| 29 |
| Solicitation |
| CLINS |
| Please clarify how MARCORSYCOM wants to receive proposals and quotes since some of the requested pricing is |
dependent on the outcome of some of the previously required steps.
Instructions for proposal submission can be found in Section L (Attachment 5) of the solicitation.
| 30 |
| Solicitation |
| CLINS |
| Since the first contract year only addresses 4 units and the other |
contract years address 36 units, did MARCORSYSCOM intend for the first contract year to be a “ramp-up” period?
The first contract year is to permit the vendor time to attain a quality solution. The four units that are completed will be evaluated by the user and may be subject to testing if required. The desired production rate is 3 units per month when at full rate production (FRP)
| 31 |
| Other |
| N/A |
| Please provide the following item for each crane listed in the |
“ATC_SLEP_-_GFP_Attachment_3_-_145_ATCs.docx” document:
• age
• manufacturer/make
• model
The Cranes were manufactured between 2005 and 2008. Manufactured by Terex and DEMAG, Model: All-Terrain Crane Mac 50
| 32 |
| Other |
| N/A |
| What was the prior crane services contract for the units included |
in this solicitation? Please provide the contract number, value and incumbent contractor.
There was not a prior “services” contract for the cranes. They were maintained by the operating forces.
| 33 |
| SOW |
| 3.1.2.1.1 |
| This paragraph states that "The Contractor shall notify the Government within 14 calendar days of receipt of each ATC, if any subsystems have major physical and functional degradation, which requires complete overhaul or is not economical to repair.” When systems or subsystems meet this criteria, will the Government treat these components as "Over and Above" work and provide funding for parts, labor and costs necessary to return these systems/subsystems to the original specifications outlined in the Performance Specification? |
| No, there will be no additional work effort (AWE) on this contract. If a major component of the crane; such as the superstructure was damaged and beyond economical repair, the program office would make the decision on whether or not to send the crane to DRMO. |
| 34 |
| SOW |
| 3.1.2.1.2 |
| This paragraph states “Repairs shall consist of the most economical approach between cleaning, repairing, replacement of parts, or any combination thereof, while meeting performance specifications.” Are the parts mentioned in this paragraph and indented list considered Government Furnished Material and provided as “Over and Above?” |
| No these are not Government Furnished Materials. “The Contractor shall conduct a thorough inspection of the following subsystems or features on all ATC systems and shall repair all physical and functional degradation. Repairs shall consist of the most economical approach between cleaning, repairing, replacement of parts, or any combination thereof, while meeting performance specifications.” |
| 35 |
| SOW |
| 3.1.2.1.3 |
| This paragraph states “The Contractor shall replace the following parts and materials and properly dispose of the old parts and materials in accordance with all applicable regulatory and environmental laws.” Are the parts mentioned in this paragraph and indented list considered Government Furnished Material and provided as “Over and Above?” |
| No these are not Government Furnished Materials. “Replacement parts and materials shall be new and shall maintain the same form, fit, and function as the corresponding discarded item; while meeting the performance specification. The Contractor shall replace the following parts and materials and properly dispose of the old parts and materials in accordance with all applicable regulatory and environmental laws.” |
| 36 |
| SOW |
| 3.1.4 |
| This paragraph states “The Contractor shall provide the Government with (4) Spare Parts Kits (SPK) – see spare parts Exhibit G in Section J. The SPK shall undergo all modernization and maintenance in this SOW and, when installed onto the ATC, meet the requirements in the performance specification.” Are the components supplied in kit brand new items, repaired or overhauled items, or some combination of new and repaired items? Additionally, are the parts in the kit considered GFM for the purpose of the contract? |
| No these are not Government Furnished Materials. The contractor shall provide the items list in Exhibit G, to the Government, new or overhauled, but in fully serviceable condition. Packed IAW MIL-STD-2073_. |
| 37 |
| SOW |
| 4.1.1 |
| This paragraph states “The Contractor shall provide a standard commercial warranty for ATC and all of its components and sub-components.” If a Contractor typically provides a standard commercial warranty that is specific to whether a vehicle is stationed CONUS or OCONUS, will the Government allow different commercial warranty offers without being considered taking an exception? |
| No. The contractor shall provide its best warranty solution to support a CONUS and OCONUS requirement. See section 4.1.3. |
The offeror should consider a breakout of CONUS and OCONUS locations and distribute warranty costs over the entire fleet.
| 38 |
| SOW |
| 6.1.4, 3.1.1 |
| This paragraph states “The Contractor shall provide the Government and DSS with provisioning technical documentation to include a Bill of Material (BOM), Common Hardware Items/Standard Item Data (CH/SID), Long Lead Time Items List (LLTIL), Basic Issue Items (BII), Common and Bulk Items List (CBIL), Power Sources List (PSL), Design Change Notices (DCN), Engineering Data For Provisioning (EDFP) and the LSA-036.” Does this section of the SOW require provisioning for the entire ATC or does this documentation pertain to just the six additions called for in section 3.1.1 of the SOW? |
| The contractor’s role will be to assist DSS in the entire provisioning effort as required/needed to complete the effort. Both SLEP parts and parts not associated to the SLEP. |
PSPEC
SOW (3.1.1(e)) PSPEC (1.2(e))
| This paragraph states that the contractor is to “Provide a synthetic 100,000lb sling solution that is ultraviolet (UV) protected and can be stowed on the ATC.” Can the Government clarify or elaborate on what solution is being requested in this section of the solicitation? It is not clear from the requirement if the solution the Government wishes to achieve relates specifically to the material composition, ultraviolet protection, sling capacity, weight of the existing sling or a combination of these requirements. |
| The Government requires a sling with the following properties: |
-non-metal, synthetic material -100k lb lifting capacity -UV protection properties -Must be able to be stowed on the ATC..
| 40 |
| SOW |
| 7.2, 7.2.1, 7.2.2, 7.2.3 |
| These paragraphs state that “two qualified instructors” are required for various training functions. Can the Government clarify that two trainers are required for each training session or is it intended that one trainer be present one week and another trainer the following week where consecutive training is required. |
| Two (2) instructors are required to be at each training session. Please see section 7.1. |
| 41 |
| PSPEC |
| Sections 3 & 4 |
| Sections three and four detail various environmental and operational testing requirements. Is it the Government’s intention to retest the entire ATC after the six modifications are made or just test the modifications for compliance with these requirements? For example, will “Fording” tests as required in section 3.7 be required as part of the SLEP? |
| The Government will only evaluate the modifications for compliance with the requirements. We do not anticipate any of the modifications will warrant additional environmental testing. Each SLEP vehicle should meet all requirements of the PSPEC. The Government reserves the right to test all or none. |
| 42 |
| SOW |
| 3.1.2.1.1 (c) |
| This paragraph states “The Contractor shall inspect the vehicle frame for corrosion, straightness, and soundness, to include all welds and mounting assemblies, and repair or replace to meet specifications.” In order to dutifully accomplish these inspections it is assumed that the frame will need to be media blasted and tested using Non-Destructive Testing methods. Does this paragraph require the frame to be completely blasted to near White per Joint Surface Preparation Standard near White |
Blast Cleaning before performing these inspections?
No. Based on maintenance information received from the using units, we do not anticipate failure of welds. Visual inspections of the welds should suffice for the most of the units. If the crane exhibits straightness or soundness issues, then the welds should be inspected to a more diligent degree to ensure, if repair is necessary, that the frame welds and mounting assemblies meet the applicable standards listed in the PSPEC.
| 43 |
| SOW |
| 3.1.3 |
| This paragraph states “The Contractor shall repair all corrosion, treat, and paint all ATCs. Specific requirements for this service are provided in the performance specification.” Does the Government require the application of Zinc Rich Primer for corrosion prevention? If so, this would imply that all steel components of the ATC would need to be media blasted to bare metal in performance of the SLEP. |
| The systems shall be repaired to meet the requirements of PSPEC Paragraphs 3.20 and 3.30 for corrosion and chemical decontamination. It is at the Contractor’s discretion how to meet the requirements. |
| 44 |
| SOW |
| 3.1 |
| This paragraph states “The ATC SLEP is designed to refurbish and improve the ATC to a like new condition through improvement; inspection, component repair and replacement followed by inspection and validation that the ATC is returned back to original specifications outlined in the Performance Specification.” If inspection of the ATC reveals that major components are missing or damaged beyond a condition that is economical to repair, will the Government treat these items as Over and Above and pay for the cost of the part plus any costs associated with sourcing and handling of the item? |
| No, there will be no additional work effort (AWE) on this contract. If a major component of the crane; such as the superstructure was damaged and beyond economical repair, the program office would make the decision on whether or not to send the crane to DRMO. |
| Would the Government consider allowing the contractor access to supply sources? (i.e. FAR Clause 52.251-1 Government Supply Sources) |
| No. The government will not open access to supply sources. |
| 46 |
| Solicitation |
| Section L |
| Would the Government consider extending the due date of the solicitation to 17 December 2018? |
| No; however, the Government will extend the proposal submission deadline until 15 November 2018. |
United States Marine Corps