Question_and_Answers_2.17.2016.pdf

N00024-16-R-2207

T-ATS(X)

Questions and Answers February 17, 2016

1. Question: In Section C, second paragraph on page 6 of 69, it states, "Due to the nature of the scope of work for this effort, the Government requires that the successful Contractor have the demonstrated capability and facilities to construct the T-ATS(X) vessels; therefore, the resultant contract for this solicitation will only be awarded to a shipyard capable of constructing the T- ATS(X) vessels." Since this is not a vessel of length that Contractor have the demonstrated capability and facilities to construct the T-ATS(X) vessels; therefore, the resultant contract for this solicitation will only be awarded to a shipyard capable of constructing the T-ATS(X) vessels." Since this is not a vessel of length that would attract shipyards with ample design and engineering resources, is it acceptable for a qualified Design firm who has ample design and engineering resources Prime and then get, as a subcontractor, a shipyard who has the capacity to construct the designed vessel?

I ask this since I have not seen a solicitation in the past that was so restrictive on the bidding parameters. It would appear that it is not in the best interest of the Government to be so restrictive especially in a procurement such as the T-ATS(X). Large shipyards who are currently engaged in the construction of major US Navy assets will not concern themselves with something like this but rather the smaller yards who have a desire and capacity to build but lack the resources to provide the design. Of course, shipyards can obtain a design firm as a sub and that is understood but, all I am saying is that the Government should accept bids from qualified bidders to provide all the requirements of the solicitation.

Answer: Section L, under Factor 2.0 Production Facilities, states "Offerors under this solicitation must have the demonstrated capability and facilities to construct the T-ATS(X) vessels; therefore, the resultant contract for this solicitation will only be awarded to Offerors that are a shipyard or teamed with a shipyard capable of constructing the T-ATS(X) vessels." Since the amount of design to develop a T-ATS design from an existing commercial design is small in comparison to the overall construction effort, it is the Government's conclusion that to avoid excessive pass-through costs, it is not appropriate to have a Shipyard as a subcontractor. A Shipyard must be the Prime Contractor or the Shipyard must be a Prime Contractor in a teaming arrangement. The Government has concluded that there is an adequate number of Shipyards interested in constructing the T-ATS(X) vessels and competition is not being limited.

2. Question: I understand the solicitation, however would you also require a dive team comprised of veterans experienced in deep sea salvage to board and or man this vessel in the event it is deployed? I retrain Vets & cross train Navy Divers (familiar with Navy protocol) to work at depth. IF so how might I bid that part of the work?

Answer: Diving and salvage services are not part of this solicitation and will not be part of the future ship acquisition solicitation.

3. Question: As noted on pg 5 Section A of the RFP, the contractor will update the parent craft design during this scope of work to meet the COR while Factor 1 of Section L pg 55 states that the modification of the parent design to meet the three identified COR requirements is not permitted. Our parent design would require refinement to easily meet the three identified COR requirements. Is this acceptable?

Answer: If the parent design of the commercial vessel being proposed must be modified to meet the three key requirements (i.e. the bollard pull requirements, working deck area, and dynamic positioning capabilities), the Offeror's proposal will not be acceptable. The commercial vessel parent design must meet these requirements without modification. For example, if the commercial vessel parent design is DP-1, this would require modifications to the design and therefore will not be acceptable. As another example, if the commercial vessel parent design has a bollard pull of 120 tons or the parent vessel design has 4,000 sq. ft. of working deck, this would require modifications and therefore will not be acceptable. The Government has concluded that there are a sufficient number of existing commercial vessels whose designs meet these three key requirements which require no modifications.