Q_ _As_28_June_2016.docx

28 June 2016 Q & A

1. Section L only shows two volumes, Solicitation Package and Technical Package. Starting at page 163, III Small Business, IV Past Technical Performance and V Price Proposal appear to be sections of the Technical Package. Shouldn’t Small business and Price be part of the solicitation and not technical as per L-13-C?

A. Offers shall be submitted on two CDs in accordance with Section L-13.C. (e.g. The first CD shall contain the Solicitation Package, Price Proposal, and Small Business Participation Proposal . The second CD shall contain the Technical Proposal and Past Technical Performance Proposal).

2. Some attachments referenced in the solicitation do not match the attachment lettering (ie on page 165 in the note it requires attachment L which is MECSP, on page 154 under MECSP it requires attachment P which is training information.

A. Amendment 0001 corrected solicitation references and corresponding Attachments.

3. On the top of the K Attachments it references section L-15 of the solicitation, there is no section L-15.

A. Amendment 1 corrects the reference to section L-14.

4. How far back does MSC want to see on the K Attachments?

A. See L-14.B.I.A.a.1 and L-14-B.1.B.1 -3.

5. On page 155 the solicitation package ends at number 10 Insurance and on page 157 it picks up with 12 Small Business Contracting Plan. Is there an element number 11 or is the numbering incorrect?

A. Paragraph 11 has been added to this Section of the solicitation and designated as Not Used in Amendment 0001.

6. In L-13-C it references two CDs, one for each volume. Does one set of CDs suffice or are multiple sets required? How many hard copies are required?

A. L-13.C has been amended to require two sets of CDs as well as two hard copies

7. Section 20.1 of the Surge LMSR Technical Manual states “All Shore Side Spares to be delivered to a new facility” prior to delivery (turnover) as determined by the Contracting Officer. However, Section 15.16.a of the Surge LMSR Technical Manual states the Government may request the Contractor to obtain a commercial facility which will be reimbursed upon approval. There is no mention of the requirement in the solicitation for a facility to store shore based spares. Will the contractor be required to obtain a warehouse/facility for storage of shore based spares? Please identify the current location of the shore based spares.

A. The language in the Technical Manual will be revised in an upcoming Amendment.

8. Section 15.7.1 of the Surge LMSR Technical Manual states that the contractor’s corporate office shall transmit all MILSTRIP requisitions to the Defense Supply System. Since a storekeeper will be on each ship during FOS and ROS as shown in Section 19, can the storekeepers submit MILSTRIP requisitions to the Defense Supply System?

A. Either method can be used to submit MILSTRIP requisitions to the Defense Supply System. However, the Contractor’s Property Control Plan shall include a tracking method.

9. Does the Government Estimate of Reimbursable expenses listed in Section L-14.B.III.B include expenses which do not offer subcontract opportunities, i.e., capital hire, war risk bonus, additional insurance, legal fees, MM cadet wages/travel, contractor overtime, additional crew wages, etc. A breakdown of the reimbursable expenses by category is required to assist with development of the Small Business Participation Plan and the Small Business Subcontracting Plan.

A. The Government’s Estimate of Reimbursable expenses listed in Section L-14.B.III.B does not include fixed price components. The values provided are based on reimbursable expenses in prior years as well as projected expenses for the new contract period.

10. Section L-13.C.1 states the technical proposal shall not exceed 25 pages in length, excluding fold-outs, blank pages, title pages, tab indices, table of contents, resumes and employment agreements. Section L-14.B.I.C requires submission of a Draft Property Control Plan. It is anticipated that a draft plan will require at least 25 pages. Can the solicitation be amended so that the Draft Property Control Plan is not included in the page count?

A. The Draft Property Control Plan is not counted in the overall page count for technical proposals. This will be clarified in an upcoming Amendment.

11. How one might obtain Attachment O?

A. Attachment O was provided in Amendment 0001.

12. There is no #11 in section L-14. A. outlining requirements for the solicitation package. We just want to be sure we aren’t missing something?

A. See response to Q.5.

13. Section L-13.C states the first CD shall contain the Solicitation Package, Price Proposal, and Small Business Participation Plan. Is the Small Business Subcontracting Plan to be submitted on this CD as well?

A. The Small Business Subcontracting Plan shall be submitted on the first CD.

14. Section L-13.C.2 states Past Performance narratives shall be submitted within solicitation Attachment H? Attachment H is “Invoice Requirements/Report of Expenditures”. Attachment I is “Past Performance Datasheets”.

A. See response to Q.2.

15. Section C-1.1.16.3.1 states the Government will reimburse the Contractor for actual explosive bonus costs and Section C-1.1.16.3.2 indicates the explosive bonus shall be included in the fixed daily rate. Please clarify.

A. C.1.1.16-3.1 applies to the Surge ships (5 ships in Lot 1 – all ships in Lot 2). C-1.1.16.3.2. applies to the 2 Marine Corps* LMSRs in Lot 1.

Note: References to “Marine Corps LMSRs throughout the RFP are requirements that only pertain to the two Marine Corps ships in Lot 1. Unless otherwise specified, the stated requirements pertain to all ships in Lot 1 and Lot 2.

16. Section C-1.3.2.1, C-1.3.2.1.1 and C1.3.2.2 state the Contractor shall be reimbursed $4.00 per meal, not-to-exceed $12 per day for meals as outlined in the RFP. Recommend this be changed to $8.00 each for breakfast and lunch and $14 for dinner, total not-to-exceed $30.00 per day similar to SBX-1.

A. This section will remain unchanged for Surge LMSRs.

17. Section L-14.B.I.D Quality and Safety Management Systems makes reference to RFP section C-3.18. Section C-3.18 deals with Narcotics, Controlled Substances, and Marijuana. This reference appears to be an error. Request you clarify.

A. This reference will be revised to C-3.23 in an upcoming Amendment.

18. Section C-1.5.6 – Are GSA approved safes with electronic locking devices already aboard each ship?

A. Yes.

19. Section C-1.7.7.2 states all travel and per diem costs for crew traveling OCONUS to join Surge ships are reimbursable. Section C-1.7.7.2.2 states costs associated with delays that entail two days or less will not be reimbursed. Section C-1.7.7.3 states the Contractor’s proposed FOS per diem rates shall include a two-day on board turnover period. Please clarify.

A. Sections 1.7.7.2 and 1.7.7.2.2 pertain to travel delays. Section 1.7.7.3 pertains to the time aboard ship that the referenced crew will spend conducting turnover. As these are key billets, the government expects a full, thorough, and complete turnover be conducted for these billets.

20. Section C-1.7.8 states the Contractor may consider it desirable to have crew overlap beyond that normally required to ensure ship safety and personnel and operational continuity and the Contractor may seek reimbursement with prior COR approval. Section C-1.7.8 also states reimbursement of crew overlap shall be a matter within the Contracting Officer’s sole discretion. Please clarify.

A. Section C-1.7.8 will be revised in an upcoming Amendment to allow prior COR approval for crew overlap. Answer will be provided in an upcoming Amendment.

21. When will pricing sheets be made available?

A. See response to Q.11.

22. L-13 Paragraph C discusses page count. The technical proposal is not to exceed 25 pages and the technical performance narratives are not to exceed 10 pages. Is the 10 page count for the narratives included in the 25 page count for the technical proposal or are they in addition to the 25 pages?

A. The page count for the Technical Proposal is separate from the page count for Past Technical Proposal narratives.

23. We respectfully request that the due date for questions regarding the subject RFP be extended at least an additional two weeks. We have only had 5 working days to review the RFP and there are attachments and forms that still need to be revised/added to the solicitation.

A. Amendment 0001 extended the due date for offers.

24. Section 1.8.5 requires ALL of the crew to be trained in Helicopter FF. Section 1.8.6.1 states that on air capable ships appropriate crew members be trained. Section 1.6.6.2 requires a minimum 10 person firefighting crew. Please clarify. Is helo FF required on surge vessels? On Marine Corps LMSR are all crew to be trained or sufficient crew to meet the 10 man requirement?

A. This applies to US Marine Corps (USMC) ships only. The contractor is to have enough personnel trained and onboard at all times to meet the requirements of the 10 man team and the HCO and LSE requirements.

25. Are HCOs and LSEs required on all ships or only Marine Corps LMSR. Section 1.8.6.3 and 1.8.6.4 is not clear on the requirement.

A. USMC ships only.

26. The ROS-5 crew requires the OIC to be a Master. Please confirm that the OIC will be paid Master’s wages and not just hold a Master’s license.

A. Section C-1.7.2.2 will be removed in an upcoming Amendment. Section 19 sets the Minimum Crew Manning for the contract.

27. Is the transition plan required in the technical proposal counted towards the 25 page limit?

A. The Transitions Plan will not count towards the 25 page limit.

28. C-5 specifies “At a minimum, Key Shore Side Personnel shall include a Program Manager, the Port Engineer(s), the primary point of contact (POC) for Operations or Port Captain, the Property Administrator and the POC for Contract Administration.” and “The Program Manager, Port Engineer and Property Administrator shall be 100% dedicated to this contract.” The MSC requirement for Port Engineers to be 100% dedicated. It is not unusual; however, it is not necessarily reasonable or economically feasible for offerors and the Government to impose 100% dedication of a Program Manager or a Property Administrator. Please consider removal by Amendment of the requirement for the Program Manager and Property Administrator to be 100% dedicated.

A. An individual required to be 100% dedicated cannot hold two different positions. The purpose of 100% dedication is to ensure the individuals are focused on their area of expertise. Recent government audits have shown that 100% dedication is required.

29. C-5 further states “The Contractor shall submit resumes to the Contracting Officer with clearly defined experience summaries for all key personnel. The Contracting Officer will approve or disapprove the assignment to this contract of each individual. A final list of shore side key personnel shall be submitted 15 days after the contract award.”, yet L-14.B.3.I.A.3, states “Under this section, offeror shall provide resumes and/or Letters of Intent (if applicable) for all proposed Key Shore Side Personnel and complete the Table provided under Attachment K-3” and under L-14.B.3.3.II.A.1 states “Key Shore Side personnel include those positions required under Section C-3.5 as well as any additional shore side position(s) the offeror has designated as “Key.” Provide resumes for all proposed key shore side personnel that exceed contract requirements, as well as any additional personnel the offeror has designated as “Key”, and complete the Table provided under Attachment K-4. If the proposed individual is not a current employee, then a signed “letter of intent” must be submitted.” Please give good consideration of removal of the requirement for submittal of names (K-3 and K-4) and/or resumes or Letters of Intent for certain key shoreside personnel, which is consistent with other recent MSC RFP’s. The requirement to submit resumes or letters for a contract in which the award/NTP is greater than one year away, as is the case for the Lot 1 BOB HOPE ships, is unreasonable in consideration of the H-2 substitution/replacement clause. MSC is already protected in C-5 as mentioned above.

A. The PM3 Program has successfully awarded contracts in this manner in the past and does not believe the requested change is necessary.

30. The extra credit language in the third paragraph in L-14.B.3.I.A.3 seems to contradict the similar language in second paragraph under the same section. Please clarify.

A. Offerors shall submit all resumes for Key Shore Side Personnel under Section L-14.B.3.I.A.3 (under the Minimum Technical Requirements). For this section the proposed Key Shore Side Personnel must meet the contract requirements under C-3.5 and C-3.6. No extra credit will be given for individuals that exceed the requirements.

However, it is the offerors choice to designate which of the submitted resumes it is submitting for the Government to consider uner the Technical Trade-Off Factor (Section L-14.B.II.A.1.), either because the qualifications of the individual exceeds the contract requirements, or because the number of Key Shore Side billets proposed exceed the number of positions required by the contract (e.g. more Port Engineers than the number required in Sec C-3.5.2). Extra credit may be given for individuals with qualifications that exceed the contract requirements or more Key Shore Side positions than the minimum required by the contract.

31. C-3.11.5 stipulates that “The Contractor shall install a separate stand-alone system IAW Navy Policy, which allows ship's crew access to personal email and internet. All costs associated with this stand-alone system are for the Contractor's account.” For the USMC FOS ships, stand-alone satellite communications capabilities might be the only obvious answer; however, such added measures will result in significant avoidable cost to the Government for the ships that are in ROS some 95% of the time if phone lines are available at the ROS layberths. Even though iaw C-1.8 it cannot be assumed that layberth locations will remain constant for the duration of the operating contract, can the Government advise how long the current layberth contracts remain in effect, and if land line communication is available at the layberth sites? Additionally, would the Government consider optional fixed pricing in proposals for installation of stand-alone satellite communications capabilities on ROS ships that might be activated for missions beyond occasional Turbo Activations or routine activations for sea trials?

A. This requirement conforms with similar language in a recently awarded Surge contract. Offerors shall include this cost in their fixed price.

32. L-13.C states that “Offerors must submit the information required below on two Compact Discs (CDs) that are compatible with Microsoft Office 2010”, yet L-13.H states “In cases where the paper copy and the electronic copy of the proposal conflict, the original paper copy shall take precedence.” In addition to the electronic submittals on CD, are printed paper copies of the proposal preferred or required too?

A. Section L-13.C has been revised under Amendment 0001.

33. L-13.C states “Offerors must submit the information required below on two Compact Discs (CDs) that are compatible with Microsoft Office 2010” and L-13.H states that “electronic copies of the proposal shall be submitted in a format readable by Microsoft Office 2007.” Please advise by Amendment if some submittal information in acceptable in a format compatible with Adobe Acrobat Reader 8.0 or later version.

A. Offerors shall use Microsoft Office 2010 for submittal of offers. Adobe format is not acceptable.

34. N32205-16-R-3000 was posted on Friday, June 10, 2016, yet the closing date for proposals on Section A for this major effort is only 28 days away on July 8, 2016 with the Independence Day holiday weekend in between and another day lost for proposal delivery. Please give good consideration of an Amendment for a reasonable extension of the closing date for proposals.

A. The due date for offers has been extended under Amendment 0001.

35. The RFP requires a $4 Billion P & I Limit requirement and our club, as well as other in the International Group, is not going to certify that much. This also exceeds what is required under other MSC contracts. If the insurer is NOT prepared to guarantee cover in the amount of $4,000,000,000, the RFP requires that the contractor shall provide written evidence of cover from another insurer(s) whereby they agree to provide cover up to this limit. We might be able to find enough underwriters who do not participate on the club’s reinsurance program to take the limit from $3.08 billion to $4 billion but it would not be easy and it would be expensive. Will MSC reconsider the amount of insurance requested? Please note that this same question was asked in the recent PM2 SBX-1 RFP and MSC lowered the insurance requirement.

A. The P & I Limit requirement has been revised under Amendment 0001.

36. Where in the RFP does it specify which portion of the procurement is set aside for small business?

A. This information has been provided under Section M-3 of Amendment 0001

37. Given that the pricing forms have not yet been provided to offerors and missing information in the Wage Determinations, will MSC consider an extension to the due date for questions as well as the due date for offers?

A. The due date for offers has been revised under Amendment 0001.

38. The tables provided in Section L-14.B.3.III (Small Business Participation) of the solicitation provide the Government’s reimbursable estimates in lump sum. Can these estimates be broken down and provided in an itemized format corresponding with the main expenditure categories listed in the Expenditures Table included with Attachment G-Invoice Requirements?

A. The Government’s estimate of reimbursables is provided as a tool for offerors to use as a baseline for developing a Small Business Participation Plan. This should not impact the percentage of the effort that will be performed by large and small businesses. (Also see response to Q.9.)

39. Please confirm that the reimbursable estimates provided in Section L-14.B.3.III exclude any items/costs that will be directly funded by the Government.

A. It is unclear what is meant by “directly funded by the Government.” PM3 ship operators are required to provide annual budgets for reimbursable expenses which are reviewed by the Government. These expenses are sometimes referred to as “directly funded” expenses once they are approved by the Government. These “budgets” represent the majority of reimbursable expenses.

40. Of the reimbursable estimates provided in Section L-14.B.3.III, what is the estimated amount expected to be procured/obtained from Government sources (as opposed to commercial sources) by the contractor?

A. This would be dependent on the specific item, the availability of the item and the Contractor’s purchasing system.

41. The table of estimated reimbursable expenses for Lot 2 provided in Section L-14.B.3.III shows an amount for Option 3 and Option 4 that is approximately double the amount of the earlier contract periods. Can you please provide some guidance on the cause of this increase during Option 3 and Option 4?

A. Spikes in reimbursable expenses for those periods are attributable to the number projected ship availability periods.

42. Section L-14.B.3.V (Price Proposal) references Pricing Forms which are included with Attachment O; however, there is no Attachment O included with the solicitation posting on FedBizOpps. Can you please provide Attachment O?

A. Attachment O was provided with Amendment 0001.

43. The Wage Determination reflecting the CBA between Patriot and SIU-Pacific provided in Attachment B (Wage Determination No. CBA-2016-8682) includes Appendix 1 and Appendix 2 which list the wage and benefit rates for unlicensed deck and engine departments, respectively. However, the figures contained in Appendix 1 and Appendix 2 are not clearly legible and require some interpretation due to what appears to be poor photocopy/fax quality of those appendices. Can you please provide fully legible copies of Appendix 1 and Appendix 2?

A. We are attempting to get a cleaner copy, but the Government cannot guarantee a revision will be received before the closing date of the Solicitation.

44. The Wage Determination reflecting the CBA between AMSEA and AMO provided in Attachment B (Wage Determination No. CBA-2016-8678) does not contain figures for fringe benefits, nor does it contain sufficient information to enable calculation of fringe benefits; consequently, we cannot ensure that our offer complies with the applicable sections of the Service Contract Act. Therefore, can you please provide the fringe benefit rates related to this Wage Determination?

A. Aggregate fringe benefits will be provided in an upcoming Amendment.

45. The Wage Determination reflecting the CBA between AMSEA and SIU provided in Attachment B (Wage Determination No. CBA-2016-8679) does not contain figures for fringe benefits, nor does it contain sufficient information to enable calculation of fringe benefits; consequently, we cannot ensure that our offer complies with the applicable sections of the Service Contract Act. Therefore, can you please provide the fringe benefit rates related to this Wage Determination?

A. See response to Q.44.

46. Section C.3.5 of the solicitation references a Property Administrator as one of the Key Shore Side Personnel. However, Section C.3.6.3 describes the qualifications for a Property Control Manager. Please advise if the Property Administrator and Property Control Manager are intended to be the same position.

A. References to Property Control Manger have been revised to Property Administrator.

47. Section C-3.5 of the solicitation states that Key Shore Side Personnel shall be 100% dedicated to this contract. Can you please advise if it is acceptable for these persons to also fulfill other roles related to this same contract. For example, can one employee serve as both the Program Manager and the POC for Contract Administration?

A. The purpose of C-3.5 is to have one Key Shore Side billet dedicated 100% to a single position. This also means that an individual with 100% dedication to this contract cannot hold a position under another contract. Various issues arising under contract administration in the past have validated this requirement.

48 Could you please provide Section K of the subject RFP in word format so we can complete as applicable and return with our offer?

A. Section K can be printed, completed and scanned as an attachment to the offeror’s proposal, then returned.

49 Section C-1.3.2.4 (Lot 1 only) states that the cost of hotel services and meals for twelve (12) Permanently Embarked Personnel shall be reimbursed by the Government as provided in Section C-1.7.6.1. Section C-1.7.6.1 refers to supercargo and security team members which are referred to as “transients” and not PEP. Please clarify.

A. The language in Section C-1.3.2.4 has been revised/clarified in Amendment 0001.

50 Section C-1.3.2.5 requires quarterly reconciliation for meal and berthing costs for thirty (30) PEP per day in support of the Flagship and twelve (12) PEP per day on Non-flag ships. Additionally, the contractor is required to provide a credit to the Government for less numbers of embarked personnel. Since the contractor must plan (purchase) sufficient provisions, including perishables, to support the contractually required number of PEP it is not appropriate for the Government to expect credit when the actual number of PEP is less than the minimums stated. Can the RFP be revised to remove the mention of credits in this section?

A. The language in Section C-1.3.2.5 has revised/clarified in Amendment 0001

51 Many places in the RFP refer to Attachment O, Pricing Forms, yet these document(s) has not yet been provided to bidders. Please consider extending the questions period after Attachment O is provided, in order for offerors to review and propose any questions or concerns.

A. See responses to Q.11 & Q23.