Consolidated_Q&A_Pt2.pdf

FOLLOW-UP QUESTIONS AND NEW QUESTIONS

INITIAL QUESTION #5A - Clause C-7.4 reads: All tank cleaning during the term of the Contract will be for the account of the Contractor. Does MSC require Owners to clean cargo tanks between every cargo?

MSC’S INITIAL RESPONSE –It is cargo dependent; all tank cleaning during the term of the contract will be for the account of the contractor. Tank Cleaning requirements are based on Energy

Institute Hydrocarbon management (HM-50) Tank Cleaning Guidelines.

NEW FOLLOW-UP QUESTION - The RFP states that intention is to carry F-7. Does MSC require the Vessel to clean between two consecutive cargoes of F-76?

MSC’S CLARIFYING RESPONSE - Typically tank cleaning would not be required between two consecutive cargoes of the same specification.

INITIAL QUESTION #5B - To what standard does MSC require the cleaning? Must it be gas free safe for men?

MSC’S INITIAL RESPONSE – Owner must confirm vessel will arrive at load port in a clean, gas-free condition, and be ready for internal tank inspection by Quality Assurance Representative

(QAR). Ensure any adjacent tanks are also clean and gas free. Contractor shall provide (Owner's account) a Certified Marine Chemist to certify tanks safe for entry for internal tank inspection by

Government or Charterer representative. Contractor will provide time needed to re-inert after inspection. If a prior (last and next to last) cargo contained a percentage of benzene, Owner's

Certified Marine Chemist must also measure toxicity for Benzene content and certify safe for entry. All safe for entry, toxicity, and flammability assessments will be performed in the presence of the inspecting QAR.

NEW FOLLOW-UP QUESTION TO 5B - The vessel to arrive at load port clean and gas-free and ready for inspection – is this for every load port and not just at delivery?

MSC’S CLARIFYING RESPONSE - Tank cleaning is required and conducted to

HM-50 requirements. As a matter of practice, gas-freeing is required only when vessels are loading their first DoD cargo under current MSC charter, have been dry docked or had repairs made to their cargo system before loading the cargo in question, or have had quality issue on the previous DoD cargo that might require a tank inspection.

NEW FOLLOW-UP QUESTION TO 5B - Section C-3-1 (w) reads “Contractor will provide time needed to re-inert after inspection.” Please confirm that the vessel remains on hire for the time to re-inert tanks after the vessel has been inspected by the QAR.

MSC’S CLARIFYING RESPONSE – Confirmed.

NEW FOLLOW-UP QUESTION TO 5B - Please confirm that MSC will pay for the disposal of slops, e.g. the tank washings that the vessel cannot discharge overboard during the decanting process under the MARPOL guidelines.

MSC’S CLARIFYING RESPONSE – Owner must confirm vessel will arrive at on-hire load port in a clean, gas-free condition, and be ready for internal tank inspection by Quality Assurance Representative (QAR). Ensure any adjacent tanks, to include slop tanks if adjacent to cargo tanks, are also clean and gas free.

Once on-hire, discharge of future slops as a result of charterer’s cargo will be for charterer’s expense.

INITIAL QUESTION #6 - Clause C-9.7 Carriage of Non-Clean Products reads: “The Charterer shall have the right to carry dirty petroleum products excluding crude oil at any time during the currency of this

Charter Party and also the right to change from dirty petroleum products to clean petroleum products any time during the currency of this Charter Party, it being understood that any time and expense involved in cleaning the tanks does not alter the responsibilities to carry clean petroleum products after carrying dirty petroleum products shall be for the Charterer’s account, except that any additional cleaning required by reason of carrying a higher grade of cargo which can normally be done by the crew and/or with the

Vessel’s equipment shall be for the Owner’s account. It is also understood that this paragraph of the parties with respect to the condition of the tanks on delivery and redelivery as contained in C-7.”

MSC’S INITIAL RESPONSE – An example would be, that if the vessel fails a tank inspection, then all additional expenses will be for the owners account.

NEW FOLLOW-UP QUESTION TO #6 MSC’s reply does not address the lack of clarity of this clause.

MSC’S CLARIFYING RESPONSE – Clause C-9.7 has been revised as follows to clarify any ambiguity:

“Clause C-9.7 Carriage of Non-Clean Products reads: “The Charterer shall have the right to carry dirty petroleum products excluding crude oil at any time during the currency of this Charter Party and also the right to change from dirty petroleum products to clean petroleum products any time during the currency of this Charter Party, it being understood that any time and expense involved in cleaning the tanks to carry clean petroleum products after carrying dirty petroleum products shall be for the Charterer’s account. “

INITIAL QUESTION #10 - The vessel being offered (and all other vessel likely to be offered) can use either HFO180, HFO 380 or MGO in the main engines and auxiliary engines. What fuel will

MSC use to evaluate the vessels in Attachment B, Basic Pricing Data?

MSC’S INITIAL RESPONSE – MSC will evaluate the grade of fuel that is proposed and warranted by the Contractor.

MSC’S CORRECTED RESPONSE – MSC will base its evaluation of fuel off of MGO only. Accordingly, a revised Attachment B has been incorporated as part of this amendment.

INITIAL QUESTION #13 - Box 93 asks owners to advise consumption in heavy weather – it is difficult to provide a consumption number without definition it could be Force 6 or a full hurricane. Can this requirement be deleted?

MSC’S INITIAL RESPONSE – Section C-1.56 provides the definition for heavy weather conditions as “Conditions of gust winds of Beaufort Force 5 and above”. MSC maintains this requirement.

NEW FOLLOW-UP QUESTION TO #13 - Is this consumption an evaluation factor? If owner submits consumption at Force 6, will this be acceptable?

MSC’S CLARIFYING RESPONSE –The fuel consumption rate from Charter Box 93 is not included as part of the total evaluated fuel calculations in Attachment B, however offerors are still required to provide the requested information. With regards to the second question, Charter Box 93 requests the “Average fuel consumption (net Barrels per day and grade(s) for all engines/auxiliaries utilized while underway in heavy weather (Beaufort Force 5 and above) passages at the speed, ranges, and grade(s) indicated)”, therefore for Charter Box 93, a calculated consumption rate using Beaufort Force 6 conditions is acceptable.

NEW QUESTION #22 - There appears to be a typo for FAR clause by reference 52.219-9 Alt II (on p. 62 of 96). It reads “Small Business Subcontracting Plan (OCT 2015) Alternate II OCT 2001”. This is confusing because Alternate II from Oct. 2001, whereas Alternate III is from Oct. 2015. Please clarify which FAR clause alternate is supposed to be referenced in this RFP.

MSC’S RESPONSE – FAR Provision 52.219-9 dated October 2001 has been replaced with FAR

Provision 52.219-9 dated November 2016, furthermore the alternate II has also been replaced with the November 2016 updated version.

NEW QUESTION #23 - In Amendment 0002, Page 2, Para 2: states that the work ‘terminal’ has been inserted before the word acceptances – we do not see that this has been done.

MSC’S RESPONSE – Change has been incorporated by way of this amendment.

NEW QUESTION #24 - Page 2, Para 3: The phrase ‘or terminal’ has not be inserted

MSC’S RESPONSE – Change has been incorporated by way of this amendment.

NEW QUESTION #25 - Page 2 Para 7: refers to “Attachments N through P” but no Attachment N is included. It appears that ‘Attachment K’ should be re-named ‘Attachment N’ ?

MSC’S RESPONSE – Change has been incorporated by way of this amendment. Attachment K posted under Amendment 0002 has been relabeled as Attachment N.

NEW QUESTION #26 - Please advise if vessel modifications required under the RFP, such as additional berths for government embarked personnel, CONSOL equipment, communications space designed and equipped for the Government, and decontamination station must be performed in a US shipyard.

MSC’S RESPONSE – Yes, vessel modifications that require a shipyard must be done at a US shipyard.

NEW QUESTION #27 - A discrepancy in the number days existed on Attachment B, please advise as to which days are correct.

MSC’S RESPONSE – Any discrepancies on Attachment B have been resolved.

Accordingly, a revised Attachment B has been incorporated as part of this amendment.

NEW QUESTION #28 - Section L.4.13 - L.4.17 of the submission package is requesting the same information as L.7.9 of the technical proposal. Please advise if you want this information in the solicitation proposal, the technical proposal or both

MSC’S RESPONSE – The documents required under L-4.13, L4.14, L4-15, L4-16, and

L4-17 are required to be submitted as part of the offerors technical proposal volume only.

Accordingly, sections L-4.13, L4.14, L4-15, L4-16, and L4-17 have been updated.

NEW QUESTION #29 - Can the Government supply the Swivel Joint Detail drawing?

MSC’S RESPONSE – Swivel Joint Drawings has been added to Attachment Q.

Accordingly, by way of this amendment a revised Attachment Q has been incorporated.