N3220526R6006 Attachment 22 - Questions and Answers_A0002.pdf

N3220526R6006 AƩachment 22 QuesƟons and Answers

Q1. Final as-built specs vs. original contract spec — any changes/deviations from the class baseline?

A1. All changes have been handled with specification revision or Request for Variance (RFV) to date.

Q2. Propulsion, Dynamic Positioning (DP) system, and towing/winch system — manufacturer, model, and any known issues from sea trials?

A2. We have a Machinery equipment list with OEM and Models. No known issues to date.

Offerors can request this list by emailing the POCs listed in Section L-1 of the Solicitation.

Q3. Mission system fit (salvage, diving support, oil spill response, wide-area search) — installed

vs. "fitted for but not with"?

A3. Towing is the only mission that won’t have additional equipment required.

Q4. Government Furnished Equipment (GFE) list vs. Contractor Furnished Equipment (CFE) — what's aboard now vs. installed later?

A4. Only known systems that GFE that won’t be installed until later is Next Generation Wideband (NGW) and Television Direct-to-Sailors (TV-DTS). Estimated install date for NGW is Jan/Feb 2027 and TV-DTS is TBD

Q5. IT/navigation/communications suite — are there proprietary systems requiring specific vendor support or licensing?

A5. Besides MSC support for IT equipment, Wartsila, the OEM, will be needed for all Navigation/Machinery Centralized Control System (MCCS) issues.

Q6. Automation level and required watchkeeping/engine room manning configuration?

A6. Ship will receive an Automated Centralized Control Unattended (ACCU) class notation for engine room. Ship is provided with MCCS for assistance in watch keeping.

Q7. Outstanding trial cards, deficiency list, and punch-list items not yet closed?

A7. No known issues yet.

Q8. Builder's trials vs. acceptance trials results — recurring problems (vibration, DP performance, winch load testing)?

A8. No known issues at this time.

Q9. Projected delivery date and confidence level given yard's schedule history?

A9. Please see Section F-2 of the solicitation for anticipated schedule. Actual dates will become more known once Builder Trials (BTs) are complete. See C-1.1.1 and C-1.1.1.1 of PWS.

Q10. Warranty period length and scope — what's covered post-delivery, and who administers claims (shipyard direct or through MSC)?

A10. Warranty period is 1 year and covers whole ship including equipment. MSC adjudicates what Guarantee Deficiency Report (GDR’s) get fixed. Management of the warranty period will be collaborative between the OPCO and MSC.

Q11. Required complement (total, crew vs. guest capacity) and licensing requirements (unlimited tonnage, DP certification, towing endorsement)?

A11. We do not yet know when the COI will be issued. We anticipate COI manning minimums will be similar to AHTS type OSVs of similar size and capability.

Q12. Unique certifications for salvage/diving operations mandated by the contract?

A12. There are no specific certifications mandated by the contract specific to salvage/diving other than Dynamic Positioning Operator. See PWS C-3.8.9.

Q13. Relief crew rotation model MSC expects for this class?

A13. Please refer to Crew Rotation in PWS C-1.7.2.

Q14. Homeport assignment(s) for each hull and impact on existing infrastructure/agents?

A14. Ships are assigned to an Area of Responsibility (AOR) and typically hubbed from a port.

Hubbed ports are subject to change. AOR assignments for ships are also subject to change

Projected AOR assignments:

C7F (Far East)

T-ATS 11 BILLY FRANK Jr

C3F (San Diego)

T-ATS 6 NAVAJO

T-ATS 12 SOLOMON ATKINSON

C5F (TBD)

T-ATS 7 CHEROKEE NATION

80.3 (US East Coast)

T-ATS 13 JAMES D. FAIRBANKS

T-ATS 8 SAGINAW OJIBWE ANISHINABEK

T-ATS 10 MUSCOGEE CREEK NATION

C3F (Pearl Harbor)

T-ATS 9 LENNI LENAPE

Q15. Spares provisioning status — initial spares package included, and what's on order vs. on hand?

A15. A final list of known provisioned and delivery with the ship is not presently available. A known list of recommended spares is available for offerors to e-mail the POCs listed at Section L-1 of the solicitation.

Q16. Technical documentation handover — full drawing package, maintenance manuals, PMS loaded into required CMMS?

A16. Yes, all technical documentation will have hard copies on board and loaded into SAMM post delivery.

Q17. Solicitation structure — single contract for all commissioning hulls, or phased by delivery date?

A17. One contract for all eight ships phased in as ships are delivered from the shipyards. This may change based on the actual delivery schedule.

Q18. Base + option period structure and total potential value?

A18. 1-year Base + four 1-year options.

Q19. Incumbent (if any) and transition timeline expectations?

A19. There is no incumbent. These are new construction vessels.

Q20. Small business or socioeconomic set-aside constraints affecting teaming strategy?

A20. This is not a set-aside, it is full and open competition

Q21. ABS classification status and any open conditions of class?

A21. Class and certs will be issued at delivery, and no open conditions of class yet.

Q22. USCG/SOLAS compliance certificates in hand vs. pending?

A22. All certs are currently pending. See PWS C-1.1.1.2.

Q23. Environmental compliance (ballast water, MARPOL) — as-built compliance vs. retrofit needed?

A23. Offerors can request a copy of the Master Equipment List from the POCs identified in Section L-1 of the solicitation.

Q24. What OEM is most of the equipment (engine room)?

A24. Wartsila for ship propulsion and control systems (including DP system). MacGregor for crane and winches.

Q25. Will there be ECDIS on board?

A25. Yes. Wartsila Nacos Platinum.

Q26. How many total accommodations are on board?

A26. There are approximately 35 individual rooms that can accommodate up to 65.

Q27. Where are the SIPR drops?

A27. SIPR drops will be in Radio Room, Master’s office, Chief Engineer’s office, Chief Mate’s office, and Wheelhouse.

Q28. What and/or when is COI anticipated?

A28. Please see response to question 11.

Q29. What ships are these replacing?

A29. These vessels are replacing T-ATF and T-ARS class vessels.

Q30. How many laundry units are on board?

A30. 4 total sets (1 washer, 1 dryer per set)

Q31. Describe the armory set up.

Q31. Ships from both shipyards have armories; however, they are in different locations aboard the vessel.

Q32. What and how long is the ship warranty period and who is managing it?

A32. Please see response to Question 10.

Q33. For Remote Operated Vehicle (ROV)/Dive operations, are they mission based?

A33. Yes. Planned and emergent ROV (Remote Operated Vehicle)/Dive operations are mobilized to meet each mission depending on the nature of the mission.

Q34. For those ROV/Dive Operations, does the contractor need to bring their own equipment?

A34. The contractor will not need to provide equipment for ROV/Dive operations.

Q35. What are the salvage space and container capacities of the ship?

A35. Salvage stowage is primarily for “Yellow Gear” salvage equipment. It is 825 m3. Mission stowage has space for up to five 20-foot containers (TEU). It is 375 m3. However, due to stanchion locations and weight limitations, the number of containers stowed in in that space will likely be fewer.

Q36. Will the Maker’s List be in SAMM?

A36. Yes, it will be available in SAMM. For those interested in a list now, please email the POCs identified in Section L-1 of the solicitation.

Q37. Will Ship Clip be available on board?

A37. Yes, it will be available.

Q38. When is the Storekeeper required to be on board?

A38. Please see C-3.10.1.3.2. of Att 1 (PWS).

Q39. Will Starlink be available on board?

A39. Yes (Starlink or Starshield) but installation date is TBD.

Q40. Where will the ships be hubbed?

A40. Refer to Question 14.

Q41. DP Planning – what will the watch teams consist of?

A41. Watch team needs to be in accordance with COI Please see Att 1, C-1.1.

Q42. NAV Suite – can it hit DP and stay automatic or is it all manual?

A42. DP maintains vessel position automatically within limits of capability.

Q43. The requirement for presenting evidence of Facility Security Clearance (FSC) requires offerors to possess a TOP SECRET facility clearance at the time of proposal submission. Will an offeror with an active SECRET facility clearance and a documented TS upgrade in process be considered eligible? With delivery of the first hull under this contract not slated until 2027, allowing offerors time to obtain a TOP SECRET facility clearance will increase the competitive field without impacting the planned schedule.

A43. All offerors are required to have Top Secret Facility Clearance at time of proposal.

Q44. As the issuing authority of this RFP, will MSC agree to sponsor an expedited upgrade request to DCSA to upgrade an existing SECRET Facility Security Clearance to TOP SECRET?

The RFP creates the Government's bona fide need necessary to sponsor a company's request for such an upgrade.

A44. As this is a competitive, full and open procurement, MSC will not be providing sponsorship to potential offerors.

Q45. The pre-solicitation states under section 11 that “the Contractor will be required to possess and maintain a TOP SECRET facilities clearance and to employ personnel with TOP SECRET/SECRET security clearances”. However, the draft PWS on page 134 Section C-3.2.2 states that “The contractor shall possess and maintain a facility clearance at the SECRET level.”

Will the facility clearance level required be TOP SECRET or SECRET? Lastly, if TOP SECRET clearance is required, will this RFP be issued basis the Offeror being required to have at the time of offer or at the time of vessel delivery/contract commencement?

A45. Refer to Q43 and Q44 for response. The draft PWS that was provided with the solicitationnotice has been corrected in section C-3.2.2 to Top Secret.

Q46. Can you provide a General Arrangement drawing for the lead ship for each yard (Austal and Bollinger)?

A46. We can send upon request to the POCs listed in Section L-1.

Q47. Can MSC provide a maker’s list for all primary equipment installed on the vessel, including make/model number/rating information?

A47. Please see response to Q36.

Q48. Can MSC provide a copy of the shipyard warranty language?

A48. Please see question 10.

Q49. The PWS requires three days of overlap for Key Shipboard Personnel. Will MSC entertain shorter overlap periods with mitigations such as pre-turnover virtual meetings?

A49. The current requirement remains at three days in accordance with Attachment 1 C-1.7.4.

Q50. Which shipboard positions require Security Clearances and at which levels?

A50. Please see attachment 1 (PWS) C-1.7.7.

Q51. C-1.7.3.1 Requires minimum hitch lengths of 90+ days, which is far in excess of the norm for vessels of the size and type of the T-ATS’s, and which will make recruiting and retaining crews very difficult. Will MSC consider changing this requirement?

A51. This requirement remains unchanged.

Q52. Request that the proposal due date be extended by 21 days to 16 November 2026.

A52. Please see Amendment A0001; we have extended the proposal due date to the 16th of November at 1300 Norfolk, VA time.

Q53. Will Contractor costs (e.g. Port Engineer travel) to manage shipyard warranty repairs be reimbursable?

A53. Please refer to Attachment 1 sections C-2.5.10.1.4 and C-3.11

Q54. Section L-8(C)(2)(a), L-8(C)(2)(b), Attachments 19 and 20; Section M, Technical Trade-off Factor

The Ship Operating and Ship Maintenance experience criteria require experience with two or more DP2 OSVs of at least 70 m, 3,000 GT and 6,000 HP, and two or more ocean-going towing vessels of at least 50 m, 3,000 GT, 10,000 HP and 150 MT bollard pull, sustained for five or more of the past ten years.

Few U.S.-flag ocean towing vessels exceed 50 m and 3,000 GT, even among those that meet or exceed the horsepower and bollard pull thresholds. The combined size, tonnage, and duration criteria therefore appear to limit the pool of qualified offerors to only one firm, eliminating competition so the acquisition becomes Sole Source. To avoid this outcome, will the Government consider changing the requirement to "and/or" (i.e., OSVs and/or ocean-towing towing vessels) and permit Offerors with vessels of similar particulars rather than the specified minimum vessel criteria?

A54. Please see section L-8(C)(2)(a) and (b) as they have been revised from “and” to “or”.

Q55. The solicitation requires that "all proposal ... paragraphs shall be numbered." This approach may introduce ambiguity between hierarchical heading numbering and paragraph-level numbering, particularly in documents with multiple levels of headings. It may also complicate document navigation and automated table of contents generation, which relies on heading styles rather than paragraph numbering. In addition, maintaining unique paragraph numbering across a large, collaboratively developed document increases the likelihood of formatting inconsistencies during revisions without a corresponding improvement in evaluability. To support clarity, consistency, and ease of evaluation, would the Government allow line numbering (restarting each page) in lieu of paragraph-level numbering? Line numbering provides precise reference points for evaluators while preserving document structure, readability, and compatibility with standard Word formatting and navigation features.

A55. Paragraph numbering has been removed. Please see the revised solicitation section at L- 7(6).

Q56. Please confirm that the QMS and SMS Certificates and SMS Index are excluded from the page count of Vol III.

A56. Please refer to the table in Solicitation Section L-8(3), Volume 3 for all page count exclusions.

Q57. C-3.8.4 provides a bulleted list of ways the Engineering Manager can meet PWS qualifications for the role, through experience and education. Directly after this list, it states, "Five years of the combined experience must include work that requires the Engineering Manager to possess a state license as a Professional Engineer." Please clarify whether this requirement should have been part of the bulleted list of options or if the Engineering Manager must additionally have possessed a state license for five years.

A.57 Please see revised section C-3.8.4, it now states 5 of the 12 years for the last bullet.

Q58. We respectfully request a 60-day extension of the proposal due date for two reasons:

1) Several questions submitted under L-5 concern the vessel experience thresholds. The answers will directly determine how offerors structure their teams and technical approach, and how they prepare Attachments 19 and 20. Offerors need enough time after the Government's answers, and any resulting amendment, are released to prepare complete and compliant proposals. 2) Collective bargaining agreements for a new vessel class. Section B-1.0 states that no adjustments will be made to the per diem rates for CBA wages, so offerors must price firm wages and fringes on Attachment 21 for the full period of performance. The T-ATS is a new ship class, so offerors using organized labor must negotiate manning scales, billets and wage/fringe terms with the maritime unions before they can finalize pricing. Those negotiations are unlikely to finish before the current due date. Without finalized CBA terms, offerors would have to include significant contingency in fixed per diem rates, which would raise prices to the Government. A 60-day extension would lead to more complete, accurately priced and competitive proposals, which serves the Government's interest.

A58. Please see response to question Q52. Additionally, there is a revised Wage Determination provided at Attachment 2.

Q59. Please advise the USCG sub-chapter under which the vessels have been built so Offerors can determine manning and licensing requirements.

A59. The vessels are being built under Subchapter I.

Q60. Please clarify whether Offerors are required to enter crew wage, fringe benefit, and payroll tax costs for RAV and ROS (Undefined Crew) in Attachment 11 Form A at the time of proposal submission, or whether these cells should be left blank or otherwise excluded from the proposed RAV and ROS (Undefined Crew) per diem rates because these costs will be negotiated on a case-by-case basis.

A60. Attachment 11 has been revised to remove Form A. Section L-8(E) Volume V (Price Proposal) and Section M-1(E) Price Factor (Trade-Off) have been revised. Please review the revised sections. Additionally, ROS manning requirements can be located in Attachment 1 – Performance Work Statement (PWS) at section C-1.7.1.1.

Q61. Please clarify whether Offerors should include indirect expenses, G&A, and profit in the proposed RAV and ROS (Undefined Crew) per diem rates at the time of proposal. If these elements are not to be included at proposal submission, please clarify how they will be determined and incorporated into the applicable per diem rate.

A61. Offerors should include indirect expenses, G&A and profit in their FOS, RAV and ROS per diem rates. However, form A has been removed from attachment 11. Please see response to question 60.

Q62. Please confirm whether the NWCF and GF pass-through CLINs identified in Section B constitute the reimbursable elements of the contract notwithstanding their designation as Firm Fixed Price. Additionally, please clarify whether Offerors are required to propose dollar values for these pass-through CLINs and, if so, identify the amounts or basis Offerors should use for proposal and price-evaluation purposes.

A62. The term “reimbursable” has been replaced by “pass-through,” but still constitutes the reimbursable elements of the contract. The CLIN distinction between pass-through NWCF and pass-through GF is due to having separate lines of accounting which dictate having separate CLINs. Offerors are to propose in accordance with Section L-8(E) Volume V (Price Proposal) and will be evaluated in accordance with Section M-1(E) Price Factor (Trade-Off) – in addition to completing Attachment 11 Form B. This form does not include any type of pass throughs/reimbursable elements to propose to, as pass through expenses are based on estimated Government need.

Additionally, please see response to question 61 and note that Section L-8(E) Volume V (Price Proposal) and Section M-1(E) Price Factor (Trade-Off) have been updated.

Q63. Please clarify the intended relationship between Attachment 11 and Attachment 21 and confirm whether Attachment 21 is intended to provide a more detailed post-award breakout of the same costs comprising the awarded per diem rates proposed in Attachment 11. Additionally, please clarify where costs identified separately in Attachment 21 but not separately identified in Attachment 11, including Overlapping Crew Wages, Travel, and Training, should be included in Attachment 11 for purposes of developing and supporting the proposed per diem rates.

A63. Please see response to question 61 regarding Attachment 11.

However, Attachment 21 is for the awardee to fill in as a deliverable in accordance with Section H-17 of the solicitation. Please see section B-1.9 - Adjustments to ROS Crew Size and B-1.10 - Alternate ROS as to special circumstances as to when Attachment 21 may be used.

Q64. C-1.1.3 states that "Anticipated delivery dates are noted in C-1.1.2.1," but that section does not have any information about anticipated delivery dates. Please correct the reference.

A64: Section C-1.1.3 has been revised to reference Section F-2 of the solicitation.

Q65. The ROS crew manning in C-1.7 of the PWS has a total of 18, but the numbers add up to

17. Please clarify if there is a missing billet or if the total should be 17.

A65. PWS Section 1.7 has been corrected to 17 for ROS; however, the apparent discrepancy is due to the radio requirement to have 2 persons with COMSEC training/certification. If the Master will fulfill the requirement for 1 COMSEC person then only 17 are needed. If the Master will not fulfill this requirement then 2 radio persons will be required to meet the minimum COMSEC manning requirements and the total will be 18.

Q66. Will the Government be providing a revised Solicitation and PWS that have valid references? There are several instances in both documents that show “Error! Reference source not found.”

A66. Yes, we will have both the PWS and Solicitation revised. Please see attachments in PIEE.

Q67. The solicitation requires that all information shall be typed no smaller than 12-point font.

May Offerors use a smaller, still readable font for each of the following:

a) headers and footers

b) figures/graphics

c) tables

A67. See Solicitation Section L-7(6). 12-point font is required throughout the entirety of offerors’ proposals.

Q68. The solicitation requires submission of a Small Business Participation Commitment Document (SBPCD) that complies with the requirements of FAR 52.219-9, Small Business Subcontracting Plan, as well as a Small Business Subcontracting Plan (SBSP)in accordance with FAR 52.219-9 and DFARS 252.219-7996. Please clarify whether offerors are required to submit both the SBPCD and the SBSP as separate documents, or if the Government will accept a single consolidated plan that addresses all requirements of FAR 52.219-9 and DFARS 252.219-7996.

A68. Solicitation Section L-8(B)(2) has been updated to state Small Business Subcontracting Plan (if required, provide as a separate document). It is not an evaluation factor and should be kept separate from the SBPCD (which will be evaluated).

Q69. Will the Government provide the percentage goals for each small business category that Offerors should use when developing the Small Business Subcontracting Plan?

A69. The Government will not provide specific percentage goals for the Small Business Subcontracting Plan. Offerors are required to develop and propose their own realistic and challenging percentage goals based on their technical approach, market research, and anticipated subcontracting opportunities, in accordance with FAR 52.219-9.

Q70. Please advise the basis of an 8-hour day and what the rate of pay is after the 8 hours. Wage determination includes an hourly rate for each rating. Is that rate paid for each hour up to 8 hours in a day? Is overtime paid for any hour worked after 8 hours in a day? Or is it calculated after 40 hours in a week?

A70. See section C-1.1.3.4 Full Operating Status, which defines FOS crew work hours and additional requirements and how to price any anticipated overtime. Please see Section C-1.1.3.5 for Reduced Operating Status requirements and C-1.1.3.9 for Repair Availability. The Department of Labor defines overtime being triggered on a weekly basis (hours worked over 40 in a 168-hour workweek). If utilizing a Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA) there may be further requirements for overtime. Additionally, please see Section C-1.7.10.2 regarding further overtime pricing as fixed price vs pass-through (reimbursable) and C-1.1.3.3.1, Crew Maintenance Overtime.

Q71. PWS C-1.5.2.12 requires the contractor to operate and maintain the Government furnished IT services to maintain a Controlled Unclassified Information (CUI) network and a classified network onboard the ships. As there is no requirement to receive information outside of the vessels, please confirm CMMC Level 1 certification is required for performance of the contract.

A71. Level 1 Certification is required. DFARS 252.204-7025 (Notice of Cybersecurity Maturity Model Certification Level Requirements) has been updated to reflect this.

Q72. The solicitation requires the offeror to possess an active TOP SECRET Facility Clearance at the time of proposal submission and provides that an offeror without an active TOP SECRET FCL will be ineligible for award. Would the Government consider revising this requirement to permit an otherwise qualified vessel operator that currently possesses an active SECRET FCL to submit a proposal, with the required TOP SECRET FCL upgrade initiated through the applicable sponsorship/security process and completed prior to commencement of performance requiring TOP SECRET access? The upgrade must be supported by a bona fide classified contractual requirement and appropriate sponsorship/documentation, such as the applicable DD Form 254.

Accordingly, requiring an active TOP SECRET FCL at proposal submission may prevent an otherwise qualified SECRET-cleared vessel operator from competing when it does not presently have another contractual requirement through which to obtain the TOP SECRET facility eligibility required by this solicitation. Would the Government consider allowing offerors with an active SECRET FCL to compete, subject to obtaining the required TOP SECRET FCL through Government sponsorship following selection and prior to any performance requiring TOP SECRET access? This approach would maintain the Government's ultimate TOP SECRET security requirement while providing qualified U.S. vessel operators an opportunity to compete.

A72. Please see response to question Q44 and Q45

Q73. The following questions are related to MSC choosing to use a minimum quantitative approach (MQR) to small business participation. The percentage required and estimated pass-through expenses appear unrealistic. Can MSC provide the basis for their estimated pass-through expenses? Did MSC take into account that 2 of the vessels will likely be homeported outside of the United States when they established the MQR of 7%? Will MSC reconsider the pass/fail MQR on TCV approach by either (1) increasing the MQR percentage but have it based on subcontracted dollars, (2) reducing the percentage to an achievable amount based upon TCV or (3) reverting back to the typical small business goal approach?

A73. Passthrough expenses are anticipated to be expense types listed in section B; table 5. The MQR of 7% was based on market research and small business goals; however, the estimated pass-through expenses to account for ships that may be hubbed overseas has been revised to account for this. Please see updated section L-8(B)

Q74. Both L-8 (E) (c) and M-1 (E)(3) state “No benefits or projected savings will be factored into price by the Government.” Will MSC provide a further explanation of the context or examples of benefits or projected savings?

A74. The Government will evaluate proposals based strictly on the actual prices proposed. The Government will not apply credits, discounts, or mathematical deductions to an offeror's evaluated price based on projected, indirect, or non-binding cost savings that may result from the offeror's proposed technical approach.

Q75. The pricing related to crew ramp up is based upon the vessel delivery schedules outlined in section F-2. Please advise how it will be addressed if vessels delivery dates are delayed.

A75. The vessel delivery schedule in Section F-2 represents the Government’s current notional timeline. After an award is made, any potential delays or changes will be handled on a case-by-case basis.

Q76. Please provide the Gross Tonnage (GT) and Gross Register Tonnage (GRT) for the vessels.

A76. Final certified tonnage figures have not yet been issued, as classification society certification by the American Bureau of Shipping (ABS) and issuance of the International Tonnage Certificate (ITC 69) remain pending vessel completion.

Q77. The NUC periods for the first vessel are outside the contract period of performance. Will that be contracted separately, or will the period of performance be shifted to the coincide with the first NUC period?

A77. The solicitation requirements, including NUC periods, are based upon the current Government notional schedule. Offerors must propose strictly in accordance with the Period of Performance and schedule outlined in the solicitation. Any subsequent adjustments or schedule changes post-award will be handled on a case-by-case basis