QA_05-21.docx

DATE: 02 December 2014

TO: ALL POTENTIAL OFFERORS

SUBJECT: RFP N62387-15-R-5301; Questions & Answers 5-21

Q5. Is this a follow-on requirement? If so, please provide the incumbent contract number. If not, is this a new requirement? Also, the Wage Determination at Attachment B appears to be incorrect/incomplete. Please clarify the Government’s intent with regards to the Wage Determination(s).

A5. The Government considers this a new requirement. Whereas the operating contracts for some of the vessels under this RFP primarily supported a Full Operating Status (FOS) mission, this RFP contemplates a Reduced Operating Status (ROS) mission for all subject vessels. The numbers of the earlier contracts are provided:

USNS KOCAK

USNS OBREGON

USNS PLESS

N00033-12-C-3116

At present, MSC anticipates that three Wage Determinations corresponding to the current collective bargaining agreements associated with the three contracts listed above will apply to the present procurement. . These Wage Determinations are not yet available, and will be posted as soon as possible once received by MSC. The corresponding CBAs also will be posted as soon as possible (in some cases, these may be in advance of the official, DOL Wage Determination).

Q6. Will the Wheat and Martin remain at Blount Island Command for the duration of the contract? If the answer is no, where will they be layberthed?

A6. It is anticipated that USNS WHEAT and MARTIN will remain at Blount Island for the duration of the contract, in accordance with the current U.S. Transportation Command (USTC) siting plan.

Q7. Where will the initial layberth location be for the other vessels (USNS KOCAK, OBREGON, & PLESS)?

A7. It is anticipated that the KOCAK-class vessels will be layberthed at a US Atlantic Coast location, in accordance with the current USTC siting plan.

Q8. Section C-3.6.5, Number of Technical Personnel requires the contractor’s technical point of contact (TPOC) to be aboard their assigned ships or in close proximity (driving distance) during normal working hours. Travel costs for TPOC’s are not reimbursable. Further, this solicitation states that no additional payment will be made to the Contractor should the ships be relocated. Section F-2 lists the projected layberth for 3 ships as “TBD (Atlantic Coast)”. How should the contractor price these undefined requirements? Will the government reconsider this position and reimburse the contractor for a change in a layberth location?

A8. Section C-3.6.5 requires “a minimum of one technical point-of-contract (TPOC) per lay berth in support of this contract.” That section further states that, in the case where a Contracting Officer has allowed the Contractor to designate one TPOC for two layberth locations in close proximity, AND a vessel is moved such that this it is no longer possible for one TPOC to support both layberths, that “no additional payment will be made to the Contractor.” For pricing purposes, offerors should anticipate one TPOC per layberth until and unless the Contracting Officer indicates otherwise.

Q9. Since the ships will be ROS status, will the SAMM system be placed in ROS status?

A9. No.

Q10. Tech Manual 7.3.1 Port Engineer onsite: Contract is written that a P/E must be onsite for any work greater than $100K. Is MSC willing to increase this dollar amount, as most average jobs can run well past that amount for standard items?

A10. No. The amount will remain at $100k, as stated.

Q11. Tech Manual 15.16: Shore Based Spares: upon contract award, can the new OPCO get a copy of this inventory and where the spares are stored?

A11. Yes. This will be provided within 30 days of contract award.

Q12. Section C- 1.1.16.7, Preparation for Cargo Operations – Cranes and Ramp. For each ship, how many cargo operations events are anticipated to be performed on an overtime basis?

A12. Cargo operations events to be performed on an overtime basis cannot be accurately forecasted at this time.

Q13. C-1.1.18.3, Simultaneous Cargo Operations. For each ship, how many around the clock cargo operations events are anticipated during the performance period, including option years.

A13. “Around the clock” cargo operations events cannot be accurately forecasted at this time.

Q14. ROCON Technical Manual Section 20 refers to Section C-3.5; however, C-3.5 addresses Communications Requirements. Should this refer to Sections C-3.7, C-3.7.3, and C-3.7.5 instead?

A14. The reference to C-3.5 should instead refer to C.7.5 (Ship Redelivery, Redelivery of Government Property, and Phase-In, Phase-Out Services). This will be corrected via a future amendment.

Q15. Section C-5.3.3, Durable Movable Property states “Upon transfer of the Government property records report, the Contractor shall become liable for the expense of repair or replacement of Government provided DMP.” Please confirm the Contractor is only liable for the expense of repair or replacement of Government provided Durable Movable Property (non-reimbursable) per ROCON Technical Manual 15.23.

A15. As stated in Section C-5.3.4, DMP “includes both reimbursable and nonreimbursable items as identified in the ROCON Technical Manual.” Therefore, “[u]pon transfer of the Government property records report, the Contractor shall become liable for the expense of repair or replacement of” both reimbursable and non-reimbursable Government provided DMP. Note that normal wear and tear is excepted.

Q16. Section H-7, Reduction in Contract Price – this language is for a layberth contract. Will H-7 be deleted?

A16. No. H-7 will remain in the contract as the Government may require the contractor to provide layberth services. See RFP, Section C-1.1.1, Scope of Work/Mission.

Q17. In reference to Section H-13, Enterprise-Wide Contractor Manpower Reporting Application (ECMRA): Is the proposed contract exempt from this reporting requirement?

A17. Yes, the contract resulting from this solicitation will be exempt from ECMRA reporting. This contract is categorized as Product Service Code V115, Transportation/Travel/Relocation- Transportation: Vessel Freight. The exclusion at H-13(5) applies.

Q18. Section L-12.1-B requires the offeror to provide past experience in the technical forms for operating one steam, one gas turbine and one motor vessel for a minimum of three continuous years in the last ten years. Section L-12.1-C.I, Past Performance Data, describes “recent” past performance data as a contract in-progress or completed within the last three years. Will the Government consider past performance data for contracts with a duration of three continuous years within the last ten years, even if those contracts are not in progress or completed within the last three years?

A18. No. Contracts that are not “recent” as defined at L-12.1-C.I.a.i will not be considered as Past Performance Data.

Q19. In review of the above referenced RFP and attachments, it has been noted that Attachment D is missing from the final Solicitation posting. Please advise if a final version will be posted in an amendment and if you expect any differences from the Draft version included in the Draft RFP.

A19. Attachment D will be posted via a future amendment. Its omission from the original solicitation release was unintentional.

Q20. C-1.7.10, Deduction for Crew Shortages. Please define crew shortage. Is a crew member who is not working on a particular day because he is on vacation or on a sick day considered to be a crew shortage? What about other absences that are excused, but possibly unpaid, such as extended FMLA leave, jury duty, or personal needs?

A20. A Crew Shortage occurs when any manning on any of the vessels is less than the minimum stated at Section 19 of the Technical Manual. For purposes of the contract, the cause of the crew shortage is not relevant.

Q21. In reference to RFP Section G-6 (Postaward Conference): Is the contractor’s travel cost to attend this conference reimbursable?

A21. Yes, with prior approval of the Contracting Officer.