QA_22_-_36.pdf

DATE: 12 December 2014

TO: ALL POTENTIAL OFFERORS

SUBJECT: RFP N62387-15-R-5301; Questions & Answers 22-36

Q22. At C-1.2.3.1, Dock Trials, the RFP states that the dock trial will be conducted within the ROS-5 or RAV per diem and extra costs will be reimbursable. However, the ROS-5 dock trial has four additional crewmembers. Are the costs for these additional crewmembers reimbursable outside of the regular per diem?

A22. The cost of the four additional crew members is not reimbursable, and should be included in the proposed fixed price for each dock trial.

Q23. In the Table of Expenditure Types (Section B-11.0, Reimbursable Services), expenditure type

25341 is listed as SSET Training. Does this refer to the course formerly known as Shipboard

Security Engagement Tactics which is now known as Ship’s Reaction Force (SRF), Security

Watch Basic (SWB), and Security Watch Advanced (SWA)? It is noted that according to dialogue with MSC Training Centers, SRF, SWB, and SWA are all included as three parts of an inclusive curriculum, so are all three courses (SRF, SWB, SWA) reimbursable?

A23. Yes, SSET has been replaced by SRF, SWB, and SRA, which are MSC-specific training requirements. Per RFP Section C-1.8.4, Cost of MSC/Navy Required Training, “All costs associated with MSC/Navy required training, including travel, are not reimbursable and shall be included in the Contractor’s fixed price per diem.” As such, SSET Training will be removed from the list of reimbursable expenses in a future amendment.

Q24. There are numerous training and administrative requirements listed as being “Master’s” responsibilities throughout the RFP; however, when the ships are in ROS-5 or ROS-30, there is no Master assigned. Are these same “Master’s” requirements intended to be met and carried out by the Chief Mate (SOIC) while the ships are in ROS?

Example 1: Section 1.8.9 indicates, “The master shall have completed ATO [Anti-Terrorism

Officer] Level II training at least one time in their career.” While in ROS, is this requirement expected to be fulfilled by the Chief Mate or other designated Ship’s Officer in Charge (SOIC).

Example 2: Section 1.8.10 indicates, “Anti-Terrorism Awareness Training Level 3 shall be successfully completed by Masters every (3) years by CD or on-line.” While in ROS, is this requirement expected to be fulfilled by the Chief Mate or other designated Ship’s Officer in

Charge (SOIC).

A24. Unless otherwise indicated, OICs/Chief Mates should fulfill all training and administrative requirements designated for Masters when their respective ships are in ROS status.

Q25. The following question is of significant importance as its wording seems to set a requirement for this contract IN EXCESS of the requirements prescribed by COMSCINST 5530.3.

RFP Section C-1.8.11 states, “Those mariners assigned to the ship’s physical security team and all deck watch standers (in port, at sea or at anchor) shall participate in the following MSC approved courses in accordance with COMSCINST 5530.0 Series:

1.8.11.1 Ship Security and Tactics (SST). The Master or OIC shall assign a minimum of five (5) mariners to the Ship’s Reaction Force (SRF) each of whom shall have successfully completed

MSC approved Ship’s Reaction Force course every three years. These mariners must hold current small arms training certificates for the length of their tour of duty.”

Please clarify which section, specifically, in COMSCINST 5530.3 requires “all deck watch standers” to complete Ship’s Reaction Force training. COMSCINST 5530.3, Chapter 3, Section

6, Ship’s Reaction Force states, “a. All ships are required to maintain a SRF with a minimum of five members in accordance with their VSP.” The pertinent requirement in section b states, “…each ship will have at least 5 small arms qualified personnel assigned to the crew.”

Further, COMSCINST 5530.3 Appendix C, FP/ CBRD Training Requirements Matrix states, “Training: Shipboard Security Tactics (SST), Student: SRF, Periodicity: Every 3 Years, Responsibility for Training: MSC-certified trainers.”

We have found no requirement in COMSCINST 5530.3 for “all deck watch standers” to complete

Shipboard Security Tactics/ SRF training; yet we have found multiple references throughout

COMSCINST 5530.3 requiring ships to maintain an SRF with at least five SRF trained members.

Please clarify.

A25. As stated in C-1.8.11, all deck watch standers must complete the SST/SRF Training requirements in COMSCINST 5530.3.

Q26. In reference to RFP Section L-12.1.C.I.c: Are Past Performance Questionnaires required for contracts that are already entered in PPIRS (Past Performance Information Retrieval System)?

A26. No, however: If an offeror intends to use a PPIRS report instead of one of the required past performance questionnaires, the offeror is responsible to for clearly stating this and ensuring the equivalent information is reflected in the PPIRS report by the proposal due date.

Q27. In reference to RFP Section M-1.C.III (Ship Overhaul and Repair Experience - Planned

Maintenance Experience) & Attachment L – Tech Factor III: There is a tonnage discrepancy between the RFP and Attachment L – Tech Factor III. Is the tonnage requirement 10,000GT or

3,000GT?

A27. Attachment L – Tech Factor III is incorrect. The correct tonnage requirement is 10,000GT, not 3,000 GT. This will be formally corrected via a future amendment.

Q28. Since the three KOCAK-class vessels’ layberths are undetermined, how should TPOC's be priced? It is possible that 2, 3, or 4 will be required, dependent upon whether or not each of the

KOCAK-class go to different layberths or to the same layberth. Likewise, if one of the two ships currently at Blount Island is relocated and not in the vicinity of any other vessel, will the TPOC for that additional layberth become reimbursable?

A28. Offerors should price their proposals with the assumption that 2 TPOCs/Port Engineers will support all five vessels under this contract. Additional TPOCs/Port Engineers will be considered reimbursable at the applicable rate specified for “Port Engineers/Port

Captains” in Form A of Attachment G – Pricing Form. The RFP will be updated to reflect this via a future amendment.

Q29. Regarding RFP Section C-3.6.5: Are each of the TPOCs/Port Engineers to be dedicated 100% to this contract?

A29. Yes. RFP Section C-3.6.5 will be updated to reflect this via a future amendment.

Q30. Define driving distance for TPOCs, as stated in RFP Section C-3.6.5, Number of Technical

Personnel.

A30. Within RFP Section C-3.6.5, the phrase “driving distance” will be replaced with “transit time of 30 minutes” via a future amendment.

Q31. Please clarify if the layberths will be supplied by the Government or if it will be the Operator's responsibility to contract for the layberths?

A31. Currently, the Government expects to supply the layberths for USNS MARTIN and USNS

WHEAT. In accordance with Section C.1.1.1, the Government reserves the right to direct the Contractor to provide layberth services for any of the ships under this contract.

Q32. If the contractor is required to supply a layberth and a suitable layberth cannot be found or the layberth operator refuses to accept the operator's terms and conditions, will the operator be penalized?

A32. The Government reserves all rights to address any lack of performance on a case-by-case basis in accordance with the terms of the contract.

Q33. C-3.6.5 refers to Technical Points of Contact (TPOC) for each layberth and/or ship group. The

TPOC concept is maintained throughout 3.6.5, except in the last sentence that says “Should the

Contracting Officer approve the assignment of one TPOC for two layberth locations, it is understood that no additional payment will be made to the Contractor should the ships be relocated such that it would not be reasonable for one port engineer to commute between the two layberth facilities.” Please clarify if a TPOC is the same thing as a Port Engineer.

A33. A TPOC is equivalent to a Port Engineer. For clarity, the term “TPOC” will be replaced by

“Port Engineer” within C-3.6.5.

Q34. L-12 (d) specifies that all information in offers must be compatible with Microsoft Office 2010.

Are pdf files for certain components of a proposal also acceptable?

A34. Yes.

Q35. The Technical Manual has Dock Trial manning, but the pricing sheets do not have Dock Trial schedules. How shall that special manning be addressed in the fixed price?

A35. Frequency of dock trials is anticipated to be once per year, per ship.

Q36. Regarding Q&A #20, we would like a further clarification, as we interpret your answer to be at odds with other ROS mariner situations where a position is considered to be “manned” even if the crewmember is not working, as long as he is being paid for the day. If a crewmember is not at work because he/she is off the vessel on a paid vacation day or a paid sick day, does this constitute a crew shortage?

A36. Yes, if a crewmember is not at work because he/she is off the vessel on a paid vacation day or a paid sick day, this would constitute a crew shortage.