PRESOL | M | Questions and Answers from Dry Tortugas National Park Site Visit - Part II

FBO DAILY ISSUE OF JULY 31, 2008 FBO #2439
SOLICITATION NOTICE

M -- Questions and Answers from Dry Tortugas National Park Site Visit - Part II

Notice Date: 7/29/2008
Notice Type: Modification/Amendment
Contracting Office: SER - National Park Service Contracting & Property Mgt.100 Alabama St., SW Atlanta GA 30303
ZIP Code: 30303
Solicitation Number: CC-DRTO001-08
Response Due: 8/13/2008
Archive Date: 7/29/2009
Point of Contact: Cherrie Brice Concessions Mgt. Specialist 4045623108654 cherrie_brice@nps.gov;
Small Business Set-Aside: N/A
Description: To: All Recipients of the prospectus: CC-DRTO001-08- A Concession Business Opportunity for round trip passenger ferry service between Key West, FL and Dry Tortugas National Park and other specified services NPS RESPONSES TO QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY SUNNY DAYS CATAMARANS QUESTION 7 [Ref.: Draft Contract Exhibit A Draft Operating Plan 3C 'Vessel Requirements' pp. A-4 to A-6] The solicitation requires that, after the first 24 months of the 10 year contract, services are performed with a single vessel with a seating capacity of at least 200. At this time only one of the two Permit holders, Yankee, has such a vessel already. As such, any offeror without such a vessel already will have to make a substantial investment in designing and building a permanent vessel. While a new vessel should be significantly more economical and far less polluting than any existing vessel, the current specifications for the permanent vessel clearly provide Yankee with a significant unearned advantage. Further, by requiring that during the 24 month interim period the services that currently are being provided successfully by the two existing permit holders with two vessels (Yankee's large vessel and Sunny Days moderate size vessel) must be provided with one or two boats of a combined minimum seating capacity of 175, NPS is also requiring all offerors other than Yankee to make yet another significant investment in one or more vessels, the cost of which cannot possibly be amortized over the 24 months during which they will operate. The combination of investments that the solicitation requires of all offerors other than Yankee makes the current solicitation unduly and unnecessarily restrictive of competition. To remove restrictions on competition, would NPS eliminate the requirement for the concessioner to operate during the interim operating period, extend the two current contracts as need be, and set the start date for contract performance with the final vessel configuration to be up to 24 months after award? Or, in the alternative, would NPS ease the capacity specifications during the interim period to allow more flexible approaches that don't require an unrecoverable investment? NPS RESPONSE:The NPS developed the vessel requirements for the Draft Contract in compliance with 36 C.F.R. 51.6. This regulation specifies that the NPS Director must not develop terms and conditions in a concession contract to accommodate the capabilities or limitations of any potential offeror. With respect to the foregoing requests, the NPS is not eliminating the requirement for the concessioner to operate during the interim operating period; extending the two current authorizations; and modifying the start date for contract performance; or, in the alternative, revising the vessel requirements in the Draft Contract. Decisions concerning vessel requirements were made during the prospectus development process. Considerations included, without limitation, financial, operational, and visitor comfort concerns. Offerors should review the Prospectus documents, determine the requirements of the Draft Contract, and respond to the Proposal Package questions in the Prospectus as written. QUESTION 8 [Ref.: Draft Contract Exhibit A Draft Operating Plan 3C 'Vessel Requirements' pp. A-4 to A-6] Since the prospectus requires vessel capacities of 151 persons or more, and that requirement causes more strict screening of passengers both by the city of Key West and MTSA is it your intent that offerors make provisions for such screening (and the cost thereof) in their proposals? NPS RESPONSE:As shown on the enclosed Errata Sheet, CC-DRTO001-08, the NPS has revised the original requirement for the Primary Vessel to have a United States Coast Guard Certificate of Inspection (COI) for a minimum of 200 passengers. The COI requirements are specified in Exhibit 18 on page 20 of the Business Opportunity section and in subsection 3) C) (2) on page A-5 of the Draft Operating Plan. The revised portion of the COI requirements specifies a minimum of "150" passengers. QUESTION 9 (Ref.: Proposal Package pp. 3 and 25] In Primary Selection Factor 1a, the bidders' air and water pollution and vessel emissions control measures are evaluated, and although this Subfactor states, "Fuel efficiency of engines and the maintenance of boat engines also impact the environment," the proposed vessels' fuel efficiency is not one of the five requested evaluation points. Although Secondary Selection Factor 1 states, "The NPS objective is to reduce emissions from vessel operations," the fuel efficiency of the vessels, which directly affects total emissions, is not requested there or elsewhere in the selection factors. Considering its driving importance, wouldn't the NPS reasonably back up its objective by requesting and evaluating bidders' vessels' fuel consumption? NPS RESPONSE:As shown on the enclosed Errata Sheet for DRTO001-08, the NPS has revised the Proposal Package, Principal Selection Factor 1, Subfactor 1a, Air and Water Quality, Page 4, by adding a new item 6 related to engines and fuel efficiency. QUESTION 10 [Ref.: Draft Contract Exhibit A Draft Operating Plan 3C 'Vessel Requirements' pp. A-4 to A-6] By specifying a single large Primary Vessel, the prospectus immediately precludes the cleanest emissions vessels, because (1) a single large (e.g., over 200 passengers) vessel will use dramatically more fuel in one run than the amount used in two runs from a smaller (e.g., less than 150 passenger) vessel, and (2) the capacity specification in the prospectus may disallow light construction vessels (i.e., other than aluminum or steel) due to USCG guidelines for vessel certificates over 150 passengers. By not allowing bidders enough flexibility to propose the cleanest vessels, the prospectus thus will result in total emissions that are substantially higher than necessary and even higher than the current combined operations - contrary to its stated principles of reducing emissions. Will the NPS consider more flexible Primary vessel specifications that actually permit designs that will reduce emissions rather than increase emissions? NPS RESPONSE:The NPS has considered the request to change the Primary Vessel requirements and is not revising the Prospectus to accommodate the request. Decisions concerning vessel requirements were made during the prospectus development process. Considerations included, without limitation, financial, operational, and visitor comfort concerns. Offerors should review the Prospectus documents, determine the requirements of the Draft Contract, and respond to the Proposal Package questions in the Prospectus as written. QUESTION 11 Ref.: Proposal Package p. 22; and Draft Contract Exhibit A Draft Operating Plan 3C 'Vessel Requirements' pp. A-4 to A-6] By specifying a single large Primary Vessel, the prospectus unavoidably will result in higher passenger fares, as fuel consumption at ever-increasing fuel prices will cost more than alternate vessel designs under 150 passenger capacities. However, the lower the fare, the more people can afford to visit the Park. Since the Park's General Management Plan states that "The NPS intent is to keep the cost of visiting the park as low as possible so as many visitors as possible can visit," wouldn't the NPS reasonably have selection factor elements that evaluate the bidders' proposed passenger fares, to help ensure this intent? What will be the initial passenger fare? NPS RESPONSE:Subsection 36 C.F.R. 51.18 (c) authorizes the NPS to include subfactors under the principal and secondary selection factors to describe specific elements of the selection factor. The NPS has determined it is not appropriate to revise the Proposal Package in response to Question 11. Offerors should review the Prospectus documents, determine the requirements of the Draft Contract, and respond to the Proposal Package questions in the Prospectus as written. With respect to the initial passenger fare required under the Draft Contract, please see the draft Operating Plan" page A-2, 3A and B. QUESTION 12 [Ref.: Draft Contract Exhibit A Draft Operating Plan 3C 'Vessel Requirements' pp. A-4 to A-6] Must the interior sound level be specified so low - at 70 decibels - when there are no vessels available that could test to this specification? For comparison, we measured sound decibel levels in the low 80s in cars driving down the road with air conditioner on low. NPS RESPONSE:Decisions concerning vessel requirements, including decibel levels, were made during the prospectus development process. Considerations included, without limitation, financial, operational, and visitor comfort concerns. Offerors should review the Prospectus documents, determine the requirements of the Draft Contract, and respond to the Proposal Package questions in the Prospectus as written. QUESTION 13 [Ref.: Draft Contract Exhibit A Draft Operating Plan 3C 'Vessel Requirements' p. A-5] The prospectus requires an active ride control system on the final Primary vessel. However, available active ride controls (t-foils, interceptor plates, active trim tabs) dramatically increase fuel consumption (often by 20% or more) and can be prohibitively expensive (t-foils may add up to a half million dollars to a vessel cost.) Interceptor plates are ineffective at the specified speed range of 26 knots. Some active ride controls, such as t-foils, have such serious maintenance issues that they can endanger the vessel rather than improve its stability. Further, active ride controls offer little or no advantage to vessel designs with length-to-width ratios over 14:1 except in a very narrow range of sea conditions. Rather than imposing a blanket requirement for active ride controls, will the NPS consider allowing Primary vessel designs that use passive design features to achieve improved stability instead of active ride controls? NPS RESPONSE:As shown on the enclosed Errata Sheet for DRTO001-08, the NPS has revised the equipment requirements located in the Business Opportunity Section, Exhibit 18, and Page 20, and in Exhibit A, Page 20. The revised equipment requirements include a passive ride control system as an option or in addition to an active ride control system. In addition, the NPS has also revised the Proposal Package, Principal Selection Factor 2, subfactor 2b Vessels, 1, Page 7, by adding a new information requirement(o) Description of the vessels active/or passive ride control system(s). QUESTION 14 [Ref.: Draft Contract Exhibit A Draft Operating Plan 3C 'Vessel Requirements' p. A-4] For the Interim vessel, will the NPS consider allowing a two-vessel plan in which one of the two vessels has a 90 passenger capacity, although the combination of the two vessels meet all other currently stated prospectus requirements (including the requirement for a combined minimum capacity of 175 passengers)? NPS RESPONSE: The NPS has considered the request to alter the Interim Vessel requirements and is not revising the Draft Contract to accommodate the request. Decisions concerning vessel requirements were made during the prospectus development process. Considerations included, without limitation, financial, operational, and visitor comfort concerns. Offerors should review the Prospectus documents, determine the requirements of the Draft Contract, and respond to the Proposal Package questions in the Prospectus as written. QUESTION 15 [Ref.: Draft Contract. Since the Services Contract Act (SCA) normally would apply to contracts such as this one, has the NPS received a DoL exemption from the Services Contract Act for this competition? NPS RESPONSE The NPS believes the Services Contract Act does not apply in the circumstances presented by this concession opportunity. However, if it is determined that this Contract is subject to the Service Contract Act, then pursuant to the provisions of Section 5 of this Contract, which requires compliance with all Applicable Laws, the appropriate provisions of the Service Contract Act will be incorporated into this Contract. To: All Recipients of the prospectus: CC-DRTO001-08- A Concession Business Opportunity for round trip passenger ferry service between Key West, FL and Dry Tortugas National Park and other specified services NPS RESPONSES TO QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY YANKEE ROAMER QUESTION 1 Referring to Contract Exhibit A (Draft Operating Plan), section 3(B) (Rates), subsection (1) (Initial Rates): "Rates in effect at the time of the publishing of the prospectus are included in the Appendix to the Prospectus." Appendix G to the Prospectus (2008 Rates for Current Operators) shows Yankee Freedom II rates for adults as $149.00. As of May 2008, our rates for adults aboard Yankee Freedom II are $159.00. A reduction in rates for financial projections would not be favorable and would cause undue financial hardship. Can Appendix G be revised to reflect the actual approved 2008 rates which includes a fuel surcharge? NPS RESPONSE:The rates were changed on April 1, as shown in the enclosed Errata Sheet No. 1, Appendix G has been revised to reflect the operator's current rate of $159.00. QUESTION 2 There are no provisions that we can find in the Prospectus and its attachments to allow for frequent adjustments for fuel surcharges. The uncertainty of the price of fuel is totally beyond the control of any concessioner. Further, the cost of fuel is a major expense. Without some method of quickly adjusting to fuel costs, it places the economic viability of this concession contract in question. Annual adjustments are not reasonable because fuel price escalations take place almost daily. We request that the National Park Service allow a fuel surcharge that is keyed to the average price of fuel in Key West. In the same vein, insurance costs are also beyond the control of the concessioner and we would ask if the rates could be adjusted automatically, annually, to reflect any increase of insurances with proof of said increases. NPS RESPONSE:The NPS Rate Approval guide was provided to all Offerors as Appendix B of the Prospectus. The National Park Service is required by law to approve all rates charged to the public by park Concessioners and to ensure that those rates are comparable to similar goods and services provided outside of the park. Concessioners may request rate increases for factors deemed relevant, including but not limited to additional transportation charges for food, gasoline or other products due to distances from suppliers. The Concessioner is responsible for providing documentation to justify the rate increase. The National Park Service will make every effort to respond quickly to these rate requests. The National Park Service is currently researching how the private sector is handling rapidly changing fuel costs for services. A policy has not been developed so we cannot address the issue of a surcharge at this time. QUESTION 3 Referring to Contract Exhibit A (Draft Operating Plan), section 4(F) (Transportation from Garden Key to Loggerhead Key), subsection (a) the National Park Service has stated that the concessioner does not have to provide this service if there are fewer than six paying customers. In subsection (b), the National Park Service stated that no more than six passengers will be transported on a daily basis. Pursuant to this request, we have a number of questions: a. Under these circumstances, is this service only required when there are six paying customers and optional when fewer than six? NPS RESPONSE:The Draft Contract authorizes, but does not require, the Concessioner to provide daily transportation service from Garden Key to Loggerhead Key. Each trip is limited to six passengers and the Concessioner may provide one trip per day. The second sentence in subsection 4) F) (a) states that "This service need not be conducted with fewer than six (6) paying customers." Thus, if the Concessioner elects to provide this authorized service and the Park Service incorporates applicable provisions in the Operating Plan, then the Concessioner has made a commitment to provide the service as specified. The commitment would continue until the Concessioner elects to alter or discontinue the authorized service, in which event the Park Service would change the Operating Plan accordingly and the Concessioner would change the promotional materials as necessary. Once the commitment to provide the daily service is made, however, if fewer than 6 people reserve space for a trip scheduled for a given day, the Concessioner may elect not to make that particular scheduled trip. Potential patrons would need to be made aware of this contingency prior to paying for the trip. The Concessioner would also need to ensure customers know how and when information would be conveyed to them if the scheduled trip is to be cancelled. b. As long as the investment is being made in the vessel, why is it limited to only six people per day? Should not the boat be available to make several trips? NPS RESPONSE: The final General Management Plan Amendment Environmental Impact Statement, located at the following web site: http://www.nps.gov/drto/parkmgmt/upload/drtofgmpeis.pdf identifies visitor use restrictions at Loggerhead Key. The Commercial Services section on page 64 states, "Loggerhead Key tours would be limited to 12 visitors and subject to the use restrictions described on table 1." Table 1 in this document on page 41 further explains the restrictions for numbers of visitors arriving via the Concessioner's vessel. c. Additionally, the Business Opportunity section, Exhibit 19 (Vessel Minimum Requirements for Inter-Island Transportation) states that the vessel must be inspected for a minimum of six passengers plus required crew. Is this correct? Does this, then, preclude the option of providing this service for less than six paying passengers as noted above? Perhaps this specific requirement in Exhibit 19 should have been stated as a maximum number of passengers plus crew. NPS RESPONSE:As shown on the enclosed Errata No. 1 for DRTO001-08, the NPS has revised the requirement for a Certificate of Inspection (COI) for the inter-island vessel. The capacity requirements are specified in the Business Opportunity, Exhibit 19, page 21 and Contract Exhibit A: Draft Operating Plan, Section 3 C (3). The revised capacity requirements in these sections do not include a requirement for a COI. QUESTION 4 Again referring to the Business Opportunity section, Exhibit 19 (Vessel Minimum Requirements for Inter-Island Transportation) states that the vessel must be capable of a minimum of 30 knots sustainable loaded speed. a. Is it necessary to design and build a boat and power system for 30 knots for this service given the proximity of Loggerhead to Dry Tortugas? Speeds this high may be very injurious to the natural resource and place at risk the passengers in such a small boat. If higher speeds are necessary for other purposes of this vessel, what would they be? If there are no other purposes, why would the National Park Service include this specification and expect the concessioner to commit the additional costs to provide a feature that is not expected to be used? NPS RESPONSE:As shown on the enclosed Errata No. 1 for DRTO001-08, the NPS has revised the requirement for a minimum of 30 knot sustainable speed. The minimum speed requirements are specified in The Business Opportunity, Section 19, page 21 and Contract Exhibit A: Draft Operating Plan 3 C (3), page A-6. The revised speed requirements specify a minimum of 15 knot sustainable speed. b. Please define 'storage' for the vessel as shown on Contract Exhibit PC-6. NPS RESPONSE: Contract Exhibit C: Assigned Land and Real Property Improvements references a general location for securing an inter-island vessel. If a Concessioner determines that they wish to offer this authorized service, further discussions will be held with the Concessioner on specific locations and how the vessel will be secured. c. We would like to ask the NPS to reconsider the requirement of a diesel engine. While we recognize the relative environmental impact of diesel vs. gas, a diesel engine will denote a very heavy boat that is difficult to take out of the water if that is what is meant by 'storage' i.e. does that mean it will be pushed up on to the beach, have a rail system or use a trailer and puller? Furthermore, in the event of mechanical difficulties, a diesel engine will require the removal of the boat back to the mainland for repairs or bringing a mechanic out to the Dry Tortugas. It occurs to us that this is unwieldy and not a very user-friendly solution to this requirement. We respectfully would like to ask the question whether or not we could substitute the diesel requirement for a simple 4-stroke engine for which we could have a spare in the case of breakdowns. NPS RESPONSE:As shown on the enclosed Errata No. 1 for DRTO001-08, the NPS has revised the requirement specifying a diesel fueled operated propulsion engine. The equipment requirements for the inter-island vessel located within The Business Opportunity Section, Exhibit 19, Page 21 and Exhibit A, Equipment, page A-6 are modified as follows: after the statement requiring "diesel-fuel" add "or gasoline fueled four stroke engine." Exhibit E, Section 3) A) (6) (a) on page 14 is modified as follows: delete the first sentence and replace with "if the authorized transportation service to Loggerhead Key is agreed to by the concessioner, and the concessioner utilizes a diesel fuel propelled engine for this service, the NPS will provide diesel fuel at the fort for the inter-island vessel only. At the end of the last sentence in Exhibit E, Section 3) A) (6) (a) on page 14 add the following: "Gasoline will not be provided at the fort nor will the concessioner be allowed to carry containers of fuel on board the interim vessel(s) or the primary vessel due to NPS safety concerns. The Concessioner must make other provisions for delivering gasoline to the inter-island vessel." The specific method of transferring the vessel to and from the beach will be determined by the Service if the successful Offeror determines that they wish to provide this authorized service. A trailer and puller are anticipated to be the most likely option. d. We do not understand the request for Coast Guard COI requirement as this is not a requirement for a 6-passenger boat. Please explain. NPS RESPONSE:Please see the response to question 3. As shown on the enclosed Errata Number One for DRTO001-08, the NPS has revised the requirement for a Certificate of Inspection (COI) for the inter-island vessel in the applicable sections of the prospectus.
Web Link: FedBizOpps Complete View
(https://www.fbo.gov/?s=opportunity&mode=form&id=247a748d6a020ab6eb818add8b469f24&tab=core&_cview=1)
Place of Performance: Address: Key West, FL; Zip Code: 33034
Record: SN01626325-W 20080731/080729230749-247a748d6a020ab6eb818add8b469f24 (fbodaily.com)
Source: FedBizOpps Link to This Notice
(may not be valid after Archive Date)

| FSG Index | This Issue's Index | Today's FBO Daily Index Page |

Loren Data's SAM Daily™

M -- Questions and Answers from Dry Tortugas National Park Site Visit - Part II