“Under CEOss, the Corps established our own blanket purchase agreements, then competed orders against those under GSA. Under SeaPort-e, the Navy is responsible for establishing the multiple award contracts – compete, award, and maintain – so they manage those contracting vehicles. Where we managed that and awarded our individual orders [and] the BPAs, now we award Marine Corps orders under Navy contracts,” she explained.
“We no longer have to spend the time and money to establish BPAs, because the Navy contracting vehicles already are in place. Additionally, the Navy will manage the primes [contractors] and team members – companies can become team members with someone who has a contract – and the Navy manages that rather than the Marine Corps, as we did in the past. We just manage the order and utilize SeaPort tools to award those. But the Corps still supports those orders, just as we always have.”
Walter Miller, a senior logistics management specialist contractor, instructs Cpl. Ghiemar DeGuzman, motor transport mechanic, Marine Corps Logistics Command, on his equipment as Jeremy Meyer, a logistics management specialist contractor, far left, watches. Miller and Meyer are among four staff who operate the new Albany Individual Issue Facility. Supply and provisioning support also fall under a functional area of SeaPort-e. U.S. Marine Corps photo byPublic Affairs Specialist Marti Gatlin
While there are no plans for Marine-specific modifications to SeaPort-e, MCSC is considering interfacing it with other existing funding tools. The change also increases the Marine Corps role in future contracting developments.
“We have the opportunity to engage with a government council the Navy has for SeaPort-e,” Apperson noted. “The Corps already participates at the headquarters level to provide our input. In the future, we have an avenue to have our voice heard.”
Although it would have been better to make the move at the beginning of the next fiscal year, Apperson said, approval for the transition came in late spring 2012 and MCSC had to act more quickly.
“We had a number of BPAs expiring at the end of June and early July, so that became our time to transition. As a result, we are now issuing a number of solicitations through SeaPort, but will continue to manage [pre-existing orders] under the CEOss business model so long as those are still active,” she said. “But as of July 2012, all new orders are under SeaPort-e.
“With the BPAs expiring under CEOss, we would not have had the competition we desired had we continued to use that tool. The existing task orders generally have a base plus two option years, but before we exercise an option, we will make sure it is in the best interest of the Corps. If so, we will continue to do that until those options expire in the next year or two. But most everything will be under SeaPort-e by 2014.”
Apperson believes SeaPort-e will be transparent to warfighters and Marine commanders throughout the Corps – and eventually could become the standard process for the Marine Corps across the board.
“Not all Corps activities come through this Systems Command, but do go through headquarters, which establishes the procedures for those, and I believe they expect the others to use SeaPort-e, as well. It is not related to any formal system, such as Lean Six Sigma, but it is an efficient system or I would not have recommended moving forward with it,” she said.
“SeaPort-e is a tool – and every tool is only as good as its user. We always desire to get the best support and I believe there is an opportunity, with SeaPort-e using many more contractors, to possibly get better quality services. We had very good services under CEOss, but there always is an opportunity to improve with more competition.”
This article was first published in Marine Corps Outlook: 2012-2013 Edition.