Responses to Questions-Indoc Training-FINAL-Sep26.xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 23 KB Posted
- Solicitation number
- FA286026Q0029
About this file
This file is a Question and Answer (Q&A) document addressing clarifications from offerors regarding Solicitation #FA286026 for Pilot Indoctrination Training in support of the 1st Airlift Squadron at Joint Base Andrews, MD.
The document clarifies several key procurement details: (1) Interactive eLearning and computer-based training (CBT) modules in SCORM-conformant format are acceptable and encouraged for Lessons 6 and 7 covering procedures and flows, provided all learning objectives are met; (2) The SF 1449 pricing schedule controls the contract line item number (CLIN) structure, with CLINs 4003 and 4004 confirmed as non-existent administrative errors; (3) The FAR 52.217-8 extension is evaluated at 50% of the combined total of CLINs 4001 and 4002, with CLINs 5001 and 5002 deleted via Amendment 0002; (4) FAR 52.217-8 and 52.217-9 will be formally incorporated via Amendment 0002; (5) Optional Task CLINs 0004 and 0005 (biannual publication updates and emergency procedures CBT) are firm base period requirements despite PWS terminology; (6) Service Contract Labor Standards do not apply as Key Personnel qualify under the FLSA Professional Exemption; (7) Offerors shall price one (1) annual emergency procedure product per period as the firm quantity; and (8) The Government will not disclose an estimated budget or Not-to-Exceed ceiling. The document also confirms that a highly experienced Canadian B757 pilot/instructor is acceptable as the technical Subject Matter Expert, but a B767 SME would not fulfill the requirement due to inherent differences in the B757 flight deck and flying performance characteristics.
View the file
Other files
On GovTribe
Work with this file
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
Sheet1
| PILOT INDOCTRINATION TRAINING, SOLICITATION #FA286026 | ||||
| QUESTION # | QUESTION/COMMENT | Referenced Solicitation | ||
| Document | GOV RESPONSE | |||
| 1 | We have previously developed interactive Before Takeoff and After Takeoff flows using modern web-based graphics. Rather than limiting this portion to a passive video, would the Government consider an interactive eLearning solution that allows pilots to actively practice the flows and procedures themselves? These will be delivered in SCORM. The advantage is that the training can remain aligned with the operator’s SOPs and be efficiently modified whenever procedures change, rather than requiring an entirely new video production. | PWS Section 2.4 (Lessons 6 and 7 - Procedures/Flows) | Yes. In accordance with PWS Section 2.4, customized lessons may be delivered as a high-quality video series, an interactive computer-based training (CBT) version, or a combination of both. Interactive eLearning/CBT modules that allow pilots to actively practice checklist flows and procedures in a SCORM-conformant format are fully acceptable and encouraged, provided all topics and learning objectives in Lessons 6 and 7 are met. | |
| 2 | The SF 1449 schedule, the 52.212-1 addendum, and the 52.212-2 addendum each describe the CLIN structure differently. Which controls for pricing and evaluation? | SF 1449 Pricing Schedule / Addenda 52.212-1 & 52.212-2 | The solicitation pricing schedule (SF 1449 continuation sheet) controls. The contract line item numbers (CLINs) listed on the SF 1449 continuation sheet represent the definitive pricing structure. The Addenda text will be corrected via solicitation amendment to match the SF 1449 schedule exactly. | |
| 3 | CLINs 4003 and 4004 are referenced in the 52.212-1 addendum but don't appear in the schedule. Confirm they don't exist, or amend to add them. | Addendum 52.212-1, Section B(3) / SF 1449 Schedule | Confirmed - CLINs 4003 and 4004 do not exist. The reference to these CLINs in the Addendum was an administrative typographical error. The final Option Period (Option Period 4) consists strictly of CLINs 4001 and 4002 as scheduled on the SF 1449. The Addenda will be corrected via amendment to remove references to CLINs 4003 and 4004. | |
| 4 | The 52.217-8 extension is evaluated at 50% of "CLINs 4001–4004" in one addendum and 50% of "CLIN 4001" in the other. Which is correct? | Addendum Section III (Part II - Price) & Factor 2 (Price) | The FAR 52.217-8 extension is evaluated at 50% of the combined total of CLINs 4001 and 4002. The TEP calculation adds the proposed prices of CLIN 4001 and CLIN 4002 together and calculates exactly one-half (50%) of that sum. The unified Addendum document will be corrected via amendment to consistently state this combined calculation. | |
| 5 | Should offerors price CLINs 5001/5002, and are those amounts in the TEP in addition to the 50% calculation or in place of it? | SF 1449 Schedule / CLINs 5001 & 5002 | No. CLINs 5001 and 5002 are deleted from the pricing schedule via Amendment 0002. The FAR 52.217-8 extension is evaluated mathematically by the Government by calculating 50% of the final Option Period (CLINs 4001 and 4002 combined). Offerors shall strictly price CLINs 0001 through 4002. | |
| 6 | FAR 52.217-8 isn't in the Contract Clauses section though the evaluation relies on it. Will it be incorporated? Will 52.217-9 be added for the option years? | SF 1449 Contract Clauses Section | Yes. FAR 52.217-8 (Option to Extend Services) and FAR 52.217-9 (Option to Extend the Term of the Contract) will be formally incorporated into the Contract Clauses section of the solicitation via Amendment 0002. | |
| 7 | Option CLIN 1003 appears only in Option Year 1, not OY2–4. Intentional? | SF 1449 Schedule / Option Periods 1 through 4 | Yes, this is intentional. In accordance with PWS Section 1.5(c) / 2.7(c) (Optional Task 3: 5 Additional Videos/CBTs for new Mission Pilots), this requirement represents a one-time surge deliverable and is not a recurring annual task across Option Periods 2 through 4. | |
| 8 | PWS 2.7 calls the biannual pub update and emergency procedures CBT "Optional Tasks," but CLINs 0004/0005 place them in the base period as firm items. Confirm they're base requirements. | PWS Section 2.7 / CLINs 0004 & 0005 | Confirmed. CLINs 0004 and 0005 are firm-fixed-price requirements of the Base Period. The PWS terminology "Optional Tasks" reflects the discrete nature of these deliverables, but as scheduled on the SF 1449, they are firm requirements for the periods in which they appear and must be priced by offerors. | |
| 9 | FAR 52.222-41 (SCA) is incorporated but no Wage Determination is attached. Provide the WD or confirm SCA doesn't apply. | Contract Clauses / FAR 52.222-41 | Confirmed, the Service Contract Labor Standards (SCLS / SCA) do NOT apply to this requirement. All designated Key Personnel positions (Project Manager, Technical Lead, and Subject Matter Experts/Instructor Pilots) qualify under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) Professional Exemption (29 CFR Part 541). The reference to FAR 52.222-41 was included in error and will be deleted via solicitation amendment; no Wage Determination is applicable. | |
| 10 | PWS 2.7(b) says "1-2 annual" emergency procedure products. Specify a firm quantity for CLINs 0005, 1002, 2002, 3002, 4002, 5002. | PWS Section 2.7(b) / Pricing Schedule | For pricing purposes, offerors shall price a firm quantity of one (1) annual emergency procedure product per period. (If two products are required in an option period, the additional requirement will be bilaterally agreed upon or executed via a separate task order modification). PWS Section 2.7(b) is clarified to state a baseline quantity of one (1) product per period to align with the pricing schedule. (Note: CLINs 5001 and 5002 are deleted via Amendment 0002). | |
| 11 | Will the Government disclose an estimated dollar range or NTE ceiling to help scope level of effort? | Solicitation / General Instructions | No. In accordance with commercial acquisition practices, the Government will not disclose an estimated budget, dollar range, or Not-to-Exceed (NTE) ceiling. Offerors must propose their most competitive firm-fixed-pricing based on the requirements in the PWS. | |
| 12 | Would a highly experienced Canadian B757 pilot/instructor be acceptable as the technical Subject Matter Expert, provided the individual meets the required aircraft experience and technical qualifications? | PWS | Yes, per section 2.2.3 of the PWS and the inherent nature of flying a B757 this would be acceptable. The SME will have strong collaboration with the team in building customized training lessons listed in the PWS Section 1.4. | |
| 13 | Given the significant commonality between the B757 and B767 and the fact that pilots have historically operated under a common B757/B767 type-rating framework, would an appropriately qualified B767 SME also be considered toward the technical SME requirement? | PWS | No, due to the inherent nature of instructing how to fly a B757 with differences in flight deck and flying performance, this does not fulfill the desired experience of the SME. The SME will have strong collaboration with the team in building customized training lessons listed in the PWS Section 1.4. |
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .