Attachment 8 - Government Response to Industry_25 Aug 26.pdf

Question

Attachment Question/Comment Government Answer

1 Attch 1

Regarding RNAV-RNP training. I’m a little unclear as to whether the Air Force wants one whole day dedicated to RNAV-RNP academics (8 hours) or if they just want it covered on a separate day after systems training and it can be included with other topics that day. The AC covering RNAV-RNP training lists several topics that must be addressed, however there is no minimum time specified. Our experience is that the academic training requirements can be met in much less time than 8 hours.

RNAV-RNP can be incorporated with other topics on a day as long as all the topics are covered and the students’ questions are answered. Recommend incorporating RNAV-RNP with a more robust academic session on VNAV.

2 Attch 1

Regarding RNAV-RNP training. Does the Air Force really want one whole 4 hour simulator session dedicated only to RNAV RNP approaches? The AC requires a total of 4 approaches be flown by the pilots during initial training. This leaves time in a normal simulator period for other approaches to be flown. Would flying other approaches during that period be acceptable as long as the AC requirements are met and the crew is proficient?

The RNAV-RNP SIM can include other approaches as long as the 4 approaches, per pilot, are completed and all of the student questions are answered. If additional RNAV-RNP approaches are required during the RNAV- RNP sim to ensure student understanding and performance are satisfactory then they will complete addition RNAV- RNP approaches before moving on to other approaches/items. This would be a good place for a LOFT type sim incorporating RNAV SID, NADP climb profiles, short enroute segment, full descent and STAR ending with an RNAV- RNP approach. Students coming out have historically only done terminal area work.

3 PWS

Does MAX differences training have to occur after the completion of the end of course check for the initial course? Yes or no would be an acceptable answer.

No. See Amendment 1, Attch 1 PWS para 1.3.1.

4 Attch 5

Attachment 5, Provisions and Clauses_FA445226R0002.pdf, is internally paginated “Page 8 of 19” through “Page 19 of 19.” Pages 1 through 7 do not appear in the posted file. Section L paragraph 2.0 directs offerors to “Complete all fill in Provisions and Clauses” in Attachment 5, and Section L paragraph 2.1.1(8) requires “Provisions and Clauses with all fill-ins complete” in Volume I

Page 1-7 do not contain any P&Cs, hence why it was not included as part of the provisions and clauses attachment. The Government will not be submitting a revised Attachment 5 with pages 1- 7 included, nor will an extension be granted for not including pages 1-7.

5 Attch 5

Related to Question 3, the following do not appear on pages 8 through 19 of Attachment 5:

52.212-3, Offeror Representations and Certifications — Commercial Products and Commercial Services;

52.212-5, Contract Terms and Conditions Required to Implement Statutes or Executive Orders — Commercial Products and Commercial Services;

the covered telecommunications equipment and services representation and prohibition at 52.204-24, 52.204-25 and 52.204-26, or their successor provisions;

Not Applicable. RFO removed 52.212-3, 52.212- 5, 52.204-24, 52.204-25 and 52.204-26.

6 Attch 5

The following do not appear on pages 8 through 19 of Attachment 5: 52.216-21, Requirements, although 52.216-19(c) refers to it conditionally

Will add 52.216-21

7 Attch 5 52.217-8 and 52.217-9, although 52.212- 2(b) addresses the evaluation of options.

This requirement has ordering periods not options; 52.212-2(b) states "if applicable". This is not applicable.

Cover Letter

The Cover Letter states at paragraph 4 that the Government “intends to award a single Requirements type contract,” and at paragraph 7 refers to “this IDIQ contract.”

Revised para 7 to requirements contract in Amendment 1

Please identify the minimum quantity or dollar value, if any, the Government is obligated to under the resulting contract

See Atch 5, 52.216-19(a) for minimum order

10 N/A What is the current contract number FA445221D0001

Cover Letter

Cover Letter paragraph 4, clause 52.216- 18(a), and Attachment 6 describe a five-year ordering period running 1 November 2026 through 31 October 2031. The Contract Data Requirements List forms at Attachment 4, Block 16, instead describe a base period and four option years, keyed to CLIN series 000X, 100X, 200X, 300X and 400X. Confirm whether the resulting contract has a five-year ordering period or a base period with four option years

Confirm 5 year ordering period. Will amend CDRLs to reflect ordering periods in Amendment 1

Cover

Letter/Attch

The Cover Letter table at paragraph 5 uses CLINs 0001 through 0010, while Attachment 6 uses X001 through X010. Confirm the CLIN numbering convention offerors are to use

Attch 6 states ordering periods, however govt can revise X to 0 in Attch 6 Amendment 1 to reduce any ambiguity.

13 Attch 1

Confirm that the 10 June 2026 Performance Work Statement is the version to be incorporated into the resulting contract, or issue the final Performance Work Statement with sufficient time for offerors to respond to it.

Confirming 10 Jun 2026 PWS is the version to be incorporated into the resulting contract.

14 Attch 3

Section M paragraph 1.2 refers to “solicitation FA44526R0002.” Confirm this is a typographical reference to FA445226R0002 and correct it by amendment

Amended to FA445226R0002 in Amendment 1

15 Attch 3

Gate 6 at Section M paragraph 2.1.1(6) requires “Proof of Boeing OPC load software (IAW PWS paragraphs 1.2. and 4.11.2).”

Performance Work Statement paragraph

4.11 is QUALITY ASSURANCE and has no subparagraph 4.11.2. The Operational Program Configuration load software requirement appears at Performance Work Statement paragraphs 1.2 and 4.12.2.

Confirm the intended reference and correct the Gate 6 citation by amendment, so that a pass/fail gate is not keyed to a paragraph that does not exist in the Performance Work Statement.

4.11.2 revised to 4.12.2 in Amendment 1

Attch 4 and

Contract Data Requirements List A001, Block 5, cites “PWS para. 1.3.10.9.” The Performance Work Statement has no paragraph 1.3.10.9. AF Form 4031 and Mission Oriented Simulator Training appear at Performance Work Statement paragraph

Revised to 1.3.11.9 in Attch 4, Amendment 1

1.3.11.9, which is also the paragraph cited for A001 in the Data Deliverables table at Performance Work Statement paragraph 1.4.

17 Attch 4

Contract Data Requirements List A003 is posted with the Block 17 Price Group field cut off the page; that field is legible on the other Contract Data Requirements List forms. Requested remedy: post a legible copy of the A003 form, or confirm the Price Group applicable to A003.

Confirm price group is NSP.

Will include in Attch 4, Amendment 1

18 Attch 6

For the Contract Line Item Numbers with a unit of measure of “each,” please confirm whether one unit is one student or one class.

One student or per pilot.

19 Attch 3

Please confirm which estimated quantities govern the Initial Total Evaluated Price calculation. Section M paragraph 2.1.4 states the Initial Total Evaluated Price will be calculated using “the estimated quantities per year, provided below,” but no quantity table appears in Section M.

Amending to "the estimated quantities per ordering period, provided in attachment 6." in Amendment 1.

Attch 6 &

Cover Letter

Attachment 6 shows CLIN X003 as 104 each in Ordering Period 1 and 120 each in Ordering Periods 2 through 5, while the Cover Letter table at paragraph 5 shows 104 and describes the quantities as applying to “each of the five ordering periods.” Please clarify

Quantity in Attch 6, Ordering Period 1, CLIN 0003 updated to 120 in Amendment 1

21 Attch 6 & 1

CLIN 0002 / X002 carries an estimated quantity of 186 each per ordering period, while Performance Work Statement paragraph 1.3.2 states an estimate of 100 classes and 200 pilots per year. Please clarify.

Revised CLIN 0002 to 200.

22 Attch 6 & 1

CLIN 0010 / X010, 737MAX Differences, is fixed at 20 each in all five ordering periods, while Performance Work Statement paragraph 1.3.10 states an estimate of 10 classes and 20 pilots “required initially,” and that “once all unit members have completed MAX Differences, the number of classes required per year will be the same as the number of Initial Qualification students.” Please Clarify

See Attach 1 - PWS 1.3.1. in Amendment 1

23 Attch 6 & 1

Please confirm whether offerors price to the flat quantity in Attachment 6 or to the steady state described in the Performance Work Statement.

Please propose pricing IAW Attachment 6

24 Attch 5

Clauses 52.222-41, 52.222-42 and 52.222-43 appear in Attachment 5, the 52.222-42 Statement of Equivalent Rates for Federal Hires table is blank, and no Department of Labor wage determination is attached to the solicitation. Please identify the applicable wage determination number, revision and locality, or confirm that no wage determination applies to this acquisition.

52.222-41, 42, and 43 have been removed, as this requirement is exempt.

52.222-53 has been added in Amendment 1, Attch 5

25 Attch 5

Clause 52.219-14, Limitations on Subcontracting (Deviation 2026-O0038), appears in full text at Attachment 5 pages 12 through 13 and establishes the applicable limitation and the treatment of similarly situated entities. Please confirm the point at which the Government will measure compliance under a Requirements contract — at the requirements contract level across the ordering period, or separately for each task order issued under it.

Separately for each task order issued under it.

26 Attch 7

Section L paragraph 2.4.1 requires a Consent Letter, Attachment 7, executed by each subcontractor, teaming partner and/or joint venture partner, and defines a “significant subcontractor or teaming partner” as any entity proposed to perform more than 10% of the total effort. Please confirm how “more than 10% of the total effort” is measured — by proposed price, by labor hours, or by another basis.

Proposed price. Clarified in Attch 2, Amendment 1

27 Attch 7

Confirm whether Attachment 7 is required where an offeror proposes a subcontractor but submits no subcontractor past performance reference.

Not required, however Government reserves the right to use both the information provided in the offeror’s past performance proposal volume and information obtained from other sources available to the Government, to include, but not limited to, Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS), Electronic Subcontract Reporting System (eSRS), or other databases; the Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA). (Atch 3, para 2.1.3.1.)

28 Attch 5

Performance Work Statement paragraph

4.12.4 requires instructors to be United States citizens with the ability to access export-controlled material, Controlled Unclassified Information, and USAF C-40 CUI level tactics, techniques and procedures.

DFARS 252.204-7012 appears in Attachment 5, and DFARS 252.204-7024, Notice on the Use of the Supplier Performance Risk System, appears at page 18. DFARS 252.204-7019 and 252.204-7020, or their successor provisions, do not appear on pages 8 through 19. Please confirm whether those provisions apply to this acquisition and whether a current NIST SP 800-171 assessment posted in the Supplier Performance Risk System is a condition of award.

252.204-7019 and 252.204- 7020 were removed with the RFO update

29 Attch 3

Gate 5 requires “a confirmation statement that all training can be implemented no later than 31 October 2026.” Proposals are due 28 August 2026 and the anticipated award date is not stated. Please confirm the Government’s definition of “implemented” for this purpose — for example, whether it means capable of accepting the first class, or completion of all syllabus approvals and

Capable to submit syllabus for approval

Contract Data Requirements List deliverables

Cover Letter

Confirm whether the Government will adjust the 31 October 2026 date if award occurs later than anticipated.

No

31 Attch 4

A002 — Block 4 cites DI-MGMT-82350;

Performance Work Statement 1.4 cites DI- PSSS-81522D NOT 1. Please confirm which Data Item Description governs each of these deliverables.

PWS 1.4 revised in Amendment 1

32 Attch 4

A003 — Block 4 cites DI-SESS-81699, while Block 3 gives the subtitle “Instructional Media Package”; Performance Work Statement 1.4 cites DI-SESS-81526D, Instructional Media Package. Please confirm which Data Item Description governs each of these deliverables.

PWS 1.4 revised in Amendment 1

33 Attch 4

A005 — Block 4 cites DI-SESS-81517C NOT 2; Performance Work Statement 1.4 cites DI-PSSS-81522D NOT 1. Please confirm which Data Item Description governs each of these deliverables.

PWS 1.4 revised in Amendment 1

34 Attch 4

A006 — Block 4 cites DI-SESS-81525D;

Performance Work Statement 1.4 cites DI- PSSS-81522D NOT 1. Please confirm which Data Item Description governs each of these deliverables.

PWS 1.4 revised in Amendment 1

35 Attch 4

Contract Data Requirements List A003, Block 16, states that “the courseware shall contain all course files (for example: course pages, images, shock wave files, and source files) and all source code.” This is a commercial services acquisition. Please confirm the license rights the Government requires in courseware delivered under A003; confirm whether delivery of source code is required where an offeror proposes commercially available courseware developed exclusively at private expense;

and identify the restrictive markings the Government will accept on such courseware.

Intent is to ensure online training is available for all of the students, so language removed from Block 16, as providing source code is not needed.

36 Attch 4

Contract Data Requirements List A004 and Performance Work Statement paragraph

4.12.7.2 require syllabi to be provided to Air Mobility Command two months prior to implementation, and Gate 5 requires

Updated in Atch 1, Amendment 1 to as soon "as practicable prior to implementation" implementation no later than 31 October 2026. Please confirm whether the syllabi submitted as attachments to the Technical Volume satisfy the initial delivery under Contract Data Requirements List A004, or whether a separate post-award delivery is required, and how the two-month advance requirement is reconciled with the 31 October 2026 implementation date.

Attch 2 &

Cover Letter

Section L paragraphs 1.2.1.1 and 1.4 and Cover Letter paragraph 13 require submission by email to both points of contact, with each volume separately labeled. Please confirm any maximum message or attachment size, whether volumes may be split across multiple emails, and whether a file-transfer service such as DoD SAFE may be used if the package exceeds the email limit. Please confirm also whether the confirmation of receipt described at Cover Letter paragraph 13 will be sent per email or per proposal.

Submit proposals via email.

Each volume must be a separate file, however all volumes may be submitted in one email. If an Offeror sends more than one email to submit all proposal materials, a confirmation email will be sent for each email, outlining each file that was received.

38 Attch 3

Could you please clarify the requirement stating that “the Boeing OPC load has been obtained”? Specifically, which Boeing OPC load or operator configuration is being referenced? Our simulator can accept nearly any compatible OPC load, including the USAF OPC load, if it is provided.

However, OPC loads are generally operator-specific and may include differences in display configuration, navigation database, and other aircraft options. Please identify the required OPC load and confirm who will be responsible for providing it. Also, what documentation is acceptable for confirmation?

The AMC SPO will be able to provide the Boeing OPC load and operator specific aircraft options to include FMC software version.

Revised Sect M, Gate 6 in Amendment 1 to reduce ambiguity

39 Attch 1

Could you please confirm whether the B737-700 simulator must specifically have the CFM56-7B27 configuration; or B737-700 simulator with the CFM56-7B24 configuration would be acceptable?

No, the CFM56-7B24 is not acceptable. See Attch 1 -

PWS 4.12.2.

40 Attch 1

The solicitation specifies dual-cue flight directors with a Rockwell Collins Model 4000 Head-Up Guidance System (HGS) and a wide-angle view. We understand that the HGS-4000 uses a common installation kit and combiner configuration. Therefore, the viewing area should be consistent across HGS-4000 installations. Could you please clarify what is meant by “wide-angle view”?

Specifically, is there a required horizontal or vertical field-of-view measurement, combiner specification, part number, or another technical standard that the installed HGS must meet?

HGS should have the same display cues and menu options for each mode display. Specific measurements of the view are not as important.

The HGS needs to be approved for use throughout the full flight regime as a supplemental display. The HGS needs to meet the applicable airworthiness, performance, and integrity criteria for Category II approach (as specified in FAA AC 120-29) and Category III approach, landing and rollout (as specified in FAA AC 120-28D Appendix 3) operations as a fail passive manual landing and rollout system.

41 Attch 1

Is the Government willing to allow differences training to occur as part of initial qualification training, that is prior to the end of course check, making the initial differences course 1 sim period longer and 1 day of ground training longer?

See Attach 1 - PWS 1.3.1. in Amendment 1

42 Attch 1 & 3

Since this contract will be awarded based on the lowest bid, could you please clarify whether the RFP requires the complete FAA-approved course or only the simulator time specified in the RFP?

Requires the complete FAA-approved course.

43 N/A

The RNP AR section states that training must comply with the applicable FAA Advisory Circular but does not require instructors to follow the corresponding FAA-approved course. Because course requirements may vary by contractor, could you provide a standardized course outline for all contractors to follow?

No. This is a performance-based requirements contract. The PWS outlines the requirements of the tasks that shall be accomplished. It is up to the contractor to provide an acceptable outline/syllabus.

44 Attch 2 & 3 For Factor 2 past performance, what proof, if any, is required to demonstrate successful past performance for commercial clients?

See Sect L, 2.4.2. The Government will pull CPARS reports directly from the official CPARS database using the contract and order numbers provided in the

Offeror's past performance submissions.

45 Attch 1 For the hours mentioned in PWS 4.4.2, are there any penalties or flexibility for working outside of the hours of 7 am and 10 pm?

See Amendment 1 Attch 1

4.4.2 - Training from 2300 to 0700 should not be scheduled.

46 Attch 2

Section L 2.4.1 mentions a ‘significant subcontractor or teaming partner.’ Can we include more than one past performance submission for this formal relationship?

No. See Sect L, 2.4.2. No more than two (2) past performance submissions may be submitted for the prime contractor. No more than one (1) past performance submission may be submitted for a subcontractor. If multiple subcontractors are proposed, the prime contractor must select only one subcontractor reference to include in the overall total.

47 Attch 2

Section L 2.4.1 refers to the Subcontractor Consent Letter (Attachment 7) “…authorizing release of adverse past performance…” Do we include Attachment 7 in our proposal if there is no adverse past performance?

Yes. The letter grants the government broad legal consent to share past performance data with the prime contractor, which applies regardless of whether the record is positive, neutral, or adverse

48 N/A

Depending on when we receive answers to the questions, please consider a one-week extension to incorporate any changes to our proposal.

No

49 Attch 3

May Gate 1 be satisfied through a subcontractor?

Section M paragraph 2.1.1(1) requires the offeror to provide a copy of FAA Training Specifications for a program approved under 14 CFR Part 142 for the B737- 700/800 series and subsequent variants to include the MAX8. PWS paragraph 1.2 states that the contractor must possess a B737-700/800 training program as well as a B737 MAX Differences training program approved under Part 142.

Where an offeror holds Part 142 Training Specifications covering the B737-700/800 and proposes to perform the B737 MAX Differences course through a subcontractor holding Part 142 approval and qualified instructors for that variant, will the Government accept the subcontractor's Training Specifications and instructor certifications against Gates (1) and (4), with the subcontractor disclosed in Volume I under Section L paragraph 2.1.1(6)?

The prime contractor must perform at least 50 percent of the cost of contract performance incurred for personnel with its own employees. While the Government will permit a subcontractor to perform the B737 MAX Differences training only if the subcontractor is disclosed in Volume I (per Section L, paragraph 2.1.1(6)), and the prime remains compliant with the 50% performance threshold required by RFO 52.219-14 (Deviation 2026- O0038) - Limitations on Subcontracting.

50 Attch 3

Must the USAF C-40B/C designation appear on the Training Specifications themselves?

Gate 1 requires Training Specifications for the B737-700/800 series and subsequent variants "including the USAF C-40B and C- 40C." FAA Training Specifications ordinarily identify commercial type certificates rather than a customer's military designation for the same airframe.

Will the Government accept Training Specifications approving a B737-700/800 program, together with a statement identifying the USAF C-40B/C as the military designation of those airframes, or must the C-40B/C designation appear on the FAA document itself?

The RFP does not require the literal "USAF C-40B/C" designation on the FAA Training Specifications document itself. Section M, paragraph 2.1.1(1) requires Training Specifications for the B737-700/800 series "including the USAF C-40B and C-40C." The word "including" suggests the B737-700/800 program must be applicable to the C- 40, not that the FAA document must contain that specific military nomenclature. FAA documents typically use the manufacturer's commercial type certificates (e.g., B737- 700/800) rather than a specific customer's internal designation. The government is generally aware of this standard practice.