Attch 5 Additional Questions and Responses 70USO926R70093976 v1.xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 19 KB Posted
- Attached to
- 9mm Duty and Training Ammunition
- Solicitation number
- 70US0926R70093976
About this file
This file is a Questions and Responses document for solicitation 70US0926R70093976, a 9mm Duty and Training Ammunition contract for the United States Secret Service. The document addresses five substantive clarifications requested by potential offerors regarding proposal submission requirements and technical specifications.
Key clarifications include: (1) SF 1449 form submission procedures following a system error correction in Amendment 3; (2) correction of bid sheet formulas to multiply unit prices by the full quantities (8,000 cases for CLIN 0001; 2,000 cases each for CLINs 0002 and 0003) rather than by reduced multipliers, and removal of the "+P" designation; (3) confirmation that the offeror, vendor, and manufacturer must be the same entity to ensure direct accountability for quality and performance; and (4) technical specification clarifications for ammunition requirements. Regarding CLIN 0001, the required bullet weight remains 130–150 grains (±3 grains), rejecting the incumbent's current 124-grain specification. For CLIN 2, the term "jacket" has been removed from frangible bullet requirements to accommodate non-jacketed designs. The government clarified that gelatin testing will use 20 percent ballistic gelatin blocks calibrated to SAAMI standards, with 12 gelatin blocks per sample submission (three virgin blocks for each of four test events). Performance evaluation will be assessed on a per-bullet-fired basis, and retained bullet weight will be documented but is not a discriminating evaluation factor. The response due date is October 26, 2026, with samples due by October 28, 2026.
View the file
Other files
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| Attch 3 Bid Sheet Amendment 4 v1.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| Attch 5 Additional Questions and Responses 70USO926R70093976.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| Attch 3 Bid Sheet Amendment 4.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| SF1449 70US0926R70093976 Amendment 3.pdf | ||
| Attch 3 Bid Sheet Amendment 2.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| Attach 2 SOR Amendment 2.pdf | ||
| Attach 1 Instruction and Clauses Amendment 2.pdf | ||
| Attch 4 Questions and Responses for 70US0926R70093976.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| Attch 1- Amendment 1 Instructions to Offers and Clauses.pdf | ||
| Attch 1- Instructions to Offers and Clauses.pdf | ||
| Attch 2- SOR.pdf | ||
| 70US0926R70093976 released.pdf | ||
| Attch 1- Clauses and Instructions.pdf | ||
| Attch 2- SOR.pdf | ||
| Attch 3 Bid Sheet (1) (2).xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet |
Show all 15
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
| 70US0926R70093976 | ||
| Questions and Answers | ||
| Number | Question | Answer |
| 1 | One administrative point remains material to preparing a compliant proposal: Amendment #2 states that the SF 1449 will be updated at a later date due to a system error. Can you please confirm whether offerors should wait for a corrected SF 1449 to be posted by amendment before executing the solicitation form, or whether the currently released form should be completed in the interim and later replaced if an updated version is issued? | See Amendment 3 |
| 2 | I am reviewing Solicitation 70US0926R70093976 and noticed what appears to be a discrepancy in the amended Bid Sheet. |
The Quantity/Cases column lists 8,000 cases for CLIN 0001 and 2,000 cases each for CLINs 0002 and 0003. However, the Total Evaluated Price formulas appear to multiply the unit prices by 8, 2, and 2 rather than by 8,000, 2,000, and 2,000.
Could you please confirm whether offerors should leave the provided formulas unchanged, or whether the formulas should calculate using the full quantities shown in the Quantity/Cases column? The formula is incorrect on the Bid Sheet.
CLIN 1 8000 x Unit Price = Price CLIN 2 2000 x Unit Price = Price CLIN 3 2000 x Unit Price = Price
Additionally the "+P" designation should be removed from the Bid Sheet.
| 3 | the Questions and Responses document states that the supplying vendor must be the ammunition manufacturer. Could you please confirm whether this means the offeror/prime contractor itself must be the ammunition manufacturer? | To ensure clear accountability, quality assurance, and streamlined contract administration, the Offeror, Vendor, and Manufacturer should be the same contractor responsible for providing the ammunition. This single-source approach establishes direct responsibility for product quality, compliance with contract requirements, delivery performance, and post-delivery support. |
| 4 | CLIN 0001 states the bullet should be 130-150 (+/- 3) grains. As the incumbent contract awardee, know the USSS currently utilizes a 124gr projectile. Will the USSS update the requirement to 124-150 (+/-3)? |
CLIN 2 stated the bullet must be a 100±10 grain jacket nontoxic lead-free bullet. All our current industry partners for 9mm Frangible bullet use non-jacketed designs that are either sintered, compressed, or injection modeled. We are unaware of any jacketed “frangible” 9mm products that meet the SAAMI frangible criteria. Could the USSS please clarify if the “jacket” feature could be an optional requirement or remove it?
Could the USSS please elaborate on the Terminal Ballistics testing and gelatin setup / requirements for CLIN 0001?
How is the gel verified to be consistent? Is there a BB penetration metric similar to what I used by other test methodologies using 10% gel to ensure consistent media?
The SOW states up to a maximum of 3 shots per event. Does that mean:
There will only be 1 round fired per event unless the bullets exits the block and is not captured?
Will 3 rounds will be fired per event, and would the results of the 3 rounds be averaged?
Could the USSS please elaborate on how are the terminal requirements applied?
How is the 6 to 11 in penetration applied?
Average of all shots through all barriers.
Each individual shot must comply.
Average of shots per barrier must comply?
How is the expansion diameter applied with the requirement of 0.50 required (0.60 optimal)?
Is that the average of all expansions?
Each individual shot? (often times bullets react differently based on barrier types and result in different expanded diameters. Steel and Autoglass specifically often expand less than 0.50in individually) Average of shots per barrier?
The requirement says that retained weight is recorded in the test event. Is there a minimal threshold for retained weight, and how would that be applied? The proposed 124-grain ammunition is not acceptable. The required bullet weight range remains 130 to 150 grains, with a tolerance of ±3 grains.
For CLIN 2, the term “jacket” should be removed from the requirement.
Gelatin testing procedures and performance standards are established in the Statement of Requirements (SOR). Testing will use 20 percent ballistic gelatin blocks, with each block calibrated using a BB fired at the velocity and penetration depth specified by SAAMI standards.
Each submitted sample will undergo testing in a total of 12 gelatin blocks, consisting of three virgin blocks for each of four test events. Gelatin performance requirements will be assessed on a per-bullet-fired/tested basis.
The methodology for calculating expanded bullet diameter is defined in the SOR. Retained bullet weight will be documented during testing; however, it is not a discriminating evaluation factor.
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .