20260605- 1630EST- HICAR AOI- RFI Responses for Publication.pdf

Unclassified // Public Release

Hypervelocity Improved Capability Assault Rifle (HICAR) Government Response to Industry Requests for Information Current as of 1600 EST on 5 June 2026

The document below summarizes the original Area of Interest solicitation, Requests for Information (RFI) received by the Government, and the Government’s responses to these RFIs.

AOI verbiage as published is written in Bold Text; RFIs are written in Italicized Text; and Government responses are written in Italicized Red Text.

A Reminder to Industry as stated in the published AOI: this solicitation is in support of a SOF RDT&E effort to inform future requirements for procurement relevant to this emerging technology.

Government POCs for this response have not changed from the AOI posting.

PROBLEM STATEMENT (AOI as Published 18 May 2026) https://sam.gov/workspace/contract/opp/b1a57529aa574e8ba220e0311434733e/view

USSOCOM is seeking a carbine system to act as a replacement or upgrade for the current URG-I (Upper Receiver Group - Improved). The goal is to integrate advancements in material science and weapon design to provide operators with a technically superior individual weapon system capable of firing both legacy 5.56x45mm NATO and emerging hyper velocity ammunition.

The current URG-I is an M4-based platform optimized for standard 5.56NATO ammunition, with a recognized effective range of approximately 300 meters. Special Operations Forces (SOF) require the ability to provide effective fire on targets with their primary 5.56mm carbine out to 600 meters and beyond. This weapon system will allow an operator to effectively engage targets at extended distances while maintaining the portability and ergonomics of a lightweight carbine.

The Hypervelocity Improved Carbine (HICAR) program will develop an improved carbine capable of operating with currently issued 5.56NATO ammunition, while also incorporating design features that ensure reliability, durability, and longevity with the use of future hypervelocity 5.56x45mm ammunition. The ability to leverage the performance benefits of current and future experimental hypervelocity rounds is vital to addressing future capability gaps on the battlefield.

Weapon submissions that address the following technology priorities will benefit during the selection process:

Hypervelocity Ammunition Compatibility: The ability to accept and reliably cycle both 5.56NATO and hyper velocity 5.56x45mm ammunition is a primary objective.

The development of a complete weapon system or conversion kit optimized for hypervelocity ammunition will be a collaborative effort between the government and the proposer. Hypervelocity rounds offer significant performance benefits, including:

Increased Effective Range: Higher muzzle velocity allows the projectile to maintain kinetic energy over longer distances, extending the effective range to 600m+.

Improved Terminal Performance: Enhanced energy transfer upon impact leads to more effective terminal ballistics.

Enhanced Barrier Penetration: The increased velocity and kinetic energy enable the projectile to more effectively defeat body armor, barriers, and other hardened surfaces.

Longevity and Durability: The system must be engineered to withstand the increased chamber pressures and bolt thrust generated by hypervelocity ammunition without compromising the weapon's service life or operator safety.

Interoperability: The system must remain fully interoperable with USSOCOM’s existing suite of Visual Augmentation Systems and Weapon Accessories (VASWA).

PROPOSED SOLUTION

A successful solution will be contingent on the completion of the Proposer’s Shoot, Limited Safety, User Evaluation, Product Verification Testing (PVT), and Operational Testing (OT).

Some of the technical attributes are listed below. A solution brief’s Technical Merit and Relevance will be based on the ability to meet the primary attributes and the cumulative evaluation of the secondary solution attributes/capabilities:

What is the page number limit for the white paper? Are compliance matrices, images, and appendices excluded from that limit?

o Below please find a link to the overarching Commercial Solutions Offering (CSO) Posting from 23 July 2025 governing the format and content for all Phases as referenced in the original AOI:

https://sam.gov/workspace/contract/opp/1f683f742b9f4a30b0d1020ceb4e438 5/view.

As stated therein, o PHASE 1 SOLUTION BRIEF CONTENT:

o Solution Briefs should not exceed five (5) written pages using 12-point font.

Alternatively, Solution Briefs may take the form of briefing slides which should not exceed fifteen (15) slides. Briefs should include at a minimum:

Title Page (does not count against page limit) Entity Name, Date, Point of Contact Name, E-Mail Address, Phone, and

Address.

Specifically identify the AOI for which the Solution Brief is submitted.

Executive Summary of the technology (one page) Describe the concept and unique aspects of the technology as it relates to the AOI.

Identify whether the solution is an existing technology that has satisfied a pilot or demonstration (ie, commercially ready and viable technology), or the if the solution will require development for defense application.

If development or adaptation is proposed, identify a suggested path to mature the technology.

Identify aspects of the solution which may be considered proprietary or

Intellectual Property (IP) Provide a brief overview of the company, including a summary of product commercialization and go-to-market strategy.

o PHASE 1 SOLUTION BRIEF BASIS OF EVALUATION o All solution briefs correctly submitted in response to an AOI will be evaluated against the stated criteria below.

1. (Y/N) The proposed innovative commercial solution, technology, process, or method, is new as of the date of submission of a proposal; or is an application that is new as of the date of submission of a proposal of a technology, process, or method existing as of such date.

2. Relevance of the Solution Brief in addressing the AOI.

3. Technical Merit and feasibility of the solution to address

Government AOI problem statement.

4. A quick, reasonable, and efficient way exists for the DoD to test the innovative commercial solution, within a specified duration, whether outside or integrated within the DoD infrastructures or networks, as appropriate.

o Additional technical evaluation criteria specific to a particular project may be used. In these instances, the additional criteria will be posted within the AOI announcement on the SAM.Gov and the NSWC Crane public-facing website.

o Solution Briefs will be evaluated on the basis of the merit of the proposed concept in addressing the AOI, not against other Solution Briefs submitted in response to the same AOI. Additionally, while not overtly stated in AOIs, the Government’s evaluation will consider whether the proposal increases the likelihood of accomplishing NSWC Crane’s Mission Focus Areas.

o All submissions will be evaluated, however, only a select few will be invited to pitch. The government reserves the right to limit the number of entities invited to pitch. As such, a company’s solution may be evaluated to be of merit, but not invited to pitch. Solution Briefs that are chosen for the Phase 2 Pitch will be notified in writing as soon as practicable.

We have multiple proposed solutions. Is it preferred that we submit one white paper with those solutions, or a separate paper for each?

o It is the Government’s preference for Industry to submit separate white papers for each solution.

Primary Attributes:

o HICAR shall be chambered in 5.56x45mm NATO (T=O).

Is the HICAR chamber required to conform strictly to existing 5.56x45 mm

NATO chamber geometry, or may industry propose modified chamber/ freebore geometry optimized for both legacy and hypervelocity ammunition?

Does this mean 5.56x45mm NATO chamber design or any chamber design that can accept 5.56x45mm NATO cartridge?

Submissions shall be chambered in 5.56x45mm NATO.

o HICAR shall be compatible and capable of fit and functioning with the M4A1 lower receiver group without permanent modifications (T); with zero modifications (O).

Does the Government envision HICAR primarily as a complete weapon system, an upper receiver group replacement for URG-I, or either approach so long as the system meets the stated attributes?

Will complete rifle submissions and upper receiver group submissions be evaluated equally, or will one configuration be preferred?

If HICAR is proposed as an upper receiver group compatible with existing M4A1 lowers, how will lower-dependent attributes such as trigger pull weight, ambidextrous controls, selector configuration, fenced controls, rear sling point, and buttstock be evaluated?

Can vendors submit a base upper receiver group with optional lower receiver enhancement kit, or would that be considered multiple solutions?

For the M4A1 lower receiver compatibility requirement, which Government lower receiver configurations will be used during evaluation?

Is SOCOM asking for an upper receiver kit and/or a completed weapon?

The government requires a full and complete weapon system for each submission. This submission should feature an upper receiver group compatible with a Program of Record (POR) M4A1 lower in order to be considered for selection into the Phase II Shoot-Off.

For the 'without permanent modifications' target and 'zero modifications' objective, are reversible changes such as buffer, action spring, trigger, selector, receiver extension, or end plate changes permitted?

What is the definition of “Permanent” for a modification to a lower receiver? For example, are parts (like a trigger assembly) that can be installed without machining considered “temporary” even if they replace parts previously installed on a M4A1?

What types of modifications would be considered "permanent" changes to the lower receiver?

Permanent is defined as any part that must installed and removed with machining. Any modifications that do not require machining are permitted.

Is changing the receiver extension considered a permanent modification to the lower receiver?

No.

If the buffer is exchanged, would that count as a permanent change to the

M4A1 lower receiver assembly?

No.

o HICAR shall fire and function with M855A1, Mk262 as well as Government supplied M855A1+ hypervelocity ammunition loaded to 82kpsi (T); with future hypervelocity ammunition designs optimized for projectile velocity and terminal effects on target (O).

Will the Government provide chamber pressure curves, velocity data, projectile details, cartridge dimensions, and bolt thrust data for M855A1+ prior to white paper submission or Phase II?

Will M855A1+ ammunition be made available to industry prior to white paper submission, or only during Phase II?

Will M855A1 be made available for vendor purchase and usage for testing?

Will M855A1 be exportable?

Vendors that are selected to proceed to Phase II Shoot-Off will have the opportunity to purchase at their expense this ammunition under the Government’s authority.

M855A1+ – can you provide any additional information on the proposed ammunition system? Will it utilize the current M855A1 projectiles? Will it be a brass case or NAS3 case or something else? Are there any differences in case outer dimensions from the current 556 NATO ammunition? Is the specified 82ksi the mean or max pressure for the cartridge?

Is the 82kpsi stated pressure the maximum pressure or average pressure?

The M855A1+ is defined as an unmarked (exposed steel tip)

M855A1 enhanced performance round (EPR) projectile manufactured by Olin Winchester loaded into a Federal-peak alloy high-pressure-tolerance case of standard external dimension to an average of 82,000 PSI chamber pressure. This is a prototype technical data package only authorized by the Government for sale to Industry in support of research, development, test, and evaluation objectives.

What is the expected pressure of proof rounds for the 82kpsi load?

What is the expected upper pressure or performance envelope for 'future hypervelocity ammunition designs' in excess of 82 kpsi?

Is there a maximum target pressure for HICAR?

What are the anticipated increased pressures for the hypervelocity ammunition?

Has the bolt thrust been characterized?

This data is unknown to the Government at this time. Maximum, Proof, and Optimal pressure of the provisional M855A1+ cartridge will be identified as research objectives with weapon and ammo industry partners during the HICAR effort.

For HICAR Phase II prototype barrels and any subsequent Phase III production, can chamber autofrettage capability at Watervliet Arsenal or Benét Laboratories be made available to the proposer as Government- Furnished Service, either directly or routed through NSWC-Crane?

No.

Please confirm that the 82,000 psi M855A1+ specification refers to peak chamber pressure (Pmax) measured per NATO EPVAT (piezoelectric) protocol, rather than a copper-crusher (CUP) or statistical mean-of-maximums basis. This affects our chamber and bolt-thrust safety-factor calculations.

This metric is measured through modified NATO EPVAT protocol with a 6213b high-pressure piezo transducer.

Are there any SAAMI approved or ammo manufacturer-recommended engineering details for minimum barrel wall, bolt lug sizes and materials?

Not that the Government is aware.

For the objective to cycle and function with current training ammunition, what specific ball, frangible, and tracer cartridges will be tested?

This will include all cartridges in use across SOCOM in the MFP

2 and MFP 11 5.56 NATO family of ammunition.

o HICAR barrel shall be between 11- 12 inches in length, measured from bare muzzle to bolt face (T=O).

What are the threshold and objective muzzle velocity expectations, if any, for M855A1+, M855A1, and Mk262 from the required 11-12 inch barrel?

This information is not stated in the AOI.

o HICAR shall not fire when on safe and dropped in accordance with TOP 3-2- 045 (T=O).

Will M4A1 lower receivers be made available to vendors for drop testing with the HICAR upper receiver kit or does the drop test only apply to a complete vendor weapon?

The government requires a full and complete weapon system submission. This submission should feature an upper receiver compatible with a Program of Record (POR) M4A1 lower in order to be considered for selection into the Phase II Shoot-Off.

o HICAR shall employ the HUXWRX Flow 556k L In “Black Magic” suppressor (SKU: M3228) to reduce signature (T=O). (This suppressor will serve as a surrogate for HICAR testing, an optimized suppressor requirement will follow in the future)

Will the HUXWRX Flow 556k 'Black Magic' suppressor, mount, and muzzle device be Government-furnished for testing, or must industry procure and include them?

For OAL, which muzzle device is to be used? HUXWURX (if so, what part number) or a vendor supplied muzzle device? If vendor supplied, what are requirements?

Will SOCOM provide the required HUXWURX suppressor or provide a path for industry to procure the appropriate suppressor and muzzle device?

If a vendor White Paper is selected for Phase II Shoot-Off, industry is expected to procure the mount, muzzle device, and suppressor from HUX in preparation for the evaluation. Product Number is

SKU: M3228.

Will testing with the HUXWRX suppressor include thermal limits, cooling requirements, suppressor replacement criteria, or maximum sustained firing schedules?

The test plan will be determined by the government as part of the R&D effort.

What percentage of reliability, durability, and user evaluation will be conducted suppressed versus unsuppressed?

Most evaluations will be conducted unsuppressed. The exact battery of fire will be published to industry if submission is selected to proceed further in the solicitation.

Will suppressed accuracy, suppressor-induced POI shift, and return-to-zero be evaluated?

Secondary Attributes:

o Average Mean Radius of 1 MOA (T); 0.5 MOA (O) when fired unsuppressed.

Measured by averaging total of three (3) groups of ten (10) shots each fired by three (3) separate weapons in unsuppressed, manned, supported configuration at 100 meters with Black Hills Mk262 Mod1-C 77gr, PN# MP460556N9- COMM ammunition. No single ten round group larger than 2.5 MOA extreme spread (T=O).

For the accuracy requirement, must each of the three submitted weapons independently meet the 1 MOA threshold / 0.5 MOA objective average mean radius, or is performance averaged across all weapons?

How will 'no single ten-round group larger than 2.5 MOA extreme spread' be applied: to every weapon, every group, and every test condition?

For accuracy testing: Does this mean that three groups of ten shots per weapon (total nine groups for three weapons) or one group of ten shots per weapon (total of three groups for three weapons)?

The government will conduct testing by firing three (3) separate ten

(10) round groups from three (3) distinct rifles. Each group’s average mean radius (AMR) will be measured, and the average AMR will be calculated across all nine groups. This average AMR shall not exceed the metric specified. No individual ten (10) round group shall exceed an extreme spread as specified above. This battery of fire will consist of ninety (90) total rounds across three

(3) weapons.

How will 'effective fire on targets at 600 meters and beyond' be evaluated:

hit probability, retained energy, terminal effect, dispersion, barrier penetration, or another metric?

The government will not evaluate this until Phase III.

Will terminal performance and barrier penetration be formally evaluated, or are those considered expected benefits of the ammunition rather than weapon evaluation criteria?

The government will not evaluate this until Phase III.

Will accuracy testing be conducted by Government shooters, contractor shooters, a fixture, or a manned supported position only?

How is the weapon fired for this test? From a mount or fixture, prone, etc.?

If selected to compete in the Phase II Shoot-off, this evaluation will be conducted by Industry-provided Shooters under Government observation at a Government-facility.

Is the requirement for 2.5 MOA extreme spread referring to radius or diameter?

Diameter.

To clarify, does the AMR of 1 MOA at 100 meters mean approximately

1.145 inches at 100 meters?

Yes.

o Barrel muzzle threaded to 1/2x28 or 5/8x24 threads per inch (T=O).

For muzzle threading, is either 1/2x28 or 5/8x24 equally acceptable, or is one preferred for compatibility with the specified suppressor/mount?

Which is preferable?

Either is acceptable.

o Weight not to exceed, unloaded and without suppressor, of 8lbs (T); 6.5lbs (O).

For the 8 lb threshold / 6.5 lb objective weight requirement, what components are included in the measurement: lower receiver, stock, empty magazine, muzzle device, sights, rail covers, sling hardware, or accessories

Is weight measured with or without the required HUXWRX muzzle device installed?

For the weight, is this referring to the upper receiver kit only or a completed weapon? If a completed weapon, is it with the M4 lower or a supplier-provided lower?

For the weight specification, could you please clarify what is and isn’t included? Is an empty magazine included (if so, please specify magazine SKU)? Are the heat mitigation rail covers included?

The complete weapon will be weighed against the metric specified with the HUX muzzle device but without magazine, suppressor, rail covers, or visual augmentation systems (VAS).

o Length not to exceed, when measured from the end of the receiver extension to the end of muzzle device, of 31 (T); 28 (O) inches.

For the 31 inch threshold / 28 inch objective length requirement, is length measured with the stock collapsed, extended, or at a specified length-of-pull position?

The complete weapon will be measured against the above metric from the end of the muzzle device to the end of the receiver extension.

o Continuously timed and biased M1913 picatinny rail at 12 o'clock minimum of 16 inches in length (T=O).

For the 16-inch continuous timed and biased M1913 rail requirement, how is rail length measured, and must the rail extend forward of the muzzle on an 11-12 inch barrel configuration?

Continuously timed and biased M1913 picatinny rail at 12 o'clock minimum of 16 inches in length. (T=O): how exactly will this be measured? For examples, from the rear of the rear most slot to the front of the front most slot or the length of the outside edges? There can be a fair amount of difference between these two and could render a submission which is intended to be compliant as non-compliant.

Could you please clarify the definition of Picatinny rail length? For instance, is it the distance between the centerlines of the first and final slot?

The rail length will be measured against the above metric from the rearmost portion of the top rail that contacts the charging handle to the muzzle-end of the rail.

How will the acceptable amount, range, or degree of bias required for the picatinny rail be determined?

Does the handguard need to be monolithic or rigidly attached and uninterrupted?

What does timed and biased mean here?

The handguard should have zero bias with continuous timing to ensure optimal employment of VAS. Timing refers to the space between Picatinny slots and flats. Bias of the rail should be oriented at zero degrees from stock end to muzzle end.

o Interoperability with all current SOCOM POR Visual Augmentation Systems

(VAS) accessories and enablers (T=O).

Will the Government provide the current SOCOM POR Visual Augmentation Systems and Weapon Accessories list for interoperability evaluation?

What is the current list of SOCOM POR VAS accessories and enablers to validate interoperability?

When will the technical and physical specifications of the Visual Augmentation Systems (VAS) be released?

Is there a list of VAS accessories?

What’s the hardest (largest) VAS suite that needs to fit?

Is there something we need to look for? Smaller size handguard could prevent mounting.

The list below is inclusive but not exhaustive of the VAS expected to interface with the vendor’s submission:

Optics: SU-231A (Eotech CCO), CQS-CM (Eotech Clip-on Magnifier), SU-293 (Sig Sauer 1-6x SFP), SU-294 (Nightforce 1- 8x FFP), SU-300 (Vortex 1-6x SFP)

Laser: LA-23 SAL, LA-30 SAL-UHP Clip-on: SU-309 SRS LWIR

Does the submitted rifle need to have Back Up Iron Sights (BUIS)?

o Recoil shock impulse less than the POR Mk17 7.62NATO to ensure VAS survivability (T=O).

What instrumentation and methodology will be used to measure 'recoil shock impulse less than the POR Mk17 7.62 NATO'?

What instrumentation and methodology will be used to measure 'recoil shock impulse less than the POR Mk17 7.62 NATO'?

What specific Mk17 configuration, ammunition, suppressor state, and firing condition will establish the recoil shock impulse baseline?

How will VAS survivability be evaluated: live-fire shock, rail deflection, zero retention, accessory function, or another method?

Recoil shock impulse less than the POR Mk17 7.62NATO to ensure VAS survivability (T=O) – will this be an objective or subjective analysis?

Is there an objective measuring method to determine “less recoil than a MK17?” If so, what is that method?

How is recoil shock being measured including method and instrumentation?

What is the recoil impulse of the Mk17 when firing 7.62 NATO ammunition?

What methodology is used to measure recoil impulse?

Are there numbers for this or a graph?

The recoil shock impulse of the Mk17 is specified as a comparative parameter. How is this measured, and what is the measured value with the Mk17?

“Recoil shock” is an objective measure of impulse peak and frequency exhibited by the Mk17 short-stroke gas system measured by NSWC testing engineers in accordance with TOP 3-2-826a. If a vendor White Paper is selected to advance onto the Phase II Shootoff, the government will provide more information on testing conditions, methods, and standards.

o HICAR ergonomics similar to M4A1 (T=O).

o HICAR MRBS of 800 (T); 1,600 (O) rounds between stoppages.

What firing schedule, cooling intervals, ammunition mix, suppressed/unsuppressed ratio, and cleaning/lubrication intervals will be used for MRBS, MRBF, and barrel-life testing?

Will reliability testing include M855A1, Mk262, M855A1+, and training ammunition in a fixed sequence or separate test blocks?

Are the HICAR MRBS and MRBF requirements meant to include the standard M4A1 configuration, a modified M4A1 configuration, or an optimized configuration that is not backward compatible with the M4A1?

This measurement will be collected against the full weapon system submitted by the vendor.

To clarify, does the stated MRBS and MRBF apply to all ammunition types?

This measurement will be evaluated for M855A1+ cartridges.

o HICAR MRBF of 5,000 (T); 10,000 (O) rounds between failures o Cycle and function with M855A1 and Mk262 ammunition (T) cycle and function with current training ammunition to include ball, frangible, and tracer cartridges (O).

When will the specifications for the training ammunition (ball, frangible, and tracer) be released?

When will the training ammunition be provided or made available for testing?

If a vendor’s White Paper is selected to move toward Phase II Shoot-Off, the government will provide this information.

o Barrel life 8,000 (T); 20,000 (O) rounds. Measured with M855A1+ ammunition fired as a function of Muzzle Velocity loss of 5% below mean or dispersion above an established threshold, whichever occurs first (T=O).

How will barrel life be evaluated, specifically regarding the stated 5 percent muzzle velocity loss and the 'dispersion above an established threshold' criterion?

Yes.

What does “dispersion above an established threshold” mean? Referencing the bullet point on barrel life. Does it refer to the earlier bullet of 2.5 MOA extreme spread?

“Dispersion above established threshold” means that your weapon will be evaluated relative to a future metric identified by the government specific to the experimental M855A1+ ammunition.

Keep in mind this is an RDT&E effort and so standards like this are being built through observation of prototype performance.

Are there any recommended surface treatments or plating for the barrel?

No.

What will the shooting sequence be to test and determine this? Is there some set standard that they can expect and design for?

If a vendor’s White Paper is selected to move toward Phase II Shoot-Off, the government will provide this information.

o Trigger-pull weight less than 5lbs (T), 3lbs (O)

Is replacement of the Government trigger permitted to meet the trigger pull threshold/objective, or will trigger pull be evaluated only if a complete weapon is proposed?

This measurement will be collected against the complete weapon submitted.

Does SOCOM have a preferred trigger or is the vendor to source one that meets requirements?

o Selection of fire: Safe, Semi-auto (T) Fully Automatic (O).

Is the fully automatic objective evaluated only with M4A1 select-fire lowers, or must the proposed HICAR include a complete select-fire lower receiver?

Select-fire function is the expected, Threshold capability of the complete weapon submission. Fully automatic fire is an aspirational, Objective specification. Automatic Fire capability should not be integrated at the expense of weapon performance, specifically dispersion or reliability.

Is there a desired rate of fire for the rifle?

o Cycle and function with Gen3 PMAG Magazines (T=O).

Another bullet point, "Cycle and function with Gen3 PMAG Magazines

(T=O)" has a [3] after it and no note. Is there more information intended for this bullet?

o Handguard should minimize deflection and POI shift when under load from a bipod or supported on a barricade (O).

Will the Government define the required rail deflection test method for the handguard objective, including load amount, direction, point of application, and allowable POI shift?

Can you provide source of measurement to gauge “minimize” deflection and POI shift?

Vertical POI shift will be measured with dispersion testing by mounting the bipod as close to the muzzle as possible, and then by repeating dispersion with weapon supported by bipod directly in front of the mag-well.

Is there a maximum width and/or height for the handguard?

o Handguard with M-LOK mounting points at 7 positions radially for mounting accessories and enablers (T=O).

Are seven (7) radial M-LOK slots required along the entire functional length of the handguard?

Yes.

What is the minimum number of usable M-LOK slots required along each of the seven (7) positions?

Five (5).

o Modular ambidextrous safety lever (O). (“Modular” defined as ability to have a selector lever on left, right or both sides simultaneously) For the modular ambidextrous safety lever objective, may industry include a replacement selector kit as part of the HICAR system, or must the system use the existing Government selector?

This evaluation will be conducted against the complete weapon submitted.

o Ambidextrous bolt catch/bolt release, ambidextrous magazine release, and ambidextrous charging handle (O).

For the ambidextrous bolt catch/release and magazine release objectives, are modifications or replacement components on the lower receiver permitted?

This evaluation will be conducted against the complete weapon submitted.

What method will be used to determine compliance with the requirement to prevent accidental engagement of the magazine release and bolt release mechanisms?

If a vendor’s White Paper is selected to compete in the Phase II Shoot-off, the method and conditions of this evaluation will be communicated to the Industry Partner.

o Fencing around the controls to prevent accidental engagement of the magazine release and bolt release mechanisms (T=O).

For the fencing around controls requirement, does this apply to a complete weapon lower receiver only, or must industry provide a solution compatible with existing M4A1 lowers?

Is full & complete fencing around controls wanted, or enough to prevent accidental discharge of controls adequate for this requirement?

Full and complete fencing is desired by the government. This evaluation will be conducted against the complete weapon system submitted.

o Single rigid sling point at the rear of the receiver for maritime operations (O).

For the single rigid sling point at the rear of the receiver for maritime operations, may industry provide a receiver end plate or stock assembly as part of the system?

This evaluation will be conducted against the complete weapon submitted.

"Single rigid sling point at the rear of the receiver for maritime operations.” This bullet point has a [4] after it that seems to imply a missing note. For clarification, is this a requirement for a rigid sling loop designed for direct attachment of webbing/sling clip, or a QD socket?

Does the rigid sling point need to be a Q/D, loop, or other?

Is this wanted to be a QD sling point or a sling loop point?

A single rigid sling point is specified at the rear of this receiver. Is a particular format desired (i.e. rotating QD; rotation-limited QD; loop;

etc.)?

The government desires a rigid sling attachment at the rear of the receiver resembling a solid, closed metal loop; not a QD socket.

Does the front of the handguard need a sling point?

Yes. This front attachment point can be rigid or QD socket.

o Resistant to damage from immersion in three (3) feet of seawater for two (2) hours without affecting the weapon's performance and able to fire within thirty (30) (T); ten (10) (O) seconds after submersion.

The seawater immersion requirement states the weapon must fire within “thirty (30) (O); ten (10) (T) seconds after submersion.” Can USSOCOM confirm whether the Threshold is 10 seconds and the Objective is 30 seconds, or is it intended to be the reverse?

This is meant to be reversed and should read:

“…able to fire within thirty (30) (T); ten (10) (O) seconds after submersion.”

Could you please define unacceptable damage for the seawater immersion test?

Submersion under these conditions should not affect the weapon’s performance as evaluated against afore stated criteria.

The seawater immersion specification stipulates that the system should be ready to fire after a certain amount of time. Does the firearm only need to fire, or does it need to fire and cycle?

The weapon should fire and cycle.

o Protected with durable corrosion resistant coating in all SOF climatic environments including NBC contaminated environments. Corrosion and abrasion proof coatings to minimize the attraction of dust and contaminants (T=O).

Is there a way for our engineering team to be provided with the MIS-STD- 810 testing procedure that we will used so that they can correctly provide the best coatings and processes for this requirement?

If a vendor’s White Paper is selected to compete in the Phase II o Utilize where possible self-lubricating coatings and minimize buildup of dust, carbon, copper, and debris (O).

o Fully functional in all environments from -40 to 165 degrees Fahrenheit (O).

o Comply with relevant direct-fire MIL-STD specifications as directed by NSWC-Crane SOCOM Weapons Team (O).

What are “relevant direct-fire MIL-STD specifications as directed by NSWC-Crane SOCOM Weapons Team?” Can this be provided by the Government?

May we have a full list of the specific MIL-STD by NSWC-Crane?

Where can we get a copy of this?

NSWC Crane will evaluate submissions against the following list of specifications which is inclusive but not exhaustive:

o TOP 3-2-045a (2016) Test Operations Procedure for Small Arms- Hand and Shoulder Weapons and Machine Guns.

This is publicly available on the internet.

o TOP 3-2-826a (2016) Kinematic Tests of Small Arms. This is publicly available on the internet.

o MIL-DTL-70599C (2019) Military Specification for Carbine, M4 chambered in 5.56mm. This is publicly available on the internet.

o Industry Partner submit to and successfully perform all tests required by NSWC-Crane SOCOM Weapons Team to achieve limited safety release (LSR) from the Navy Weapon Safety Evaluation & Review Board (WSESRB) (O).

May we have the full list of tests and methods required for LSR by NSWC Crane? Who will perform these tests?

What is the limited safety release (LSR)?

If a vendor’s White Paper is selected to compete in the Phase II o Inscribed at position of Government-choosing with Industry Partner, OASW (SO/LIC) & SSO CD&I TOS Team Lethality logos.

May we have vector files of the appropriate logos?

If a vendor’s White Paper is selected to compete in the Phase II

Shoot-off, these logos will be transmitted to the Industry Partner.

o Contain markings to include caliber, year of manufacture, and manufacturer identification.

Where does year of manufacture have to be marked on the rifle?

At a position of Manufacturer Choosing, but ideally in vicinity of the government logos on the lower receiver.

o Not rely on any first-order-supply-chain components from adversary countries as defined in the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) (O).

Any such reliance must be fully documented and mitigated in the Contract Risk Register by Industry Partner (T).

o If not already in BASE, Industry to provide industrialization plan to produce HICAR in the United States by the completion of the contract (T). Designed, engineered, and assembled in the United States (O).

What does BASE refer to?

BASE refers to the initial HICAR-Urban development phase of a multi-phase firm-fixed price RDT&E effort.

Does SOCOM have a target length for its applicable contracts?

Which contract conclusion does the requirement for Made in USA apply to?

Produced in the United States by what point of contract? Is the intent to have items / system produced in the US by end of contract for deliverables or by prototyping and would this be expected to be produced in the US at a percentage or entire manufacturing process?

The measure for this evaluation is a reference to the final period of performance (POP) deadline of the last option exercised in a multi-phase, multi-CLIN, firm-fixed price RDT&E effort.

To what level of detail does SOCOM request the Industrialization Plan?

We request an Industrialization Plan with enough detail for

Government decisionmakers to assess risk to 1) scaling this capability across the SOF Enterprise in the event of a follow-on delivery contract for large-scale procurement; 2) manufacture of this capability without dependence on NDAA-prohibited // adversary-controlled supply chains.

A complete HICAR system to consist of the following:

o Weapon System, Urban (11-12” barrel) Heat Mitigation Rail Covers Buttstock, Multi-Point Adjustable 7x Magpul Gen3 556 Magazines Field Maintenance Kit, Fix-It Sticks Field Cleaning Kit User Manual and Maintenance Manual, hard copy and digital

For the buttstock requirement, is the buttstock considered part of the HICAR system even if the weapon is submitted as an upper receiver group?

No. To avoid this confusion, the government requires the submission of a complete weapon system.

What does “Weapon System, Urban” refer to?

This refers to the 11-12” barrel HICAR variant featured in this solicitation.

Does SOCOM have a preferred buttstock or other furniture on the

Weapon System?

No.

Does SOCOM have a pre-selected Field Maintenance & Cleaning Kits or should the vendor provide vendor-recommended kits?

No.

When will the specification for the heat mitigation rail covers be released?

The government does not have a specification for this subcomponent.

SUBMISSION GUIDANCE

PHASE I- White Papers

Include information on the estimated cost per weapon, an estimated timeline to deliver the prototypes, and any risk proposers foresee with the development of the weapon (to include concerns with the above technical aspects). White papers should include information on how the vendor’s proposal is specifically optimized to function with current hypervelocity ammunition as well as engineered to accommodate future ammunition in excess of 82kpsi.

All whitepapers must contain images of the proposed weapon. A minimum TRL of 6 is required.

All white papers will be retained by the Government for a period of 24 months, and proposers may be contacted by the Government to gauge interest within that time to continue with the proposer’s solution. Proposers are not guaranteed to be contacted if not chosen after down selection nor are they beholden to perform if they no longer wish to carry forward with their original proposal.

All other procedures will follow the originally posted CSO N0016425SC0001 (Crane confirm this nomenclature).

Could you please provide your definition of TRL 6?

According to the Office of Undersecretary of Defense for Research and

Engineering (OSD RDT&E) definition, readily accessible via the internet, “Technology Readiness Level (TRL) 6 is a system/subsystem model or prototyping demonstration in a relevant end-to-end environment (ground or space) which represents a major step up in a technology's demonstrated readiness beyond TRL 5. Examples include testing a prototype in a high-fidelity laboratory environment or in simulated operational environment.”

Can technologies below TRL 6 be included if they are expected to be at or above TRL 6 by Phase 2 or have a high manufacturing readiness level?

Phase II – Pitch Day

If selected to move forward from the white paper evaluation, then proposers will be asked to participate in a pitch day. The pitch day will consist of an in-person meeting between the proposers, and the GOV. Proposers will provide a weapon demonstration of their weapon during pitch day. Ammunition will be provided. Primary ammunition will be M855A1+ and secondary will be M855A1. Estimated round count for the demonstration will be 600 rounds.

Presentation will happen immediately after the proposer’s demonstration. Pitch duration will not exceed 30 minutes to include questions and answers.

During Phase II leading into Pitch Day, the proposer will be 1) authorized to purchase M855A1+ from a specified vendor using internal R&D funds, business to business and 2) requested to provide up to three (3) prototype at vendor expense to the government lab at NSWC-Crane, Indiana for controlled data collection using M855A1+ cartridges.

For Phase II prototype delivery to NSWC Crane, are the requested three prototypes in addition to the Pitch Day demonstration weapons?

What is the required delivery date for the three Phase II prototypes to NSWC Crane for controlled data collection?

If selected to move forward to phase II are the weapons for demonstration on or about September 15th expected to have all proposed capabilities and it is the expectation that fully developed and tested weapons will be provided in 10 weeks? Or is the expectation to provide a demonstration of what is currently available with the understanding that certain materials and components may not be fully developed and tested in this short period?

If selected for Phase II shoot-off, each vendor should prepare six (6) total firearms for this phase. Three (3) for government-observed/ conducted testing prior to shoot-off and three (3) fresh prototypes for the shoot-off. The first three weapons should be ready for evaluation by the Government no earlier than 01 August 2026.

The weapon prototypes should demonstrate to the Government against the AOI specifications what is currently mature, safe, and available. Recall that this is a government RDT&E effort to inform a future requirement based on data collected throughout the duration.

Will the Government specify the M855A1+ ammunition vendor, lot, quantity available, and expected lead times for industry purchase during Phase II?

Will the Government return vendor-funded prototypes after testing, retain them, or consume them during testing?

Will the sample weapons be returned? Will the data collected on the sample weapons be shared back with the vendors?

Weapons submitted will be returned in an exhausted state to each vendor for forensic analysis. It is the Government’s intent that data collected from each batch of firearms will be shared with the respective vendor who produced them.

Will SOCOM sign a Bailment Agreement or similar to be able to receive foreign-manufactured prototypes?

If selected to advance to Phase II Shoot-Off, the government will inform this response.

Pitch Day Location:

US Army Marksmanship Unit Parks Range.

Fort Moore, GA 31905

Vendors notified Pitch meeting 10 July 2026.

Pitch Meeting 15-16 September 2026.

Will the 600-round Pitch Day demonstration have a prescribed course of fire, firing schedule, ammunition mix, and maintenance allowance?

Yes.

Who will fire the weapons during Pitch Day: Government personnel, vendor personnel, or both?

Vendor-designated personnel will fire the weapons for batteries of objective measurement by the Government like dispersion; Government-personnel will fire the weapon to evaluate subjective attributes like handling, maneuverability, form, fit, and function during the Limited User Assessment.

Will vendors be permitted to inspect, lubricate, cool, or replace user-serviceable components during the 600-round demonstration?

Section "Phase II - Pitch Day" specifies an estimated 600 rounds with M855A1+ as the primary and M855A1 as the secondary ammunition. Is the round-count split between the two ammunition types fixed in advance, or determined at the demonstration based on the Government's interest? Our prototype thermal-management and pacing plan currently assumes a worst case of 600 x M855A1+.

The task, conditions, & standards of the of the Phase II Shoot-Off will be communicated to the down-selected vendors such that they can adequately prepare.

Phase III – Request for Prototype Proposal (RPP) RPP process will remain in alignment with the original CSO N0016425SC0001.

An individual proposer’s or team of proposer’s should not submit multiple solution briefs to the AOI, unless each individual solution is substantively unique. If submitted as a team, the first page of the solution brief should list each company on the team and a primary point of contact for each company on the team as well as the lead proposer’s and point of contact for the overall team.

NOTE: In accordance with NSWC, Crane CSO N0016425SC0001: The government reserves the right and ability to facilitate introductions of proposers with complementary capabilities. If teaming introductions by the government are provided, a proposer is not obligated to act on the recommendation. If a proposer selects to move forward in accordance with a government recommended teaming arrangement, a Phase II pitch deck will be requested by NSWC, Crane in order to facilitate a complete evaluation of the jointly proposed solution.

FOLLOW-ON PRODUCTION

Companies are advised that any prototype Other Transactions (OT) agreement awarded in response to this Area of Interest may result in the award of a follow-on production contract or transaction without the use of further competitive procedures. The follow-on production contract or transaction will be available for use by one or more organizations in the Department of War and, as a result, the magnitude of the follow-on production contract or transaction could be significantly larger than that of the prototype OT. As such, any prototype OT will include the following statement relative to the potential for follow-on production: “In accordance with 10 U.S.C. 4022(f), and upon a determination that the prototype project for this transaction has been successfully completed, this competitively awarded prototype OT may result in the award of a follow-on production contract or transaction without the use of competitive procedures.”

ELIGIBILITY REQUIREMENTS

This solicitation will be awarded in accordance with the Commercial Solutions Opening (CSO) process detailed within N0016425SC0001 Naval Surface Warfare Center, Crane’s Commercial Solutions Opening posted to SAM.gov:

https://sam.gov/workspace/contract/opp/1f683f742b9f4a30b0d1020ceb4e4385/view

In accordance with 10 U.S.C. 4022(d), at least one of the following conditions must be satisfied to enter into a prototype OT agreement: (A) at least one nontraditional defense contractor or nonprofit research institution participating to a significant extent, (B) all significant participants are small businesses or nontraditional defense contractors, or (C) at least one third of the total cost of the prototype project is to be paid out of funds provided by sources other than the Federal Government.

White papers must be submitted electronically in PDF format to POC’s listed below via email by June 12, 2026, 2:00 PM EST.

Questions or clarifications may be directed to NSWC, Crane POC for Q&C at email by Q&A Deadline, June 02, 2026. Late submissions will not be considered.

Additional Notes:

Contractors from the following companies will be advising the assessment team:

Frontier Technology Inc. Defense (FTI Defense) 4141 Colonel Glenn Hwy, STE 140 Beavercreek, OH, 45431

IQ SIG

7735 Georgetown Road, STE 1218 Bethesda, MD 20814

Confidentiality

All information provided in this AOI and subsequent proposals will be treated in confidentiality and used solely for the purpose of this evaluation. Proposer’s are expected to maintain confidentiality regarding proprietary information shared during the process.