Questions and answers.docx

Questions and Answers RFP0003859 and RFP0003859B

1. Is the FBI specifically looking for brands that market their suppressors as having "flow-through" designs? Griffin Armament has recently developed a utility patent pending flow-through design that we are referring to as "Eco-Flow™". In our testing, it greatly reduced blowback and should meet the requirement.

The government will accept any suppressor design which satisfies the intent of the “flow-through” requirement outlined in C.2.1 (which is to reduce the amount of gas directed rearward through the weapon at the shooters face). The manner in which this is accomplished, and the naming of this feature is left to the discretion of the offeror.

2. For the length added to the carbine, is that measurement taken from the muzzle's face on the host firearm without the muzzle device installed or from the face of the muzzle device supplied with the suppressor?

Per section, M.2.3 of the solicitation one suppressor with muzzle device will be attached to a Bureau Pattern Carbine and will be measured for added length from the carbine’s muzzle.

3. Could we choose to send a couple of tool kits with the submitted suppressors that will not be included in the individual suppressor unit pricing matrix? The reason for this is that these kits are typically considered armorer tools and are not included with every suppressor.

Yes.

4. If a suppressor is selected for phase 3 but does not make it through that selection process, will it receive a report card to see how it did?

Following testing and final selection of an awardee, the FBI will offer vendors the opportunity to receive a detailed debrief regarding their product's performance in accordance with FAR 15.506 Post Award Debriefing.

5. If a suppressor receives the highest score but does not win the solicitation will that information be relayed to the vendor? In that situation, we wouldn't care why but would like to know if the product scored the highest.

Following testing and final selection of an awardee, the FBI will offer vendors the opportunity to receive a detailed debrief regarding their product's performance to include scoring in accordance with FAR 15.506 Post Award Debriefing.

6. Is the purpose of the solicitation to contract a GSA schedule holder that qualifies as SBA who can supply the currently purchased Surefire Socom RC2 that's mentioned in the RFP?

No, we are looking for the best suppressor to minimize the suppressor noise and make it safer for the agent. Due to little interest from small business, the government has re-classified to a full and open competition.

7. Would the Griffin Armament Taper Mount system as seen in the Recce 5 & 7 (https://www.griffinarmament.com/recce-7-silencer/) be considered a QD system for the purpose of the RFP? This system can be attached or removed in 4.5 seconds. Additionally, it features a muzzle device with a thread and locking alignment taper.

Section C.3.9 states the suppressor must be a "Quick-Detach" (QD) design utilizing a flash hider style muzzle device, threaded 1/2-28 TPI. Muzzle brakes are not allowed.

8. Please confirm these are the weapon systems that the FBI intends to pair with the suppressors as mentioned in the RFP? Or does the FBI intend to pair these with any other weapon systems?

Yes. The referenced weapons are those the FBI intends to pair with suppressors.

9. How long will the Phase I and II evaluation periods be?

Although a specific time period is not defined, the government intends to make award by the end of FY21 barring any unforeseen obstacle.

10. How much time is expected between the conclusion of Phase II evaluation and notification of Phase III selections?

Although a specific time period is not defined, notification for Phase III will occur immediately following the completion of Phase II.

11. What weapons or training weapons will this training aid be used with? Is a traditional "blue gun" (blue colored polymer training weapon) compatible non-lethal training aid suppressor required? Yes. If so, how will that training suppressor attach to the blue training weapon? Same manner as the operational suppressor. Does the training aid suppressor need to be compatible with blank fire weapons? No Does the training aid suppressor need to be compatible with submunitions fire weapons? No

12. Please confirm if RFP 0003859(b) is subject to "Notice of Service-Disabled Veteran Owned Small Business Set-Aside" (FAR 52.219-27).

Due to little interest from small business, the government has re-classified to a full and open competition.

13. RFP 0003859(b) Section I.2(b)(21) is marked for "Notice of Service-Disabled Veteran Owned Small Business Set-Aside" and cites FAR 52.219-27. SAM.Gov lists this RFP as a "Total Small Business Aside and cites FAR 19.5". Please confirm which is the applicable clause for this RFP

Same as question 12 above.

14. The technical proposal requirements listed in Section J, Attachment 3 are different than the technical proposal requirements in L.6. Which one takes precedence and should be followed?

We have amended the solicitation to ensure these are the same.

15. Could the FBI please clarify if there is a template or format for the signed cover page as specified in Section L.9 (page 83)?

See attached cover letter template.

16. What is the average and worst case (But acceptable) result with the BPC when tested to the standards and protocols in the tender (“accuracy/velocity assessment”, and group to group shift as per the “suppressor shift” and “suppressor group repeatability”) as issued (unsuppressed, with current muzzle device) with the intended test ammunition?

Manufacturers are encouraged to maximize the point totals as outlined in Section M. The point total in each event is based on current known systems scoring in the middle of each category.

17. Would it be possible to evaluate the accuracy of the systems as a positive or negative change from the BPC’s confirmed baseline performance rather than as a cumulative result? Justification: evaluating the cumulative end result of the suppressors being attached to the BPC is undeniably necessary for the individual combination and user, however, for the purposes of fair evaluation and comparison to determine relative performance, removing the rifle as a variable will provide more directly correlative decision data. As currently written, a rifle that provides a consistent 2.0 MOA group with the suppressor and muzzle device attached, but is .5 MOA capable without the suppressor or provided muzzle device, is “better” than a suppressor that provides a consistent 4 MOA group the suppressor and muzzle device attached that is a 4 MOA rifle without the suppressor or provided muzzle device, despite evidence that the latter suppressor and muzzle device have no negative effect on performance, where the former example shows a 1.5 MOA degradation in performance.

The government intends to perform the test as written in section M of the solicitation.

18. At what distance(s) will the accuracy/velocity assessment, suppressor shift, and suppressor group repeatability tests be conducted?

It is the intent of the government to fire these assessments at a distance of 100m, then obtaining the MOA derivative for scoring.

19. What ammunition will be used for testing? Is this the new FBI contract ammunition?

Federal Ammunition products:

Z556T4FBI

Z223T3FBISBC

Z223FBITR55E

20. What mirage mitigating device or method will be followed to avoid thermal turbulance from negatively affecting the “accuracy/velocity assessment”, “suppressor shift”, and “suppressor group repeatability” testing due to the changes in the perceived light path?

Air will be directed over the suppressor.

21. What optic and mount, attached to the rifle following what protocol, will be used for “accuracy/velocity assessment”, “suppressor shift”, and “suppressor group repeatability” testing?

It is the intent of the government to use Badger Ordnance rings and a Leupold 6.5 x 20 scope.

22. Will the optics and mounts be used for “accuracy/velocity assessment”, “suppressor shift”, and “suppressor group repeatability” testingbe dedicated to their individual test rifles throughout the test, or will they be swapped from BPC to BPC as needed?

It is the intent of the government to keep the optic/mount combination on the same rifle throughout phase II testing.

23. If the optics and mounts used for the “accuracy/velocity assessment”, “suppressor shift”, and “suppressor group repeatability” testing are to be swapped from rifle to rifle, what methodology or protocol will be used to ensure that they are providing no negative influence to the test results?

It is the intent of the government to keep the optic/mount combination on the same rifle throughout phase II testing.

24. What protocol or methodology will be employed during testing to ensure that the optic or mount failure do not count against suppressor performance?

It is the intent of the government to confirm zero prior to and immediately following testing.

25. What is the expected delivery rate/schedule of delivery following contract award?

See section C.2.2 of the solicitation.

26. Upon completion of testing, what is the plan for the return of supplied test items?

All unsuccessful offerors items will be returned to the offeror following all applicable Federal Statutes, upon request.

27. If successful, will the supplied test items be returned, or will they be part of a delivery order?

All items from the successful offeror(s) will be retained by the government as retainer samples, and not be a part of the delivery order.

28. Will a test report be provided to participants upon completion of each phase?

See question 5 above.

29. What is the expected duration of each phase?

See question 9 above.

30. Required samples for the carbine submission (RFP 0003859B) include only a single non-lethal training aid / “blue suppressor,” correct?

Yes.

31. Do you know if the Federal 64 grain tactical bonded 5.56 ammunition is available from Federal in small quantities for internal baseline testing?

Contact Federal Ammunition at (208) 750-3288.

32. Under the Phase II (M.2.3 – Section 3) Sound Assessment methodology and scoring, will a separate score be assigned for measurements taken from each location at both the muzzle and at the shooter’s right ear?

No, see section M.2.3.2.

33. Under Phase II (M.2.3 – Section 7) for Suppressor Gas Blowback, can you share any additional information on how gas blowback at the ejection port will be quantified and measured using high-speed camera analysis? Will this be a subjective comparison of the video, or is there a measurement protocol for assessment?

This will be a subjective comparison from the images collected from the high-speed camera.

34. Under Phase II (M.2.3 – Section ) Precision Assessment, will testing be attempted in uniform environmental conditions with regard to temperature and humidity across the submitted test samples?

Yes, this testing will be fired in an indoor shooting tunnel.

35. In Section L.7 – Proposal Preparation Instructions: Volume #2 Past Performance, the instructions state that offerors are to use 3 Past Performance References. However, on Section J Attachment 3, the fifth item on the checklist states “List of previous contracts within the last three years, not to exceed five examples.” Should offerors submit the 3 contracts identified in the Past Performance Volume, as well as two additional contracts? Will offerors be rated more highly if five examples of previous contracts are listed in the Technical Proposal, as required by the Manufacturer Checklist? Any clarity you can provide here is appreciated.

We ask that you send in a minimum of three past performance references, but not to exceed five. There is no higher rating for offerors that send in more.