W15QKN15R0002-0004.pdf

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT 1. Contract ID Code Page Of

2. Amendment/Modification No.

3. Effective Date

4. Requisition/Purchase Req No.

5. Project No. (If applicable)

6. Issued By Code 7. Administered By (If other than Item 6) Code

8. Name And Address Of Contractor (No., Street, City, County, State and Zip Code)

9A. Amendment Of Solicitation No.

9B. Dated (See Item 11)

10A. Modification Of Contract/Order No.

10B. Dated (See Item 13) Code Facility Code

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

The above numbered solicitation is amended as set forth in item 14. The hour and date specified for receipt of Offers is extended, is not extended.

Offers must acknowledge receipt of this amendment prior to the hour and date specified in the solicitation or as amended by one of the following methods:

(a) By completing items 8 and 15, and returning ____________ copies of the amendments: (b) By acknowledging receipt of this amendment on each copy of the offer submitted; or (c) By separate letter or telegram which includes a reference to the solicitation and amendment numbers. FAILURE OF YOUR ACKNOWLEDGMENT TO BE RECEIVED AT THE PLACE DESIGNATED FOR THE RECEIPT OF OFFERS PRIOR TO THE HOUR AND DATE SPECIFIED MAY RESULT IN REJECTION OF YOUR OFFER. If by virtue of this amendment you desire to change an offer already submitted, such change may be made by telegram or letter, provided each telegram or letter makes reference to the solicitation and this amendment, and is received prior to the opening hour and date specified.

12. Accounting And Appropriation Data (If required)

13. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO MODIFICATIONS OF CONTRACTS/ORDERS

It Modifies The Contract/Order No. As Described In Item 14.

A. This Change Order is Issued Pursuant To: The Changes Set Forth In Item 14 Are Made In

The Contract/Order No. In Item 10A.

B. The Above Numbered Contract/Order Is Modified To Reflect The Administrative Changes (such as changes in paying office, appropriation data, etc.) Set

Forth In Item 14, Pursuant To The Authority of FAR 43.103(b).

C. This Supplemental Agreement Is Entered Into Pursuant To Authority Of:

D. Other (Specify type of modification and authority)

E. IMPORTANT: Contractor is not, is required to sign this document and return _______________ copies to the Issuing Office.

14. Description Of Amendment/Modification (Organized by UCF section headings, including solicitation/contract subject matter where feasible.)

Except as provided herein, all terms and conditions of the document referenced in item 9A or 10A, as heretofore changed, remains unchanged and in full force and effect.

15A. Name And Title Of Signer (Type or print)

16A. Name And Title Of Contracting Officer (Type or print)

15B. Contractor/Offeror 15C. Date Signed 16B. United States Of America 16C. Date Signed

By (Signature of person authorized to sign) (Signature of Contracting Officer)

NSN 7540-01-152-8070

PREVIOUS EDITIONS UNUSABLE

30-105-02 STANDARD FORM 30 (REV. 10-83)

Prescribed by GSA FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

SEE SCHEDULE

X

Firm Fixed Price

0004 2016JAN15

W15QKN

ARMY CONTRACTING COMMAND - NJ

PICATINNY ARSENAL, NJ 07806-5000

VINCENT FRANK TURCO

EMAIL: VINCENT.F.TURCO.CIV@MAIL.MIL

W15QKN-15-R-0002

2015AUG28

X

X

/SIGNED/

2 signed

SEE SECOND PAGE FOR DESCRIPTION

1 38

CONTINUATION SHEET

Reference No. of Document Being Continued Page of

Name of Offeror or Contractor:

PIIN/SIIN MOD/AMD

SECTION A - SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION

Buyer Name: VINCENT FRANK TURCO

Buyer Office Symbol/Telephone Number: ACC-NJ-SW/(973)724-2016

Type of Contract 1: Firm Fixed Price

Kind of Contract: Supply Contracts and Priced Orders

*** End of Narrative A0000 ***

MHS-Amendment # 0004 - Section A________________________________

AMENDMENT 0004

INDUSTRY QUESTIONS / GOVERNMENT RESPONSES AND UPDATES

TO THE MODULAR HANDGUN SYSTEM FINAL REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL

Amendment 0004 to the Modular Handgun System (MHS) Request for Proposal (RFP) addresses the following items:

1) Section E Change Point of Contact (POC) for Wipe Test Clause 52.246-4065-Section c(9)

2) Section G - Fill-in Contractors Point of Contact (POC) information

3) Section H

A) Renumber Section H.5.2.1.2 to H.5.2.2.2 correct typographical error-no impact

B) Clarify Sections H.5.2.2.1 & H.5.2.2.2

4) Section L Clarify Sections L.1.5.18 and L.2.1

5) AR-PD-177

A) Clarify written instructions from amendment 0003-Section A

6) Update to RFP Section A, to include industry questions with Government responses

NOTE: Questions start at number 120 as they are being are numbered sequentially starting from the last question in Amendment 0003. Need last few questions

Section E_________

Change Point of Contact (POC) for Wipe Test Clause 52.246-4065-Section c(9)

Change From:____________

The independent testing laboratory employed by the Contractor must be licensed by the NRC or the applicable NRC Agreement State, or by the equivalent regulatory agency when the independent testing laboratory is located outside the United States. The subcontracting under this solicitation and the resulting contract is open to competition between Department of Defense activities and private firms. Under the authority of 10 U.S.C. 2208(j), applicable working capital funded activities are available as potential subcontractors. The point of contact for safety concerns relating to radioactive commodities in contracts is Mr. Thomas G Gizicki, Senior Health Physicist, AMSTA-CSC-

Z, TACOM LCMC Safety Office, DSN 786-0891, commercial 586-282-0891; email: mailto:thomas.g.gizicki.civ@mail.mil.

Change To:__________

The independent testing laboratory employed by the Contractor must be licensed by the NRC or the applicable NRC Agreement State, or by the equivalent regulatory agency when the independent testing laboratory is located outside the United States. The subcontracting under this solicitation and the resulting contract is open to competition between Department of Defense activities and private firms. Under the authority of 10 U.S.C. 2208(j), applicable working capital funded activities are available as potential subcontractors. The point of contact for safety concerns relating to radioactive commodities in contracts is C. Martin Johnson Jr., US Army Aviation and Missile

Command, AMSAM-TMD-SRR-C, Building 5417 Nuclear Counting

Redstone Arsenal, AL 35898-5000, Phone: 256-876-0472, email: charles.m.johnson335.civ@mail.mil.

Section G_________

Please fill-in the requested Contractors Point of Contact (POC) information under the Additional Information Section as follows:

Contractors Contract Representative:

2 38

W15QKN-15-R-0002 0004

Name of Offeror or Contractor:

PIIN/SIIN MOD/AMD

POC Name:

POC Phone Number:

POC E-mail Address:

Section H_________

Section H.5.2.2.1_________________

Change From:____________

The Government will evaluate the capability of the Offerors Modular Handgun System candidate design to meet the Reliability requirement for Mean Rounds Between Stoppages (MRBS) and Mean Rounds Between Failures (MRBF) using up to 35,000 rounds of Ball ammunition.

Evaluation will consider how closely the candidate Modular Handgun System comes to meeting the threshold requirements as found in the

Performance Purchase Description Modular Handgun System (AR-PD-177) paragraph 3.7.1.a and paragraph 3.7.1.b and verified according to paragraph 4.8.1. For candidate systems that fail to meet the threshold requirement, the assigned rating will be based on the overall risk of unsuccessful performance. The closer a candidate system comes to meeting the objective requirement of 2,500 MRBS and 10,000

MRBF, the more favorably the candidate Modular Handgun will be rated. The rating will be based on overall test results and the risk of unsuccessful performance of this factor.

Change To:___________

The Government will evaluate the capability of the Offerors Modular Handgun System candidate design to meet the Reliability requirement for Mean Rounds Between Stoppages (MRBS) and Mean Rounds Between Failures (MRBF) using up to 35,000 rounds of Special Purpose ammunition. Evaluation will consider how closely the candidate Modular Handgun System comes to meeting the threshold requirements as found in the Performance Purchase Description Modular Handgun System (AR-PD-177) paragraph 3.7.1.a and paragraph 3.7.1.b and verified according to paragraph 4.8.1. For candidate systems that fail to meet the threshold requirement, the assigned rating will be based on the overall risk of unsuccessful performance. The closer a candidate system comes to meeting the objective requirement of 2,500 MRBS and 10,000 MRBF, the more favorably the candidate Modular Handgun will be rated. The rating will be based on overall test results and the risk of unsuccessful performance of this factor.

Section H.5.2.2.2_________________

Change From:____________

The Government will evaluate the capability of the Offerors Modular Handgun System candidate design to meet the Service Life requirement using up to 35,000 rounds of Ball ammunition. Evaluation will consider how closely the candidate Modular Handgun System comes to meeting the threshold requirement of 25,000 rounds as found in the Performance Purchase Description Modular Handgun System (AR-PD-177) paragraph 3.7.1.c and tested concurrently with Reliability in accordance with paragraph 4.8.1. Paragraph 6.7.p. of AR-PD-177 defines criteria which constitutes an unserviceable weapon. The closer a candidate system comes to meeting the objective requirement of 35,000, the more favorable the rating will be received. The rating will be based on overall test results and the risk of unsuccessful performance of this factor.

Change To:____________

The Government will evaluate the capability of the Offerors Modular Handgun System candidate design to meet the Service Life requirement using up to 35,000 rounds of Special Purpose ammunition. Evaluation will consider how closely the candidate Modular Handgun System comes to meeting the threshold requirement of 25,000 rounds as found in the Performance Purchase Description Modular Handgun System (AR-

PD-177) paragraph 3.7.1.c and tested concurrently with Reliability in accordance with paragraph 4.8.1. Paragraph 6.7.p. of AR-PD-177 defines criteria which constitutes an unserviceable weapon. The closer a candidate system comes to meeting the objective requirement of

35,000, the more favorable the rating will be received. The rating will be based on overall test results and the risk of unsuccessful performance of this factor.

Section L_________

Section L.1.5.18________________

Change From:_____________

L.1.5.18. Ammunition Data (For Non-DOD Standard Ammunition): Offerors shall provide velocity data and pressure data in accordance to

ANSI/SAAMI Z.299.3-1993, Section I-Characteristics. See Velocity Data Interpretation and Pressure Data Interpretation sections.

The Offeror shall provide General Cartridge Specifications that include, but is not limited to, the following: cartridge weight, case material, bullet weight, bullet core material, bullet jacket material, powder type, primer type, nominal powder charge weight.

The Offeror shall include drawings: Top Level drawings for the cartridge and bullet with key dimensions (overall length, diameter etc.)

The Offeror shall provide any energetic material test data performed in accordance with the AOP-7 and STANAG 4170 and a complete energetic material composition list for the energetic found in the cartridge. The Offeror shall also provide Safety Data Sheets for all

3 38

Name of Offeror or Contractor:

PIIN/SIIN MOD/AMD

Energetic materials."

All of the ammunition data requested in L.1.5.18 should be submitted on one (1) compact disc. This information should be included with the written proposal; instructions found in L.2.1.

Change To:__________

L.1.5.18. Ammunition Data (For Non-DOD Standard Ammunition): Offeror shall provide velocity data and pressure data in accordance to

ANSI/SAAMI Z.299.3-1993, Section I-Characteristics. See Velocity Data Interpretation and Pressure Data Interpretation sections. The

Ammunition Data shall include the following:

The Offeror shall provide General Cartridge Specifications that include, but is not limited to, the following: cartridge weight, case material, bullet weight, bullet core material, bullet jacket material, powder type, primer type, nominal powder charge weight.

The Offeror shall include drawings: Top Level drawings for the cartridge and bullet with key dimensions (overall length, diameter etc.)

The Offeror shall provide any energetic material test data performed in accordance with the AOP-7 and STANAG 4170 and a complete energetic material composition list for the energetic found in the cartridge. The Offeror shall also provide Safety Data Sheets for all

Energetic materials.

All of the ammunition data requested in L.1.5.18 should be submitted on one (1) compact disc. See section L.2.1 for submission instruction.

Section L.2.1_____________

Change From:____________

L.2.1 General: Offerors shall include in their written proposal submission the proposal Volumes I through VIII (Five (5) Hard Copies and five (5) Compact Discs (CD), the Copyright Release Letter on one (1) CD, and the Safety Assessment Reports on one (1) CD along with one

(1) Hard Copy of O&M Manual/Instructions to the address identified below NO LATER THAN the date and hour outlined in the Modular Handgun

System RFP. The written proposal submission shall be signed by the person authorized to enter into the proposed contract on behalf of the Offeror.

Change To:__________

L.2.1 General: Offerors shall include with their written submission:

a. Proposal Volumes I through VIII (Five (5) Hard Copies and five (5) Compact Discs (CD)

Separate CDs for the following:

b. The Copyright Release Letter found in L.1.5.17 on one (1) CD,

c. The Safety Assessment Report found in L.1.5.15 on one (1) CD

d. The Ammunition Data found in L.1.5.18 on one (1) CD

e. The O&M Manual/Instructions found in L.1.5.14 on one (1) Hard Copy

These proposal submission items shall be sent to the address identified below NO LATER THAN the date and hour outlined in the Modular

Handgun System RFP. The written proposal submission shall be signed by the person authorized to enter into the proposed contract on behalf of the Offeror.

AR-PD-177__________

In amendment 0003 section A regarding AR-PD 177 the temperature numbers written in the paragraphs as changes from/to for sections

3.6.10.1 a & b should read -40 degrees Fahrenheit not -40\'b0F

INDUSTRY QUESTIONS / GOVERNMENT RESPONSES_________________________________________

QUESTION 120:_____________

Per Section 3.5.8.b. of AR-PD-177, the ability to fire blanks in the MHS handgun submission is an Objective requirement. How does the

USG reconcile this Objective requirement with Threshold requirements to be able to fire blanks in 3.5.12.f.? It seems that all of

3.5.12 would be dependent upon first pursuing that initial Objective requirement in 3.5.8.

GOVERNMENT RESPONSE 120:________________________

The objective requirement for the blank in paragraph 3.5.8b should be a threshold requirement. The RFP takes precedence over the language in all supporting documents to include the purchase descriptions. Section L paragraph L.4.1.3.3 states "The Offeror must submit a proposal for a blank handgun conversion kit for both the full size and compact handguns, and blank ammunition. The proposal should state how the blank ammunition with conversion kit can meet the requirements of AR-PD-183."

4 38

Name of Offeror or Contractor:

PIIN/SIIN MOD/AMD

QUESTION 121:_____________

Are the Threshold requirements found in 3.5.12 contingent upon first meeting the Objective requirement of 3.5.8? In other words, if the proposal chooses not to fire blanks per 3.5.8.b, the 3.5.12 conversion kit is therefore not necessary?

GOVERNMENT RESPONSE 121:________________________

The objective requirement for the blank in paragraph 3.5.8b should be a threshold requirement.

QUESTION 122:_____________

Per 3.5.12.f., the conversion kit shall safely fire only XM1157 blank ammunition, a Threshold requirement. 3.5.8.b lists the ability to fire blanks as an Objective requirement. Please explain this apparent contradiction. If the ability to fire blanks is optional in

3.5.8.b., how is it then a Threshold requirement in 3.5.12.f?

GOVERNMENT RESPONSE 122:________________________

The objective requirement for the blank in paragraph 3.5.8b should be a threshold requirement. The RFP takes precedence over the language in all supporting documents to include the purchase descriptions. Section L paragraph L.4.1.3.3 states "The Offeror must submit a proposal for a blank handgun conversion kit for both the full size and compact handguns, and blank ammunition. The proposal should state how the blank ammunition with conversion kit can meet the requirements of AR-PD-183."

QUESTION 123:_____________

Per 3.5.12.f., the conversion kit shall safely fire only XM1157 blank ammunition, a Threshold requirement. Is it acceptable that the conversion kit will fire both XM1157 blanks and M1041 marking rounds with no additional changes to the kit in order to meet the

3.5.12.g. Objective requirement? In other words, does the Objective requirement of 3.5.12.g. further describe the capability of the same kit for 3.5.12.f, or would these be two different configurations of the conversion kit?

GOVERNMENT RESPONSE 123:________________________

Yes. The Objective requirement of 3.5.12.g. further describes the capability of the same kit for 3.5.12.f. If the vendor chooses to submit a stand-alone blank kit which cannot fire the M1041 rounds, which is described in 3.5.12.f, the submission would only meet the

Threshold requirement. In this case, the vendor would be required to submit a separate kit that fires the M1041 rounds. If the vendor chooses to submit a blank kit that can also be used to fire the M1041 rounds, as described in 3.5.12.g, the blank kit would then meet the Objective requirement. In this case, the vendor's blank kit would be the same item as the CCMCK kit. Note that the kit would need to meet all the requirements listed in AR-PD-177 paragraph 3.5.4 as well.

QUESTION 124:_____________

Per AR-PD-183 section 4.5.4. Noise level, The noise test shall be conducted in accordance with the appropriate testing procedure in TOP

1-2-608. Then goes on to state For all test firings, the shooter shall fire from the prone position from the shoulder. The second statement is in conflict with TOP 1-2-608 4.2.1.1.a Weapon Firing Tests, Hand- held and shoulder weapons. (1) Mount hand-held and shoulder weapons in a test-firing fixture with their barrels or tubes 1.5 m above and parallel to the ground plane\'85

a. Per AR-PD-117 there are no requirements to provide the MHS with a shoulder stock attachment, is it safe to assume that TOP 1-2-608

4.2.1.1.a takes precedence over the requirement shall fire from the prone position from the shoulder.?

GOVERNMENT RESPONSE 124:________________________

Firing from the shoulder will not apply to the MHS. It will be hand fired from the standing, prone, and kneeling position.

QUESTION 125:_____________

Kindly advise what information we are to provide in Volume VIII with respect to the requirement to include Section G Contract

Administration Data. Please refer to paragraph L.4.1.10 SOLICITATION, OFFER AND AWARD DOCUMENTS AND CERTIFICATIONS/REPRESENTATIONS on page 331.

GOVERNMENT RESPONSE 125:________________________

Please include Contractor points of contact. Section G has been revised accordingly.

QUESTION 126:_____________

Referencing Amendment 0003 to Solicitation W15QKN-15-R-90002, Section L, Paragraphs L.1.5.18 and L.2.1, can the Government please

5 38

Name of Offeror or Contractor:

PIIN/SIIN MOD/AMD

confirm that Ammunition Data required in Para. L.1.5.18 should be included in Volume 1-Written Technical (as defined in Para. L.4.1.3)?

Additionally, do Offerors include this information as an Attachment to Volume 1-Writen Technical or include the information under

Characteristics of the Cartridge (Para. L.4.1.3.1)?

GOVERNMENT RESPONSE 126:________________________

The ammunition data requested in L.1.5.18 should be submitted on one (1) compact disc per the instruction found in L.2.1. It should not be included in Volume1 Written Technical but rather included with the written proposal submission Volumes I through VIII (same box as written proposal submission). Paragraphs L.15.18 and L.2.1 are amended for further clarification.

QUESTION 127:_____________

Please confirm that no Ammunition Data (Para. L.1.5.18), Safety Assessment Report (Para. L.1.5.16), Operations & Maintenance

Manuals/Instructions (Para. L.1.5.14) and Copyright Release Letter (Par. L.1.5.17) is submitted along with the Bid Sample Hardware ammunition is to be delivered to the Aberdeen Ammunition Management Branch as defined in Para. L.1.4.1.

GOVERNMENT RESPONSE 127:________________________

The Ammunition data (Para. L.5.18), Safety Assessment Report (Para L.1.5.16), Operation & Maintenance Manuals/Instructions (Para

L.1.5.14), and Copyright Release Letter (Para. L.1.5.17) should be submitted in accordance with Paragraph L.2.1.

Please note that in paragraph L.1.4.2 for the Bid Sample Hardwar Proposal Submission Instruction that three (3) hard COPIES and one (1)

COMPACT DISC (CD) of the Offeror's Operations & Maintenance (O&M) Manual & Instructions for the handgun are also required with the handgun bid sample hardware submission.

QUESTION 128:_____________

Section L.1.5.14. of the solicitation requires that a commercial Operations and Maintenance Manual/Instructions be submitted with the bid samples. The section continues to explain that the parts interchange of the gun will include barrel, frame, slide, magazine and drive spring, as if to reinforce that the manual needs to cover a field strip condition and nothing more. By definition, an Operations level manual does not have Armorers level part replacement instructions, nor are government personnel being trained on Armorers level part replacement procedures until after the first down-select. Section L.1.5.6. allows for submission of spare parts, and section

L.1.5.7. references a need to disassemble guns for dye penetrant NDT, thereby requiring instructions and training on proper assembly and disassembly of the gun. How is the government going to properly disassemble and reassemble the guns at an Armorers level without the necessary instructions and training?

GOVERNMENT RESPONSE 128:________________________

Section L.5.2 recommends field, unit and depot level maintenance training. The maintenance manuals provided by the vendor should reflect the field, unit and depot level maintenance.

QUESTION 129:_____________

Are spare parts being tracked and the cost being counted against the offeror during bid submission sample testing, or is this analysis reserved for PVT testing? This will impact the method by which the offeror instructs a repair to be completed, with a single part vs with a subassembly of components (if it does not count against the offeror, but otherwise reduces the risk that the gun is assembled improperly due to lack of instruction).

GOVERNMENT RESPONSE 129:________________________

Yes, the usage of spare parts will be tracked during all testing. The spare parts consumed during reliability testing will be factored into the evaluation of price during PVT testing.

QUESTION 130:_____________

In amendment 0003, C.3.1.8.5.2 Radioactive Wipe Test (p. 2-3 of amendment) was changed to read as (highlight added): In accordance to

AMC Regulation 385-2, Ionizing Radiation Safety Program, radioactive materials shall not be permitted on the MHS without providing a

Radioactive Material Justification. If the Contractor utilizes radioactive material, the Contractor shall conduct a radioactive wipe test on all handguns and sights, in accordance to clause ES6050 Wipe Testing Requirements for Newly Procured Radioactive Commodities, to prove that there are no radioactive parts there is no leakage of radioactive material, and submit a Radioactive Wipe Test Report, DI-

NDTI-80809B (CDRL A015). Amendment 0003, P. 50., SECTION E (Inspection and Acceptance) was also changed to incorporate Clause 52.246-

4065 (ES6050); of specific interest is paragraph c.(6) where (highlight added): The Contractor shall have an independent testing laboratory conduct wipe testing and analysis on the deliverable end item as described above. The sample for wipe testing may be submitted to the independent testing laboratory of the Contractors choice. An independent testing laboratory representative may perform wipe testing at the Contractor's facility as long as the wipe tests are analyzed at the independent testing laboratory. Will the

6 38

Name of Offeror or Contractor:

PIIN/SIIN MOD/AMD

Government confirm that the Radioactive Wipe Test is not required for Bid Sample Hardware?

GOVERNMENT RESPONSE 130:________________________

Yes, the Radioactive Wipe Test is not required for the Bid Samples.

*** END OF NARRATIVE A0007 ***

7 38

Name of Offeror or Contractor:

PIIN/SIIN MOD/AMD

SECTION E - INSPECTION AND ACCEPTANCE

Clause 52.246-4065 (ES6050)_____________________________

WIPE TESTING REQUIREMENTS FOR NEWLY PROCURED RADIOACTIVE COMMODITIES

(a) In accordance with the following procedures, the wipe test shall be conducted on devices containing Hydrogen-3 (Tritium), Nickel-63, and Americium-241. The Wipe Test is intended to verify that devices containing radioactive material do not impose a threat to the environment or to an individual's health. The removable activity shall not exceed 1,000 disintegrations per minute (DPM).

(b) Applicable Documents for Hydrogen-3 (Tritium) & Nickel-63.

ANSI N42.9-1972

Standard Test Procedures for Photomultipliers for Scintillation Counting and Glossary for Scintillation Counting Field

ANSI N42.15-1980

American National Standard Performance Verification of Liquid Scintillation Counting System

ANSI N42.16-1986

American National Standard Specifications for Sealed Radioactive Check Sources Used in Liquid Scintillation Counters

(c) Requirements.

(1) When conducting wipe testing for Hydrogen-3 (Tritium) and Nickel-63, the suitable filter for liquid scintillation (LS) is a cellulose nitrate filter which dissolves or becomes transparent when mixed with LS fluid. Use only one type of filter and ensure that the liquid scintillation counter is calibrated using the same type of filter for background as is used to take all the nickel and tritium wipes. Dampen the filter (with distilled water) prior to wiping the device.

The suitable filter paper for Americium-241 (Am-241) is a pressure-sensitive smear.

(2) Using moderate finger pressure, wipe the radioactive surface (not to exceed a 4 by 4 inch square) of the device with filter paper.

(i) For tritium devices, the radioactive surface is the external area adjacent to the source(s).

(ii) When performing this procedure on the Chemical Agent Monitor (CAM) (Nickel-63), the area to be wiped is the exterior surface of the CAM around the protective cap of the nozzle.

(iii) For the M43A1 Chemical Agent Detector (Americium-241), separate the top case assembly from the bottom case assembly. There are two areas which shall be wiped with a single wipe - the exposed area of the cell module and the area around the exit port.

(3) Place wiped filter papers for Hydrogen-3 (Tritium) & Nickel-63 items in scintillation counter vials with 1 ml of distilled water. For Am-241 wipes place each filter into a sealable plastic bag. Assure the bags or vials are identified and traceable to the item tested.

(4) Prepare the wipe for analysis according to the filter used. These analysis procedures shall be operated in accordance with the manufacturer's recommendations.

(i) Wipe analysis for Hydrogen-3 (Tritium) & Nickel-63 items shall be analyzed on a liquid scintillation counter. Operate the liquid scintillation counter in accordance with the documents cited in paragraph (b) above.

(ii) Wipe analysis for the M43A1 Chemical Agent Detector shall be analyzed by a gas flow proportional counting system or equivalent alpha detection instrumentation. The gas flow proportional counting system used to evaluate wipe tests shall be calibrated by an alpha reference source traceable to the National Institute of Standards & Technology at least every three months, and checked by an alpha reference source prior to each day's operational.

(5) Test results including a record of the amount of activity of each sample and verification of performance of the liquid scintillation counting system for Hydrogen-3 (Tritium) and Nickel-63 items are to be provided as specified in the Data Item

Description (DID).Results of instrument calibration, required in paragraph (4) above for flow proportional counting (Americium-241), will be submitted to the government procuring office.

(6) The Contractor shall have an independent testing laboratory conduct wipe testing and analysis on the deliverable end item as described above. The sample for wipe testing may be submitted to the independent testing laboratory of the Contractors choice. An independent testing laboratory representative may perform wipe testing at the Contractor's facility as long as the wipe tests are analyzed at the independent testing laboratory.

(7) Wipe Test sampling shall be conducted as follows:

(i) A wipe test shall be performed on the entire First Article (FAT) sample(s) (if FAT is required by the contract).

(ii) A wipe test shall be performed on each production lot. A random sample shall be selected from each production lot in accordance with the table below:

8 38

Name of Offeror or Contractor:

PIIN/SIIN MOD/AMD

Lot Size Sample Size

1 - 30 All

31 - 50 30

51 - 100 37

101 - 200 40

201 - 300 43

301 - 400 44

401 - 2,000 45

2,001 - 100,000 75

(iii) Prior to selection of the wipe test sample, the lot shall have met all other contract requirements. A sample shall not be submitted from the rejected lot unless authorized by the Contracting Officer.

(iv) Sample units shall be randomly selected from the entire lot by the Government Quality Assurance Representative.

(8) The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) requires radiation exposures to be as low as reasonable achievable (ALARA), see 10 CFR

20.1101. But, in any case, failure of any sample unit to meet the maximum activity level of no more than 1,000 Disintegrations per

Minute shall be cause for the Government to halt further product acceptance and for the Contractor to immediately perform a failure analysis and take corrective action. The failure analysis, in addition to isolating the root cause of the excessive activity level, shall include the Contractor's assessment with rationale as to the extent the condition is present in both in process and delivered product (i.e., identification of the suspect items). The Contractor's corrective action shall address the positive measures taken to prevent recurrence of the condition in the future as well as corrective actions to be taken on all suspect product. Both the failure analysis and corrective action shall be subject to review and approval by the Government prior to re-initiation of Government product acceptance.

(9) The independent testing laboratory employed by the Contractor must be licensed by the NRC or the applicable NRC Agreement State, or by the equivalent regulatory agency when the independent testing laboratory is located outside the United States. The subcontracting under this solicitation and the resulting contract is open to competition between Department of Defense activities and private firms. Under the authority of 10 U.S.C. 2208(j), applicable working capital funded activities are available as potential subcontractors. The point of contact for safety concerns relating to radioactive commodities in contracts is C. Martin Johnson Jr., US Army Aviation and Missile Command, AMSAM-TMD-SRR-C, Building 5417 Nuclear Counting Redstone Arsenal, AL 35898-5000, Phone: 256-

876-0472, email: charles.m.johnson335.civ@mail.mil.

(10) The independent testing laboratory must be able to verify the performance of the instrumentation used to analyze the wipe tests. Documentation shall be provided in accordance with the Data Item Description.

(End of Clause)

*** END OF NARRATIVE E0001 ***

9 38

Name of Offeror or Contractor:

PIIN/SIIN MOD/AMD

SECTION G - CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION DATA

Additional Information______________________

Contractors Contract Representative:____________________________________

POC Name:

POC Phone Number:

POC E-mail Address:

Contract Specialist:____________________

Mr. Vincent Turco

Army Contracting Command - New Jersey

ACC-NJ-SW

Bldg. 9 Phipps Rd.

Mail Stop: Bldg. 10

Picatinny, NJ 07806-5000

Phone: (973)724-2016

E-mail: vincent.f.turco.civ@mail.mil

Contracting Officer:___________________

Mr. Kevin Puma

Army Contracting Command - New Jersey

ACC-NJ-SW

Bldg. 9 Phipps Rd.

Mail Stop: Bldg. 10

Picatinny, NJ 07806-5000

Phone: (973)724-6612

E-mail: kevin.p.puma.civ@mail.mil

Contracting Officer:___________________

Mr. Daniel L. Potempa

Army Contracting Command - New Jersey

ACC-NJ-SW

Bldg. 9 Phipps Rd.

Mail Stop: Bldg. 10

Picatinny, NJ 07806-5000

Phone: (973)724-4870

E-mail: daniel.l.potempa2.civ@mail.mil

Contract Officer Representative:________________________________

TBD

*** END OF NARRATIVE G0001 ***

10 38

Name of Offeror or Contractor:

PIIN/SIIN MOD/AMD

SECTION H - SPECIAL CONTRACT REQUIREMENTS

Procedure for Down-Selection of the Modular Handgun System (MHS) Candidates After Awards

H.1.1 Down Select Proposal Submittal Instructions

H.1.1.1 Within 30 days after issuance of the delivery order for CLIN 0001 the contractor shall deliver 2 HARD COPIES and 2 COMPACT DISCS of the following written proposal volumes:

Volume I - Price Proposal

Volume II - License Rights - Ammunition

Volume III - License Rights - Weapon and Accessories

H.1.1.2 Proposal Submission Format - The Offerors proposal shall consist of the volume as indicated above. Files shall not contain classified data. The submission shall be clearly indexed and logically assembled in the English language, and all prices/cost denoted in

American currency (U.S. Dollars). Each volume shall be clearly identified and shall begin at the top of a page. All pages of each volume shall be appropriately numbered and identified by the complete company name, date and solicitation number in the header and/or footer. A

Table of Contents should be created using the Table of Contents feature in Microsoft Word. All proposals shall be submitted in Microsoft

Office format. An Adobe Acrobat PDF file shall be created to capture the signatures for submission. The Offeror shall not use the security options within the files. Microsoft Word files shall use the following page set-up parameters:

Margins Top, Bottom, Left, Right 1

Gutter 0

From Edge Header, Footer 0.5

Page Size, Width 8.5

Page Size, Height 11

H.1.1.2.1 The following additional restrictions apply:

Each paragraph shall be separated by at least one (1) blank line. A standard, 12-point minimum font size applies. Arial or Times New

Roman fonts are required. Tables and illustrations may use a reduced font size not less than eight (8) point and may be landscape. NOTE:

Electronic submissions shall consist of a separate CD for the price volume II all other volumes shall be contained on another separate

CD.

H.1.1.3 Content Requirements: All information shall be confined to the appropriate volume. The Offeror shall confine submissions to essential matters, sufficient to define the proposal and provide adequate basis for evaluation. Offerors are responsible for including sufficient details, in a concise manner, to permit a complete and accurate evaluation of each proposal. Each file of the proposal shall consist of a Table of Contents, Summary Section, and the Narrative discussion. The Summary Section shall contain a brief abstract of the file. Proprietary information shall be clearly marked.

H.1.1.4 Separate Instruction by Volume:

Volume I Price Proposal

Contractors may provide an update to the current contract line item prices to reflect any adjustments in price to be considered in this

Down Select evaluation. (Note: Only downward adjustments in price are allowed). If an updated price proposal is submitted, it shall consist of an entire revised Section B with all contract line items filled in with the updated prices except for CLIN 0001 and CLIN 0002 which were awarded under Delivery Order 0001. CLIN 0001 and CLIN 0002 will not be part of the price evaluation for the Down Select.

Offerors shall use either attachment MHS_Downselect_Section_B_Full_&_Compact.xlsx OR MHS_Downselect_Section_B_One_Gun.xlsx, depending on whether the basic contract was awarded for the full and compact MHS or just a one MHS solution.

Procedures for Use and Rental of Government Property. In accordance with FAR 45.202(a), the Government shall consider any potentially unfair competitive advantage that may result from an Offeror using Government property. To eliminate the competitive advantage, a rental equivalent evaluation factor shall be added to each offer which is predicated on the use of Government property. Offerors shall refer to Local Clause 52.245-4003 Evaluation Procedures for Use and Rental of Government Property.

Volume II License Rights Proposal Ammunition: The Government will engage in negotiations for License Rights (LR) with the successful

Contractors in order to finalize the Contractors' proposed LR terms and conditions.

Volume III License Rights Proposal Handgun and Accessories: The Government will engage in negotiations for License Rights (LR) with the successful Contractors in order to finalize the Contractors' proposed LR terms and conditions.

H.2.1 Rating and Definitions Procedure for Down-Select

H.2.1.1 The Evaluation team will conduct an in-depth review and evaluation of each Contractor's proposal against the Down Select requirements. Application of color/adjectival ratings will identify significant strengths, strengths, significant weaknesses, weaknesses and/or deficiencies associated with each evaluation factor. Color/Adjectival ratings will be used for all factors with the exception of

11 38

Name of Offeror or Contractor:

PIIN/SIIN MOD/AMD

Price.

Proposals will be evaluated for adequacy of response and feasibility of approach.

H.3.1 Down Select Evaluation

Subsequent to award of the base contract(s), the first delivery order will be issued for the Weapon System Component Package requirements in accordance with CLIN 1001 of the base contract and Statement of Work C.3.1 which will satisfy the minimum guarantee of each of the contracts. The deliverables from this first order will be the used for the evaluation and down-selection to a single Modular

Handgun System (MHS) contractor to continue into production.

H.4.1 Basis for Down-Selection Decision

The Government will down-select to the Contractor whose proposals represent the best value to the Government using the trade-off method, with the Source Selection Authority (SSA) giving the appropriate consideration to the six (6) evaluation factors: System Accuracy

Shooter In The Loop, Reliability and Service Life, License Rights (LR) Ammunition, License Rights (LR) Handgun and Accessories, Other

Characteristics, and Price. The Government will weigh the relative benefits of each proposal and award will be made based on an integrated assessment of the results of the evaluation. In making the integrated assessment of the evaluation results, the SSA will give due consideration to all of the Factors and Sub-Factors and their relative order of importance.

H.5.1 Factors and Sub-Factors to be Evaluated for Down-Select

The criteria for down-select evaluation (DSE) consists of both technical and non-technical factors. These factors are as follows:

Factor 1: System Accuracy Shooter In The Loop

Factor 2: Reliability and Service Life

Factor 3: License Rights Ammunition

Factor 4: License Rights Handgun and Accessories

Factor 5: Other Characteristics

Factor 6: Price

The System Accuracy Shooter in the Loop factor and the Reliability and Service Life Factor are equally important, and are more important than the License Rights Ammunition, which is significantly more important than the License Rights Handgun and Accessories, which is significantly more important than the Other Characteristics Factor, which is significantly more important that the Price factor. The combination of all factors other than Price are significantly more important than the Price factor. The Government will weigh any increase in merit rating against any additional price to determine if the parity of the relationship warrants the paying of a higher price for additional merit. However, affordability may become more determinative in the event competing technical ratings are closely grouped and offer comparable value to the Government. The Government reserves the right to down-select to other than the lowest priced

Contractor, or to other than the Contractor with the highest technical rating if the Government determines that to do so would result in the best value to the Government. The Government will weigh the relative benefits of each proposal and the SSA will assess the results of the evaluations of each of the factors.

H.5.1.1 Factor 1, System Accuracy Shooter- In-The-Loop has no sub-factors

H.5.1.2 Factor 2, Reliability and Service Life has two (2) sub-factors which are listed below:

Sub-Factor 1 Reliability

Sub-Factor 2 Service Life

H.5.1.2.1 The relative order of importance for these factor are as follows: the Reliability sub-factor is more important than the

Service Life sub-factor.

H.5.1.3 Factor 3, License Rights Ammunition has no sub-factors:

H.5.1.4 Factor 4, License Rights Handgun and Accessories:

Sub-Factor 1 Handgun

Sub-Factor 2 Accessories

H.5.1.4.1 The relative order of importance for these two sub-factors are as follows: the Handgun LR is significantly more important than the Accessories LR.

H.5.1.5 Factor 5, Other Characteristics, has six (6) sub-factors which are listed below:

Sub-Factor 1 Physical Dimensions (Full Size and Compact)

Sub-Factor 2 Material Reliability in Extreme Conditions

Sub-Factor 3 Magazine Characteristics

Sub-Factor 4 Maintainability - Field Level Maintenance

Sub-Factor 5 Ammunition Characteristics

Sub-Factor 6 Joint Concept of Operations (CONOPS)

12 38

Name of Offeror or Contractor:

PIIN/SIIN MOD/AMD

H.5.1.5.1 The relative order of importance for these factor are as follows: the Physical Dimensions sub-factor is more important than the Material Reliability in Extreme Conditions sub-factor, which is more important than the Magazine Characteristics and Maintainability

Field Level Maintenance sub-factors, which are of equal importance, and which are more important than the Ammunition Characteristics sub-factor, and which is more important than the Joint Concept of Operations sub-factor.

H.5.1.6 Factor 6, Price has no sub-factors

Note: If at any point during the DSE the Government identifies a safety issue with a Modular Handgun System Candidate, the Government reserves the right to discontinue testing and eliminate the candidate from further consideration.

H.5.2 DOWN-SELECT EVALUATION (DSE) APPROACH

The System Accuracy Shooter-In-The-Loop, Reliability and Service Life, and the Other Characteristics Factor and Sub-Factors will receive a color/adjectival rating in accordance with the table below.

Note: The term proposal used in the following rating definition schemes can refer to any of the items submitted in response to the RFP, which is inclusive of the bid sample and all written volumes.

Note: The terms strengths and weaknesses used in the following rating descriptions are inclusive of significant strengths and significant weaknesses as described within the definitions. Evaluation of the Sub-Factors will consider the following:

| Table 2.1 Color/Adjectival Ratings |

| Color | Rating | Description |

| Blue | Outstanding | Proposal meets requirements and indicates an exceptional |

| | | approach and understanding of the requirements. Strengths far |

| | | outweigh any weaknesses. Risk of unsuccessful performance |

| | | is very low. |

| Purple | Good | Proposal meets requirements and indicates a thorough |

| | | approach and understanding of the requirements. Proposal |

| | | contains strengths which outweigh any weaknesses. Risk of |

| | | unsuccessful performance is low. |

| Green | Acceptable | Proposal meets requirements and indicates an adequate |

| | | approach and understanding of the requirements. Strengths |

| | | and weaknesses are offsetting or will have little or no impact |

| | | on contract performance. Risk of unsuccessful performance is |

| | | no worse than moderate. |

| Yellow | Marginal | Proposal does not clearly meet requirements and has not |

| | | demonstrated an adequate approach and understanding of the |

| | | requirements. The proposal has one or more weaknesses which |

| | | are not offset by strengths. Risk of unsuccessful performance |

| | | is high. |

| Red | Unacceptable | Proposal does not meet requirements and contains one or more |

| | | deficiencies. Proposal is un-awardable. |

Within these factors, each sub-factor will be rated separately using the color /adjectival ratings. The components of each sub-factor will be assessed for significant strengths, strengths, weaknesses, significant weaknesses, deficiencies, risks, and uncertainties. Each sub-factor will be assigned an adjectival rating based upon these collective findings. The compilation of these sub-factor adjectival ratings will form the basis of the factor rating.

a. Significant Strength - Is an aspect of an Offeror's proposal that has appreciable merit or appreciably exceeds specified performance or capability requirements in a way that will be appreciably advantageous to the Government during contract performance.

b. Strength - Is an aspect of an Offerors proposal that has merit or exceeds specified performance or capability requirements in a way that will be advantageous to the Government during contract performance.

c. Weakness - A flaw in the proposal that increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance.

d. Significant Weakness - A flaw that appreciably increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance.

e. Deficiency - A material failure of a proposal to meet a Government requirement or a combination of significant weaknesses in a

13 38

Name of Offeror or Contractor:

PIIN/SIIN MOD/AMD

proposal that increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance to an unacceptable level.

f. Uncertainty - Any aspect of a non-price Factor proposal for which the intent of the Offeror is unclear (e.g., more than one way to interpret the offer or inconsistencies in the proposal indicating that there may have been an error, omission or mistake).

H.5.2.1 Factor 1: System Accuracy Shooter In The Loop

The Government shall conduct a User test with each Modular Handgun System candidate that has successfully been granted a Safety Release.

The Government shall evaluate this factor in accordance with the Modular Handgun Joint Pistol Qualification Course (JPQC). Each

Warfighter in this test will fire each candidate weapon system. The JPQC includes target engagements spanning 1m to 35m, from various firing positions, with target exposure times of 3 to 8 seconds. See Appendix K for the Modular Handgun System Joint Qualification

Pistol Course document for list of engagements and round counts per engagement. Data collected for each engagement will include hit/miss, and location of hit when applicable (some engagements instruct shooters to aim for designated zones identified on the target).

The results from each warfighter test will be assessed against their respective services qualification standards (ratings as a percentage of score). The rating will be based on overall test results and the risk of unsuccessful performance of this factor.

H.5.2.2 Factor 2: Reliability and Service Life

H.5.2.2.1 Sub-Factor 1: Reliability

The Government will evaluate the capability of the Offerors Modular Handgun System candidate design to meet the Reliability requirement for Mean Rounds Between Stoppages (MRBS) and Mean Rounds Between Failures (MRBF) using up to 35,000 rounds of Special Purpose ammunition. Evaluation will consider how closely the candidate Modular Handgun System comes to meeting the threshold requirements as found in the Performance Purchase Description Modular Handgun System (AR-PD-177) paragraph 3.7.1.a and paragraph 3.7.1.b and verified according to paragraph 4.8.1. For candidate systems that fail to meet the threshold requirement, the assigned rating will be based on the overall risk of unsuccessful performance. The closer a candidate system comes to meeting the objective requirement of 2,500 MRBS and 10,000 MRBF, the more favorably the candidate Modular Handgun will be rated. The rating will be based on overall test results and the risk of unsuccessful performance of this factor.

H.5.2.2.2 Sub-Factor 2: Service Life

The Government will evaluate the capability of the Offerors Modular Handgun System candidate design to meet the Service Life requirement using up to 35,000 rounds of Special Purpose ammunition. Evaluation will consider how closely the candidate Modular Handgun System comes to meeting the threshold requirement of 25,000 rounds as found in the Performance Purchase Description Modular Handgun System (AR-

PD-177) paragraph 3.7.1.c and tested concurrently with Reliability in accordance with paragraph 4.8.1. Paragraph 6.7.q of the AR-PD-177 defines criteria which constitues an unserviceable weapon. The closer a candidate system comes to meeting the objective requirement of

35,000, the more favorable the rating will be received. The rating will be based on overall test results and the risk of unsuccessful performance of this factor.

.5.2.3 Factor 3: License Rights - Ammunition

H.5.2.3.1 MHS Purpose Rights License

This text defines MHS Purpose Rights License. Should an offeror offer to grant the MHS Purpose Rights License and the Government accept, this text shall be modified to reflect the actual grant of data and patent rights and patents and patent applications covered by the license.

MHS purpose means any activity in which the United States Government is a party, including cooperative agreements with international or multi-national defense organizations, or…