W52P1J-20-R-0023 Amd 0002.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

0002 2020APR29

W52P1J

ARMY CONTRACTING COMMAND - RI

ROCK ISLAND, IL 61299-8000

BLDGS 60 & 62

JACOB HARRISON

EMAIL: JACOB.T.HARRISON15.CIV@MAIL.MIL

W52P1J-20-R-0023

2020FEB28

X

X 2020MAY26 04:00pm

/SIGNED/

2 signed

SEE SECOND PAGE FOR DESCRIPTION

1 11

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: JACOB HARRISON

Buyer Office Symbol/Telephone Number: CCRI-AB/(309)782-7519

Type of Contract 1: Firm Fixed Price

Kind of Contract: Supply Contracts and Priced Orders

*** End of Narrative A0000 ***

Solicitiation W52P1J-20-R-0023 Amendment 0002

The purpose of this Amendment is to incorporate various changes to the Solicitation. The changes are detailed below.

1. Proposal due date is extended by two weeks. The proposal due date is extended from 12 May 2020 at 4:00 p.m. CST to 26 May 2020 at

4:00 p.m. CST. An Offeror must ensure its proposal, in its entirety, reaches the intended destinations before the date and time set forth in this Amendment. Both the written portion and the Bid Sample portion of the proposal must reach their respective destination prior to proposal closing date and time to be considered.

2. The method of submission for the Bid Sample portion of proposals has changed. Section L.2.4.3 has been updated with a new address that Offerors must utilize when shipping Bid Sample proposals. Additionally, the Government now requires Offerors notify the Government prior to shipment of Bid Samples(reference L.2.4.4).

3. The Government will not entertain any further request for proposal extension beyond the established due date of 26 May 2020 established herein.

4. As previously addressed in the Questions and Answers, the weapon mount and orientation are incorporated herein at M.4.2.2.1 and

M.4.2.3.1.

5. All other terms and conditions of Solicitation W52P1J-20-R-0023 remain unchanged.

*** END OF NARRATIVE A0003 ***

2 11

W52P1J-20-R-0023

Name of Offeror or Contractor:

PIIN/SIIN MOD/AMD

SECTION L - INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS, AND NOTICES TO OFFERORS

APPENDIX A: SECTION L INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS, AND NOTICES TO OFFERORS

L.1 GENERAL PROPOSAL INFORMATION

L.1.1 The proposal, subject to the Submission, Modification, Revision and Withdrawal paragraph of Instructions to Offeror(s) Competitive

Acquisitions (FAR Provision 52.215-1) contained in Section L of the solicitation, shall be submitted in the format and quantities set forth below. All information necessary for the review and evaluation of a proposal is to be contained in the proposal volumes set forth below. Section M of the solicitation sets forth the evaluation criteria and details the factors to be evaluated and its relative order of importance. The Offerors proposal, as required by Section L, will be evaluated as set forth in Section M of this solicitation.

L.1.2 The Government will not assume the Offeror possesses any capability, understanding, or commitment not specified in its proposal.

It is an Offerors responsibility to submit a well-written proposal, with detailed information, which clearly demonstrates an understanding of and the ability to comply with the solicitation requirements to allow for a meaningful evaluation. The Government does not assume the duty to search for data to cure problems it finds in proposals.

L.2 PROPOSAL CONTENT, FORMAT, AND INSTRUCTIONS

L.2.1 PROPOSAL CONTENT

L.2.1.1 The Offeror shall submit its proposal in four separate volumes in English and in U.S. dollars as set forth below:

Volume I: General

Volume II: Factor 1: Bid Sample Test

Volume III: Factor 2: Technical

Volume IV: Factor 3: Price

L.2.1.2 Each volume of the Offerors written proposal shall be consistent with the other proposal volumes and shall demonstrate the understanding and ability to perform according to the specifications of the contract. The Offeror shall provide supporting documentation in sufficient detail to permit a complete evaluation of the proposal. The Government may conduct a crosswalk between the information provided in the Offerors proposal volumes to assess whether the Offeror submits consistent proposal information.

L.2.1.3 Each volume stands on its own for evaluation purposes and must include all information necessary for evaluation (e.g., if it is to be evaluated in response to a Section L, Volume 1 requirement, the information must be included in the Offerors Volume 1 proposal for it to be considered). Offerors are also required to provide all required information for each subfactor independently. When rating a subfactor, the Government will only evaluate the information provided in the section of the proposal addressing that particular subfactor. When rating a factor that does not have subfactors, the Government will only evaluate the information provided in that volume. The Government will not consider information located in other sections or other volumes of the proposal in its evaluation of an individual factor or subfactor.

L.2.1.4 Each Offeror shall submit a Bid Sample as a component of the proposal. Bid Sample submission requirements are outlined in L.6.2.

The Offerors Bid Sample submission will satisfy the submission requirements in L.6.2. There will be no written proposal component for this factor.

L.2.2 PROPOSAL FORMAT

L.2.2.1 The written submission shall be clearly indexed, logically assembled and comply with the instructions contained in this section.

Each volume shall be clearly identified. All copies of the written proposal shall be submitted using Microsoft Office Word/Excel or

Adobe Acrobat software. Attachment 0001 - Price Matrix shall be submitted in the same format as provided. The use of hyperlinks in proposals is prohibited. The Offeror shall not lock or password protect any file

L.2.2.2 The Bid Sample submission shall be clearly identified as DDI rounds and comply with the instructions contained in this section.

Quantities required for Bid Sample submission are identified in L.6.2.

L.2.2.3 The Offeror's written proposal shall be formatted using standard 8.5 x 11 inch paper, 12 Point, Arial font, and single-spaced and with a minimum of 1-inch margins. If needed, schedules, drawings and other documents more appropriate to larger paper may be formatted no larger than 11 x 17 inch paper; however, each 11 x 17 inch page counts as two pages. All spreadsheets must be in Microsoft

(MS) Excel 2013 format and include all formulas, function, macros, computations, or equations used to compute the proposed amounts. For each workbook, all Rows, Columns, Cells, and Worksheets must be visible. Zero height and zero width rows and columns in Worksheets are not acceptable. Worksheet cells formatted with the font color equal to the fill color are unacceptable. Print image files or pictures or files containing only values are not acceptable.

L.2.3 SUBMISSION DUE DATE

The Offeror must ensure its proposal, in its entirety, reaches its intended destination before the date and time set for closing on

Standard Form 33 of the solicitation. Proposals in response to this solicitation shall be valid for 180 days. Both the written portion

3 11

Name of Offeror or Contractor:

PIIN/SIIN MOD/AMD

and the Bid Sample must reach their respective destination prior to proposal closing date.

L.2.3.1 Should an Offeror have difficulties with the delivery of proposals, please immediately notify the PCO at jennifer.n.paul.civ@mail.mil and/or the Contract Specialist (CS) at jacob.t.harrison15.civ@mail.mil.

L.2.4 METHOD OF SUBMISSION

L.2.4.1 Written proposals shall be submitted via email to the PCO at jennifer.n.paul.civ@mail.mil and CS at jacob.t.harrison15.civ@mail.mil by the time and date specified for receipt of proposals in block nine of the Standard Form (SF) 33. Each

Volume shall be a separate file and clearly identified.

L.2.4.2 For written proposals, Offerors shall submit their proposal with the subject line identifying the RFP number, the Offerors Name, and the number of emails sent for the submission. For example: W52P1J20D0023, XYZ Company, Email 1 of 2. Additional emails should only be sent if the contents exceed 10MB. The body of the email shall specify the total number of attachments sent as well as the name of each attachment so the Government can verify all attachments were received.

L.2.4.3 The Bid Sample portion of the proposals shall be submitted to the address below. Bid Samples can be provided in the best commercial manner. While specific instructions for submission are not provided, it is the obligation of the Offeror to ensure submissions arrive in proper condition. Offerors shall submit only the Bid Sample portion of the proposal to the below destination.

Offerors shall NOT send written proposals to the below address. Any written documents submitted with the Bid Samples will not be evaluated.

NATO NORTH AMERICAN REGIONAL TESTING CENTER

DODAAC: W58H0J / UIC: WOLGAA

ATTN: Jeff Kent BSO Building #8

Lake City Army Ammunition Plant / LCAAP

MO 7 Hwy & MO 78 Hwy

Independence, MO 64056

L.2.4.4 For Bid Sample proposals, Offerors submission shall identify the RFP number, the type of round, and the Offeror's name. For example: W52P1J20D0023, DDI 5.56mm, XYZ Company.

Offerors shall notify the Contracting Officer and Contract Specialist via email a minimum of 48 hours prior to shipment of Bid Sample proposals.

L.2.4.5 No classified information shall be included in this solicitation. If classified material is received, it will not be evaluated.

L.2.4.6 Offeror must be registered in the System for Award Management (SAM) and have an assigned Commercial and Government Entity (CAGE) code.

L.2.4.7 The solicitation, amendments, notices, and other information will be made available on beta.sam.gov. Offerors are advised to continuously monitor this website for new information. The Offerors are deemed to have knowledge of all documents that are posted to beta.sam.gov.

L.2.4.8 The Government will not reimburse Offerors for incurred costs associated with the preparation of proposals, to include the Bid

Sample.

L.2.4.9 The Government assumes ownership of the Bid Samples upon timely receipt. Late Bid Samples will be returned at the Offerors expense.

L.3 SINGLE PROPOSAL SUBMISSION

Offerors are limited to submitting one proposal that includes a single approach to meeting the requirements of this solicitation.

L.4 CONTRACT AWARD

L.4.1 The Government intends to award a single-award Indefinite Delivery/Indefinite Quantity, Firm Fixed Price contract using a Best

Value Subjective Tradeoff evaluation in accordance with the criteria outlined in this solicitation.

L.4.2 Each initial proposal should contain the Offerors best terms for award of a contract under the solicitation. The PCO reserves the right to contact Offerors for clarification, without opening discussions. The Government intends to award a contract without discussions. The Government reserves the right to conduct discussions if determined to be necessary. Only the PCO, or the designated

CS, can contact the prospective contractor for clarifications or for opening discussions. No other Government representative has the authority to communicate with the prospective contractor regarding this solicitation and its terms and conditions.

The PCO may limit the number of proposals in the competitive range to the greatest number that will permit an efficient competition among the highest rated proposals. The PCO will promptly inform those Offeror(s) determined to be outside the competitive range. All

4 11

Name of Offeror or Contractor:

PIIN/SIIN MOD/AMD

Offerors in the competitive range will be advised of any significant weaknesses and deficiencies identified during the Factor 2 -

Technical and Factor 3 - Price evaluations, if necessary, and will be offered a reasonable opportunity to correct or resolve them. At the conclusion of discussions, the PCO will give all Offerors still within the competitive range an opportunity to submit a Final

Proposal Revision (FPR) by a common cutoff date and time. Although a Final Proposal Revision may be permitted for Factor 2- Technical and Factor 3- Price, the Government will not permit the Offeror to submit additional samples or revisions to Factor 1- Bid Sample Test.

L.5 REJECTION OF OFFERS

Offerors shall carefully read, understand, and provide all the information requested in the Proposal Preparation Instructions and

Content contained in Section L. In accordance with clause FAR 52.215-1 contained in this solicitation, the Government may reject any or all proposals if such action is in the Governments interests. The circumstances which may lead to the rejection of a proposal include, but are not limited to, the following:

(a) The proposal fails to meaningfully respond to the Proposal Preparation Instructions specified in Section L of this solicitation.

(b) The proposal contains unbalanced pricing that the Contracting Officer determines is an unacceptable risk to the Government pursuant to Clause 52.215-1(f)(8).

(c) The Offeror proposes exceptions to the attachments, exhibits, enclosures, or other RFP terms and conditions.

(d) The Offeror's proposal contains any inconsistencies between proposal volumes.

L.6 PROPOSAL VOLUMES

To be considered, the Offeror must submit a complete response to this solicitation using the sequence and format instructions provided in each section below. The proposal shall be divided into the separate volumes specified below.

Volume I: General (L.6.1)

Volume II: Factor 1 - Bid Sample Test (L.6.2)

Subfactor 1 - Dimensional and Visual Consistency (Included within L.6.2)

Subfactor 2 - Weapon Compatibility (Included within L.6.2)

Subfactor 3 - Cartridge Durability (Included within L.6.2)

Volume III: Factor 2 - Technical (L.6.3)

Subfactor 1 - Production Processes (L.6.3.1)

Subfactor 2 - Production Rates (L.6.3.2)

Subfactor 3 - Equipment Usage and Management of Tooling (L.6.3.3)

Subfactor 4 - Material Control (L.6.3.4)

Volume IV: Factor 3 - Price (L.6.4)

L.6.1 VOLUME I: GENERAL

L.6.1.1 STANDARD FORM (SF) 33. Offeror means the official legal bidding entity identified in Block 15A on the SF 33, Solicitation, Offer and Award. The Offerors legal name and address must match the information for the Offeror listed at SAM.gov, including the corresponding

CAGE Code and DUNS (note: the address listed in Block 15A will be the official mailing address used by the Government for letter correspondence, if necessary).

Using the SF 33 form, Solicitation, Offer and Award, posted as page 1 of the solicitation, the Offeror shall complete blocks 12-18 and all certifications requiring signature.

The Government requires a minimum acceptance period of no less than 180 calendar days. The Offeror shall complete Block 12 of each SF 33 submitted with full cognizance of the minimum acceptance period of 180 calendar days.

If any amendments to the solicitation are issued, the Offeror must acknowledge each amendment number and date in Block 14 of the SF 33 and complete the applicable SF 30.

The name, title, signature, and date identified in Block 16, 17, 18, must be an authorized representative with authority to bind the

Offeror to contractual obligations.

L.6.2 VOLUME II: FACTOR 1: BID SAMPLE TEST

The Offeror shall submit Bid Samples, as identified below, as the only portion of the proposal for Volume II. Bid Samples will be evaluated for Factor 1 Bid Sample Test, including all subfactors, in accordance with Section M. A written component of the proposal will not be evaluated under Volume II, Factor 1 or any of its subfactors.

The Offeror shall submit the quantities listed below for each of the following DODICs that meet requirements set forth in the applicable performance specification:

-AB46 (5.56mm): NSN 1305-01-675-1363: The Offeror shall submit 150 rounds of 5.56mm, M199A1E1, DDI

5 11

Name of Offeror or Contractor:

PIIN/SIIN MOD/AMD

-AB47 (7.62mm): NSN 1305-01-675-2866: The Offeror shall submit 100 rounds of 7.62mm, M63A1E1, DDI

-AB48 (Caliber .50): NSN 1305-01-676-3652: The Offeror shall submit 100 rounds of Caliber .50, M2A1, DDI

L.6.3 VOLUME III: FACTOR 2: TECHNICAL

The Offeror shall not exceed 20 pages for the entirety of this factor and its subfactors, combined. Any pages in excess of 20 pages for the Factor 2- Technical will not be considered.

L.6.3.1 Subfactor 1: Production Processes

Offeror shall provide detailed descriptions of the production processes (including process maps), and the steps required to manufacture, inspect, package and test all calibers of the DDI cartridge.

L.6.3.2 Subfactor 2: Production Rates

Offeror shall provide a detailed description of the number of machines that are to be used per caliber. Additionally, the Offeror shall provide the capabilities of the machines in parts per hour.

L.6.3.3 Subfactor 3: Equipment Usage and Management of Tooling

Offeror shall provide a detailed description of its proposed methodology and structure for the initial equipment set-up, day-to-day equipment upkeep, and tooling preventative maintenance. Offeror shall include tool wear calculation and tooling replacement intervals, part inventory levels, and calculations of up-time and operational availability.

L.6.3.4 Subfactor 4: Material Control

Offeror shall provide a plan for its material control system of product, and test assets, through all stages of production and acceptance including but not limited to all of incoming material, in-process material, and non-conforming material.

L.6.4 VOLUME IV: FACTOR 3 PRICE

L.6.4.1 The Offeror shall complete the Price Evaluation Sheet provided as Attachment 0001.

L.6.4.2 Each area that requires the Offerors input on the Price Evaluation Sheet has been highlighted in blue. Failure to complete the

Price Evaluation Sheet in its entirety may deem an Offerors proposal as unacceptable.

L.6.4.3 For each of the four (4) DODICs within the Price Evaluation Sheet, the Offeror shall enter a firm fixed unit price for all of the quantity ranges in each of the five (5) ordering periods and for First Article Test (FAT).

L.6.4.4 All FAT and unit prices proposed will be binding. Proposed unit prices are limited to four decimal places and shall be stated in current U.S. dollars.

L.6.4.5 FAT prices are required for all five (5) ordering periods. Offerors should not assume FAT will be waived and must provide FAT prices as requested. The Government reserves the right to require or waive FAT throughout the life of the contract. Offerors should price FATs on the Attachment 0001 - Price Evaluation Sheet to reflect the total price of a FAT.

L.6.4.6 The Government reserves the right to require the submission of any data (i.e. cost or pricing data) necessary to validate the reasonableness of an offer.

L.6.4.7 No other information is to be added to the Attachment 0001 - Price Evaluation Sheet, nor shall Offerors make any changes to the

Attachment 0001 - Price Evaluation Sheet.

*** END OF NARRATIVE L0001 ***

6 11

Name of Offeror or Contractor:

PIIN/SIIN MOD/AMD

SECTION M - EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

APPENDIX B: SECTION M EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

M.1 BASIS OF AWARD

M.1.1 OVERVIEW

This is a Best Value Subjective Tradeoff evaluation conducted in accordance with Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 15.3, Source

Selection, as supplemented by the Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (DFARS), Army Federal Acquisition Regulation

Supplement (AFARS).

Award will be made to the responsible Offeror whose offer, conforming to the solicitation, is determined to be the best overall value, price and other factors considered.

M.1.2 EVALUATION FACTORS

The Governments award determination will be based on the following non-price and price factors:

Volume I: General (M.4.1)

Volume II: Factor 1 - Bid Sample Test (M.4.2)

Subfactor 1 Dimensional and Visual Consistency (M.4.2.1)

Subfactor 2 - Weapon Compatibility (M.4.2.2)

Subfactor 3 - Cartridge Durability (M.4.2.3)

Volume III: Factor 2 - Technical (M.4.3)

Subfactor 1 - Production Processes (M.4.3.1)

Subfactor 2 - Production Rates (M.4.3.2)

Subfactor 3 - Equipment Usage and Management of Tooling (M.4.3.3)

Subfactor 4 - Material Control (M.4.3.4)

Volume IV: Factor 3 - Price (M.4.4)

M.1.3 RELATIVE ORDER OF IMPORTANCE

Factor 1- Bid Sample Test is significantly more important than Factor 2 - Technical.

Factor 2- Technical is more important than Factor 3- Price.

All Non-price evaluation factors, when combined, are significantly more important than Price.

If the offerors proposal receives a rating of Unacceptable for any subfactor, then the relevant factor rating shall be Unacceptable.

The evaluation of proposals submitted in response to this solicitation, and source selection, shall be conducted using a best value subjective tradeoff, considering both the evaluation factors and their relative order of importance to identify the proposal which represents the best value to the Government. As part of the best value determination, the relative strengths, significant strengths, weaknesses, significant weaknesses and deficiencies of each Offerors proposal will be considered, as specified below, in addition to the other evaluation methods described below, in selecting the offer that is most advantageous to the Government.

Although a Final Proposal Revision may be permitted for Factor 2- Technical and Factor 3- Price, the Government will not permit the offeror to submit additional samples or revisions to Factor 1- Bid Sample Test.

The award decision will be based on a comparative assessment of proposals against the source selection criteria (Sections L and M) of the solicitation. Offerors are cautioned that award may be made to other than the highest rated Offeror or other than lowest-priced

Offeror.

M.2 NUMBER OF CONTRACT AWARDS

The Government intends to award one contract as a result of this solicitation. The Government may choose not to award a contract if it concludes that no proposal submission contains a reasonable probability of complying with contract terms and conditions. The Government will select the proposal which represents the best value to the Government.

M.3 KEY EVALUATION DEFINITIONS

M.3.1 FACTOR 1 AND FACTOR 2 DEFINITIONS

The following combined adjectival ratings will be used in the evaluation of Factor 1, Bid Sample Test and Factor 2, Technical.

Combined Technical/Risk Ratings_______________________________

Outstanding (Blue) - Proposal indicates an exceptional approach and understanding of the requirements and contains multiple strenghts, and risk of unsuccessful performance is low.

Good (Purple) - Proposal indicates a thorough approach and understanding of the requirements and contains at least one strength, and

7 11

Name of Offeror or Contractor:

PIIN/SIIN MOD/AMD

risk of unsuccessful performance is low to moderate.

Acceptable (Green) - Proposal meets requirements and indicates an adequate approach to understanding of the requirements, and risk of unsuccessful performance is no worse than moderate.

Marginal (Yellow) - Proposal has not demonstrated an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements, and/or risk of unsuccessful performance is high.

Unacceptable (Red) - Proposal does not meet requirements of the solicitation, and thus, contains one or more deficiencies, and/or risk of unsuccessful performance in unacceptable. Proposal is unawardable.

(End of Combined Technical/Risk Ratings)

As part of the combined technical/risk assessment (using the adjectival rating described above), assessment of technical risk, which is manifested by the identification of weakness(es), considers potential for disruption of schedule, degradation of performance, the need for increased Government oversight, and/or the likelihood of unsuccessful contract performance. The evaluation will not assign separate risk ratings; however, the following definitions of risk are below for informational purposes and will be used during the combined technical/risk assessment:

Technical Risk Descriptions___________________________

Low - Proposal may contain weakness(es) which have little potential to cause disruption of schedule, increased cost or degradation of performance. Normal contractor effort and normal Government monitoring will likely be able to overcome any difficulties.

Moderate - Proposal contains a significant weakness or combination of weaknesses which may potentially cause disruption of schedule, increased cost or degradation of performance. Special contractor emphasis and close Government monitoring will likely be able to overcome difficulties.

High - Proposal contains a significant weakness or combination of weaknesses which is likely to cause a signficant discruption of schedule, increased cost or degradation of performance. Is unlikely to overcome any difficulties, even with special contractor emphasis and close Government monitoring.

Unacceptable - Proposal contains a material failure or a combination of significant weaknesses that increases the risk of unsuccessful performance to an unacceptable level.

(End of Technical Risk Descriptions)

M.3.2 FACTOR 3 DEFINITIONS

Factor 3: Price does not have adjectival definitions.

M.3.3 ADDITIONAL DEFINITIONS

These key evaluation definitions apply for the evaluation of all Factors:

Significant Strength - 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 appreciable advantageous to the Government during contract performance.

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

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

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

Deficiency - A material failure of a proposal to meet a Government requirement or a combination of significant weaknesses in a proposal that increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance to an unacceptable level.

M.4 PROPOSAL VOLUMES

M.4.1 VOLUME I: GENERAL

The Government will verify that all required information required in L.6.1.1 was provided.

M.4.2 VOLUME II: FACTOR 1 - BID SAMPLE TEST

There are three (3) subfactors under the Factor 1, Bid Sample Test: Subfactor 1: Dimensional and Visual Consistency, Subfactor 2: Weapon

Compatibility, and Subfactor 3: Cartridge Durability.

8 11

Name of Offeror or Contractor:

PIIN/SIIN MOD/AMD

Subfactor 2: Weapon Compatibility is equally as important as Subfactor 3: Cartridge Durability. Both Subfactor 2: Weapon Compatibility and Subfactor 3: Cartridge Durability, when combined, are significantly more important than Subfactor 1: Dimensional and Visual

Consistency.

Testing for cartridge durability and weapon compatibility will be performed simultaneously when functioning the M249, M240, and M2 machine guns.

Any cartridge durability failure that causes a stoppage shall also count against the weapon compatibility evaluation.

Although a Final Proposal Revision may be permitted for Factor 2- Technical and Factor 3- Price, the Government will not permit the offeror to submit additional samples or revisions to Factor 1- Bid Sample Test.

M.4.2.1 Subfactor 1: Dimensional and Visual Consistency

M.4.2.1.1 Evaluation Process

The Government will evaluate samples in accordance with the process outlined as follows.

- The submitted samples will be inspected for dimensional and visual conformance of key characteristics.

- Key dimensional characteristics include: Overall Length, Case Mouth OD, Head Diameter, Length to Shoulder, Weight

- Key visual characteristics include: color compliance, fluting, and quality of workmanship

M.4.2.1.1.1 M199A1E1 5.56MM

- As defined in MIL-STD-1916 a random sample of cartridges will be subject to dimensional inspections for key dimensional characteristics using calibrated calipers, a digital scale, and length to shoulder gage 8654101.

- As defined in MIL-STD-1916 a random sample of cartridges will be visually inspected for key visual characteristics.

M.4.2.1.1.2 M63A1E1 7.62 MM

- As defined in MIL-STD-1916 a random sample of cartridges will be subject to dimensional inspections for key dimensional characteristics using calibrated calipers, a digital scale, and length to shoulder gage 8648876.

- As defined in MIL-STD-1916 a random sample of cartridges will be visually inspected for key visual characteristics.

M.4.2.1.1.3 M2A1 Caliber 50

- As defined in MIL-STD-1916 a random sample of cartridges will be subject to gaging and dimensional inspections for key dimensional characteristics using calibrated calipers, a digital scale, and length to shoulder gage 8648897.

- As defined in MIL-STD-1916 a random sample of cartridges will be visually inspected for key visual characteristics.

M.4.2.1.2 Evaluation Criteria

The Government will evaluate Dimensional and Visual Consistency for the following:

M.4.2.1.2.1 The frequency at which an Offeror's samples are within the dimensional tolerances as identified in the applicable cartridge specifications/drawings, thus demonstrating reproducibility and quality control in the production cycle.

M.4.2.1.2.2 The frequency at which an Offeror meets visual inspection requirements in each sample.

M.4.2.1.2.3 The Government will evaluate the samples ability of being free of burrs, chips, flashing, voids, sharp edges, wrinkles, deep draw scratches, scaly metal, cracks, dirt, grease, rust, and other foreign matter of imperfections. The Government will evaluate the samples ability to be free of foreign material including, but not limited to, corrosion, stains, oil, sealant smears, and metal chips.

M.4.2.1.2.4 The Government will evaluate color as the samples ability to be in accordance with MIL-STD-709 and AMS-STD-595/17178 (Silver

Gloss).

M.4.2.1.2.5 The Government will evaluate the presence of fluting as the Offerors ability to manufacture samples with consistent fluting along the axial length of the sidewall, per the performance specification.

M.4.2.2 Subfactor 2: Weapon Compatibility

M.4.2.2.1 Evaluation Process:

The Government will evaluate samples in accordance with the process outlined as follows:

Note: A round which will no longer cycle in the weapon will be replaced with a new cartridge in order to complete the weapon compatibility test. The Government will continue to replace failed cartridges until there are no samples remaining. The Government will pull a random sample of cartridges, in strict accordance with the DODIC specific evaluation processes below, and use the remaining submitted samples to replace failed cartridges. The Government will not request additional samples to complete the Bid Sample Test if all submitted samples are exhausted due to replacements.

9 11

Name of Offeror or Contractor:

PIIN/SIIN MOD/AMD

Any cartridge durability failure that causes a stoppage shall also count against the weapon compatibility evaluation.

Both machine guns and rifles will be fixed mount, with horizontal weapon orientation.

M.4.2.2.1.1 M199A1E1 5.56MM

- A random sample of twelve (12) cartridges linked with M27 links will be cycled through an M249 machine gun manually a total of twenty-five (25) times to determine the ability to properly interface with the weapon system.

- A random sample of thirty (30) cartridges will be loaded into standard issue magazines, and cycled through an M16 series weapon a total of ten (10) times to determine the ability to properly interface with the weapon system.

- A random sample of thirty (30) cartridges will be loaded into standard issue magazines, and cycled through an M4 series weapon a total of ten (10) times to determine the ability to properly interface with the weapon system.

M.4.2.2.1.2 M63A1E1 7.62MM

- A random sample of twelve (12) cartridges will be linked with M13 links and cycled through an M240B machine gun manually a total of twenty five (25) times to determine the ability to properly interface with the weapon system.

- A random sample of twenty (20) cartridges will be loaded into standard issue magazines, and cycled through an M14 series weapon a total of fifteen (15) times to determine the ability to properly interface with the weapon system.

M.4.2.2.1.3 M2A1 Caliber .50

- A random sample of twelve (12) cartridges will be linked with M9 links and cycled through an M2 machine gun manually a total of twenty-five (25) times to determine the ability to properly interface with the weapon system.

M.4.2.2.2 Evaluation Criteria

The Government will evaluate weapon compatibility as the samples ability to be fed, chambered, ejected, and extracted through the appropriate weapon from a linked belt or standard issue magazines without inducing weapon stoppages or causing damage to the weapon system.

Weapon damage includes any pitting, scratches, gouging, or similar wear to any ammunition and weapon interface. Any cartridge durability failure that causes a stoppage shall also count against the weapon compatibility evaluation.

M.4.2.3 Subfactor 3: Cartridge Durability

M.4.2.3.1 Evaluation Process:

The Government will evaluate samples in accordance with the process outlined as follows:

Note: Cartridges that are replaced per M.4.2.2.1 will not be subject to cartridge durability testing. Only the initial random samples pulled, per the DODIC specific evaluation processes below, will be evaluated for this subfactor.

Both machine guns and rifles will be fixed mount, with horizontal weapon orientation.

M.4.2.3.1.1 M199A1E1 5.56MM

- A random sample of twelve (12) cartridges linked with M27 links will be cycled through an M249 machine gun manually a total of twenty-five (25) times to determine the durability of each cartridge.

M.4.2.3.1.2 M63A1E1 7.62MM

- A random sample of twelve (12) cartridges will be linked with M13 links and cycled through an M240B machine gun manually a total of twenty five (25) to determine the durability of each cartridge.

M.4.2.3.1.3 M2A1 Caliber 50

- A random sample of twelve (12) cartridges will be linked with M9 links and cycled through an M2 machine gun manually a total of twenty-five (25) times to determine the durability of the cartridges

M.4.2.3.2 Evaluation Criteria

The Government will evaluate cartridge durability as the samples ability to be fed, chambered, ejected, and extracted through the appropriate weapon system without any degradation to the cartridge through testing outlined in the applicable evaluation process. Any cartridge durability failure that causes a stoppage shall also count against the weapon compatibility evaluation.

Degradation of the cartridge includes any scratches, gouging, cracks, chips, burs, dents, splits or complete cartridge casualty. The

Government will evaluate the severity of degradation.

M.4.3 VOLUME III: FACTOR 2 - TECHNICAL

M.4.3.1 Subfactor 1: Production Processes

The Government will evaluate the Offerors understanding and detailed descriptions of the production processes (including process maps), and the steps required to manufacture, inspect, package, and test all calibers of the DDI cartridge.

10 11

Name of Offeror or Contractor:

PIIN/SIIN MOD/AMD

M.4.3.2 Subfactor 2: Production Rates

The Government will evaluate the Offerors understanding and detailed description of the number of machines that are to be used per caliber, and the machines capabilities in parts per hour.

M.4.3.3 Subfactor 3: Equipment Usage and Management of Tooling

The Government will evaluate the Offerors understanding and detailed description of its proposed methodology and structure for initial equipment set-up, day-to-day equipment upkeep, and tooling preventative maintenance. Additionally, the Government will evaluate the offerors tool wear calculations and tooling replacement intervals, part inventory levels, and calculations of up-time and operational availability.

M.4.3.4 Subfactor 4: Material Control

The Government will evaluate the Offerors plan for its material control system of product, and test assets through all stages of production and acceptance, including but not limited to all incoming material, in-process material, and non-conforming material.

M.4.4 VOLUME IV: FACTOR 3 - PRICE

M.4.4.1 The Government will calculate a Weighted Evaluation Price for each Ordering Period by multiplying the proposed unit prices for each quantity range by the respective weight and maximum quantity for that range, and summing the totals. The weight associated with each range represents the likelihood that an order, if and when placed, would be within that range. Evaluation of prices in each ordering period does not obligate the Government to utilize all ordering periods, nor does it guarantee future orders will be placed in accordance with the assigned weights outlined in Attachment 0001 - Price Evaluation Sheet. Weights and quantities are for evaluation purposes only.

M.4.4.2 The Total Evaluated Price for each Contract Line Item Number (CLIN) is calculated by summing the Weighted Evaluation Price for all five ordering periods.

M.4.4.3 The Total Evaluated Price is highlighted in yellow, which is the sum of all four (4) CLINs Total Evaluated Price.

M.4.4.4 The Total Evaluated Price will be evaluated utilizing Price Analysis to determine price reasonableness IAW FAR 15.404-1(b). In the event price cannot be determined fair and reasonable through price analysis, the Government will reserve the right to request cost and pricing data, which will be required within ten (10) days of request.

M.4.4.5 Proposals will be reviewed to identify any Unbalanced Pricing. In accordance with FAR 15.404-1(g), Unbalanced Pricing, a proposal may be rejected if the Contracting Officer determines the lack of balance poses an unacceptable risk to the Government.

*** END OF NARRATIVE M0001 ***

11 11