Draft Request for Proposal (RFP) #2 W519TC-26-R-0001 and Virtual Industry Day for the Special Ammunition and Weapon Systems (SAWS) and Non-NATO Commercial Ammunition acquisition
Closed Solicitation Posted
- Solicitation number
- Draft-W519TC-26-R-0001
- Agency
-
ACC Rock Island
Army Contracting Command, Department of Defense
- Responses due
- Set-aside
- No set-aside
Opportunity facts
- NAICS code
- 332993 Ammunition (except Small Arms) Manufacturing
- PSC
- 1395 Miscellaneous Ammunition
- Place of performance
- N/A Unknown
Notice details come from SAM.gov. Updated .
About this opportunity
Army Contracting Command – Rock Island Arsenal is releasing Draft Request for Proposal #2 for multiple-award IDIQ contracts for Special Ammunition and Weapon Systems (SAWS) and non-NATO commercial ammunition, with a virtual industry day on May 14, 2026 and feedback on draft requirements due May 26, 2026. This is a draft solicitation for industry review and refinement, not a formal proposal call; the government is not currently soliciting or negotiating binding proposals.
Up to five contracts will be awarded to highest-technically-rated offerors using an HTRO source selection methodology based on technical capability rather than price. The procurement is non-competitive and carries no set-aside. Offerors must hold current DDTC registration, Federal Firearms License Type 11, active SAM registration with CAGE code and UEI number, and prior Arms, Ammunition & Explosives contract experience as prime or subcontractor since January 1, 2019. Compliance with Executive Order 13662 and CAATSA Section 231 is required; Russian-manufactured sources and suppliers affiliated with the Russian Federation are prohibited.
The solicitation covers non-standard ammunition and mortar systems for former Soviet Union and Eastern Bloc weapon platforms across Federal Supply Groups including weapons, fire control equipment, ammunition, guided missiles, and vehicles (NAICS 332993, PSC 1395). The maximum contract ceiling is $3,552,685,000 items across five one-year ordering periods with minimum guaranteed delivery of $1,000.00. Technical evaluation focuses on sourcing and delivery capability, End User Certificates, export licenses, international transportation, Technical Data Package development, Lot Acceptance Testing, and prior USG contract awards, with a minimum technical threshold of 17,500 points (80 percent of 21,875 total possible points).
Contractors must comply with comprehensive security and safety requirements for arms, ammunition, and explosives handling at contractor-owned facilities, including physical security standards per DODM 5100.76, Explosive Safety Site Plans with net explosive weight and quantity distance separation, and incident reporting within 72 hours to ATF, FBI, and DCSA. Pre-award DCSA security surveys and recurring 18-month inspections are mandatory. Technical requirements include Technical Data Packages within 30 days of delivery order award, Lot Acceptance Tests with 60 days' notification, and detailed ammunition specifications for mortar systems, small caliber rounds, rocket-propelled and spin-stabilized grenades, and general ammunition covering velocity, pressure, accuracy, temperature performance (-30C to +50C), minimum shelf life, and packaging compliant with ISPM-15 standards.
Notice text
2 versions
Update #2 · Latest ·
Update to include slides from Virtual Industry Day held on May 14, 2026.
________________________________________________________________________
This posting announces the release of Draft Request for Proposal (RFP) #2 and the scheduling of a virtual industry day for the Special Ammunition and Weapon Systems (SAWS) and Non-NATO Commercial Ammunition acquisition. This second draft serves as a direct update to the initial version posted on March 17, 2026, and specifically incorporates feedback, questions and answers, and insights gained during the industry engagement held on March 24, 2026. This posting provides updated versions of the draft solicitation and its various attachments, as well as a consolidated list of questions and answers derived from previous industry interactions.
The primary objective of this updated notice is to provide industry partners with a comprehensive understanding of the mission requirements and to gather additional feedback on the content before the formal RFP is finalized. It is important to clarify that the government is not currently soliciting or negotiating formal proposals through this draft. The focus of this phase is strictly on refining the acquisition's technical and administrative requirements to ensure clarity and feasibility. This draft RFP #2 remains non-binding, and all information contained within is subject to further modification based on continued evaluation and industry input.
Throughout the provided documentation, the terms Request for Proposal and solicitation are used synonymously and interchangeably. Furthermore, unless a specific provision states otherwise, any references to the number of days for submissions or contractual requirements refer to calendar days rather than business days. This approach ensures a standard timeline for all participants as the government moves toward the release of the formal solicitation.
The USG is seeking feedback on the following questionnaire regarding Draft RFP #2 to ensure its effectiveness:
-
Are the instructions clear and sufficient for an offeror to complete the HTRO Matrix accurately without further guidance? Do you foresee any common points of confusion?
-
From your perspective, does this HTRO Matrix provide a fair and objective framework for evaluating an offeror's capabilities in this domain?
-
The HTRO Matrix assigns different point values across categories (e.g., Sourcing, EUCs, TDPs). Does the weighting seem appropriate? For instance, does the high point value for "Sourcing" (Category 1) align with its importance relative to other categories?
-
The Minimum Technical Threshold Rating (MTTR) is currently set at 80% of the total possible points. Is this a reasonable benchmark for identifying a qualified offeror, or would you suggest a different threshold?
-
Based on your company's experience, would you realistically be able to meet the 80% MTTR? Which categories or specific line items present the most significant challenges to achieving that score?
-
Are there any criteria that are ambiguous, conflicting, or not aligned with standard industry practices? For example, in Category 7, is the $50M contract value a meaningful threshold for differentiating experience?
-
The HTRO Matrix identifies specific types of documentation as proof. Are there alternative work samples or forms of evidence that you believe would also be strong indicators of capability for these categories?
-
Price evaluation requires Offerors to bid on all items explicitly listed in the Price Matrix. Do you anticipate any difficulties in securing firm pricing for all specified items? Are there any specific items that would preclude your company from submitting complete pricing?
The USG will host a virtual Industry Day in support of this acquisition on May 14, 2026 at 09:00AM EST using MS TEAMS.
Registration for the virtual Industry Day and the Industry Feedback Questionnaire is requested back no later May 4, 2026 at 5:00PM EST using the following link:
https://forms.osi.apps.mil/r/FnBrJQnKfy
Any additional questions and feedback in addition to the questions/statements provided above and regarding this Draft RFP shall be submitted to the following USG Contracting Representatives:
-
Logan Frye, Contract Specialist, Email: logan.e.frye.civ@army.mil
-
Bethany Carbajal, Contracting Officer, Email: bethany.n.carbajal.civ@army.mil
Update #1 ·
This posting announces the release of Draft Request for Proposal (RFP) #2 and the scheduling of a virtual industry day for the Special Ammunition and Weapon Systems (SAWS) and Non-NATO Commercial Ammunition acquisition. This second draft serves as a direct update to the initial version posted on March 17, 2026, and specifically incorporates feedback, questions and answers, and insights gained during the industry engagement held on March 24, 2026. This posting provides updated versions of the draft solicitation and its various attachments, as well as a consolidated list of questions and answers derived from previous industry interactions.
The primary objective of this updated notice is to provide industry partners with a comprehensive understanding of the mission requirements and to gather additional feedback on the content before the formal RFP is finalized. It is important to clarify that the government is not currently soliciting or negotiating formal proposals through this draft. The focus of this phase is strictly on refining the acquisition's technical and administrative requirements to ensure clarity and feasibility. This draft RFP #2 remains non-binding, and all information contained within is subject to further modification based on continued evaluation and industry input.
Throughout the provided documentation, the terms Request for Proposal and solicitation are used synonymously and interchangeably. Furthermore, unless a specific provision states otherwise, any references to the number of days for submissions or contractual requirements refer to calendar days rather than business days. This approach ensures a standard timeline for all participants as the government moves toward the release of the formal solicitation.
The USG is seeking feedback on the following questionnaire regarding Draft RFP #2 to ensure its effectiveness:
-
Are the instructions clear and sufficient for an offeror to complete the HTRO Matrix accurately without further guidance? Do you foresee any common points of confusion?
-
From your perspective, does this HTRO Matrix provide a fair and objective framework for evaluating an offeror's capabilities in this domain?
-
The HTRO Matrix assigns different point values across categories (e.g., Sourcing, EUCs, TDPs). Does the weighting seem appropriate? For instance, does the high point value for "Sourcing" (Category 1) align with its importance relative to other categories?
-
The Minimum Technical Threshold Rating (MTTR) is currently set at 80% of the total possible points. Is this a reasonable benchmark for identifying a qualified offeror, or would you suggest a different threshold?
-
Based on your company's experience, would you realistically be able to meet the 80% MTTR? Which categories or specific line items present the most significant challenges to achieving that score?
-
Are there any criteria that are ambiguous, conflicting, or not aligned with standard industry practices? For example, in Category 7, is the $50M contract value a meaningful threshold for differentiating experience?
-
The HTRO Matrix identifies specific types of documentation as proof. Are there alternative work samples or forms of evidence that you believe would also be strong indicators of capability for these categories?
-
Price evaluation requires Offerors to bid on all items explicitly listed in the Price Matrix. Do you anticipate any difficulties in securing firm pricing for all specified items? Are there any specific items that would preclude your company from submitting complete pricing?
The USG will host a virtual Industry Day in support of this acquisition on May 14, 2026 at 09:00AM EST using MS TEAMS.
Registration for the virtual Industry Day and the Industry Feedback Questionnaire is requested back no later May 4, 2026 at 5:00PM EST using the following link:
https://forms.osi.apps.mil/r/FnBrJQnKfy
Any additional questions and feedback in addition to the questions/statements provided above and regarding this Draft RFP shall be submitted to the following USG Contracting Representatives:
-
Logan Frye, Contract Specialist, Email: logan.e.frye.civ@army.mil
-
Bethany Carbajal, Contracting Officer, Email: bethany.n.carbajal.civ@army.mil
Files
Show all 17
Notice history
Similar open opportunities
On GovTribe
Work this opportunity
- Track it in your pipeline
- Find teaming partners
- Similar opportunities
- Ask GovTribe AI about this opportunity