FBI Request for Proposal for 9mm Ammo

[shawn mccarver]

I have just finished reading the 113 page FBI Request for Proposal of December 2012, wherein the FBI was seeking to buy service, training, reduced lead training and frangible 9mm ammo.

I understand why the RFP has to be the way it is, but dealing with the government is obviously a big pain in the rear. If you don't think so, read the contract IN ITS ENTIRETY.

Highlights of the RFP are that the 9mm must be between 120 and 147 grain JHP of no greater pressure than SAAMI +P and it penetrate ballistic gelatin between 12 and 18 inches, and it must pass all of the FBI barrier tests. No failure to penetrate at least 12 inches is permitted. EVER.

The ammo must work and not cause damage or excessive wear to the following pistols: Any generation of the following models: Glocks 17, 19 and 26, SIG Sauer 226 and 228 and the HK MP5 and its variants.

It must have a power factor of between 135 and 155 (bullet weight in grains x velocity at 15 ft measured in ft. per sec. / 1,000).

The service ammo must have a bullet weight of between 120 and 147 grains. Training ammo bullet weight must be between 115 and 147 grains, and the frangible is between 80 and 100 grains.

This is rich: The ammo must not penetrate the FBI body armor.

In reading vendor questions and answers, it seems that the contract specifies materials required for testing that are not readily identified (i.e. no item number for a specified material to be used in the barrier test), and in one case, the instructions given in response to a vendor question was to call "Sandi Flowers at Dominion Steel" and order the "FBI bullet testing steel," and in yet another case, the denim specified in the contract (a specific type FBI obtains from a "JoAnn Fabrics" store) was apparently discontinued and is unavailable.

Merely reading this contract will make your blood pressure go up as you understand that it takes a year for these morons to decide on new 9mm ammo using our tax dollars, and it sounds like the specs were written by the Marx Brothers when you see the questions asked for clarification by the expert chemists and ballisticians employed by the ammo companies, and the government issuing revised contract specs at every turn.

Truly, it would be the equivalent of me trying to issue specs to build a nuclear reactor. I am just not qualified to do it, and the people who are would obviously think my "attempt" at doing so would be like "amateur night out."

Oh, and after 113 pages of contract BS, the contract says it has to be off-the-shelf production item.

Now, perhaps I am a simpleton, but it seems a better use of limited tax dollars would be to have some secretary at the office go to the nearest hardware store and buy a case of so of each brand, run it on the chronograph and the firing range and in the gelatin with the barriers and make a decision. Imagine how many millions it takes these creeps to decide what to spend some more millions on to buy for new 9mm ammo.

And, what is really wrong with the current off-the-shelf 9mm ammo that requires all of this effort to re-test 9mm ammo? I mean the testing protocol takes up dozens of pages, and is obviously a big pain to carry out.

Reading one of these ignoramus federal contracts will really convince you that the people who work at these places are "just not right," which would be ok IF they were not spending OUR money.

This is the RFP number:

RFP-OSCU-DSU1301

The award was finally issued in August 19, 2013 and Federal, Winchester and Hornady were given contracts.

 

[Bkreutz]

Why should the FBI be any different than any other federal organization? You think they waste money, you should look closer at any of the military branches. I spent a decade wondering about similar things before giving up.

 

[rwsmith]

Having worked.....

Having worked on a nightmare government project I'll never make that mistake again.

 

[Erich]

Thanks for a great post, Shawn. Great to lift the veil . . .

 

[Engineer1911]

If you think these people working for the government is less than efficient, belong to a gun club where the same people sit on the executive board. The "Scope of Work" to grade a new 300 yard rifle range is in Revision 8 and still isn't in the hands of any interested bidders.

 

[CTG_COLLECTOR]

What do you expect? The FBI is run by a Ship of Fools.

 

[jap85]

Why any firearm company would sell any firearm to the government? They demand low price, EXTREMELY difficult to work with, and can penalize you for whatever ridiculous reasons? I mean the rifles sold to DOD by H&K is way cheaper than the semi on the civilian market. I know big purchase (such as F-35, nuclear boat) works in the favor of the contractor since they are usually the sole provider. Shall I remind you Obama administration recent 1.6 billion round purchase mandate a fixed price for the next 4 years. WTH

 

[shouldazagged]

Just idle curiosity, but when and why did the Bureau start using 9mm weapons with frangible ammo? Does this mean they need or have obtained new duty weapons again?

I must have missed that somehow.

 

[slfree]

Have been around a few govt. contracts. They tend to know what they want and who they wish to purchase from. Then they style the specs to scare off most and award to the ones they wanted in the first place. When buying vehicles they require a Framis valve that is only on the brand they want. (meaning the one the boss drives) Then its a no brainer to get the vehicles they want. And all of them will have a very expensive Framis valve mounted even if they do not need such a part. Once when upset with my dept. The powers that be ordered us vehicles and specified ours would go to a certain dealer and have the AC system removed. Shortly after an accident occurred due to the defoggers not working right. They were made only to function with AC installed. So the vehicles went back to the dealer for aftermarket refitting of the AC units. All on the publics dime. Nobody lost their job.

 

[DWalt]

Not just ammunition, but many government solicitations are so unclear there will be dozens to hundreds of questions directed to the contracting officer by prospective bidders submitted for clarification. In fact I have seen the Q&A routine repeated 3 or 4 times, because the answers provided are themselves unclear, misleading, or just don't make any sense. My all-time favorite answer from the contracting officer is the always helpful "see the solicitation."

 

[J. R. WEEMS]

In my limited experience in such matters I found many such contracts are written in such a manner that only the vender, or contractor they want can comply. Seen this time and time again, and, in hiring as well.

 

[Boge]

So, this adds credence to the rumor that the G-Men are dropping the G23 .40 S&W in favor of a 9mm(?). Jesus, Joseph & Mary, they spent a boatload of taxpayer money on testing that!! Winchester alone supposedly spent over a million on R&D in developing the 180 gr. Ranger Bonded JHP for the FBI. Wonder if they'll ask for a refund. LOL!!

The Gov't is totally out of control regarding spending. This is insanity!! Why the Hell are they going BACK to 9mm after they screamed & hollered for a .40 S&W??!! There needs to be a serious house cleaning and the budget/staff cut to bare bones as we as a country are beyond broke!!

 

[Class III]

Per DWalt: "Not just ammunition, but many government solicitations are so unclear there will be dozens to hundreds of questions directed to the contracting officer by prospective bidders submitted for clarification. In fact I have seen the Q&A routine repeated 3 or 4 times, because the answers provided are themselves unclear, misleading, or just don't make any sense. My all-time favorite answer from the contracting officer is the always helpful "see the solicitation.""

Try bidding on a contract where 90% - 100% of the RFP has been redacted. Happened to me on MULTIPLE occasions.

Try bidding on a contract where the gub-mint is buying direct from supplier or manufacturer on a GSA price list that hasn't been updated since 1998, 14 years at the time. Happened to me last year. My GSA contact TOLD me the customary ballpark price that I could charge to install the material they would be purchasing direct from the manufacturer at 1998 pricing. The customary labor price was taken directly from the 1998 GSA Labor Rates Chart. Needless to say I did not submit a bid based on 1998 pricing. In fact I did not bid.

Try gaining access to a secured gub-mint site to survey a job so you can submit a bid and being told "No Entry Beyond This Point without Escort" and the "Escort Point of Contact" listed in the RFP for site survey is on maternity leave and won't be returning until four weeks after bids are due.

Ta'int nuttin like dealins wit da GUB-MINT.

Class III

 

[brucev]

Hum... so the fbi is going full circle back to the 9mm. Why not? It's an excellent round. And given that fbi has to employ men and women... some of whom are of small stature, the 9mm and the weapons for which it is commonly chambered is a good choice. Also... for those times when something like a Uzi or HK is needed, they won't be fooling around with different calibers.

As to the requirements... well, the folks who write such things really must find something to do with their time. After all, they aren't paid to hunt criminals on the govt. dime now are they?

 

[Harrison]

It's just the federal guvmint that we all dearly love and support with our hard earned tax $$.

 

[handejector]

Gov contracts are usually required to be filled by an open bid process.
If that were not the case, everyone would be in here whining about how the Gov just spends money without trying to obtain the best possible price on a competitive basis.
The Gov will always be railed against no matter what- damned if they do, damned if they don't.

True, some specs are skewed in some bid solicitations, but a huge percentage are not. They just spec an item they need ranging from screwdrivers to multi-floored buildings and solicit bids.
Would you prefer they just get with a bureaucrat's BIL to buy a million screwdrivers or get a 10 story building built?

They are not allowed to simply buy off the shelf in most cases. They MUST solicit bids by law.
Could it be done more efficiently? Perhaps.
But labeling Gov employees "creeps" and "morons" for performing their jobs as directed is really uncalled for.

The larger something gets and the more resources it has, the more waste it will create.
That is simply a law of nature that applies to anything from a large family to a large corporation to a huge Gov.

 

[Waywatcher]

If anyone thinks government is wasteful, inefficient, or some other negative adjective, go work to change it.

I'm serious.

If someone here thinks they could do a better job in government than those in it, go do it already. I hope you can, because we need the best government we can get, and complaining about it doesn't make it better.

 

[Buford57]

If you want a real education, take the "Bidding and Winning Government Contracts" training offered by a prominent group that I refuse to advertise.

Rule One is that if you weren't involved in helping draft the RFP/RFQ, you will not win the bid, and that it is best to get in bed with the personnel at the agency who draft the RFP at least 6 months before it issues. I pointed out that this was a clear violation of the Federal Acquisition Regulations and was greeted with a loud shrug.

Rule Two was that technical compliance with the formatting specs for the proposal were more important than the content, since the initial review would be conducted by a GS2 clerk with a checklist and having any text in a font other than that specified would send your proposal to the "unresponsive" graveyard before anyone could consider its technical merits.

These folks (and their students) have an impressive track record in winning government contracts.

When gov't RFPs call for square circles, the correct term is not "moron" but "oxymoron".

I am currently reviewing an RFQ to provide unicorns to draw the carriage in the 2017 Presidential Inauguration.

 

[Old cop]

The procurement rules in city, county, state & federal government are so onorous that the silly RFPs have to speak to all these rules. I can assure you that no one who works for any of these agencies wants to go through all this BS, and they would much rather go somewhere and buy different brands for testing on their range, as was suggested in a previous post.

It's good to be retired!

 

[shawn mccarver]

But labeling Gov employees "creeps" and "morons" for performing their jobs as directed is really uncalled for.

"it takes a year for these morons to decide on new 9mm ammo using our tax dollars"

I meant to say that "it takes a year for these efficient government employees to decide on new 9mm ammo, which exemplifies everything that I have come to expect from these nice folks with their years of government training and experience."

"Imagine how many millions it takes these creeps to decide what to spend some more millions on to buy for new 9mm ammo."

I meant to say "Imagine how many millions of dollars it takes for these efficient and well-trained government employees to test a bunch of off-the-shelf ammo that has all been tested before so that they can decide - again - which new off-the-shelf 9mm ammo on which to spend our millions of tax dollars."

Sorry about that. Now, I am the creep and the moron.

Shawn