US Army ARDEC, AMSTA-AR-PCW-F, Building 10, Picatinny Arsenal, New Je 07806-5000

A -- A - BROAD AGENCY ANNOUNCEMENT SOL DAAE30-95-BAA-03 DUE 060595 POC Magda Szymanski, 201-724-3066, Contract Specialist, e=mail mszyman, David G. Evans, 201-724-6633, Contracting Officer. The US Army Armament Research, Development and Engineering Center (ARDEC) is seeking qualified sources to submit coplete proposals to develop and demonstrate the capability of a low cost synthesis process that will produce DMNB with a purity of at least 98.00 weight percent on a l00 pound scale. The following low-cost one-pound process developed by ARDEC may be used to scale-up the synthesis to the 100 pound scale to yield low cost DMNB with a purity of at leasst 98.00 weight percent. A) Preparation of 2-Bromo-2-nitropropane = 2-Nitropropane (commercial, 97% 2-NP; impurities; nitroethane and 1-nitropropane; 450.0g, 5.0 moles) was added in 30 minutes to a stirred solution of sodium hydroxide (220.0g, 5.5 moles) in water 2.5 liters) at 0-5 degrees C. The reaction solution was stored at 0-5 degrees C for 30 minutes and then brought to room temperature. After 30 minutes the lower layer, 2-bromo-2-nitropropane (829.9g, 98.8% yield), was separated. The crude 2-bromo-2-nitropropane contains small amounts of bromonitroethanes and bromo-1-nitropropanes but is quite satisfactory for preparation of 2,3-dimethyl-2,3-dinitrobutane without any purification. B) Preparation of 2,3 dimethyl-2,3-dinitrobutane from Sodium 2-propanenitronate and 2-Bromo-2-nitropropane = A mixture of 2-nitropropane (90.0g, 1.0 mole) and sodium hydroxide (56.0g, 1.4 mole) in methanol (500 ml) was stirred at room temperature for 30 minutes and then brought to reflux. 2-Bromo-2-nitropropane (168.0g, 1.0 mole) was added in 15 minutes. The reaction mixture was refluxed 24 hours and cooled to room temperature. The solid present, 2,3-dimethyl-2,3- dinitrobutane and sodium bromide, was filtered. Methanol and water were removed from the filtrate by reduced pressure distillation to yield a solid concentrate. The reaction solids were combined, stirred with cold water (250 ml), and filtered. The filtered solid was rinsed with cold methanol (150 ml) to give white 2,3-dimethyl- 2,3-dinitrobutane (140.6g, 79.0% yield), mp 209-210 degrees C. Evaporation of the methanol washings gave a yellow solid which was washed with water, filtered, and recrystallized to yield additional 2,3-dimethyl-2,3-dinitrobutane (2.70g, 2.5% yield) mp 202-210 degrees C. The total yield of white 2,3-dimethyl-2,3-dinitrobutane is 80.5%. When the above reaction is conducted on a 5 mole scale, addition of 2-bromo-2-nitropropane (840g, 5 moles) to 2-nitropropane (450g, 5 moles) and sodium hydroxide (280g, 7.0 moles) in refluxing methanol (2.5L) alleviates much of the problem in agitation. It is not yet known what volumes of solvent will be needed for effective agitation and satisfactory efficiencies on larger scale reactions. Secondly, on the larger scale reactions, washing the crude 2,3-dimethyl-2,3-dinitrobutane on a filter pad or plate with cold methanol is not satisfactory for removing all of the colored by-products from the desired material. The methanol passes over the solid product too quickly to wash out all of the surface impurities in the 2,3-dimethyl-2,3-dinitrobutane. Stirring the colored 2,3-dimetyl-2,3-dinitrobutane with cold ethanol in the initial reactor equipment improves the product greatly and lowers the overall yield to about 75%. Further study of techniques for ''washing'' and ''improving'' the quality of 2,3-dimethyl-2,3- dinitrobutane prepared as above on an industrial scale may be necessary. For this effort it is required to have a minimum of 1000 pounds of the DMNB prepared under the scaled-up method to establish the feasibility and practicality of producing low-cost DMNB with the stated purity at the l00 pound scale. Interested firms should submit 6 copies each of the Technical, Management, and Cost proposals. A proposal shall be comprised of technical, management and cost segments. Each segment shall be no longer than 20 pages. Indicate the name, address, and telephone number, identifying technical and business personnel who may be contacted for clarifications and/or negotiations. The technical segment should include a detailed narrative which addresses the approach and methodology to be used in meeting the research objectives and requirements and sketches and diagrams to help define and describe the approach; a description of any unique, state of the art or critical procedures proposed to meet the research requirements, including studies, simulation, hardware or testing; a description of the technical risk or uncertainty in achieving the goal; a description of any deliverables (reports, items, materials, devices) proposed to meet the research requirements; and a chart or list of milestones showing scheduled dates of completion. The management segment should describe the engineering and scientific personnel with experience and qualifications, the adequacy of facilities and test equipment and previous experience on similar/related research efforts. The cost segment predicated on a FFP type contract shall be submitted o a SF 1411 detailing estimated labor materials, and travel costs. All proprietary/limited rights data must be identified. BASIS OF AWARD: Availability of funds, importance to the agency program, merit rating and probable cost. The availability of funds and the importance to the agency program are each more important than the merit rating or probable cost. Probable cost is less important than the merit rating. MERIT RATING consists of technical and management factors. Technical is more important than Management. TECHNICAL factors are technical benefits, soundness of methodology and probability of success, which are listed in descending order of importance. MANAGEMENT factors are engineering/scientific personnel, facilities, and performance history, which are each of equal importance. To determine the probable cost, the cost proposal will be evaluated, using cost realism, to determine the most probable cost to the Government. The Government will weigh any increase in the merit rating against any additional cost to determine if the parity of relationship warrants the paying of additional cost for additional merit. Accordingly, the Government may award any resulting contract to other than the lowest priced offeror, or other than the offeror with the highest technical rating. Further, the Government reserves the right to make either no award or multiple awards. Any resulting contract will contain appropriate FAR and DOD FAR Supplement clauses (and any implementations thereof) appropriate for the type of contract. Prior to contract award, the contractor will be required to submit ''Certifications and Representations''. Data and reporting requirements will be negotiated with the firm(s) selected for contract(s). All offerors shall possess adequate cost accounting procedures. Six (6) complete copies of each proposal shall be sent to Mrs. Magda Szymanski, AMSTA-AR-PCW-F, Building 10, ARDEC, Picatinny Arsenal, NJ 07806-5000 by 4:00 pm ET, June 5, 1995. Proposals received by that date will be evaluated for possible award during FY95 under the stated objectives in the BAA. Telephone and/or written requests are not necessary as this announcement constitutes the technical requirement in full text. No other information will be supplied. All proposals should be received by the date and time stated above. (0116)

Loren Data Corp. http://www.ld.com (SYN# 0002 19950427\A-0002.SOL)