The Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD), Innovation Capability and Modernization (ICAM) Office, in collaboration with the National Center for Defense Manufacturing and Machining (NCDMM) is soliciting technical white papers for a Request for Information (RFI) focused on Automated Trades Optimized for Metal Manufacturing.
RFI: Automated Trades Optimized for Metal Manufacturing
The RFI for Automated Trades Optimized for Metal Manufacturing seeks technical White Papers focusing on transitioning the metals manufacturing, sustainment, and repair sectors to Industry 4.0/5.0 and convergent manufacturing by applying digital technologies to improve productivity, safety, and efficiency in casting, forging, welding, and other metals manufacturing operations. Digital technologies include (but are not limited to) automation, in-situ sensing, machine learning, and real-time data processing. Submissions should detail solutions that integrate physical operations with digital technologies to drive innovation, streamline processes, and enhance overall performance.
Submitters must indicate any technology required to support infrastructure improvement. At the start of the technical approach, identified technologies must be at least Technology Readiness Level (TRL) 4 or higher.
White Papers submitted in response to the RFI must demonstrate viable technical approaches to address/mitigate gaps associated with the objectives outlined in the RFI. Multiple submittals for different qualification events are permissible.
Respondents may submit more than one response to this RFI. You will find the complete list of guidelines in the RFI.
For those intending to submit a White Paper, please confirm your intent by emailing submissions@ncdmm.org by November 20.
All submissions shall be submitted electronically using the Submit Automated Trades White Paper button below. Paper and fax submissions will not be accepted.
Submissions will be acknowledged upon receipt with an email confirmation from NCDMM within 24 hours. If a confirmation email is not received within 24 hours, please email submissions@ncdmm.org to ensure delivery. NCDMM is not responsible for email system malfunctions or undeliverable emails.
Q: Is additive manufacturing a technology/capability relevant to the Automated Trades Optimized for Metal Manufacturing RFI? Specifically, the RFI mentions enabling component production in forward sustainment and battle damage repair. Would additive manufacturing fit within the technologies considered for such forward sustainment and battle damage repair?
A: Yes – Additive Manufacturing is well-suited for the RFI’s focus on forward sustainment and battle damage repair as it enables flexible and on demand component production.
Q: Will the DOD specify which size castings and forgings are more critical than others? What volume requirements? Which cast materials are more critical than others (cast iron, ductile, SS)? Is this a submission to simply state the gap in what companies may be able to provide and what an investment will achieve, regardless of specific alloys, products, and volume?
A: For the Vendor Qualification and Automated Trades Labor topic areas, the DoD will not specify critical casting/forging sizes, volumes, or materials. Submissions to these topic areas should highlight capability gaps and how investment can expand offerings. An RFI for an additional topic area related to enhanced material and material production will be released in coming weeks and may have more specificity relating to materials.
Q: When would you anticipate the awards to be issued (I see Q1-2025 for selection, but more curious about the start of the period of performance)?
A: Expectation is late Q1 2025 or early Q2 2025.
Q: Can you give some clarity on the letter of intent? Would a simple submission stating we tend to submit be fine, or does the letter of intent need to have the selected partners included?
A: A simple submission indicating your intent to participate is sufficient. There’s no requirement to list potential partners, but if known, you’re welcome to include them.
Q: We are considering submitting as a prime, or possibly as a sub-contractor with other partners acting as the prime. I understand that multiple submissions are allowed, but would it be discouraged to submit as a prime and as a sub-contractor?
A: All feasible teaming arrangements are encouraged, and each proposal will be reviewed on its own merits. We cannot recommend an ideal contracting setup; instead, focus on presenting the team and approach that best align with the RFI goals.
Q: Can government entities be active participants, and if so, are these organizations expected to fund their own scope of work or will the program be able to fund DoD participant activities?
A: Yes government entities can and are expected to be active participants, and can even be lead entities. The required funding for government performers should be detailed and itemized.
Q: What is the preferred method to document the support of relevant PM’s/PEO’s and POR’s? Would this be letters of support, active participation, etc.?
A: Letter of support from the relative potential transition partner would be the preferred method of documentation.
Q: Is there a limitation on which government entities can be involved with the program? If, for instance, we have a DoE group that has extensive collaborative history with the DoD, could the contracts be structured such that a DoE team can be supported or included?
A: We encourage collaboration across all government entities where appropriate to complete the proposed effort. Such costs to government entities must be itemized, to include those in our partner organizations in the United Kingdom, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand.
Q: Are there any requirements for cost share or program period of performance?
A: Proposed and/or required cost share will be evaluated on a case-by-case basis, and may be subject to the terms and conditions of the acquisition pathway chosen by the government. Any proposed cost share by a submitter shall be clearly indicated on responses to the RFI.
Q: What is the expected classification level of the work?
A: Information submitted shall be deemed UNCLASSIFIED, per section 6.0 of the RFI.
Q: Will you accept any additional letter(s) of support from programs in addition to the RFI response? Or is referencing related programs acceptable?
A: Yes to both questions.
Q: Is there a sublimit on capital equipment costs under the $7mm?
A: Number of submittals chosen, and corresponding funding amounts, is at the discretion of the government. The government reserves the right to award multiple, or no, awards against this RFI.
Q: What is the preferred method to document the support of relevant PM’s/PEO’s and POR’s? Would this be letters of support, active participation, etc.?
A: Letter of support from the relative potential transition partner would be the preferred method of documentation.
Q: Can government entities be active participants, and if so, are these organizations expected to fund their own scope of work or will the program be able to fund DoD participant activities?
A: Yes government entities can and are expected to be active participants, and can even be lead entities. The required funding for government performers should be detailed and itemized.
Q: Is there a limitation on which government entities can be involved with the program? If, for instance, we have a DoE group that has extensive collaborative history with the DoD, could the contracts be structured such that a DoE team can be supported or included?
A: We encourage collaboration across all government entities where appropriate to complete the proposed effort (but as with the previous question such costs to government entities must be itemized), to include those in our partner organizations in the United Kingdom, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand.
Q: What is the expected classification level of the work?
A: Information submitted shall be deemed UNCLASSIFIED, per section 6.0 of the RFI.
Q: Will you accept any additional letter(s) of support from programs in addition to the RFI response? Or is referencing related programs acceptable?
A: Yes to both questions.
Q: Is there a sublimit on capital equipment costs under the $7mm?
A: Number of submittals chosen, and corresponding funding amounts, is at the discretion of the government. The government reserves the right to award multiple, or no, awards against this RFI.
Q: Is there a preference between sustainment activities and new product development in providing a prototype?
A: No
Q: Will there be any sort of restrictions on producing publications from the efforts? We have university partners interested in participating, and they would like to know if publishing will be permitted.
A: Any data or information developed as a result of the proposed qualification demonstration is subject to government public affairs office review/approval prior to dissemination.
Q: What is the past or expected funding level for the proposal, because I saw the max funding is about 7M? Would like to understand the reasonable funding level when considering the problem and solution to this proposal.
A: Number of submittals chosen, and corresponding funding amounts, is at the discretion of the government. The government reserves the right to award multiple, or no, awards against this RFI.
Q: Are computational modeling software solutions in scope? Or can they be if part of a larger project?
A: If it supports the requirements that are being sought, then yes.
Q: Since this is not an America Makes project, what is the IP requirement?
A: IP generated through execution of government funds will be subject to rights limitations, as determined by the government. Submitters should clearly indicate any existing IP, either developed internally or through partnership, within their responses to this RFI.
Q: Can the funding be utilized for salaries and indirect costs associated with the technical approach, or is it strictly limited to equipment and materials?
A: Yes, the funding can be utilized for salaries and indirect costs associated with the technical approach.
Q: We’d like to obtain a few points of clarification regarding TRL requirements – specifically, ensuring that technologies “incorporated into the prototype are at least at TRL 4 or higher at the start of the technical approach.” Could you clarify what is meant by “start of the technical approach? Does this mean the start of the period of performance when a grant is disbursed?
A: Start of the period of performance when the funding is distributed.
Q: While reading the RFI, I was wondering if the scope includes additive manufacturing of metal parts? For example, would a team consisting of an AM supplier and an Industry 4.0 company be encouraged to respond?
A: Yes – The goal is to remove humans from dirty, dark, dangerous operations. If the idea does this it would be acceptable.
Q: Are there any resources or templates that NCDMM has for setting up a 18 month timeline? I am new to this and I do not know where to start when considering all necessary government and contractor actions?
A: No resources or templates are available. Timeline should start when your technical performance begins. Timeline should incorporate any risks that could be encountered.
Q: If we (as prime and a non-profit) submit a proposal to NCDMM which gets selected for funding through this RFI, would we be prohibited from subcontracting some portion of the development, integration, or implementation funding to one or more partner companies or institutions, possibly through a competitive process?
Under normal circumstances, such subcontracts would also require some level of funding for program management at each partner company or institution. Is that allowable?
A: The ability to subcontract portions of the funding and allocate program management costs to partner companies or institutions will depend on the acquisition pathway selected to fund the activity.
Q: Can this funding be used to resource AUKUS partners in the UK and Australia?
A: Focus is on improving domestic C&F companies. If resourcing AUKUS partners results in improving domestic capabilities, AUKUS partners could be utilized.
Q: What are the accounting requirements for the performers?
A: TBD – the government reserves the right to utilize multiple acquisition pathways, of various types (time and material, fixed-price, cost-plus, etc.), in future pursuit/execution of any technical approaches submitted. Accounting requirements are subject to the acquisition pathway chosen.
Q: The RFI says that the budget cannot exceed $7M for each project. What is the total amount of funding available under this RFI for all awardees combined?
A: Total funding amount is at the discretion of the government. Refer to section 7.0 of intentions of the OSD ICAM office.
Q: Can the proposed scope include a line item for trade shows (DMC for example), or for DoD Experimentation / Demonstration exercises?
A: Yes – The RFI is requesting a ROM breakout of cost. See section 5.0 paragraph 8 for more information.
Q: Can the included scope/budget include a line item to pay costs (materials/labor/etc.) for delivery of one a system to the services, and include training by our personnel to theirs?
A: Yes – The RFI is requesting a ROM breakout of cost. See section 5.0 paragraph 8 for more information.
Q: We are curious if in submitting a number of proposals that we might be diluting our opportunity to gain any individual proposals?
A: The government values the submission of diverse ideas and reserves the right to fund the proposals it deems most beneficial. Submitting multiple proposals does not inherently dilute your chances, but we encourage each submission to be well-crafted and distinct to maximize the potential for success.
Q: If we understand the definitions of Commercial off the Shelf equipment, this would mean that if there are capital assets that are COTS that would be needed, included in a project proposal up to 7M total for a given project that is proposed to achieve the various objectives of the RFI, that these assets would be considered and then acquired and provided to our organization?
A: Yes, your interpretation is correct, provided your organization is selected and funded. However, please note that any item procured using government funding is subject to return to the government upon completion of the project.
Q: Presumably if there are COTS equipment that the specifications would be provided to the DOD and the DOD would project manage the acquisition and delivery?
A: It depends on the acquisition pathway used to fund the project. The Terms & Conditions and associated flowdown requirements of the contract will determine whether the DoD manages the acquisition and delivery or if this responsibility lies with the organization.
Q: As part of a larger proposal would project management fees for third parties be considered for funding if internal assets are not capable or available?
A: The ability to subcontract portions of the funding and allocate program management costs to partner companies or institutions will depend on the acquisition pathway selected to fund the activity.
Q: Would said COTS equipment provided then be considered company assets that may be used for normal commercial use if there is not demand from the DOD which has been one form of historical practice?
A: Yes, but note that any item procured via government funding, is subject to return to the government at the completion of the effort.
Q: If there is / are IP considerations is there proposed language to protect the rights of the inventing company? If so can this proposed contract language be shared in advance to inform the companies interest in proposing a project of this scope?
A: It depends on the acquisition pathway used to fund the project.
Q: A major issue we are wrestling with is whether and to what degree and in which companies to implement CMMC processes, systems, controls, infrastructure etc. Would the review board seriously consider a proposal to support the design and implementation of CMMC compliant structures and software’s as part of a proposal to expand our organizations viable footprint to support DOD projects, especially with our advanced automation and additive manufacturing facilities?
A: Yes
Q: Will a submittal related to developing and expansion of internal capabilities and personnel related to machinists, welders and inspectors be valid for submittal? If any one skill is not relevant please indicate so we can focus the scope of our proposal.
A: The government values the submission of diverse ideas and reserves the right to fund the proposals it deems most beneficial. Submitting multiple proposals does not inherently dilute your chances, but we encourage each submission to be well-crafted and distinct to maximize the potential for success.
Q: If proposal are adjacent in a single process but a separate part of a larger process to complete the value chain may we submit various proposal as discrete proposals however as part of a larger whole in terms of developing a specific capability to expand capacity, reliability, etc., in the delivery of the project objectives?
A: The government values the submission of diverse ideas and reserves the right to fund the proposals it deems most beneficial. Submitting multiple proposals does not inherently dilute your chances, but we encourage each submission to be well-crafted and distinct to maximize the potential for success.
Q: Are international companies are eligible to submit a white paper for this RFI?
A: International firms in NTIB (National Technology and Industrial Base), FIVEYE (Five Eyes alliance), and AUKUS (Australia, UK, US) nations can participate, provided there are no significant adverse Foreign Ownership, Control, or Influence (FOCI) concerns after an evaluation of their ownership or investor structure. Companies outside these alliances are not eligible to apply.
Q: Questions for the following paragraph in the RFI: what is the acquisition fee?
A: The acquisition fee refers to any administrative or service charge that might typically be associated with the procurement of materials or equipment. As stated in the RFI, the acquisition fee is not applicable to the materials and COTS equipment listed in the White Paper. These items are exempt from such fees as the assumption is that the COTs equipment is assumed to be procured directly by the potential funding agency.
Q: Should I understand that commercial off the shelf material/equipment cost will be listed in proposal, but not included as part of the funding request?
A: Yes, that understanding is correct. The costs for COTS material/equipment should be itemized and included in the proposal, but they are not part of the funding request. These items are assumed to be purchased directly by the funding agency and provided to the performer.
Q: Will the COTS equipment be purchased through funding agency, so the proposal shouldn’t include the cost of COTS?
A: Yes that is the government assumption. Note that the for the purposes of this RFI, the acquisition pathway has not been established.
Q: How do I distinguish COTS and consumable material estimated for the proposal?
A: COTS Equipment: These are commercial, ready-made items that are standardized and not tailored for specific use. Examples include tools, machines, or software packages that are integral to executing the project but not consumed during use.
Consumable Materials: These are items that are expended or depleted during the execution of the project, such as raw materials, adhesives, or cleaning agents.
Q: If the estimation of the COTS is off during the execution of the project, can that list be adjusted?
A: The submitter assumes full responsibility for the accuracy and completeness of the information provided in the proposal. If discrepancies arise between the estimated and actual requirements, the submitter will be responsible for addressing any differences, including covering additional costs or adjustments necessary to achieve project objectives. To minimize risks, submitters should ensure that all estimates are carefully calculated and include any foreseeable contingencies.
Q: Since agency will supply the COTS to performers, how will the performer consider the schedule and timeline of the delivery of COTS for the proposal execution plan?
A: Performers should include a realistic timeline for the delivery and integration of COTS equipment in their proposal execution plan. However, the potential for schedule delays in the procurement and delivery of COTS should be noted as a risk factor in the White Paper response. The response should emphasize proactive planning while acknowledging the inherent uncertainties in the procurement process managed by the potential funding agency.
Q: As part of the whitepaper, we will likely need to provide business information as supporting information. Would NCDMM be open to pursuing an NDA to account for this?
A: Yes