RFI: Metal Manufacturing Vendor Qualification Support

Deadline to Submit Questions

11/15/2024

Intent to Submit Deadline

11/20/2024

Submission Deadline

12/20/2024

Review Completion

1/10/2025

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 Metal Manufacturing Vendor Qualification Support. 

The RFI for Metal Manufacturing Vendor Qualification Support seeks technical White Papers supporting the need for qualification of suppliers to produce cast and forged (C&F) products, wire and powder consumables, and advanced/hybrid manufactured products for the U.S. Department of Defense (DoD). C&F parts are critical to nearly every platform, weapon system, and weapon operated by the DoD. As such, the DoD desires assured access to adequate capacity to produce these products, and their adjacent consumables used in part fabrication, to equip and sustain its current force and modernize critical capabilities. This RFI intends to identify critical gaps in areas such as, but not limited to, equipment, facilities, technology, manufacturing and qualification processes, and workforce, which may inhibit vendors’ ability to either enter the defense industrial base or meet the needs of specific defense customers.

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 Vendor Qualification 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: As an additive equipment and parts manufacturer, any information or FAQ details you could provide on those aspects of process validation you would be interested in solving for, would be greatly appreciated.

A: Unfortunately, we are not able to discuss scope or technical details of a potential response, as that may be seen as giving an unfair advantage to a particular submitter (nor do we want our feedback to adversely influence the content of the submission).

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 question 2 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: We have groups from different DoD branches that are interested in the same metal manufacturing technology and materials, but for manufacturing for separate applications. We are currently planning to include multiple DoD branches and applications on a single white paper with the same technology and materials – is this acceptable or would it be desired to split this into multiple white papers?

A: Yes, it is acceptable to include multiple DoD branches and applications on a single white paper, as long as they are centered around the same technology and materials.

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: A letter of support from the relative potential transition partner would be the preferred method of documentation.

Q: The technical approach we intend to propose would require substantial heat treatment and mechanical testing for qualification, for which we intend to use the FAST center. However, there are needs that we have directly identified that the FAST center has identified they cannot currently support – such as stress corrosion cracking. To clarify, should these costs be included in the proposed total cost for the RFI or should these “cost share” costs be separately listed and excluded from the total?

A: The FAST center should be leveraged to the greatest extent possible, aiming to avoid duplication of costs for capabilities that FAST can already support. However, if FAST does not have the capabilities necessary to support the identified needs of the White Paper, it is permissible to include those costs as part of the proposed cost for the RFI.

Q: The most pressing application target that has been identified by our DoD partners has an extensive qualification process established that would traditionally take longer than 18 months to complete due to the breadth and duration of testing. We intend to accelerate this as part of the proposed solution, but will the call accept proposals that advance a higher TRL process/material through the qualification process, even if the full qualification at DoD component level isn’t completed? For instance, would a proposal to meet major qualification milestones, though not necessarily complete the full qualification due to existing requirements be acceptable?

A: Yes; however the requirements to achieve full qualification should be identified. If these costs are covered by the DoD component, a letter of support should be provided by the component to identify their level of support and scope of commitment to complete the full qualification. If these cost are not covered by the component, the cost to complete a full qualification should be identified as an option for future investment.

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: What is the definition of “Capital Infrastructure Improvements”?

A: Capital infrastructure improvements represents any hardware, equipment, and/or physical facility modifications required to support the intended qualification demonstration. Per the RFI, this is limited to $500K. However, if a company has requirements in excess of this, they either 1) should consider not submitting, or 2) submit and clearly indicate any requirements that exceed that cost, and how those HW/equipment/facility needs are critical/essential to supporting the demonstration.

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

Q: Is cost share expected?

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 level of specificity would you like to see with respect to a prototype in support of this effort? We believe it may be difficult to provide specific examples given the systematic approach presented. Is a dummy unit acceptable to demonstrate critical gaps, as outlined in the RFI?

A: Prototype demonstrations may vary in scope and specificity, ranging from demonstrating capacity improvement relative to a specific part or component, or to larger scale process enhancements.

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: How specific does the prototype need to be? Does it need to be a specific part number or is a general material pain point (e.g. CuNI) or type of parts ( e.g. valves) specific enough?

A: Prototype demonstrations may vary in scope and specificity, ranging from demonstrating capacity improvement relative to a specific part or component, or to larger scale process enhancements.

Q: Regarding capital infrastructure improvements or COTS, does the company own the resulting infrastructure/equipment after the project or does the government retain ownership?

A: Any item listed as capital infrastructure, and procured via government funding, is subject to return to the government at the completion of the effort.

Q: Does qualification of an additive manufacturing process (wire directed energy deposition) that can more responsively manufacture material equivalent to forged or plate product meet the objectives of this RFI?

A: Yes

Q: Would it be best for the white paper to be submitted by the AM material vendor that would be qualified under the project or by the end user that incorporates such AM materials into products/vehicles provided to the DoD?

A: Topics should be submitted by the entity best positioned to meet the stated RFI goal of increasing the capacity of the C&F industrial base.

Q: What is the anticipated number of proposals that will be considered for award?

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: Who owns IP generated under the scope of the project?

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 you provide insight to the desired TRL & MRL level end state upon conclusion of the project? Are high-TRL submissions (currently 8+) focusing on MRL improvement encouraged?

A: Identified technologies must be at least TRL 4 or higher at the start of the technical approach. TRLs achieved at the conclusion of the effort should be at the necessary level to demonstrate the expected capacity improvement of C&F industrial base.

Q: In Section 4.0, the RFI states: “It should be assumed that all such material and equipment necessary to achieve the White Paper objectives would be acquired by the funding agency and supplied to the performer. “Is the intent for the government to actually place orders for the COTS material and equipment, or, is the intent simply to not have the contractor charge a fee for this type of material? It seems having the government actually place orders could cause significant delays to the project.

A: Yes – it should be assumed that all necessary COTS materials/items will be provided by the funding agency. COTS items will be exempt from acquisition fees. Submittals should clearly indicate any COTS items requiring procurement and estimated lead times at the time of submission.

Q: Regarding the parts associated with this project, is it up to the submitter to identify the parts which will be used in the first article manufacture and qualifications (Section 4.0 First article manufacture and qualifications).

A: Yes

Q: If a large additive manufacturing piece of equipment was to be acquired to complete the project, under section Commercial Off the Shelf (COTS) Equipment, the RFI suggests the funding agency would acquire the equipment and provide to the submitter. Would this equipment then be considered Government Furnished Equipment and would be removed from the submitter facility once the project is completed?

A: Yes. COTS items required will be considered GFE, and therefore are subject to return to the government at completion of the program.

Q: Regarding the capital infrastructure improvement limit of $500,00, is capital infrastructure defined as building, roads, basic utilities like electricity, water, etc.? In other words, capital processing equipment above $500,000 would be accepted as part of this support? Below $7M, of course.

A: No. Capital infrastructure does not include buildings, roads, and basic utilities.

Q: What capabilities does the FAST center offer? (e.g., Tensile testing, High Cycle Fatigue (HCF), Fracture Toughness, Shearing, Bearing, etc.)

A: Please visit: https://fast.scotforge.com/

Q: Can the FAST center handle coupon extraction and machining as well?

A: Please visit: https://fast.scotforge.com/

Q: Could you comment on FAST capacity? Would there be a limit on the number of the coupons?

A: Please visit: https://fast.scotforge.com/

Q: The objectives mention “Qualification to non-military specifications if explicitly required for the production of a defense asset.” Could you clarify if this refers to industry specifications such as SAE AMS, ASTM, or ISO?

A: Yes

Q: Can inspection hardware and equipment be considered for infrastructure improvements if they are necessary to meet specification requirements?

A: Yes

Q: Can this funding be used to resource AUKUS partners in the UK and Australia?

A: Submissions should focus on increasing the domestic capacity of the C&F industrial base. Submittals involving partnership/collaboration with AUKUS partners are permitted.

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: What is the expected period of performance?

A: White papers that do not indicate a technically feasible path to such a demonstration within 18 months will not be considered for evaluation.

Q: How can we engage government stakeholders with this work?

A: Protocol for engagement/communication with government stakeholders will be established at a later date.

Q: Regarding the objective “Additive process qualification for use in forward deployed or contested logistics support,” does this include material extrusion/FDM that is widely deployed?

A: Yes. Assuming material extrusion/FDM related processes have the ability to demonstrate increased capacity in the C&F industrial base, IAW the stated RFI objectives.

Q: Is partnering with Korean organizations encouraged similar to AUKUS partners?

A: No

Q: Are there any size or other requirements for the lead or sub organizations?

A: No

Q: Do the project team members need to be a member of NCDMM to submit an application? Is there a fee or other requirements to apply?

A: No

Q: Please clarify if COTS equipment purchased by the performer, for use in the project, would be eligible for funding under the NCDMM contract.

A: No

Q: Please clarify the funding agency (DOD branch) and whether material and equipment provided to the performer would belong to the performer after completion of the project.

A: The Office of the Secretary of Defense, Innovation Capability and Modernization (ICAM) Office. Any item procured via government funding, is subject to return to the government at the completion of the effort.

Q: Can the scope / budget include acquisition of additional manufacturing lines / equipment?

A: Yes, assuming capital infrastructure required does not exceed $500K. Any capital infrastructure required that exceeds $500K should be clearly identified within the submittal.

Q: Are letters of support/commitment and/or letters of advocacy from other government agencies permitted? From the RFI it looks they are encouraged, but how are these to be referenced to satisfy the RFI?

A: Yes

Q: Is referencing specific contracts allowed to demonstrate in our response to the RFI along with brief summaries?

A: Yes

Q: Can the qualification scope include generation of technical data packs and documentation typically required by the services for acceptance to initiate ECPs and Source Approvals?

A: Yes

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: How is COTS equipment different from Capital Infrastructure Improvements? For example: induction furnace, a larger bridge crane, a larger switchgear are those COTS equipment? What sort of things fall under the capital infrastructure improvements?

A: Capital Equipment items are not commodities and are typically specialty products tailored to specific installations, whereas commodities (COTS equipment) are standard items with minimal customization, such as color or basic options.

Q: Could you provide clarification on the additive consumables?

A: Build materials (filaments, powders, resins, etc.), support materials, adhesives or coatings for build plates, inert gases, cleaning or post processing supplies, nozzles, and extrusion tips are examples of additive consumables.

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

For more information or to submit questions, please email submissions@ncdmm.org