SOURCES SOUGHT & DRAFT RFP INSTRUCTIONS AND EVALUATION

CRITERIA

Project Title: Specialized Navy Fleet Trailer Acquisition Program (Multiple Configurations)

Agency: US General Services Administration (GSA), Federal Acquisition Service (FAS)

On Behalf Of: United States Department of the Navy

Estimated Value: $20M+

Anticipated Set-Aside: Total Small Business Set-Aside

Primary NAICS Codes: 336212 (Truck Trailer Manufacturing — 1,000 employees)

Instructions to Respondents:

Parameter Details / Instructions

Response Due Date & Time October 20, 2026 at 3:00 PM EST

Submission Email john.hodges@gsa.gov april.stanch@gsa.gov kenneth.croushore@gsa.gov mark.f.brown@gsa.gov

File Format Adobe PDF or Microsoft Word / Excel

Page Size / Font / Margins 8.5" x 11" page size; 11 pt font minimum (Arial/Times

New Roman/Roboto); 1-inch margins

Cover Pages & Table of Contents Do not count against page limits

Proprietary Marking Instructions Mark proprietary or business-sensitive information clearly in accordance with FAR 52.215-1e

Questions Allowed Yes, questions must be submitted via email prior to

October 16, 2026, 11am ET.

Distribution of Responses Responses will be shared exclusively with Navy and

GSA evaluation personnel mailto:john.hodges@gsa.gov mailto:john.hodges@gsa.gov mailto:april.stanch@gsa.gov mailto:april.stanch@gsa.gov mailto:kenneth.croushore@gsa.gov mailto:mark.f.brown@gsa.gov

Parameter Details / Instructions

Reimbursement The Government will not reimburse respondents for any costs associated with preparing or submitting a response

1. Purpose and Instructions for Industry Feedback

The US General Services Administration (GSA), on behalf of the US Navy, is issuing this

Combined Sources Sought and Draft RFP Section Instructions and Evaluation Criteria.

This notice is for market research and industry feedback only. It is not a solicitation, and the Government is not requesting proposals at this time. The objective of this notice is two-fold:

1. To gather vital market research regarding industry limitations, supply chain constraints, production capacities, and pricing stability. Pricing is being requested for budgetary/market research only.

2. To obtain direct industry feedback on draft solicitation mechanics—specifically the

Highest Technically Rated with a Fair and Reasonable Price (HTR-FRP) methodology, virtual oral presentation parameters, and fleet transition structures— prior to releasing the final Request for Proposal (RFP).

While the Navy has provided detailed delivery forecasts and standardization requirements, the final contract type (Requirements vs. IDIQ), ordering duration, and award structure will be determined based on the feedback received through this notice.

Trailer Estimates:

Instructions for Industry Response

Interested parties are requested to submit their response divided into three distinct parts:

● Part A: Capability Statement (1 Page Maximum): A concise "pitch" or business resume outlining your Core Competencies, Company Data (CAGE, UEI, active

NAICS), Past Performance overview, unique Differentiators, and active socioeconomic certifications.

● Part B: Technical Capability & Strategy Questionnaire (15 Pages Maximum):

Detailed answers to the technical, operational, and regulatory questions outlined in

Section 2.

● Part C: Contract Structure & Draft RFP Feedback (5 Pages Maximum): Direct feedback on contract type suitability and the draft evaluation criteria outlined in

Sections 3, 4, and 5.

2. Technical Capability & Strategy Questionnaire (Part B Response)

Responders must review the attached Draft Purchase Descriptions (PDs), the Navy’s

Exact Spare Part List, and the Navy’s Quantity Requirements Forecast, and provide comprehensive answers to the following questions:

Section A: Supply Chain Integrity & Pass-Through Screening

1. OEM vs. Reseller Status: Are you the Original Equipment Manufacturer (OEM) for the configurations you intend to propose?

○ If YES: Provide the physical address of your primary manufacturing plant.

○ If NO (Reseller/Broker): Provide the name, business size, and plant location of the domestic manufacturing partner building the trailer hulls/chassis.

2. Nonmanufacturer Rule (NMR) Compliance: Do you comply with the SBA

Nonmanufacturer Rule for all CLINs you intend to propose, meaning you will either manufacture the trailers or source them from a domestic small business manufacturer? If not, specify exactly which configurations will require an individual

SBA NMR waiver.

3. Component Standardization: Designs must accept and integrate the specified Spare

Parts without redesign, adapter kits, nonstandard modifications, or replacement of the identified Government standard components, unless an approved “or equal” component is proposed and accepted.

Section B: Industry Limitations, Capacity, & Lead Times

4. CLIN Selection: Which of the specific trailer configurations does your firm possess the immediate technical capability to supply? (Partial bidding across CLINs is permitted).

5. Concurrent Production Capacity: Relative to your OEM's production capacity and the attached Navy quantity forecast, what is your maximum monthly and annual output? If awarded multiple configurations, does your facility possess the concurrent tooling, floor space, and labor to run multiple production lines simultaneously without delivery delays?

6. Production Thresholds & Lead Times: What are your minimum and maximum order quantities per single delivery order? What is the realistic turnaround time (in calendar days) from the issuance of a delivery order to the first trailer rolling off the assembly line?

Section C: Fleet Transition and Cost Structure Feedback

7. Design Cost: What upfront engineering, tooling, prototyping, or first-article testing costs would your firm require to meet the Government’s technical specifications?

Should the Government establish a dedicated, Firm-Fixed-Price (FFP) Non-Recurring

Engineering (NRE) CLIN in the solicitation to offset these initial setup costs for new entrants? If so, what is an estimated timeline for this phase?

8. Transition Barriers: Identify any specific technical or logistical requirements in the current scope that present a prohibitive barrier to entry for a new manufacturer

(e.g., proprietary software, legacy hitch integrations, unique tooling).

9. Logistics & Interoperability: Can your production line accommodate the current fleet delivery schedule without creating a lapse in operational readiness, and what data or physical assets would you require to guarantee seamless fleet interoperability?

3. Contract Structure & Draft RFP Feedback (Part C Response)

GSA requests targeted feedback on the following structural mechanisms being considered for the final solicitation:

Contract Type Questions (IDIQ vs. Requirements)

● Demand Certainty: Can your firm support a single-award contract with mandatory-use requirements, or do you require a multi-vendor environment (IDIQ) to maintain capacity?

● Volume Flexibility: How does your pricing model fluctuate if actual quantities vary by more than 15% from our historical estimates?

● Commercial Availability: Are the required items readily available on your existing

GSA Schedule, or would they require a custom open-market solution?

● Pricing & Term Stability: Can your firm maintain Firm-Fixed Pricing (FFP) for an extended contract duration (e.g., a 2-year baseline or up to 5 years based on the forecast), or does market volatility require a Fixed-Price with Economic Price

Adjustment (FPEPA) framework or a shorter 1-year base period?

● HTR-FRP Methodology: Does the Highest Technically Rated with a Fair and

Reasonable Price (HTR-FRP) methodology clearly communicate how your proposal will be evaluated? Do you see any risks, mathematical imbalances, or ambiguities with this approach for a trailer procurement?

● Cross-CLIN Pricing: If you intend to bid on multiple configurations, does your pricing model accommodate conditional cross-CLIN discounts?

● Pre-Award EEO Compliance Readiness ($10M+ Threshold): As this consolidated procurement is anticipated to exceed $10M, the apparent successful offeror(s) and any first-tier subcontractors with a value of $10M+ must undergo a mandatory Pre-

Award Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) clearance by the Office of Federal

Contract Compliance Programs (OFCCP) prior to contract award per FAR 22.805.

Does your firm currently maintain an active OFCCP clearance, or have you filed your mandatory annual EEO-1 and VETS-4212 reports to support an expedited pre-award verification track without causing an award lapse?

4. Draft Instructions to Offerors (RFP Framework)

Note: The following text represents the draft framework intended for the final solicitation.

Industry is encouraged to provide critique on its clarity, achievability, and impact on competition.

Proposal Submission and General Instructions

● Proposals may be submitted for any single Contract Line Item Number (CLIN), any combination of CLINs, or all CLINs. Offerors are not required to bid on all configurations to be considered for an award.

● The Government intends to structure the resulting award(s) as an IDIQ or

Requirements Contracts with Fixed-Price with Economic Price Adjustment

(FPEPA) delivery orders [GSA RFO-2025-12 Provision and Clause Matrices].

● Pricing Structure: Offerors must submit independent pricing for each CLIN proposed. Pricing must be based on the 5-year quantity forecast provided in

Section B, with the understanding that Fiscal Years 2027 and 2028 represent the definitive baseline quantities.

● Conditional Discounts: Offerors are permitted to submit conditional "cross-CLIN" discounts (e.g., a specific percentage or dollar reduction if awarded a precise combination of multiple CLINs). Any conditional discounts must be clearly delineated within the Price Volume.

Volume I: Factor 1 – Technical Compliance, Manufacturing Approach, and Past Performance

The technical proposal consists of a Technical Data Package (TDP) submitted in writing and a Virtual Oral Presentation conducted via Microsoft Teams or Google Meet. The TDP and Oral Presentation will be evaluated together as an integrated submission. Offerors must directly address the following four questions for each specific CLIN/configuration proposed:

● Question 1: How does your trailer design meet or exceed the Purchase Description

(PD)?

Demonstrate compliance with PD dimensional, weight (GVWR/curb weight), tow-vehicle interface (STANAG 4009), and applicable MIL-STD/SAE/FMVSS requirements identified in your engineering drawings and exceptions letter. Identify and justify any exceptions taken, and describe any “or equal” components proposed in accordance with standard Brand Name or Equal parameters.

● Question 2: What quality assurance and testing approach ensures a compliant, reliable trailer?

Demonstrate your QA program (with documented evidence submitted per Section

7.1), your Pre-Service Inspection process against TMC RP 803, and your Quality

Assurance Performance and Verification Testing (QAPVT) approach prior to

Government First Production Vehicle testing. Describe your corporate role in supporting the Air Transportability Test Loading Activity (ATTLA) air-transportability certification testing, including lift/tie-down and pull-test provisions.

● Question 3: How does your past performance and warranty program assure reliable, long-term support to the Government?

Discuss similar stake/breakbulk or comparable military/commercial trailer production within the past three (3) years, providing evidence of meeting delivery and quality commitments. Pursuant to the Revolutionary FAR Overhaul, the quality of this past performance track record will undergo qualitative assessment to evaluate operational risk. [RFO-2025-12 Provision and clause matrices] Describe your 60-month comprehensive warranty program, your CONUS authorized service network, and your explicit commitment to a 3-business-day initial response for on-site warranty repairs per PD §5.

Volume I: Factor 2 – Delivery

The technical proposal consists of a Delivery Schedule submitted in writing and an integrated Virtual Oral Presentation. The Delivery Schedule and Oral Presentation will be evaluated together as an integrated submission. The submission and presentation must directly address the following four questions for each specific CLIN/configuration proposed:

● Question 1: How will you produce and deliver the required trailers within the

Government’s required schedule?

○ Provide a realistic production and delivery schedule identifying FPV completion, production ramp-up, production capacity, and planned delivery quantities and dates, with emphasis on FY27 and FY28.

○ Identify significant schedule risks, including material/component availability, supplier dependencies, labor, production capacity, testing, and transportation, and describe mitigation measures.

○ Describe the Offeror’s plan for addressing FPV deficiencies, required retesting, or other delays while maintaining the required delivery schedule.

○ Describe the approach for coordinating deliveries to the destinations, including transportation, base access, credentialing, and delivery coordination across the five designated Navy sites.

○ Provide objective evidence supporting the proposed production and delivery schedule, such as comparable production experience, demonstrated capacity, current production resources, or supplier commitments to guarantee seamless fleet integration without a lapse in Navy operational readiness.

● Question 2: How will you execute First Production Vehicle (FPV) testing and the production/delivery schedule across five dispersed Navy sites without service degradation?

Provide a realistic production and delivery plan with milestones and risk mitigations based on the 5-year forecast (with emphasis on FY27/28), including your plan for remedying any FPV non-conformances and retesting if required. Address delivery coordination, base access requirements, and driver credentialing for each of the five Navy destinations defined in Section 5.

Virtual Oral Presentation Rules of Engagement

● Format: Presentations will be conducted virtually via Microsoft Teams or Google

Meet. The Government will specify the platform at the final solicitation.

● Time Limits: Offerors will be allotted 45 minutes to present their technical approach, followed by a strict 30-minute Government Q&A session based solely on the presented materials and submitted TDP.

● Participants: Only personnel who are proposed to perform or manage the contract may present or respond during the oral presentation. Proposal consultants may attend only if permitted by the solicitation and may not present or answer questions unless they will perform under the contract.

5. Draft Evaluation Factors for Award

Basis for Award

Awards will be made on a CLIN-by-CLIN basis to the responsible offeror(s) whose proposal represents the Highest Technically Rated with a Fair and Reasonable Price

(HTR-FRP). The Government intends to establish either one single IDIQ or Requirements contract covering all five configurations, or up to five separate IDIIQ or Requirements contracts to different manufacturers. Price will not be scored or ranked, and the

Government will not conduct a price-technical tradeoff.

Evaluation Methodology

● Consensus Review: At the conclusion of the virtual oral presentation and Q&A session, the Government evaluation team will review the Technical Data Package

(TDP) and presentation materials together to record a consensus findings report of noteworthy observations, strengths, and compliance concerns. The Government will not assign adjectival or numerical ratings.

● Material Non-Compliance Gate: An exceptions letter or TDP that reveals material non-compliance with mandatory PD requirements (e.g., MIL-STD interface geometry, GVWR, STANAG 4009 compliance, or core safety standards) will render the proposal unacceptable for that specific CLIN, regardless of oral presentation performance. Because this is a hardware procurement, the end item cannot be negotiated into compliance after award. A failure on one CLIN will not disqualify an offeror from other compliant CLINs.

● Comparative Technical Ranking: For each individual CLIN, the Government will utilize a direct comparative analysis to rank all acceptable proposals from highest to lowest technically rated. This ranking reflects the degree to which the proposal demonstrates technical compliance, a superior manufacturing/QA approach, robust past performance, and minimal lifecycle risk across the core evaluation factors.

● Price Evaluation: Price proposals will be evaluated independently to ensure the proposed pricing is fair and reasonable in accordance with FAR 15.404, accounting for the FPEPA terms.

Multi-Award Optimization Mechanics

To determine the most cost-effective award combination under the HTR methodology, the

Government will apply the following protocol:

1. The Government will isolate the Highest Technically Rated proposal for each individual CLIN.

2. If an offeror is the Highest Technically Rated across multiple CLINs and has offered a conditional cross-CLIN discount, the Navy will apply that discount to the evaluation calculation.

3. If the Highest Technically Rated offeror for a given CLIN proposes a price that cannot be determined fair and reasonable, the Government reserves the right to reject that proposal and evaluate the pricing of the next-highest technically rated proposal for that CLIN.