Attachment 1 - DIBC-RFS-26-02 Statement of Need.pdf

Attachment 1 — Statement of Need (SON)

DIBC-RFS-26-02

Defense Manufacturing Readiness Exercise

1.0 Background and Authority

The Defense Industrial Base Consortium (DIBC) is seeking prototype solutions to support the Defense Manufacturing Readiness Exercise.

The Department wants to evaluate opportunities under realistic business conditions, while respecting existing commercial commitments. The goal is to strengthen national defense production readiness by understanding what can be built, adapted, scaled, qualified, sustained, or preserved for future readiness.

This SON supports an Other Transaction (OT) prototype project under DIBC. Proposed solutions will be required to support prototype activities directly relevant to enhancing mission effectiveness and improving supporting platforms, systems, components, materials, supply chains, or manufacturing capabilities relevant to the Department.

2.0 Government Need and Intended Evidence

The Government seeks decision-grade evidence (i.e., evidence sufficient to support Government planning, investment, readiness, or other decisions) that distinguishes potential manufacturing capability from qualified, contractable, and usable defense production capacity.

The Government needs evidence that supports as applicable to the proposed role, phase, and maturity of the solution:

(a) identification of credible firms, facilities, production roles, and teaming concepts;

(b) understanding of what can be built, adapted, scaled, qualified, sustained, or preserved;

(c) identification of constraints affecting technical data, tooling, workforce, suppliers, quality systems, cyber readiness, qualification, source approval, contracting, business case, and commercial commitments;

(d) assessment of Government interventions that may reduce barriers;

(e) readiness and conversion planning;

(f) execution evidence, if authorized;

(g) qualification, acceptance, and usability assessment, if applicable;

(h) reset, sustainment, return-to-baseline, or residual-readiness assessment; and

(i) Civil Reserve Manufacturing Network (CRMN)-related planning evidence.

The Government does not seek unnecessary disclosure of trade secrets or detailed proprietary process information during initial screening. The Government is also not asking companies to make binding production commitments before role definition, feasibility conditions, business conditions, and follow-on pathways are understood.

3.0 Topic Areas Summary

The Government seeks solutions that help identify, assess, shape, validate, or advance credible design-side, manufacturing-side, integration, supplier-network, or other bounded production roles relevant to the DMRE.

Respondents may submit information for one or both topic areas. Each topic may be evaluated independently.

The Government may select one or more solutions, partial solutions, role-specific solutions, phase-limited efforts, or no solution. Solutions may support manufacturing-readiness assessment, production-role development, conversion planning, validation, execution, qualification, readiness assessment, CRMN-related planning, or other objectives of the DMRE.

During evaluation, the Government may compare submissions where necessary; however, the Government anticipates that evaluations will primarily assess each response against the criteria stated in the RFS. The Government will determine which response(s), if any, provide the greatest value in supporting the objectives of this prototype effort.

Topic Title Focus

Topic 1

Group 3 Unmanned Aerial System (UAS) and/or Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV) Design and Bounded Manufacturing Production Roles

Provide information that enables the Government to identify and assess realistic design-side, manufacturing-side, integration, and bounded production roles associated with a Group 3 UAS / UAV family.

Topic 2 Munitions Wiring Harness / Connector Bounded Production Roles

Provide information that enables the Government to identify and assess realistic bounded production roles associated with munitions wiring harnesses, connectors, electrical interconnect assemblies, inspection, test, or supplier-network functions

Cross-cutting evidence requirements described in section 5.0 of the SON apply to both topic areas, including readiness evidence, constraint identification, Government intervention assessment, qualification and acceptance, reset and residual readiness, and CRMN-related planning.

The Government is interested in both manufacturing-side and design-side participants, including manufacturers, contract manufacturers, design owners, OEMs, current producers, technical-data holders, system integrators, suppliers, and other organizations capable of contributing to manufacturing-readiness objectives.

4.0 Technical Topic Descriptions

Topic 1: Group 3 Unmanned Aerial System (UAS) and/or Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV) Design and Bounded Manufacturing Production Roles [DIBC-26-02-001] The Government requires prototype solutions or readiness concepts that can help identify, assess, shape, and potentially advance design-side, manufacturing-side, integration, and bounded production roles associated with a Group 3 UAS / UAV family.

The Government is not assuming that a single performer must vertically integrate or produce an entire system. Solutions will address realistic bounded roles, including but not limited to:

(a) component production;

(b) subsystem production;

(c) assembly;

(d) integration support;

(e) contract manufacturing;

(f) contract assembly;

(g) distributed production;

(h) supplier support;

(i) supplier-network support or orchestration;

(j) ground support equipment;

(k) testing;

(l) inspection;

(m) quality support;

(n) tooling, fixture, or test-equipment support;

(o) producer-to-incumbent teaming;

(p) current-producer or integrator-supported workshare;

(q) design ownership;

(r) technical-data ownership or stewardship;

(s) OEM or current-producer participation;

(t) system integration support;

(u) air vehicle design support;

(v) subsystem design support;

(w) configuration-management support;

(x) producibility / manufacturability engineering;

(y) technical-data holders.

Technical Focus Proposed solutions will help the Government understand:

1. which design-side, manufacturing-side, integration, firm, and facility participants may be credible for bounded UAS / UAV roles;

2. what each firm and/or facility can realistically perform in-house, outsource, design, integrate, manufacture, assemble, test, support, or otherwise contribute within a bounded production architecture;

3. what design ownership, technical-data, interface, configuration-management, supplier, incumbent, integrator, test, inspection, quality, qualification, cyber, security, and business conditions would affect feasibility;

4. what teaming or workshare concepts may be realistic;

5. what Government interventions may reduce barriers;

6. what would be required to move from potential capability to qualified, contractable, and usable capacity;

7. what reset, sustainment, or residual-readiness posture may be feasible after exercise activity; and

8. how the evidence should inform CRMN-related planning.

Topic 2: Munitions Wiring Harness / Connector Bounded Production Roles [DIBC-26- 02-002] The Government requires prototype solutions or readiness concepts that can help identify, assess, shape, and potentially advance bounded production roles associated with munitions wiring harnesses, connectors, electrical interconnect assemblies, related fabrication, assembly, inspection, test, source-approval support, or supplier-network functions.

The Government is not assuming that a single performer must produce a complete end item or become a traditional defense prime. Solutions may address a complete bounded production role or a narrower role that contributes to a credible production architecture.

Potential roles may include, but are not limited to:

(a) wiring harness fabrication;

(b) connector assembly or support;

(c) electrical interconnect assembly;

(d) cable or wire processing;

(e) inspection;

(f) test support;

(g) quality support;

(h) tooling, fixture, or test-equipment support;

(i) source-approval support;

(j) supplier support;

(k) contract manufacturing;

(l) contract assembly;

(m) distributed production;

(n) producer-to-incumbent teaming; or

(o) supplier-network support or orchestration.

Technical Focus Proposed solutions will help the Government understand:

1. which firms and facilities may be credible for bounded wiring harness and/or connector production roles;

2. what each firm and/or facility could realistically perform in-house versus outsource;

3. what controlled specifications, technical data, interface information, inspection requirements, testing requirements, qualification requirements, source-approval conditions, supplier dependencies, cyber/security conditions, and business conditions would affect feasibility;

4. what teaming or workshare concepts may be realistic;

5. what Government interventions may reduce barriers;

6. what would be required to move from potential capability to qualified, contractable, and usable capacity;

7. what reset, sustainment, or residual-readiness posture may be feasible after exercise activity; and

8. how the evidence should inform CRMN-related planning.

5.0 Cross-Cutting Technical Needs

The following cross-cutting needs apply to both topic areas. Respondents will address these areas to the extent relevant to their proposed role, maturity, and available information in the different stages of the DMRE.

For administrative simplicity, this SON references Stage 1 and Stage 2 activities. Stage 1 generally corresponds to candidate identification, screening, discovery, and early production-role matching. Stage 2 may encompass later exercise activities, including role shaping, conversion planning, validation, execution, qualification, acceptance, and readiness assessment.

5.1 Defense Manufacturing Readiness Pathway (stage 1)

The Department needs to identify, screen, assess, and match existing U.S. design, manufacturing, integration, and supplier capability to practical bounded production roles and evaluate its potential contribution to priority defense production readiness.

5.2 Readiness and Conversion Evidence (stage 2)

The Department needs evidence on the time, cost, schedule, risk, dependencies, and enabling conditions required to move from production-role identification to qualified, contractable, and usable defense production capacity.

5.3 Binding Constraint Identification (stage 2)

The Department needs to determine which constraints are binding by item, firm, facility, production role, teaming concept, and readiness pathway.

5.4 Government Intervention Assessment (stage 2)

The Department needs to test which Government actions materially reduce, remove, or fail to affect readiness or conversion barriers.

5.5 Qualification, Acceptance, and Usable Capacity (stage 2)

The Department needs to distinguish among potential capability, technical producibility, demonstration output, partially qualified output, accepted output, contractable capacity, scalable capacity, and usable defense production capacity.

5.6 Reset, Sustainment, Return, and Residual Readiness (stage 2) The Department needs to understand return-to-baseline, dual-use continuation, warm readiness, latent readiness, reactivation conditions, and residual readiness options.

5.7 CRMN-Related Planning Evidence (stage 2)

The Department needs outputs that inform CRMN-related screening, activation, support design, readiness posture, reset requirements, support packages, and disposition categories.

6.0 Relationship to Request for Solutions (RFS)

Submission timing, DIBC membership requirements, payment gates, funding, attachment requirements, evaluation process, security, data rights, period of performance, follow-on production, and disclaimers are governed by the RFS. Additional requirements may be governed by any Government invitation, DIBC instructions, and the applicable Project Sub Agreement.