PM_HS_MTC-Tracked_Request_for_Information.pdf

DISTRIBUTION A. Approved for public release; distribution unlimited.

OPSEC #: OPSEC-2026-PAE-26-172

1. REQUIRING ACTIVITY:

This Request for Information (RFI) is in support of the following program offices: Portfolio

Acquisition Executive Fires (PAE Fires); Portfolio Management Executive Offensive Fires

(PME Offensive Fires); Project Manager Howitzer Systems (PM HS); Product Manager Self-

Propelled Howitzer - Modernization (PdM SPH-M)

2. SUBJECT:

Request for Information on 155mm tracked self-propelled howitzer

3. DISCLAIMER:

This RFI is for informational purposes only. The information in this notice is subject to change and is not binding on the USG. This is not a solicitation for proposals and shall not be construed as a commitment by the USG to purchase enhancements, hardware, or services. Responses in any form are not considered offers and the USG is under no obligation to award a contract as a result of this announcement. Funding is NOT available to pay for preparation of responses to this announcement. Any information submitted by respondents to this RFI is strictly voluntary. If the

Government elects to proceed with this project, it reserves the right to utilize any appropriate acquisition strategy, including Other Transaction Authority (OTA) under 10 U.S.C. § 4022 or a

FAR-based contract.

As this is not an invitation to bid, respondents WILL NOT be notified regarding information obtained related to this RFI. Responses will not be returned nor will detailed feedback be made available to industry.

Proprietary Information. The USG acknowledges its obligations under the Federal

Acquisition Regulation (FAR) and 18 United States Code (U.S.C.) §1905 to protect confidential information provided to the USG. Pursuant to this statute, the USG is willing to accept any trade secrets or proprietary restrictions placed upon data presented in response to this survey and to protect such information from unauthorized disclosure, subject to the following:

• Data must be clearly marked PROPRIETARY and be accompanied by an explanatory text so that the USG is clearly notified on what data is proprietary.

• Mark only data that is truly PROPRIETARY.

• Do not mark data that is already in the public domain or is already in possession of the USG or third parties on an unclassified basis. Do not submit any classified data in response to this market survey.

• Proprietary data transmitted electronically must have the PROPRIETARY legend on both the cover of the transmittal e-mail as well as at the beginning of the file. Proprietary information contained within the correspondence shall use the legends: “PROPRIETARY PORTION

BEGINS” and “PROPRIETARY PORTION ENDS.”

The USG is not responsible for the public disclosure of unmarked data received in response to this RFI. Accordingly, the respondent shall ensure that technical data provided in response to this

RFI shall be appropriately marked (i.e. proprietary) to ensure proper USG handling of the data.

Should the USG need to reproduce the protected data for distribution purposes between USG offices, all such data shall be reproduced with restrictive legends in place. Additionally, marked data that is already in the public domain or in the possession of the parties or third parties, or is afterward placed into the public domain by the owner or another party through no fault of the

Government will not be protected once in the public domain. Data already in the possession of the Government will be protected IAW the Government's rights in the data.

Please provide a release statement indicating that the proprietary information may be distributed to Army personnel, including support contractors, involved with this RFI for the purpose of evaluating responses.

NOTE: Proprietary and/or foreign government information will be handled by the USG in accordance with U.S. DoD standards for Controlled Unclassified Information (CUI). If the system is in service with the host country, please provide a copy of the foreign government’s security classification guide or equivalent and go through the proper government channels for submission. Any information provided shall be identified by the respondent as either “CUI”

(using equivalent country standards as necessary) then appropriately marked, handled, and transmitted to the USG.

Vendors are requested NOT to submit any classified data in response to this RFI.

4. DESCRIPTION AND BACKGROUND:

The United States (US) Army remains committed to modernizing its field artillery formations through mature and available, 155mm, self-propelled howitzer systems. Most recently, the US

Army reevaluated its objectives for modernization and progressed to replacing the M777 howitzer with a wheeled self-propelled howitzer system in the program called Mobile Tactical

Cannon – Wheeled (MTC-W). This RFI, however, is focused on an additional capability, namely a tracked self-propelled 155mm howitzer for employment within armored formations. This RFI must be recognized as a new and distinctly separate effort from the MTC-W effort.

The USG acknowledges that several RFIs have been issued under the broader self-propelled howitzer modernization strategy. As we work to shape the acquisition approach, it is imperative that the USG continually update market research through industry partners to obtain the best available and most affordable solution for the US Army. In doing so, it is appreciated that all responses include the most up to date information.

Throughout this RFI there are references to NATO and US test standards. The USG believes these standards to be understood throughout industry. The USG will not make any standards available to industry.

The following definitions are provided to clarify this RFI.

Term Definition

System

Any combination of materiel or technologies that support the self-propelled artillery mission. This may include vehicles, ammunition, sets/kits/tools, personnel, etc.

Resupply Vehicle

Any vehicle or support system that is unique to interfacing with a self-propelled howitzer. This vehicle would provide the self-propelled howitzer with at least projectiles and propellant but may also provide other classes of consumables to support the vehicle.

Design Authority

The organization that is wholly responsible for a system’s technical design and holds authority for all changes to the design.

In Service

Equivalent to the US Army Initial Operational Capability (IOC). IOC is when some units and/or organizations in the force structure scheduled to receive a system have received it and can employ and maintain it.

Ammunition

Any projectile, propelling charge, fuze, or primer, or combinations thereof, designed for use in a tube artillery system.

Ammunition

Handling System

Any subsystem or combination of subsystems which facilitates the transfer of ammunition from a stowed condition to a loaded, ready-to-fire condition in the self-propelled howitzer.

Cannon Assembly

The combination of the cannon tube, breech, and/or other mechanisms through which ammunition is triggered, resulting in a projectile leaving the self-propelled howitzer system.

Rearm

The term used to describe the transfer of ammunition from a resupply system to a self-propelled howitzer under combat or combat-like conditions. e.g. The M992A3 rearms the M109A7.

Self-Propelled

Howitzer (SPH) A vehicle equipped with a cannon armament.

Fire Direction Center

(FDC)

The collection of personnel and materiel that provide technical and tactical fire direction for the entire battery.

5. Industry day briefing opportunities

5.1. Respondents wishing to brief the Government on their responses to the questions must coordinate a one-hour virtual discussion time slot. An initial brief for all interested parties will be on 08 September 2026 from 0900-1000 EDT to orient industry on overarching considerations and timelines. See below for additional coordinating instructions:

• Available Dates: will occur between 08-09 September 2026

• Daily Windows: 1000–1200 and 1300–1500 Eastern Daylight Time (EDT)

• Scheduling Basis: First-come, first-served

• Submission Deadline for Briefing Request: No later than 1500 EDT on 03

September 2026

Note: While participation in a virtual briefing is optional, all respondents (including those participating in a briefing) are requested to submit a written electronic response to the questions outlined in Section 6.

To request a briefing timeslot, please submit an email request to both

Jeffrey.t.budd6.civ@army.mil and Jeffrey.t.lobue.mil@army.mil

Email Subject Line: "SPH-M: MTC-T Industry Day Request – [Insert Vendor Name]"

Participation in this Industry Day is entirely voluntary. It is not necessary to respond to this Special Notice or participate in a briefing to be eligible for future government awards.

5.2. Site Visits and Demonstrations: In addition to virtual briefings and written responses, the USG is interested in understanding vendor capabilities firsthand. Vendors are encouraged to indicate during or prior to the Industry Day whether they are willing to host a US Army delegation at their facilities for manufacturing tours, live capability demonstrations, or hardware showcases.

5.2.1. Would your company be amenable to hosting a USG delegation at your facility

(or a partner's facility) for a site visit, manufacturing tour, or live capability demonstration?

5.2.2. If yes, please provide a brief description of what you would propose to show (e.g., hot production lines, prototype driving/firing demos, component manufacturing).

5.2.3. Please identify the location(s) of these potential visits and any anticipated timelines or lead times required to coordinate such an event.

6. WRITTEN SUBMISSION INSTRUCTIONS:

Responses shall be furnished to the United States Government (USG) no later 11 September

2026 at 1700 EDT. Responses received after this time may not be considered. Do not submit responses via SAM. Please submit electronic responses to this RFI, as well as questions for clarification to Jeffrey.t.budd6.civ@army.mil or Jeffrey.t.lobue.mil@army.mil.

Electronic responses are required in searchable Microsoft Word 2016 (or later), Microsoft Excel

2016 (or later), or Adobe Acrobat formats. The maximum size of each e-mail message should be no more than ten (10) megabytes. You may use multiple e-mail messages. For proprietary or otherwise sensitive information, please request a DoD SAFE link by contacting

Jeffrey.t.budd6.civ@army.mil or Jeffrey.t.lobue.mil@army.mil. The subject line shall be “SPH-

M:MTC-T RFI Responses” and the vendor’s name.

It is not necessary to respond to this RFI to be eligible for future awards.

Responses sought:

1. Respondent Overview

1.1. Company/Institute name

1.2. Address

1.3. Point of Contact

mailto:Jeffrey.t.budd6.civ@army.mil mailto:Jeffrey.t.lobue.mil@army.mil mailto:Jeffrey.t.budd6.civ@army.mil mailto:Jeffrey.t.lobue.mil@army.mil mailto:Jeffrey.t.budd6.civ@army.mil mailto:Jeffrey.t.lobue.mil@army.mil

1.4. Commercial and Government Entity (CAGE) Code

1.5. Unique Entity Identifier (UEI)

1.6. Phone Number

1.7. E-mail Address

1.8. Web page URL

1.9. Size of business pursuant to North American Industry Classification System (NAICS)

Code 336992. Based on the NAICS Code, state whether your company qualifies as:

1.9.1. Small Business (Yes/No)

1.9.2. Woman-Owned Small Business (Yes/No)

1.9.3. Small Disadvantaged Business (Yes/No)

1.9.4. 8(a) Certified (Yes/No)

1.9.5. HUBZone Certified (Yes/No)

1.9.6. Veteran-Owned Small Business (Yes/No)

1.9.7. Service-Disabled Veteran-Owned Small Business (Yes/No)

1.9.8. Registered in the System for Award Management (SAM.gov) (Yes/No)

1.10. Does your firm, or any of your potential key subcontractors, qualify as a Nontraditional

Defense Contractor (NDC) per 10 U.S.C. § 4022? (Yes/No)

1.11. Are you currently a member of any DoD-sponsored Consortia (e.g., National

Armaments Consortium (NAC), NAMC, etc.)? (Yes/No)

2. System Information

2.1. Provide a summary of the system being described in your response, including the self-propelled howitzer, resupply vehicle, and any other necessary elements to operate and maintain the system.

2.1.1. Does the participant have design authority (defined above) over all components in the system (howitzer, ammo, resupply vehicle, etc.)? If not, who are your partners?

2.1.2. Describe the minimum and maximum armament range that are currently demonstrated in your cannon system. Please identify the projectile/propellent combination used to determine state range. Please denote any combination that is developmental versus fielded.

2.1.3. Briefly describe your cannon system, including but not limited to caliber, chamber size, recoil system, service pressure, breech type, and gun mount system. Provide overall vehicle dimensions and weights.

2.1.4. Briefly describe the maturity of your self-propelled howitzer, ammunition, resupply vehicle, and related elements, as applicable to your system. Describe where material is/are in the lifecycle, for example development through initial fielding, safety testing.

2.2. Does the vehicle share components or subsystems with other fielded systems? If so, what major components/subsystems are shared and with what vehicle are they shared? The intent of this question is to assess commonality and probable availability of spare parts.

2.3. Does the respondent have technological upgrades planned for this system in the future?

If there are planned upgrades, what is the objective and timing of those upgrades?

2.4. Technical Data Rights and System Architecture

2.4.1. The USG seeks sufficient technical data rights to sustain, repair and modernize it’s systems. Please describe the respondent’s ownership of, or licensing rights to, the

Technical Data (TD) and Intellectual Property (IP) for all major sub-systems. Please identify any major subsystems which the contractor would be precluded from offering or decline to offer GPR-like rights to the USG.

2.4.2. To what extent does the system utilize a Modular Open Systems Approach

(MOSA)? Detail if and how the architecture leverages open standards for key physical and digital interfaces.

2.4.3. Provide a summary of available Interface Control Documents (ICDs), Model Based

Systems Engineering Models, or other similar documentation to control interfaces. If this information is proprietary, detail the respondent’s willingness to provide the government with the interface data necessary for third-party integration and long-term sustainment.

3. Production

3.1. What is the current production lead time for the self-propelled howitzer? What is the current production lead time for the resupply vehicle?

3.2. Describe where your system is currently produced.

3.2.1. Assuming no internal or external constraints, what is your maximum production capacity per year, for both self-propelled howitzer and resupply vehicle (if applicable)?

3.3. If not currently produced in the USA, describe how you would onshore production of the proposed system to the USA, including barrel production. Identify current US manufacturing facilities and sources of supply.

3.3.1. What is the estimated timeframe and estimated cost to deliver a system manufactured in the USA?

3.3.2. Are there any impediments to producing candidate systems in the USA?

4. Materiel Availability

4.1. Are you able to deliver one (1) tracked self-propelled howitzer, one (1) resupply vehicle, and necessary support personnel/materiel to a US Army test center within 90 days to support demonstrative and safety testing events, from six (6) months to nine (9) months, utilizing US ammunition? Assume this location is within the contiguous United States.

4.2. How much time will it take to deliver an additional four (4) self-propelled howitzers, four (4) resupply vehicles and necessary support personnel/material, for up to six (6) to nine (9) months, to a CONUS US Army facility to support additional scenarios, utilizing

US ammunition? Staggered deliveries are acceptable.

4.3. How much time will it take to deliver a total of Five (5) tracked self-propelled howitzers, Five (5) resupply vehicles, and necessary support personnel/materiel, for up to twelve

(12) months, to a CONUS US Army facility to support Soldier experimentation utilizing

US ammunition? Staggered deliveries are acceptable.

5. Ammunition

5.1. What US Army ammunition has been tested and/or qualified and confirmed to be safe and suitable for use in your self-propelled howitzer system? Provide evidence to support your claim that the test was conducted by a recognized U.S. testing facility, A NATO-equivalent government test center, or a certified independent third-party organization.

The USG reserves the right to conduct an independent analysis of the test data provided if warranted. Include ammunition nomenclature by projectile, fuze, propellant, and primer as well as the charge ranges tested and/or qualified. Standard Agreement

(STANAG) 4517 or 4224 can be referenced for general guidance to assess safety and suitability for service.

5.2. For your ammunition handling system (if applicable) and ammunition stowage, what are the current capacities by projectile, fuze, propellant, and primer and ammunition restrictions (length, weight, touch zones, etc.)?

6. Test and Evaluation

6.1. Describe the Safety and Suitability evaluations that have been completed for your system. Please address at least the following subsystems:

6.1.1. Cannon. (You may reference NATO STANAG 4110 and 4224 for typical evaluation criteria for cannons.)

6.1.2. Human Factors. (You may reference MIL-STD-1472)

6.2. Has your company or system previously tested at a US test facility? If yes, provide the test report(s) and data. Alternatively, provide the test report document identification and

USG Point of Contact.

6.3. The USG typically looks for a Safety Assessment Report conforming to DI-SAFT-

80102C, that addresses the process described in MIL-STD-882, System Safety. Are you able to provide a safety hazard and risk assessment, in this format or any similar format, prepared and available for review by the test site.

7. Fire Direction / Fire Control

7.1. Is your SPH currently able to receive and process MIL-STD-6017 messages (“VMF”)?

If yes, please summarize revision(s) supported and capability in terms of send/receive and usage.

8. Vehicle Operation and Sustainment

8.1. Do you have operator manuals, maintainer manuals, and training materiel in English that could be used for Soldier experimentation?

8.2. Do you have an established supply chain with NATO NSN or US NSNs assigned to major components? If so, are any of your suppliers US-based or are they all foreign entities? Please provide any artifacts relevant to this inquiry showing supplier base and

NATO NSN/ US NSN percentages against the platform’s base configuration. The attached Supply Chain Market Checklist (Attachment 1) may also be used.

7. RESPONSES:

Interested parties shall provide the information requested in the Responses Sought section below no later than 11 September 2026 at 1700 EDT. Electronic responses are required in searchable Microsoft Word 2016 (or later), Microsoft Excel 2016 (or later), or Adobe Acrobat formats. The maximum size of each email message should be no more than ten (10) megabytes. You may use multiple e-mail messages. The subject line shall be “SPH-M: MTC-

T RFI Responses” and the vendor’s name. Responses received after the deadline may not be considered. Do not submit responses via SAM. Please submit electronic responses to RFI, as well as questions, to jeffrey.t.budd6.civ@army.mil or Jeffrey.t.lobue.mil@army.mil.

Interested vendors will be provided with additional details on the virtual industry day after responses received. It is not necessary to respond to this to be eligible for future awards.

Responses Sought:

1. Respondent Overview

1.1. Company/Institute Name

1.2. Address

1.3. Point of Contact

1.4. Commercial and Government Entity (CAGE) Code

1.5. Data Universal Numbering System Number

1.6. Phone Number

1.7. E-mail Address

mailto:jeffrey.t.budd6.civ@army.mil mailto:Jeffrey.t.lobue.mil@army.mil