Sources Sought Synopsis SMT MHU 141.docx

Sources Sought Synopsis Next Generation MHU-110 & MHU-141 Munitions Trailers

CAUTION:

This market survey is being conducted to identify potential sources that may possess the expertise, capabilities, and experience to meet the requirements for qualification and production of the Next Generation MHU-110 and MHU-141 munitions trailers for use by United States Air Force (USAF) personnel. The level of security clearance and amount of foreign participation in this requirement has not been determined. Contractors/Institutions responding to this market research are placed on notice that participation in this survey may not ensure participation in future solicitations or contract awards. The Government will not reimburse participants for any expenses associated with their participation in this survey.

INSTRUCTIONS:

1. The document(s) below contain a description of the Next Generation MHU-110 and MHU-141 requirement and a Contractor Capability Survey. The Survey allows Contractors to provide their company’s capability.

2. If, after reviewing these documents, you desire to participate in the market research, you should provide documentation that supports your company’s capability in meeting these requirements. Failure to provide documentation may result in the Government being unable to adequately assess your capabilities. If you lack sufficient experience in a particular area, please provide details explaining how you would overcome the lack of experience/capabilities in order to perform that portion of the requirement (i.e., teaming, subcontracting, etc.)

3. ATTENTION: SMALL BUSINESS (SB) RESPONDENTS who are interested in participation for this effort:

a. No set aside decision has been made; however, the Government will determine the final strategy after thorough analysis of the SB responses and other market research available, considering the demonstrated interest and capability. Please ensure that a thorough response is provided to each question. If your company does not currently possess the full capability required to fulfill the entire requirement, what teaming/partnership/joint venture/subcontracting arrangement do you have in place to fulfill the Government needs? Providing evidence of this arrangement, e.g. emails, letter, etc. that demonstrates a united response to this SSS is highly encouraged, but not required. The evidence should state the type of arrangement and the role each member will fulfill. If you are only interested in being a subcontractor to the future awardee, state the portion of the work that your organization has capability of fulfilling.

b. Identify any areas of work that your organization believes should be broken out exclusively for SB.

4. Both large and SB are encouraged to participate in this Market Research. Joint ventures or teaming arrangements are encouraged. Any responses involving teaming agreements should delineate between the work that will be accomplished by the prime and the work accomplished by the teaming partners.

5. Questions relative to this market survey should be addressed to the Contract Specialist, Shanika Brown and Contracting Officer, Amanda Ragan at the following email addresses:

shanika.brown.1@us.af.mil amanda.ragan.1@us.af.mil

PURPOSE/DESCRIPTION

The Government is conducting market research to identify potential sources that possess the production data, expertise, engineering design capabilities, and experience to meet qualification requirements for the design and production of the Next-Generation, Small Munitions Trailers for use by the USAF. The estimated quantities for this acquisition are for 1,100 Systems for fiscal years (FY) 25 – 32. Quantities are subject to change.

A draft Purchase Description (PD) and draft Statement of Work (SOW) are included which provide a description of the Next-Generation, Small Munitions Trailer requirement. A Contractor Capability Survey, included below, allows you to provide your company’s capability. If, after reviewing these documents, you desire to participate in the market research, you should provide documentation that supports your company’s capability in meeting these requirements.

CONTRACTOR CAPABILITY SURVEY

Part I. Business Information

Please provide the following business information for your company/institution and for any teaming or joint venture partners:

· Company/Institute Name:

· Address:

· Point of Contact:

· CAGE Code:

· Phone Number:

· E-mail Address:

· Web Page URL:

· Government Proposed North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) Code: 336413

· A statement as to whether your company is domestically or foreign owned (if foreign, please indicate the country of ownership).

Responses to the Capability Survey Part I, Part II, and Part III must be received no later than close of business January 9, 2025.XXX 2024. Please ensure data is in a readable electronic format that can be received through a firewall. Attachments shall not to exceed 10 MB per email. Multiple emails are acceptable. Responses must be sent via email to the following:

· Amanda Ragan amanda.ragan.1@us.af.mil

· Shanika Brown shanika.brown.1@us.af.mil

Questions relative to this market research should be addressed to both the Contract Specialist and PCO identified above.

Part II. Capability Survey Questions

A. General Capability Questions:

1. Describe briefly the capabilities of your facility and nature of the goods and/or services you provide. Include a description of your staff composition and management structure.

2. Describe your company's past experience on previous projects similar in complexity to this requirement. Include a brief description of the work performed, period of performance, agency/organization supported.

3. Have you built any type of Munitions Trailer in the past? Are you building any now? If so, for whom, and how many?

4. What is your company’s current maximum capacity per month for this particular type of requirement? Provide information on any facility reserves you may possess to increase capacity in the event of an immediate need do to critical operational mission requirements.

5. What quality assurance processes and test qualification practices does your company employ? Please provide a description of your quality program (ISO 9001, AS9100, etc.)

6. Based upon the experience and composition of your company, what is your best estimate of production time for two (2) first production munitions trailers of each classification, the MHU-110V2 and the MHU-141V2, as described in PD15WRWNZEA05?PD24ROZEA01? What is the production lead-time for a production unit of each classification?

7. Based upon your current facilities, staffing, and resources, what is your best estimate of maximum monthly production capacity of each classification, the MHU-110V2 and the MHU-141V2, as described in PD15WRWNZEA05PD24ROZEA01?

8. If needed, do you have the ability to either construct new facilities or subcontract to meet a production capacity higher than estimated in question 2?

9. Do you have American Welding Society (AWS) certified welders and AWS certified weld inspectors? Do you have the experience and capability to weld 6061-T6 aluminum alloy?

10. Do you have 3D/Solids Modeling/Computer Aided drafting capability? What software do you use? Can you provide a complete drawing package for the new trailer designs?

11. Can you prepare a detailed stress analysis to include a Finite Element Analysis (FEA) to prove the stress level produced by the applicable design load(s) at any point in the structure is limited to a level that provides an applicable factor of safety against permanent deformation as described in 3.5.3.1.5 of PD15WRWNZEA05?PD24ROZEA01? Static and Dynamic Loading will be required to be analyzed.

12. Can you provide a complete Technical Order that incorporates Operation and Maintenance and Illustrated Parts Breakdown sections?

13. PD15WRWNZEA05PD24ROZEA01 requires the integration of specific characteristics found in the legacy MHU-110 and MHU-141 munitions trailers (the trailers’ deck layouts) and innovative chassis and frame structure designs that utilize modern running gear components that are commercially available from multiple sources to the maximum extent possible, while maximizing commonality of chassis components between the two classifications. Can you provide a design solution that incorporates all of these characteristics?

14. Have you designed and manufactured products that have the potential for galvanic corrosion, but incorporated measures into the design to isolate dissimilar metals to prevent corrosion from occurring? An example is the use of steel alloy fasteners that are secured in aluminum alloys such as 6061-T6. Please provide example(s) of having incorporated such measures into a design.

15. Have you designed and manufactured a trailer that has undergone mobility testing as described in 3.8 through 3.8.1.3 of PD15WRWNZEA05?PD24ROZEA01? Was the testing performed in-house or outsourced to a testing facility? How were the results of testing used to improve the design? Please provide example(s).

16. Have you designed and manufactured a vehicle that incorporates a steerable front axle utilizing Ackermann geometry? Please provide example(s).

17. Can you provide a robust steering system per 3.8.5 of PD15WRWNZEA05PD24ROZEA01, designed to withstand any additional forces applied through the drawbar due to over-steering by the tow tractor, after the trailer’s maximum cramping angle has been reached, and while under maximum trailer load.

18. Have you designed brake systems that required the careful design and selection of critical components such as the master cylinder, calipers, rotors, and check valves, where the relationship of the component sizes, i.e. internal piston diameters (hydro mechanical advantage), rotor diameters, and check valve sizes, was considered for optimal brake input, brake performance, and free-wheeling capability? Have you made adjustments to any components in those systems to improve conditions? Please provide example(s).

<Questions continued on following page>

19. Please indicate how the preferred pricing arrangement for the following data items:

Pre-Production/First Article Test Procedures

Test Report

Provisioning

Technical Manuals

Training Materials (Instructional Media)

Conference Agenda

Conference Minutes

Engineering Change Proposal

Request for Deviation

Request for Waiver

20. What type of warranties do you provide?

21. What experience do you have with Government technical manual requirements? Explain.

Do you subcontract out any of the work?

22. Does your company provide discounts or price breaks on orders for large quantities? If so, what are the quantity ranges?

23. Is your company familiar with Wide Area Workflow (WAWF)?

24. Is it possible to utilize Commercial of the Shelf (COTS) subcomponents (i.e. Tires, Brake Rotors, Brake Pads, Suspension components and Steering components) if we increase the weight to a 6,000 lb. specification.

25. Would the increased payload require any special design considerations that the current 5,500lb capacity MHU-141 does not?

26. Would a 6,000lb capacity MHU-141 trailer increase the time to design and manufacture each trailer and by how much?

B. Commerciality Questions:

1. The Government asserts that this requirement is non-commercial as the end item does not meet the definition of a commercial product as defined by FAR 2.101. If you disagree with this assertion, please provide a detailed explanation outlining how this is commercial that could be used to support the elements of a commerciality determination as required by DFARS 212.102(a)(iii) and DFARS PGI 212.102(a)(iii).

2. Are there established catalog or market prices for our requirement?

3. If you offer this product and/or service to both U.S. Government and commercial sources, is the same workforce used for both the U.S. and the General Public?

4. Is our requirement offered to both under similar terms and conditions? Briefly describe any differences.

5. Describe your standard warranty and return process for goods and services furnished to the Government for items similar in nature to this requirement.

C. Manufacturing Questions

1. Describe your capabilities and experience in manufacturing with regard to the requirements of this effort.

2. Describe your capabilities and experience in test, evaluation, and repair processes/procedures with regard to manufacturing items.

a. Please include experience conducting or overseeing in-house or subcontracted qualification testing.

b. Please include experience supporting first article and compatibility tests at USAF installations.

c. Please include experience in technical support of USAF testing i.e. troubleshooting and maintaining first article units (on site and/or remotely on call).

3. Describe your configuration management processes and how you identify and resolve parts obsolescence and diminishing manufacturing sources problems.

4. Demonstrate your ability and experience in the manufacture of the same or similar components currently utilized in the commercial or military environment by providing the following information on the same or similar items:

a. Contract Number

b. Procuring Agency

c. Contract Value

d. Number of assets shipped

5. If you assert this is a commercial requirement, provide your commercial manual(s) or Acceptance Test Procedures (ATP) and your rights to these manuals and or ATP used in the manufacture and functional check of these or similar assets for Government Engineer review.

6. Describe your capabilities and experience in test, evaluation, and repair processes/procedures with regard to manufacturing items.

7. Describe your process for maintaining inventory records and reporting on hand/work-in-progress balance and manufacturing status to your customer.

8. Include a detailed listing of facilities and equipment, including quantities, required to satisfy the requirements of this effort.

A. Provide an outline of the proposed process, including inspections.

a. State the type of test procedures anticipated for this effort.

b. State the type of inspection process anticipated for this effort.

i) Non-Destructive Inspection/Testing NDI/T

ii) Destructive testing/inspection

9. If the item cannot be manufactured in total, state what your organization can produce. Additionally, would you require subcontractors? If so, what percentage of the work will be allocated to them?

10. What do you perceive to be the biggest lead times on materials and parts for this asset within the current industry? Do you foresee these lead times improving?

11. After the completion of a first article, how long would your company’s production lead time be for the fielding of units?

12. Describe your process for maintaining inventory on manufactured assets and any warranty work associate with them.

Part III. Developing Strategy

1. The Government anticipates a 5-7 year Firm Fixed Price contract for this effort.

a. Please describe any risks or issues you see with this contract length and pricing structure.

b. What long-term pricing strategies would you be willing to support?

2. What areas of this acquisition do you envision would be sub-contracted out, if any? This is asked in the event that an evaluation factor needs to be included for evaluation of critical sub-contractors.

3. What risk areas (if any) does your company identify ?

4. This contract will include performance metrics that will measure production lead times and on-time delivery. Do you see any other metrics or incentives that may be applicable?

5. What additional incentives would you recommend for this kind of action, if any?

6. Progress payments based on costs may be considered; does your company have an approved accounting system as required?

7. Do you anticipate any long lead materials or materials with significantly fluctuating costs that would require the inclusion of an Economic Price Adjustment Clause?

8. The Government is considering the use of the evaluation factors listed below. A final determination/decision on the trade-off methodology has not been made and is pending the responses received to this SSS. The Government may also elect to conduct a phased acquisition, with a down-select process to move the most highly rated offerors to the next phase.

a. Factor 1: Price

i. Based on total evaluated price for evaluation of base and all options.

b. Factor 2: Technical

i. Written Technical narrative, to proceed to oral presentation of a sample task (such as presenting a CAD model of the trailer(s), presenting FEA results of a load case given from PD15WRWNZEA05PD24ROZEA01 and/or a presentation of some 3D drawings.)

ii. Technical risk assessment, inclusion of a realistic Integrated Master Schedule (IMS) submission, to proceed to oral presentation of the IMS

iii. Critical sub-contractors

c. Factor 3: Past Performance

9. Are there any additional source selection evaluation factors your company would suggest as meaningful discriminators between offerors that would give confidence to an evaluation team that your company has a material understanding of the work to be performed under this contract?

Attachments:

1. Draft Statement of Work (SOW)

2. Technical Data Package (TDP)

3. Purchase Description (PD)