RFI-AFRL-RQKM-2016-0009
MANUFACTURING INNOVATION INSTITUTES
Request for Information (RFI)
1. Contracting Office Address
Department of the Air Force, Air Force Research Laboratory (AFRL) - Wright Research Site,
AFRL/RQKMS, Area B, Bldg. 45, 2130 8th Street, Wright-Patterson AFB, OH, 45433-7541.
2. General Information
This is a Request for Information (RFI) only, as defined in FAR 15.201(e), to obtain information
about pricing, delivery, capabilities, and other market information for planning purposes. This
RFI is being requested on behalf of the Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Manufacturing
and Industrial Base Policy, in execution of the Defense-wide Manufacturing Science and
Technology (DMS&T) program. This RFI is not a request for competitive proposals; therefore,
responses to this notice are not considered offers and cannot be accepted by the Government to
form a binding contract. Responses should include information identifying whether the
responder’s firm is a small or large business. A small business is defined as having 500 or fewer
employees. The NAICS code for this potential effort is 541712. Companies that respond will not
be paid for the information submitted. No telephone calls will be accepted requesting a bid
package or solicitation. There is no bid package or solicitation. All information received shall be
safeguarded from unauthorized disclosure. Please do not submit any proprietary or classified
information.
3. General Intent
The Department of Defense (DoD) wishes to consider input from industry, academia,
prospective non-profit leads, and other stakeholders as part of an effort to select and scope the
technology focus areas for as many as two more Manufacturing Innovation Institutes (MIIs)
beyond the six established or being established by the DoD. Like their predecessors, these future
MIIs will be regionally based public-private partnerships enabling the scale-up of advanced
manufacturing technologies and processes with the goal of successful transition of existing
science and technology into defense and commercial manufacturing applications. Each Institute
will be led by a not-for-profit organization and focus on a specific technology area. The
Department is requesting responses which will assist in the selection of a technology focus area
from those currently under consideration, based upon evidence of national security requirements,
economic benefit, technical opportunity, relevance to industry, business case for sustainability,
and workforce development opportunities. Current DoD Institutes exist or are soon to be
established in the technology areas of Additive Manufacturing, Digital Design and
Manufacturing, Lightweight and Modern Metals, Integrated Photonics, Flexible Hybrid
Electronics, and Revolutionary Fibers and Textiles. DOE MIIs currently established or planned
1
include Power Electronics, Advanced Composites, and Advanced Sensors, Modeling and
Controls. These topics are not encouraged in any responses to this RFI, as they will not be
considered for a future DoD- led institute.
Some of the technical focus areas currently under consideration are (in no order of priority):
x
Bioengineering for Regenerative Medicine
x
Bioprinting across Technology Sectors
x
Securing the Manufacturing Digital Thread – Cybersecurity for Manufacturing
x
Advanced Machine Tools and Control Systems
x
Certification, Assessment and Qualification
x
Assistive and Soft Robotics
x
Open topic (RFI responders may suggest)
The following sections more fully detail this U.S. Government Request for Information.
4. Background
Manufacturing remains the essential driver for a healthy innovation infrastructure and is critical
to the U.S. economy and national defense. Complex transition gaps often exist between early
R&D activity and the successful deployment of technological innovations reflected by the fullscale, domestic production of goods. These gaps, if not addressed and bridged, can carry longterm negative consequences for the U.S. and Defense Industrial Bases. As global competition
and clock speeds to manufacture advanced products intensify, the performance of the country’s
innovation ecosystems must improve as well. What is needed is for industry, academia, and
government partners to intensely collaborate, leverage existing resources, and co-invest to
nurture manufacturing innovation in order to accelerate commercial productization and further
enhance defense systems and U.S. technological dominance.
In view of this need, a major initiative focused on strengthening the innovation, performance,
competitiveness, and job-creating power of U.S. manufacturing called the National Network for
Manufacturing Innovation (NNMI) was launched in 2012. Congress’s enactment of the
Revitalizing American Manufacturing and Innovation Act (RAMI) of 2014 supported this and
provided a complementary legislative underpinning. Key design tenets of the NNMI program
are captured within National Network for Manufacturing Innovation: A Preliminary Design, a
report issued by the White House National Science and Technology Council in January, 20131.
The NNMI is comprised of Manufacturing Innovation Institutes (MIIs), with a national goal of
establishing up to 45 institutes around the country. Seven MIIs have been established (five by
1
http://www.manufacturing.gov/docs/NNMI_prelim_design.pdf
2
the DoD, and two by the DoE), with two more currently being competed. These existing and
future MIIs bring together industry, academia (four- and two-year universities, community
colleges, technical institutes, etc.), federal and state agencies and economic development
activities to accelerate innovation by investing in industrially-relevant manufacturing
technologies with broad applications. Each Institute has a specific technology or market focus
and serves as a regional hub (or hubs) of manufacturing excellence in that technology focus area,
providing the critical, shared infrastructure necessary to create a dynamic, highly collaborative
environment spurring manufacturing technology innovations and technology transfer leading to
production scale-up and commercialization. Each MII is a public-private partnership established
via a Cooperative Agreement or similar instrument between the U.S. Government and a nonprofit organization leading a consortium of companies, academic institutions, laboratories, and
state/local governments and activities.
The key characteristics of an MII, as outlined in the National Network for Manufacturing
Innovation: A Preliminary Design report, include the following:
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
A regional hub of manufacturing excellence with national benefits that brings together
industry, universities and community colleges, federal agencies, and states
Led by a non-profit organization with the capacity to lead an industry-wide technology,
workforce development, and infrastructure agenda.
Invests in applied research in industrially relevant manufacturing technologies with broad
applications that accelerate innovation and bridge the gap between basic research and
product development (TRL/MRL 4-7) (Definitions of MRLs and TRLs can be found at
http://dodmrl.com/)
Provides shared infrastructure assets and knowledge to help companies, particularly small
and medium enterprises, access cutting-edge capabilities and equipment
Creates an unparalleled environment to educate and train students and workers in
advanced manufacturing skills
Is launched with federal funding typically in the range of $70M-$120M over a five to
seven year timeframe
Leverages a minimum 1:1 non-federal co-investment
Should be self-sustaining and fully independent of federal sustaining funds five to seven
years after launch
The successful establishment and operation of the seven current MIIs has served as important
early validation that the above preliminary design characteristics are holding up well in actual
practice. The Administration is soon to release its first annual report summarizing the recent
performance of the NNMI program, as well as the first NNMI Program Strategic Plan (both are
required by the RAMI Act of 2014), and both documents will further detail and assess how these
design characteristics are being successfully applied, as well as how they should be applied
3
going forward. Respondents to this RFI should reference those documents during formulation of
inputs, should the documents be released in time.
Building on the success and momentum of the NNMI program, the DoD has begun to develop
plans for additional MIIs to be established within the DMS&T program portfolio. The remainder
of this RFI is focused primarily on the technology areas under consideration for these MIIs, to
aid respondents in developing inputs that will help the U.S. Government shape its solicitations
for them.
5. Future DoD MII Potential Technology Focus Areas
The DMS&T program invites responders to provide information in support of potential future
solicitations for up to two more MIIs. While MIIs are led by a non-profit organization that enters
into a cooperative agreement or similar agreement with the U.S. Government, MIIs are
ultimately industry-driven. Therefore, all responsible sources are encouraged to submit
information that shall be considered by the Government.
Respondents are asked to align their inputs with one or more technology focus areas of interest
(candidate technology topics of known interest to the DoD will be presented next). To help with
the organization of inputs, respondents are encouraged to specifically address the following
questions as they relate to each technology focus area of interest they choose to address:
•
What are the common manufacturing challenges within the TRL/MRL 4-7 area for
the technology that are beyond the investment risk of industry and what are the
opportunities for investment that would make a significant national impact?
•
What evidence is there of critical technical mass for building upon an existing
regional hub(s) of excellence to create a national center of expertise as an MII?
•
What is the likelihood that the technology could generate at least $75M in cost share
to match a similar government investment?
•
What is the current state of U.S. manufacturing capability associated with this
technology and what strategies may be required to ensure a successful domestic
industrial base? Are there key areas which the U.S. has a significant lead? Are there
areas where U.S. is trailing foreign capabilities? If so, what are they?
•
What are the domestic and the global markets for the technology? (please address
defense as well as non-defense applications)
•
Within any technical focus area suggested, is there a subset of the technology that
you would focus the institute on in order to achieve market potential?
•
What would be the potential business case/benefits as well as the national economic
impact if an institute were launched in the technology area (i.e. jobs, gross domestic
product, etc.)?
4
•
What would be the potential impact on national security if an MII were launched in
the technology focus area?
•
What evidence would indicate that the institute could be self-sustaining (i.e., no need
for federal sustaining funding) after 5-7 years?
•
What is the likelihood that you would bid (as a prime or as a team member) on a
future government solicitation to lead or be part of an institute in the technology
area you are suggesting?
•
What workforce education or skills must be substantially developed to support
successful transition to production in the U.S. in this technology focus area?
•
If the technology focus area you are suggesting is substantially defense unique, what
opportunities for commercial breakthroughs are there?
•
What is the potential market failure(s) being addressed by this topic?
•
Within this technology focus area, what type of capital equipment is needed, how
much of it is available to support a manufacturing commons, and where is it?
Six candidate technology focus areas are currently under consideration for future DoD-led MIIs.
This RFI also includes a seventh “open topic” to encourage responses describing other
technology focus areas that may also be of interest to DoD. Each topical area is briefly described
below:
A. Bioengineering for Regenerative Medicine
Regenerative medicine is the process of creating living tissues to repair or replace tissue or organ
function lost due to age, disease, damage, or congenital defects2. Bioengineering for regenerative
medicine is a breakthrough field forming 3D constructs to rebuild or create tissues and organs.
Bioengineering of cells, tissues, and organs is an interdisciplinary and multidisciplinary field that
aims for the development of biological substitutes to restore, maintain, or improve existing tissue
function. Regenerative medicine, bioengineering, and the clinical use of stem cells have the
potential to repair or replace dysfunctional, degenerating, or absent cells, tissues and organs.
The challenge to industrializing regenerative medicine technologies is creating robust,
accessible, and standardized manufacturing and testing platforms and methods, that can bridge
development from the research lab and into the commercial space3. Regenerative medicine,
bioengineering, and cell-based constructs can be envisioned similar to a factory, with scaffolding
in place and modular structures built from which more complex structures are grown into a
limitless variety of features. Potential bioengineered tissue and organ regenerative targets include
2
3
http://report.nih.gov/NIHfactsheets/ViewFactSheet.aspx?csid=62
http://www.nsf.gov/eng/cbet/documents/adv_biomanufacturing.pdf
5
nerves, skeletal muscle, heart, cartilage and bone, skin, liver, bladder, and vascular grafts.
Manufacturing and testing support the development of any construct to create a reproducible and
well-characterized manufacturing platform. The end goal is achieving Food and Drug
Administration approval of the process, controls, and validation systems, and ultimately, product
licensure for commercial use. New technology innovation potential exists for minimal or nondestructive testing; test beds for novel drugs or patient-targeted therapeutics; alternative factories
for producing complex biological products, and model-simulate-design-build platforms. Key
areas needed to advance regenerative medicine manufacturing may include but are not limited to:
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
User-defined universal test devices or sensors to understand, monitor, and characterize
the product during the manufacturing process to establish manufacturing standards and
manage change
Minimal or non-destructive testing or sensing of cell, tissue, or organ constructs
throughout the manufacturing process and final product to inform composition and
activity
Advancing microelectromechanical systems, microfluidics, and systems biology into cell
and tissue bioengineering and/or additive manufacturing
Predictive tools or models to optimize product formulation and composition based on
initial formulations with in vitro and/or in vivo outcome data
Scaling architecture tools and models to inform production-scale design from scaling
down to micro, single-unit and up to larger, multiple product batches
Tools and methods to assess sensory feedback in regenerated tissue over time, minimal to
non-invasive
Targeted and fit for purpose cell culture media and reagents as universally available
building blocks with improved availability and consistency
Development or advancement of host systems, polymers, and patterning to support cell,
tissue, and organ bioengineering
Innovative fill and finish tools, techniques, and methods that could monitor or preserve
cell and tissue viability or activity
Development of innovative storage methods to ensure the long-term preservation of
bioengineered cells, tissues, and organs which address both storage time and product
functionality following storage
Additive manufacturing of 3D constructs containing both cells and their support matrix in
desired configurations
Platform technologies or modular platform technologies to support cell, tissue, and organ
bioengineering
Distributive manufacturing to support intentional, geographically-separated
manufacturing and testing processes
6
There are two other unique, but related, manufacturing efforts to bioengineering for regenerative
medicine. First, the Defense Health Agency (DHA) is committed to support regenerative
medicine manufacturing for specific patient needs related to wounded service members. Second,
the National Institute of Standards and Technology has expressed interest in a biopharmaceutical
manufacturing institute to develop near universal end-to-end manufacturing processes which
could include cells, proteins, genes, nucleic acids, and vaccines.
B. Bioprinting across Technology Sectors
The last major revolution in the biotechnology sector came with the advent of next generation
sequencing two decades ago. More often than not, medical clinicians and biotechnology
researchers including cell biologists, molecular biologists and microbiologists rely upon
commercially available, pre-packaged and often very expensive assays and kits to perform their
research and development. Innovation in biotechnology is often brought on by interdisciplinary
work where new technology emerges from the world of physical science and engineering, and is
then applied and ultimately adopted into biological fields. Similar to the impact additive
manufacturing has made in materials technology, great opportunity exists for on-demand
bioprinting to impact change across the biotechnology sector. Bioprinting, biofabrication and
biomanufacturing have consistently evolved in interdisciplinary labs and start-ups over the past
15 years. These technologies are now poised to meet a growing manufacturing and innovation
need in the biotechnology industry.
Diverse bioprinting platforms emerged to include extrusion pens, ink jet printing, electrospinning
and laser-based methods, each with their own strengths and weaknesses. All of these approaches
have demonstrated the ability to print a diverse array of biomaterials including living
microorganisms, viable mammalian cells, proteins and biofactors. Some are high resolution
techniques that can be used to mimic some of the smallest feature sizes in living tissue such as
microvasculature. Others can deposit vast amounts of cell ink quickly with modest resolution,
building up 3D constructs in high throughput formats. Still others are nozzle-less and are
capable of printing diverse materials such as fixed human tissue, cell cultures, gels and even
solid-phase environmental samples such as soils and sediments while maintaining
microbiological activity.
With the advent and rapid advancement of bioprinting technologies, the DoD is exploring this
topic with the possible goal of expanding versatile bioprinting platforms to create new
opportunities in diverse sectors that include traditional medical solutions (pharmaceutical, in
vitro and in vivo tissue engineering, etc.) and non-traditional agriculture, energy, and
environmental solutions (microbial and enzymatic biodiscovery, biotoxicity, bioenergy, carbon
sequestration, biodegradation, etc.) applications. Some opportunities in bioprinting are noted
below:
7
Platform improvements
x
x
x
x
x
x
Increasing the speed (cells, material or biofactor printed per second) and resolution (spot
size or linewidth) of bioprinters.
Broaden the range of printable materials to include soft/hard tissues or materials as well
as gradients and interfaces between soft/hard tissues and materials.
Development of more diverse inks and stackable papers that could model barrier tissues
and membrane interfaces.
Development of printers for different scale manufacturing need.
Expanding fabricating complexity
Development of printers to meet standards of different industry sectors
Tools, methods, and controls
x
x
x
Tools and methods to test and control fabrication and manufacturing
Interoperable tools, platforms, and methods within and across industry sectors
Demonstrate interfacing of cells and materials in printed tissues to increase complexity
and heterogeneity
Expanded Uses
x
x
x
x
High throughput printing of platform technologies to study, discover, and test new
scientific areas or phenomenon
Precision, on-demand, small-scale fabrication of final product
Developing rapid-design, biotoxicity screening technologies for water monitoring in
reservoirs, water treatment facilities or fisheries
High throughput bioprinting of soil or sediment with the goal of culturing isolates or
consortium of previously undiscovered and/or unculuturable microorganisms to enhance
biodiscovery across industrial sectors including agriculture, bioenergy, carbon
sequestration, enzymology, biodegradation, medicine and natural products
With improvements to bioprinting platform technologies and the synergistic use of different
bioprinting technologies together, new application areas may become evident as an MII
investment area. As such, any new concepts and ideas are welcomed in response to this RFI.
8
C. Securing the Manufacturing Digital Thread – Cybersecurity for Manufacturing
Defined as protection of unclassified technical data created, stored, used or transiting industrial
control systems (ICS) and factory floor networks that are increasingly subject to cyber threats.4
Key risks lie in the fact that factory floor systems currently represent a particularly weak link in
safeguarding technical information; in particular, small business manufacturers which are key
players in the Defense Industrial Base supply chain, are not well-equipped to manage these risks.
Design, manufacturing and product support operations are driven by a “digital thread” of
technical data -- product and process information -- that can be shared throughout the supply
chain and must be protected. Protecting these manufacturing enterprise operational systems
presents a new and different set of challenges. Not only must the technical data be protected
from theft, it must also be protected from alteration that could impair the proper functioning of
parts produced or affect the safety and availability of the production system. Meeting these
requirements is especially challenging for small and mid-size manufacturers for whom
maintaining competitiveness requires cost effective solutions. These manufacturers cannot
afford to staff up the expertise required—they need either reliable external help or smart systems
that can largely take the place of the Information Assurance staffs of large companies.
A seminal NDIA Report on this subject identified three major concerns: 1. Confidentiality,
encompassing the theft of technical data, including critical national security information and
associated valuable commercial intellectual property; 2. Integrity, encompassing the alteration of
data, thereby altering processes and the ability of finished products to provide required
performance; 3. Availability, encompassing the impairment or denial of process control,
resulting in costly damage and/or shut down of operations.5 These concerns exist throughout the
technical data and product lifecycle, from the point of creation of the technical data, through its
access at any point in the supply chain, and extending to its use to control physical
manufacturing and product support processes. Threats like these are hard to detect and
containment/restoration can require months of effort.
Today, competitive pressures are driving the integration and analysis of “big data” collected
from business information systems, engineering information systems and manufacturing systems
across the supply chain. In this networked environment, production control systems must feed
critical information to decision makers; consequently enhancing ICS cybersecurity must be an
integral part of overall enterprise network security. While most large corporations have made
significant improvements in their business information network protection, the NDIA report6
cites only an emerging awareness of the threats to their manufacturing information networks;
4
NDIAWhitePaperͲCybersecurityforAdvancedManufacturing;May5,2014
ibid
6
ibid
5
9
with Small and Mid-Size Enterprises (SME) facing significant challenges. A mechanism is
needed to help the DIB stakeholders -- DoD, defense prime integrators, and suppliers – to
collaboratively define needs, identify and adopt known solutions and best practices, and develop
new solutions to fill gaps. A similar mechanism for commercial manufacturers will improve their
competitiveness and protect their proprietary technologies. A Manufacturing Innovation
Institute can provide the mechanism to meet the digital security needs of all segments of the
manufacturing sector.
D. Advanced Machine Tools and Control Systems
Next generation advanced machine tools and control systems will enable products with high
efficiency, peerless quality, and reduced human intervention at competitive prices. The Defense
Industrial Base relies heavily on advanced manufacturing capabilities enabled by these
technologies. Advances in these technologies are also critical to enhancing the superiority of
products used by commercial manufacturers. Although the U.S. has the lead in many of these
subsystems, at the system level the domestic industry in this technology is weak, with many of
the advanced capabilities existing abroad. Input is sought on pre-competitive technology areas
that could be pursued to improve the Advanced Machine Tools and Control Systems ecosystem.
Below is a partial list of potential MII focus areas that may improve U.S. machine tool and
industrial control system defense capability and global competitiveness:
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
Robotic machining systems that reduce footprint and improve layout flexibility
Low cost, high quality, and highly-accurate machines
Integrated open source connectivity with improved machine interface and programming
Integrated Sensors for closed cycle control systems
State-of-the-art Human Machine Interfaces (HMI) for intuitive, real-time analysis and
optimization
New materials for machines and beds that are lighter, cheaper, have better rigidity, and
are stable through wide temperature ranges, dampen vibration, and enable modular
configurations and dynamic setups within a facility
Integrated automation at multiple levels; design, process, materials, material-to-machine,
machine-to-machine and machines-to-factory
Fully seamless hybrid technology, including additive/subtractive manufacturing,
fabrication and inspection
Advanced tooling enabling faster cycle time, higher economy and better quality runs.
10
x
x
Enable “batch of one”7 manufacturing including fully integrated simulation and quality
measurement
Explore new technologies for manufacturing (e.g. lasers)
Responders are encouraged to suggest future technological advancements in this area that can
help strengthen U.S. manufacturing dominance.
E. Certification, Assessment, and Qualification
As manufacturing moves towards the realization of the model based enterprise and digital
manufacturing, there is a need to advance the state of the art in assessment and certification of
products and processes through the application of advanced technologies in prototyping, testing,
and qualification. Likewise, there is also a need to assess the performance of production
processes in order to evaluate in advance, the quality of the products that they produce, as well as
to ensure the ergonomics and safety of their operation. A key problem with current certification
and qualification processes is the long time periods and significant costs for physical testing of
the products and processes. To fully employ the virtualization of product and process
assessment, certification, and safety, a deeper understanding of the physics of operation of the
product as well as the physics of operation of the production process that create product is
necessary. It will require the development, verification, and validation of virtual (i.e., digital
model based) certification and qualification processes, applying advanced technology using 3-D
models, virtual prototyping, and virtual testing. In many ways, this technology will be a link
between several of the other institutes because it would draw on the modeling work being
performed at the Digital Manufacturing and Design Innovation Institute and apply those
advances and capabilities to assessment, certification, and qualification in products, materials
and processes. There are also significant questions that must be answered to move towards more
comprehensive advanced virtual assessment, certification, and qualification technologies,
including:
x
x
x
x
How to develop general performance models that can be customized for use on a
particular class of products or systems (i.e., airplanes, helicopters, ground vehicles, etc.)?
Can models be developed of advanced manufacturing capabilities (i.e., additive
manufacturing, machining, forming, etc.) that can be used to evaluate the quality of the
product before it has been produced?
How to validate these models so that they can replace or significantly augment current
physical testing, reducing the cost and duration of testing?
How much physical testing will still be required to ensure the product and process will
operate as intended?
7
Entailsrobustcontroloftheprocess,externalandinternalfactorstoyieldthefirstpartasaqualitypart.
11
x
x
How do design and manufacturing engineers use virtual capabilities in lieu of physical
testing?
Can production systems be adequately modeled to thoroughly evaluate the safety and
ergonomics aspects of the operational elements?
These challenges are industry-wide, highly cross-cutting, commercial as well as governmental in
nature, and often beyond the risk of individual companies, governmental organizations, and
consortiums--even beyond the risk or ability of whole technology and market sectors--to
effectively address them in coherent and focused ways. The DoD wishes to better understand
and determine if establishing a public-private MII and the associated innovation ecosystem
needed to substantively overcome these challenges would hold sufficient promise.
F. Assistive and Soft Robotics
This area is defined as robots operating in support of, or in close proximity with, human activity
in safe and productive environments, particularly manufacturing. Important areas of focus will
include key manufacturing technology innovations to produce Soft Robotic systems, and Soft
Robotic applications in the manufacturing processes for DoD and commercial applications. The
technology innovations will include but will not be limited to materials, sensors, software,
simulation and modelling, and developments in the field of artificial intelligence.
Soft Robotic DoD applications could include (but are not limited to):
x
x
x
x
x
Improvised Explosive Device detection by military units
Robots carrying heavy payloads over uneven terrain
Ordnance handling and other HAZMAT duties
Pyrotechnics assembly
Automated materials handling of sensitive spare parts
Soft Robotic Commercial applications could include (but are not limited to):
x
x
x
x
Prosthetics, surgery, assistance to the elderly
Simulation and modeling
Food inspection, food processing, pick and place food items.
HAZMAT duties
12
Soft Robotic applications in manufacturing could include more efficient manufacturing where
robots work side by side with humans, completing repetitive tasks and tasks with minor
variations. Specific challenges in this area include:
x
x
x
x
x
x
Robotic interface with machine tools, quality systems, and components being
manufactured to make adjustments in real time
Capability to monitor and predict machine behavior to preemptively change process
parameters leading up to a multifunctional autonomous system
Easy learning through human interaction (e.g. human moves robot arm to desired place,
robot learns from that)
“Floating Factories” - Self-assembly of swarms of robots that cooperate to build
structures, components etc
Robots created with soft materials and structures to be able to execute complex motions
and be safe to operate in collaboration with humans
Hybrids of soft and hard robots for specific functions. Example a “soft” gripper arm
capable of manipulation of fragile objects without damage.
G. Open Topic
Respondents are encouraged to identify any other topic or topics that have not been described in
this RFI and are believed to fit the MII model and significantly benefit both defense and
domestic commercial advanced manufacturing. Respondents are encouraged to specifically
address the questions posed earlier in this RFI as they relate to those topics’ suitability toward
becoming the focus of an MII. Purely example focus areas that might deserve such consideration
could include: nano-factories for additive or subtractive manufacturing; integration, assembly
and joining technologies; polymeric material manufacturing; or chemical technology for
defense/commercial applications.
6. Information Requested
A. Responders interested in any of the suggested technology focus areas (or others) are
asked to organize the information they provide around the questions in paragraph 5
B. Any additional information deemed relevant by respondents is encouraged as well
(subject to the page count and format limitations in paragraph 7)
DISCLAIMER: This RFI is issued solely for information and planning purposes and does not
constitute a solicitation. Responders to this RFI will have no competitive advantage in receiving
any awards related to the submitted topic area. The information submitted in response to this RFI
may be used to help the Government further define its requirements. If the Government develops
13
a program that addresses any submitted or similar topic, the resulting procurement will address
technology and business specific requirements as defined by the Government.
7. Required Reponses
Responses to this RFI are limited to 25 double-spaced pages with one inch margins using
standard letter-size 8½” x 11” paper. The page count includes any title page. The font for text
should be Times New Roman 12-point or larger. Responses must be unclassified and should not
contain company proprietary information. Please pay attention to any company templates that
automatically create a “company proprietary” or similar type statement. Those must be removed
from the response. Separate responses should be submitted for each technology area. Multiple
responses from a firm are acceptable. Marketing information is NOT desired in the response.
Endorsements from elected officials are NOT desired in the response.
8. Request for Clarification
A responder may request clarification, in writing, from the Contracting Office for any aspect of
this RFI that is unclear by sending an e-mail to: [email protected]. Any requests for
clarification must be received no later than seven (7) business days prior to the close of this RFI
in order to receive a timely response. Technical questions regarding this RFI should be directed
to Dr. Fred Arnold, AFRL/RXM, (937) 904-4380 or [email protected]. If Dr. Arnold is not
available, contact Mr. Marvin Gale, AFRL/RXMS, (937) 938-4826 or [email protected].
9. Submission of Documentation
Responses to this RFI are due to the Contracting Office identified below by 3:00 PM Local
Time, 16 Feb 2016. Any late responses will NOT be reviewed. Responders shall provide one
(1) electronic copy (in Microsoft Word) of their response on a CD or DVD. USBs will NOT be
accepted. DO NOT send via email, and DO NOT send any hard copies. Please ensure your
response does not have any markings stating the information is proprietary or it will not be
considered. Submission of existing commercial documentation and product literature is NOT an
acceptable response. Documentation shall be sent to the following Contracting Office address:
AFRL/RQKMS
ATTN: Mary Ann Sharits
E-mail: [email protected]; Telephone: (937) 713-9898
10. Additional Information
While MIIs are expected to have a non-profit entity as prime contractor, all responsible sources
may submit information. All routine communications regarding this announcement should be
directed to the contractual or technical points of contact listed above. The Government may or
may not use any responses to this RFI as a basis for a subsequent project. If projects developed
in part from the RFI responses become the subject of a subsequent acquisition; any such
acquisition will be posted in FedBizOpps.gov and grants.gov. Responses to this RFI will not be
14
returned. The Government is under no obligation to acknowledge receipt of the information
received, or give feedback to respondents with respect to information submitted under this RFI.
11. Submission Checklist
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
Maximum of 25 pages including any title page
8 ½” x 11” paper
One inch margins
Times New Roman 12-point font or larger
Unclassified
No proprietary information or markings (failure to comply will disqualify the
submission)
No marketing information, commercial documentation, or product literature
No endorsements from elected officials at the federal, state, and/or local level
Microsoft Word format, NOT PDF!
Submitted on a CD or DVD, NOT USB, NOT via email, NO hard copies
Due date 3:00 PM Local Time, 16 February 2016 (Late responses will not be
considered)
15