Maritime Industrial Base (MIB) Lines of Effort (LOE) Request for Information

29 September 2025 Update: A "Frequently Asked Questions" document has been uploaded to the Attachments/Links section of this announcement. The Department of the Navy, Naval Sea Systems Command (NAVSEA) is conducting market research to identify qualified and responsible sources capable of supporting the establishment and management of a Consortium or Consortia and the execution of multi-billion dollar projects under Other Transaction (OT) authority. The overarching goal is to accelerate investment into the Maritime Industrial Base (MIB) to strengthen supply chain resilience, expand workforce development, and modernize facilities and infrastructure. The Navy is seeking to establish a Consortium or Consortia and utilize Other Transaction Authority (OTA). This initiative aims to invigorate the Maritime Industrial Base (MIB) through targeted investments, prioritizing competition where practicable, while also enabling direct awards in certain cases, such as Public-Private Partnerships, subject to appropriate approvals. I. Lines of Efforts (LOEs) and Scope of Effort The scope of this effort encompasses six LOEs: Workforce Development: Build and recruit adequate hiring pools for vendors, shipbuilders, and private and public shipyards, improve wrap-around support to increase student and worker retention and train the maritime workforce through educational institutions, centers of excellence and accelerated training programs. Supplier Development: Add capability and capacity to existing suppliers, develop new suppliers to reduce single or sole-source risks for resiliency and robustness, and improve first article quality and schedule. Infrastructure: Accelerate investments in manufacturing facilities, footprint, machines/fixtures and information systems technology. Strategic Outsourcing: Shift non-core workload away from major shipbuilders or manufacturers to free up their footprint and resources; the workload is transferred to other shipyards or manufacturers who have or will have the capability or capacity to take on additional workload. Technology Opportunities: Scale and operationalize metallic additive manufacturing, implement non-destructive testing test imaging technology and Industry 4.0 efforts, using automation/robotics to improve efficiency, productivity and reduce workforce demand; to remove known production risk areas and bottlenecks. Government Oversight: Support the need for increased oversight by the Navy and interaction with industrial base vendors, to improve shipbuilder and suppler capability, capacity, quality, and resources as the industrial base workload expands. The Navy intends to conduct extensive market research, including industry days, RFIs, and follow-up discussions, to inform the establishment of the Consortium or Consortia and the structure of subsequent OTs. Lessons learned from previous engagements will be utilized to establish agile OT structures that support the tasking. A significant emphasis will be placed on cost-sharing and Public-Private Partnerships to leverage industry capital and foster investment opportunities with small, medium, and large institutions within the industrial base. For this RFI, NAVSEA would like to gauge industry interest and capability in managing and/or participating in such a Consortium or Consortia, and in contributing to the acceleration of investment across the identified LOEs. II. Response Guidelines All responses to this RFI must be submitted using the form located at https://forms.osi.apps.mil/r/i5yw3JeAN2 or using the link in the "Attachments/Links" section of this announcement. Please note that you are not required to respond to every question. Only provide responses for areas where your company has relevant, demonstrable experience and capabilities. If you do not have background or experience in a particular subject area, simply indicate 'Not Applicable' or leave that section blank rather than providing hypothetical responses. Questions regarding this RFI should be submitted in writing to Mr. Matthew Craft [matthew.r.craft7.civ@us.navy.mil] and Mr. Jonathan Overton [jonathan.m.overton3.civ@us.navy.mil] by October 1, 2025. All responses to this announcement are due by October 15, 2025 at 11:59pm EDT. III. Information Requested Interested parties shall address the following in their RFI response: A. Company Information Provide company name, address, DUNS number, CAGE code, tax identification number, designated representative name(s), title, position description, and point of contact, including phone numbers and email addresses. Provide number of employees employed by the company, and annual revenue/receipts for the last three (3) completed company fiscal years. Identify contracts or agreements within the last five (5) years with similar scope (e.g., managing a consortium, executing large-scale industrial base development programs, managing significant public-private partnerships, or performing work directly aligned with the identified LOEs) and provide a brief overview of company responsibilities. If a small business, identify type of small business (e.g., 8(a), Hubzone, service-disabled veteran-owned, economically disadvantaged women-owned or women-owned) or non-profit. B. Experience and Performance Capability Describe your company's experience and capabilities in establishing, managing, or participating in a consortium, particularly for Government or large-scale industry initiatives. Include any experience with Other Transaction Authority (OTA) agreements. Provide an overview of your company's experience in fostering and managing Public-Private Partnerships and cost-sharing arrangements, including examples where industry capital was leveraged. Describe your experience in strategic planning, coordinating, and executing complex, multi-stakeholder programs aimed at industrial base development, supply chain resilience, or infrastructure modernization. LOE Capabilities: Summarize your capabilities related to each of the six Lines of Effort (LOEs). Workforce Development: Your approach or experience in building and recruiting hiring pools, improving retention, and developing workforce training programs for critical industrial skills. Supplier Development: Your methodologies or experience in enhancing capability/capacity of existing suppliers, developing new suppliers, reducing single/sole-source risks, and improving first article quality within a supply chain. Shipyard Infrastructure: Your experience in accelerating investments in and modernizing industrial facilities, including optimizing footprint, machinery, and fixtures and implementation of information systems technologies. Strategic Outsourcing: Your capabilities or experience in identifying non-core workloads suitable for outsourcing from prime industrial partners and managing such transitions. Technology Opportunities: Your experience in implementing advanced manufacturing technologies such as, metallic additive manufacturing, non-destructive testing (NDT) imaging, automation and robotics, to improve productivity and mitigate production risks/bottlenecks. Government Oversight: Your capabilities or experience in the execution, management, performance monitoring, and reporting pursuant to complex programs or projects in the Maritime Industrial Base or Defense Industrial Base supply chain. Your ability to develop meaningful metrics and identify the effectiveness and Return on Investment (ROI) of specific efforts. Your experience conducting investor panels / venture pitch sessions to review, assess projects for maximum return on investment and impact. Discuss your most recent and relevant experience and results. C. Consortium Structure Recommendations Indicate your interest in potentially acting as a Consortium Manager or a key participant in such a consortium. Provide recommendations on how the Consortium and subsequent Other Transaction (OT) agreements could be structured to best support agility, accelerate investment, and maximize competition while allowing for necessary direct awards (e.g., for P3s). Offer insights on effective mechanisms for promoting and facilitating significant industry investment and cost-sharing within the framework of the MIB LOEs. Propose key metrics or indicators that should be used to measure the success and impact of the MIB initiative across the LOEs. D. Potential Obstacles and Mitigation Identify any potential obstacles or barriers that could hinder or restrict your company's involvement in establishing or participating in a Consortium, executing projects under OT authority, or contributing to the specified LOEs. These could relate to engineering processes, production facilities, test facilities, or specific aspects of the scope of work. In addition, recommend solutions or mitigation paths for the Navy to overcome these identified obstacles, ensuring broader industry participation and successful program execution. E. Vetting Process and Compliance Describe your company's process and methodology for vetting and validating potential consortium members to ensure compliance with domestic entity requirements. If you have previously managed consortium formation with similar domestic entity restrictions, please provide specific examples of your vetting protocols and outcomes. Include details on: What due diligence procedures you employ to verify the citizenship, ownership structure, and foreign investment status of potential members How you assess and monitor ongoing compliance with restrictions on foreign entity participation What documentation and certifications you require from potential consortium partners Your process for conducting background checks and verifying corporate structures, including subsidiary and parent company relationships How you would handle situations where foreign ownership or control is discovered after initial vetting Any experience you have with similar vetting requirements in government contracts or security-sensitive projects F. Contract/Agreement Structure Preference Please indicate your company's preference for contract/agreement structure and provide your rationale: Cost-type agreements (e.g., cost-plus-fixed-fee, cost-plus-incentive-fee) Fixed-type agreements (e.g., firm-fixed-price, fixed-price-incentive) Hybrid approach combining both structures Other (please specify) In your response, please address: Your preferred contract type and the reasoning behind this preference How your preferred structure would facilitate consortium management and project execution Any risk considerations that influence your preference How your preferred approach would support the multi-billion dollar scale and long-term nature of this initiative Whether your preference varies based on project type, phase, or other factors within the consortium structure Additionally, describe any experience your organization has with managing large-scale programs under your preferred contract type, particularly in consortium or multi-party arrangements. G. Data Rights and Security Requirements Describe your company's expectations and experience regarding data rights and security requirements. Note: No facility security clearance is required for this RFI submission. What are your expectations for data rights arrangements in consortium-managed projects, including technical data, computer software, and intellectual property developed under the program? How do you typically structure data rights agreements in multi-party consortium environments to balance government needs with industry intellectual property protection? What is your level of experience handling export-controlled information? Are you comfortable navigating International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR) as authorized by the Arms Export Control Act (AECA)? Describe your experience working under DD Form 254 (Department of Defense Contract Security Classification Specification) requirements, including: Your current facility security clearance level and personnel clearance capabilities Experience managing classified information and controlled unclassified information (CUI) in consortium or partnership arrangements Processes for ensuring DD Form 254 compliance across consortium members Experience with security requirements in Other Transaction Authority agreements How would you manage data rights and security classification requirements across multiple consortium members with varying security clearance levels? Describe any challenges you have encountered with data rights or security requirements in similar large-scale, multi-party programs and how you resolved them. If applicable, provide examples of previous programs where you successfully managed complex data rights arrangements and security requirements. H. Award Timeline Support The Navy anticipates awarding an Other Transaction (OT) agreement for the establishment of a consortium by end of Q1 Calendar Year (CY) 2026. Please indicate whether your company can support this award timeframe and describe any factors that may impact your ability to meet this schedule, including: Your organization's availability and capacity to begin consortium establishment activities by Q1 CY 2026 Any internal processes, approvals, or preparations required to support this timeline Estimated timeframes for consortium stand-up and initial project execution following award Any potential scheduling conflicts or resource constraints that could affect your participation If you foresee any challenges meeting this timeframe, please explain and provide your recommended alternative timeline. IV. Government Considerations The Government will conduct comprehensive vetting of the potential awardee(s) selected for consortium/consortia management responsibilities. This vetting process will extend beyond basic CAGE code verification to include thorough examination of ownership structures, corporate relationships, and foreign involvement. The Government's due diligence will include review of System for Award Management (SAM) registration details, ownership and control documentation, Foreign Ownership, Control, or Influence (FOCI) determinations, corporate structure charts, articles of incorporation, stockholder information, key personnel citizenship verification, facility security clearance status, and any relevant Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS) filings. Respondents should be prepared to provide comprehensive documentation regarding their corporate structure and any foreign involvement as part of the evaluation and award process. Following the submission deadline, the government will review all responses and down-select to a smaller group of respondents for an iterative engagement process. Companies demonstrating relevant capabilities and experience may be invited to participate in a subsequent in-person industry day for additional discussion and engagement with government stakeholders. The Government reserves the right to use non-Government advisors to assist in evaluations, subject to appropriate restrictions determined by the Government. Submission of a response to this notice constitutes consent to such non-Government advisors participation. This RFI is issued for informational and planning purposes only and does not constitute a solicitation, Request for Quote (RFQ), or an Invitation for Bids (IFB). This RFI is not to be construed as a commitment by the Government to issue a solicitation or award a contract or agreement. Responses to this notice are not offers and cannot be accepted by the Government to form a binding contract or agreement. As such, the Government will not reimburse any costs associated with responding to this notice. Information submitted in response to this RFI will become the property of the United States Government. Submitters should properly mark their responses with the appropriate restrictive markings. Information that is proprietary or competition-sensitive may be protected from disclosure under the public records law only if properly labeled as such.