HR001121S0004-Amendment-05.pdf

HR001121S0004

Broad Agency Announcement

Robotic Autonomy in Complex Environments with

Resiliency (RACER)

Tactical Technology Office

HR001121S0004

Ammendment 05

January 4, 2020

The purpose of this amendment is to revise the Proposal Due Date and Time as noted below and in PART I on page 1 and in PART IV on page 35.

PART I. Proposal Due Date and Time revised from January 14, 2021, 4:00pm Eastern Time to January 28, 2021, 4:00pm Eastern Time

PART IV. Proposal Due Date and Time revised from January 14, 2021, 4:00pm Eastern Time to January 28, 2021, 4:00pm Eastern Time

Revisions are highlighted throughout the document

Table of Contents

PART I: OVERVIEW INFORMATION

PART II: FULL TEXT OF ANNOUNCEMENT

I. Funding Opportunity Description

A. Program Background and Overview B. Program Goals C. Program Acquisition Strategy D. Program Metrics and Performer Evaluation E. RACER Development F. DARPA-Hosted Field Experiments G. RACER GFX Summary

II. Award Information A. General Award Information B. Proposals and Awards C. Fundamental Research

III. Eligibility Information A. Eligible Applicants B. Organizational Conflicts of Interest C. Cost Sharing/Matching

IV. Application and Submission Information A. Address to Request Application Package B. Content and Form of Application Submission

V. Application Review Information A. Evaluation Criteria B. Review of Proposals

VI. Award Administration Information A. Selection Notices and Notifications B. Administrative and National Policy Requirements C. Reporting D. Electronic Systems

VII. Agency Contacts VIII. Other Information

A. Collaborative Efforts B. Standard Cost Proposal Spreadsheets C. Government Furnished Equipment and Information (GFX)

PART I: OVERVIEW INFORMATION

Federal Agency Name – Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), Tactical Technology Office (TTO)

Funding Opportunity Title – Robotic Autonomy in Complex Environments with Resiliency (RACER)

Announcement Type – Initial Announcement Funding Opportunity Number – HR001121S0004 Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers (CFDA) – 12.910 Research and

Technology Development Dates o Posting Date: October 20, 2020 o Abstract Due Date and Time: November 4, 2020, 4:00pm Eastern Time o FAQ/Questions Due Date and Time: November 20, 2020, 4:00pm Eastern Time o Proposal Due Date and Time: January 28, 2021, 4:00pm Eastern Time

Concise description of the funding opportunity – The goal of the Robotic Autonomy in Complex Environments with Resiliency (RACER) program is to develop and demonstrate new autonomy technologies that enable ground combat vehicles to maneuver in unstructured off-road terrain at speeds that are no longer limited by the autonomy software or processing time, but only by considerations of sensor limitations, vehicle mechanical limits, and safety. At a minimum, performance at par with a human driver, or a tele-operated vehicle should be achieved. RACER will demonstrate game-changing autonomous unmanned ground vehicle mobility focused on speed and resiliency using a combination of simulation and advanced platforms.

Total amount anticipated to be awarded – The anticipated total Phase 1 budget is approximately $19.5 million.

Anticipated individual awards – Up to three awards are anticipated.

Types of instruments that may be awarded – Procurement contract, grant, cooperative agreement or other transaction.

Any cost sharing requirements – None.

Agency contact o Points of Contact The BAA Coordinator for this effort can be reached at:

HR001121S0004@darpa.mil

DARPA/TTO

ATTN: HR001121S0004

675 North Randolph Street Arlington, VA 22203-2114

PART II: FULL TEXT OF ANNOUNCEMENT

I. Funding Opportunity Description

This publication constitutes a Broad Agency Announcement (BAA) as contemplated in Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 6.102(d)(2) and 35.016 and 2 CFR § 200.203. Any resultant award negotiations will follow all pertinent law and regulation, and any negotiations and/or awards for procurement contracts will use procedures under FAR 15.4, Contract Pricing, as specified in the BAA.

The Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) is soliciting innovative proposals to expand the knowledge base, development environments and operational capabilities for future autonomous ground vehicles. The goal of the Robotic Autonomy in Complex Environments with Resiliency (RACER) program is to develop and demonstrate new autonomy technologies that enable unmanned ground vehicles (UGVs) to maneuver in unstructured off-road terrain at the limit of the vehicle’s mechanical systems and at, or beyond, human speeds and efficiencies. RACER will demonstrate game-changing autonomous ground vehicle mobility using a combination of simulation and advanced platforms.

Proposed research should investigate innovative approaches that enable revolutionary advances in science, devices, or systems. Specifically excluded is research that primarily results in evolutionary improvements to the existing state of practice.

A. Program Background and Overview

RACER seeks to advance autonomous UGV off-road performance to overcome current limitations, and use platform-based development environments to accomplish such.

The self-driving car industry is making rapid advances in on-road autonomous mobility of commercial cars; however, military off-road autonomy algorithms and capability development has lagged due to the increased complexity of the off-road problem. On-road autonomy algorithms operate in well-structured and highly predictable environments with limited obstacle classes. They are also able to leverage the availability of large structured data sets, including highly detailed and labeled maps and highly accurate localization (from sensed and external sources). As a result, on-road autonomy algorithms are based on relatively simple two-dimensional (2D) navigation tasks that require minimal contextual understanding of their environment beyond classification of nearby objects, such as vehicles, traffic signals and pedestrians. In addition, the self-driving car industry has developed extensive field-testing capabilities, and has conducted millions of hours of testing to gather data, train algorithms, and improve reliability.

In contrast, the military off-road environment is more challenging and complex, with three-dimensional surfaces, hundreds of obstacle classes, lower fidelity or limited mapping data, and no defined road networks or driving rules. The RACER off-road motion-planning problem is continuous and must be executed in an online adaptive manner. While current on-road autonomy does not directly transfer to the off-road domain, the sensors, processing approaches, perception algorithms and other methods from on-road autonomous vehicles are applicable. RACER seeks to leverage these advances to apply them in the off-road domain and generalize them to novel environments.

Prior DoD UGV autonomy solutions have relied primarily on geometric and manually tuned autonomy approaches to perception and path planning. These approaches were limited to

2.5 m/s average autonomous speed in complex off-road environments. As a result, military autonomous vehicles lack the speed and resiliency to be operationally relevant or support battlefield Operational Tempo (OPTEMPO). The DoD has not funded the magnitude of off-road autonomy development to generate thousands of kilometers on off-road autonomy systems, to advance algorithms and algorithm approaches, and as a byproduct, generate the volume of data needed to facilitate development and training of the enhanced off-road algorithms required for

RACER.

B. Program Goals

The RACER program seeks to reinvigorate off-road autonomy capability development and fielding. The program will encourage frequent field testing and simulation environment maturation to drive research and accelerate algorithm development. RACER will progressively mature capabilities over increasingly complex and diverse terrain to demonstrate the ability to resiliently operate at speeds that are no longer limited by the autonomy software or processing time, but only by considerations of sensor limitations, vehicle mechanical limits, and safety. At program completion, RACER will deliver autonomy algorithms, a code repository, and results from off-road testing in relevant environments to support further autonomy advancement on future UGVs.

The emphasis of RACER is for UGVs to develop autonomy algorithms that allow high speeds in both open and complex terrain, with minimal interventions across multi-kilometer courses.

In Phase 1, performers will focus on developing, maturing, and demonstrating algorithms in platform-development environments on Lightweight Tactical All-Terrain Vehicles (LTATV).

There will be three required DARPA-hosted field experiments at approximate 6-month intervals to assess technical progress.

In Phase 2, performers will continue maturing technology, and increasing system speeds over longer off-road course distances, and more complex maneuver terrain with fewer interventions. In Phase 2, performers will redirect their autonomy implementation focus onto a large-scale demonstration platform, which is more representative of a combat-scale vehicle, while continuing to use the LTATV for algorithm maturation, and participate in five required DARPA-hosted field experiments at 6-month intervals. A point-of-departure example for a Phase 2 large-scale demonstration platform of interest is the Autonomous Performance Demonstrator (APD) UGV. Reference specifications for both LTATV and large-scale demonstration platforms are shown in Figure 1.

Figure 1. Point-of-Departure UGV Examples

In this solicitation, Government furnished information and/or Government furnished equipment, test support services or range access will be abbreviated and referred to as GFX.

For all program phases, DARPA anticipates that performers will conduct continuous field test and simulation development and interim demonstration events at performer field test sites.

To ensure that performer activities are focused on algorithmic approaches and to enable early field testing and system simulations, DARPA will provide, as GFX, LTATVs equipped with a sensor suite, computing resources, an optional baseline autonomy stack, vehicle and sensor models, and initial data sets from Government vehicle collects. A detailed description of this GFX is provided in Section VIII.C.

DARPA recognizes that this solicitation is focused on part of the broad off-road autonomy problem, which is maximizing speed and resiliency from on-board perception, planning, and control. To complement this solicitation, DARPA intends to solicit separately approaches to tactical global planning and simulation-environment solutions for off-road autonomy development.

DARPA is not interested in solutions that require significant platform or sensor development. For this reason, DARPA will provide the baseline vehicle, sensors, and computer hardware that will be used by all performers. The emphasis of this program will be on autonomy developments that make best use of the government-provided hardware. Performers are encouraged to leverage existing development tools. DARPA strongly encourages platform and sensor agnostic approaches and non-proprietary interfaces that enable reuse and portability to multiple platforms. To maximize opportunities for transition, performers will deliver their complete autonomy stack and all algorithm source code to a Government-furnished code and data repository.

FY21 FY22 FY23 FY24 FY25

Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4

Anticipated Phase 2 Kickoff

Anticipated Phase 2 Solicitation

Capstone Field

Experiment

Phase 1 (18 months) Phase 2 (Notional – 30 months)

Field Experiment 1

TIM

Field

Experiment 2 Field

Experiment 3 Field

Experiment 4 Field

Experiment 5 Field

Experiment 6 Field

Experiment 7

3-Month Phase 1 option for Selectees

RACER

BAA Period Anticipated

Kickoff

Figure 2. RACER Program Schedule

C. Program Acquisition Strategy

DARPA anticipates a 4-year, two-phase RACER developmental effort. DARPA will review the results of all Phase 1 activities after DARPA-hosted field experiment 3 and make a decision if the program should continue to Phase 2.

This BAA solicits proposals for Phase 1. Phase 1 shall comprise: an 18-month Phase 1 base period and a 3-month Phase1 option. The Phase 1 base effort will culminate in DARPA-hosted field experiment 3. The Phase 1 option will be a 3-month continuation effort that DARPA will exercise if needed to eliminate a gap in Phase 1 and Phase 2 performance. It is expected that the option period pace of activities and level of effort will be similar to the final 3 months of Phase 1.

Proposers shall also provide a Rough Order of Magnitude (ROM) cost for a 30-month Phase 2.

Phase 2 performers will be limited to Phase 1 prime contractors.

D. Program Metrics and Performer Evaluation

DARPA has established program metrics that will enable comparison of RACER performance to manned vehicle performance. Table 1 illustrates metrics that allow DARPA to assess performer technical progress throughout the program. Program speed metrics were developed that:

Maintain maneuver with manned combat vehicles at their OPTEMPO speeds, specifically the M1 Abrams main battle tank.

Push UGVs to achieve high sustained speeds in both open and complex terrain.

Table 1. Program metrics

Metrics Phase 1 Phase 2

Track 1

Complex terrain, long distance runs Average Autonomous Speed

5 m/s (18 km/h)

8 m/s (28.8 km/h)

Open terrain, short distance runs Autonomous Maximum Speed Runs

10 m/s (36 km/h)

20 m/s (72 km/h)

Interventions/km 0.5 0.1

RACER Autonomy SWaP Size Weight Power

1.25 m3 (5% volume) 200 kg (2.5% weight)

7 kW (5% power)

Average autonomous speed is a measure of autonomy over a full experiment run.

Interventions per kilometer tests autonomy’s ability to stay “online” over a set time/distance with minimal human assistance and tests how well a UGV remains self-directed. Interventions take the form of any interaction with the system, such as a UGV calling for help, an operator intervening in a UGV stuck state, any code resets or adjustments made during a run, or an operator emergency stop (e-stop) to avoid potential UGV damage.

The program metrics listed in Table 1 are considered to be minimum performance objectives. DARPA will more favorably assess proposers who are able to credibly exceed these minimum objectives in a variety of terrains.

The program metrics listed in Table 1 are based on courses in two performance classes.

For Phase 1:

1. Complex terrain, long distance courses: intended to be ~5km long or less (for Phase 1), generally trail-less off-road natural terrain with vegetation, slope, discrete obstacles, and ground surface changes. These courses are intended to highlight non-stop autonomous movement/maneuver

2. Open terrain, short distance courses: intended to be ~2.5km long or less (for Phase 1), generally intended to highlight speed performance of autonomy in off-road terrain. Trails with less dense and fewer encounters of vegetation, slope, discrete obstacles, and ground surface changes. These courses are intended to highlight autonomy to the maximum extents of platform performance.

In Phase 2, complex terrain, long distance courses are planned to be 15-30 km or longer and open terrain, short distance courses are planned to be 4-5km or longer.

Courses will be made up of waypoints spaced 500m-1000m apart. DARPA will structure courses at each DARPA-hosted field experiment such that multiple routes between waypoints will exist that can achieve RACER speed metrics when driven by a human driver.

Phase 1 metrics will be assessed using the LTATV platform. Phase 2 metrics will be assessed using the LTATVs and the large-scale demonstration platform.

The program metrics in Table 1 will be assessed based on a performer’s best run from both of the two course performance classes from DARPA-hosted field experiment 3.

Overall Phase 1 performance will be based on the assessment of program metrics combined with evaluations of progress against the performer’s RACER Development and Demonstration Plan (RDDP) and the quality of program deliverables. The RDDP is described in Section IV.B.2.a.III.B. The deliverables are described in Section I.E.2.

Evaluation of progress against the RDDP includes reducing risks, achieving proposer-defined Key Performance Parameters (KPPs), executing the field test approach, and meeting DARPA-hosted field experiment objectives.

DARPA plans to select one or more performers to continue on to Phase 2. Updated proposal guidance and requests for Phase 2 proposals will be provided toward the end of Phase 1.

Poor progress toward meeting program metrics at field experiments, poor progress against the performer’s RDDP, or poor quality deliverables could be grounds for program elimination at any point.

E. RACER Development

1. Objectives

The self-driving car industry has made rapid advances via a vehicle platform-based, agile develop-test-develop-test model that has accumulated data to help train algorithms and refine approaches. DARPA seeks to foster a similar approach for military off-road UGVs.

Performers are expected to develop autonomy software and algorithms for ground vehicles and to demonstrate the performance of their autonomy on LTATVs in the field.

For Phase 1, DARPA will specify goal points, waypoints and course boundaries that are specified by GPS coordinates. For Phase 1, proposer’s approaches may utilize non-WAAS GPS (accurate to +/-10m maximum and not guaranteed to be available at all times) and/or a pre-loaded 1:50,000 topological map (such as those from the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency (NGA) or the U. S. Geological Survey (USGS)). No additional GPS or pre-loaded information may be used. Nor shall performers be allowed to rely on data or maps from prior runs. This puts the onus on performers to develop algorithms that rely primarily on vehicle sensing and perception to maximize average autonomous speed.

The autonomy software and algorithms must be capable of operating in multiple off-road environments and in novel terrains. The autonomy software and algorithms must also be resilient enough to adapt to environmental and/or naturally-occurring field testing conditions typical of prototype field testing, such as dusk/dawn, moderate dust, moderate rain/snow, light fog, natural shadows, lighting changes, and possibly exposure to night conditions.

To enable cost effective field-based demonstrations as rapidly as possible, the Government will provide three LTATVs to each performer in Phase 1. In Phase 2, the Government will provide up to three additional LTATVs and a large-scale demonstrator platform to each performer. The Government will also provide a baseline sensor package, autonomy stack and initial data sets. GFX is summarized in Figure 3, Figure 3, and Section I.G. GFX is detailed in Section VIII.C.

Figure 3. Anticipated LTATV GFX Platform and Sensors

Figure 4. Anticipated RACER development environment.

Performers are permitted to request modifications or enhancements to the GFX baseline.

Should DARPA approve a request, the modifications or enhancements will be applied to the GFX of all performers. However, DARPA reserves the right to deny requested modifications to the baseline due to cost, schedule, availability of parts, or other factors. Performers are not allowed to make their own upgrades to the vehicle frame, suspension, tires, or to the sensors and computer on the vehicle.

DARPA envisions that performers will design and implement rapid development approaches founded on continuous, evolutionary field demonstrations. To supplement the

DARPA-hosted field experiments, DARPA envisions that performers will have their own field test site(s) to enable constant code development and live-platform testing throughout the program. These plans should be discussed in the proposal.

Performers must overcome numerous technical challenges to achieving higher speeds in the off-road environment, including but not limited to:

Adequate off-road sensing and fusion at speed in all terrains Scene interpretation, algorithm auto-tuning, and localization Adaptive cost assessment and path planning Fast computation of vehicle dynamics, controls and mechanical limits

At the completion of Phase 1, performers must demonstrate off-road speeds and intervention performance both for short-distance, complex terrain and long-distance, simple terrain as outlined in Table 1.

2. Deliverables

DARPA requires a kickoff meeting within one month after award. The purpose of the kickoff meeting will be to review the performer’s technical approach and RDDP and for the RACER Government Team to provide feedback on the proposal.

DARPA requires an initial Technical Interchange Meeting (TIM) within three months after award. The objective of this TIM is to assess progress toward field readiness for DARPA Experiment 1.

DARPA requires bi-weekly teleconferences with the RACER Government team to communicate program status, enable the Program Manager to stay abreast of emerging technical, cost or schedule issues, and receive Government team feedback. It is expected that the biweekly agenda will vary and be established at the prior biweekly call based on current program priorities.

Performers are also required to participate in DARPA-hosted field experiments at approximate 6-month intervals. The objective of the DARPA-hosted field experiments is to measure program metrics on Government-selected courses. Routes and corridors will be provided for the courses. Performance will be assessed by the RACER Government Team as performers attempt to navigate these courses.

DARPA requires a field experiment results and analysis report within 30 days of the completion of a DARPA-hosted field experiment that contains a summary of the performance on the field experiment courses, as well as other practice courses they have used, identifies field experiment successes, challenges, and plans to address the challenges, and documents progress against the RDDP and KPPs.

DARPA requires the complete autonomy stack and all algorithm source code be provided to the RACER Code Repository. DARPA requires executable code along with data and application programming interfaces be provided for computer software when development was paid for entirely at private expense.

Monthly Technical and Financial Status Reports should track and report on KPPs and milestones to communicate status and assist DARPA in assessing proposer progress and demonstration readiness.

Performers will be expected to provide the deliverables listed in Table 2 at a minimum.

Deliverables may be provided in the proposer’s format. Proposals should specify the content for deliverables and may include additional deliverables.

Table 2. Program Deliverables

Deliverable Schedule Phase 1

Phase 1 Kick-Off 1 Month(s) After Award (MAA)

Initial Technical Interchange Meeting 3 MAA DARPA-Hosted Field Experiment 1 Results and Analysis Report 5 MAA DARPA-Hosted Field Experiment 2 Results and Analysis Report 11 MAA DARPA-Hosted Field Experiment 3 Results and Analysis Report 17 MAA Complete Autonomy Stack and All Algorithm Source Code 18 MAA Phase 2 (Notional) Initial Technical Interchange Meeting 21 MAA DARPA-Hosted Field Experiment 4 Results and Analysis Report 24 MAA DARPA-Hosted Field Experiment 5 Results and Analysis Report 30 MAA DARPA-Hosted Field Experiment 6 Results and Analysis Report 36 MAA DARPA-Hosted Field Experiment 7 Results and Analysis Report 42 MAA DARPA-Hosted Field Experiment 8 (Capstone Demonstration) Results and Analysis Report

48 MAA

Complete Autonomy Stack and All Algorithm Source Code 48 MAA Monthly Technical and Financial Status Reports Monthly

Final Report End of the Period of Performance

F. DARPA-Hosted Field Experiments

DARPA will host a series of field experiments to assess performer technical progress and development achievements against the program metrics. The RACER DARPA-hosted field experiments will be based on terrain of interest inside military bases and/or military training areas. For proposal purposes, performers should assume the field test site locations and schedule shown in Table 1Table 3.

Table 3. DARPA-Hosted Field Experiments

Tentative Locations Duration Schedule Phase 1

Experiment 1 Fort Irwin, CA 10 days 5 Months After Award

(MAA)

Experiment 2 Yakima Training Center, WA 10 days 11 MAA

Experiment 3 Fort Irwin, CA 10 days 17 MAA Phase 2 (Notional) Experiment 4 Fort Carson, CO 10 days 24 MAA Experiment 5 Fort Drum, NY 10 days 30 MAA Experiment 6 Yuma Proving Grounds, AZ 10 days 36 MAA Experiment 7 Fort Benning, GA 10 days 42 MAA Experiment 8 Fort Irwin, CA 10 days 48 MAA

The Government reserves the right to change sites and dates depending on award timing, weather/environment, availability, and overall logistics.

Proposers should bring their platforms, code, and field test and support teams and equipment to all DARPA-hosted field experiments. Performers should plan to operate and support their UGVs at the DARPA-hosted field experiment sites similar to performer field test sites.

For proposal purposes, the following infrastructure and general operational considerations can be assumed for each DARPA-hosted field experiment site:

DARPA-hosted field experiment areas will constitute several square kilometers of natural maneuver terrain

DARPA will establish a “RACER Cantonment Area” of base support for both the RACER Government Team and the performers

It is anticipated that DARPA will provide the following operational infrastructure for a team of up to 20 on-site personnel per performer:

o A single-wide mobile office trailer for each performer o A 20’ x 20’ event tent with sides o Adequate electrical service and HVAC for performer facilities o Adequate external internet connectivity o Restroom facilities o Coordination of shipping/receiving of performer platforms and equipment o Coordination of access for personnel o Range and personnel support for testing operations with the host base (access, safety requirements, etc.)

DARPA currently envisions the following general 10-day on-site experiment demonstration approach. Performers may recommend alternative test approaches for consideration.

o Five days for shakeout and system training in a general terrain “sandbox” o Five days for DARPA evaluation runs of a performer’s capability over multiple

DARPA courses Evaluation infrastructure is currently envisioned to include:

o A boundary terrain corridor identified by GPS coordinates o A course consisting of waypoints separated by 500-1,000 meters o A DARPA safety vehicle with both a government and a performer rider/e-stop operator o A multi-megabit per second wireless network for RACER connectivity across the entire test area, anticipated to be a commercially available field mesh network o An Operations Area near each test course (within radio connectivity to the vehicle) where the RACER Government Team and the performer will monitor and interact with the vehicles during test runs.

o A performer operator station o A low bandwidth, standard set of telemetry messages to be exchanged between

DARPA and performer platforms.

For cost and efficiency purposes, the Government reserves the right to overlap performers during the DARPA-hosted field experiments Practice courses will be available for performer testing during the DARPA-hosted field experiments.

DARPA reserves the right to adjust infrastructure and general operating considerations as necessary.

G. RACER GFX Summary

To ensure performer activities are focused on algorithmic approaches and to enable early field testing, DARPA is providing substantial GFX in the following categories. Details of the GFX can be found in Section VIII.C

1. Small-scale demonstration platforms

2. Large-scale demonstration platforms

3. Baseline Sensor Package, Compute, and Autonomy Stack

4. RACER Code Repository

a) RACER Data Store

b) RACER Development Environment

5. Initial Data Sets

II. Award Information

A. General Award Information

Up to three awards are anticipated. The amount of resources made available under this BAA will depend on the quality of the proposals received and the availability of funds.

The Government reserves the right to select for negotiation all, some, one, or none of the proposals received in response to this solicitation and to make awards without discussions with proposers. The Government also reserves the right to conduct discussions if it is later determined to be necessary. If warranted, portions of resulting awards may be segregated into pre-priced options. Additionally, DARPA reserves the right to accept proposals in their entirety or to select only portions of proposals for award. In the event that DARPA desires to award only portions of a proposal, negotiations may be opened with that proposer. The Government reserves the right to fund proposals in phases with options for continued work, as applicable.

The Government reserves the right to request any additional, necessary documentation once it makes the award instrument determination. Such additional information may include but is not limited to Representations and Certifications (see Section VI.B.4, “Representations and Certifications”). The Government reserves the right to remove proposals from award consideration, should the parties fail to reach agreement on award terms, conditions, and/or cost/price within a reasonable time, or the proposer fails to provide requested additional information in a timely manner. Proposals identified for negotiation may result in a procurement contract, grant, cooperative agreement, or other transaction, depending upon the nature of the work proposed, the required degree of interaction between parties, whether or not the research is classified as Fundamental Research, and other factors.

Proposers looking for innovative, commercial-like contractual arrangements are encouraged to consider requesting Other Transactions. To understand the flexibility and options associated with Other Transactions, consult http://www.darpa.mil/work-with-us/contract-management#OtherTransactions.

In accordance with 10 U.S.C. § 2371b(f), the Government may award a follow-on production contract or Other Transaction (OT) for any OT awarded under this BAA if: (1) that participant in the OT, or a recognized successor in interest to the OT, successfully completed the entire prototype project provided for in the OT, as modified; and (2) the OT provides for the award of a follow-on production contract or OT to the participant, or a recognized successor in interest to the OT.

http://www.darpa.mil/work-with-us/contract-management#OtherTransactions http://www.darpa.mil/work-with-us/contract-management#OtherTransactions

In all cases, the Government contracting officer shall have sole discretion to select award instrument type, regardless of instrument type proposed, and to negotiate all instrument terms and conditions with selectees. DARPA will apply publication or other restrictions, as necessary, if it determines that the research resulting from the proposed effort will present a high likelihood of disclosing performance characteristics of military systems or manufacturing technologies that are unique and critical to defense. Any award resulting from such a determination will include a requirement for DARPA permission before publishing any information or results on the program. For more information on publication restrictions, see the section below on Fundamental Research.

B. Proposals and Awards

Proposers shall prepare full proposals in accordance with the proposal format instructions detailed under Section IV to address Phase 1 (including options) and a ROM for Phase 2.

DARPA will provide updated proposal guidance and requests for Phase 2 proposals toward the end of Phase 1. Submission of full proposals for Phase 2 is optional and associated proposal preparation costs will not be reimbursed under Phase 1 awards. Performers who choose not to submit full proposal for Phase 2 will not be considered for Phase 2 awards. Continuation of the program beyond the Phase 1 contract is the decision of the Government and will be based on Phase 1 results, Government need, the availability of funds, the determination that performers have made sufficient progress towards meeting program performance objectives, maturing the required technologies and addressing risks, and scientific review of the Phase 2 proposals.

Evaluations of full proposals for Phase 2 will be based on evaluation criteria to be specified in the Phase 2 proposal request.

C. Fundamental Research

It is DoD policy that the publication of products of fundamental research will remain unrestricted to the maximum extent possible. National Security Decision Directive (NSDD) 189 defines fundamental research as follows:

‘Fundamental research’ means basic and applied research in science and engineering, the results of which ordinarily are published and shared broadly within the scientific community, as distinguished from proprietary research and from industrial development, design, production, and product utilization, the results of which ordinarily are restricted for proprietary or national security reasons.

As of the date of publication of this BAA, the Government expects that program goals as described herein may be met by proposed efforts for fundamental research and non-fundamental research. Some proposed research may present a high likelihood of disclosing performance characteristics of military systems or manufacturing technologies that are unique and critical to defense. Based on the anticipated type of proposer (e.g., university or industry) and the nature of the solicited work, the Government expects that some awards will include restrictions on the resultant research that will require the awardee to seek DARPA permission before publishing any information or results relative to the program.

Proposers should indicate in their proposal whether they believe the scope of the research included in their proposal is fundamental or not. While proposers should clearly explain the intended results of their research, the Government shall have sole discretion to determine whether the proposed research shall be considered fundamental and to select the award instrument type. Appropriate language will be included in resultant awards for non-fundamental research to prescribe publication requirements and other restrictions, as appropriate. This language can be found at http://www.darpa.mil/work-with-us/additional-baa.

For certain research projects, it may be possible that although the research to be performed by a potential awardee is non-fundamental research, its proposed subawardee’s effort may be fundamental research. It is also possible that the research performed by a potential awardee is fundamental research while its proposed subawardee’s effort may be non-fundamental research. In all cases, it is the potential awardee’s responsibility to explain in its proposal which proposed efforts are fundamental research and why the proposed efforts should be considered fundamental research.

III. Eligibility Information

A. Eligible Applicants

All responsible sources capable of satisfying the Government's needs may submit a proposal that shall be considered by DARPA.

1. Federally Funded Research and Development Centers (FFRDCs) and Government Entities

a) FFRDCs

FFRDCs are subject to applicable direct competition limitations and cannot propose to this BAA in any capacity unless they meet the following conditions. (1) FFRDCs must clearly demonstrate that the proposed work is not otherwise available from the private sector. (2) FFRDCs must provide a letter, on official letterhead from their sponsoring organization, that (a) cites the specific authority establishing their eligibility to propose to Government solicitations and compete with industry, and (b) certifies the FFRDC’s compliance with the associated FFRDC sponsor agreement’s terms and conditions. These conditions are a requirement for FFRDCs proposing to be awardees or subawardees.

All proposers are expected to address transition; transition is part of the evaluation criteria in Section V.A. However, given their special status, FFRDCs should describe how and when a proposed technology/system will transition to which Non-FFRDC organization(s).

b) Government Entities

Government Entities (e.g., Government/National laboratories, military educational institutions, etc.) are subject to applicable direct competition limitations. Government Entities must clearly demonstrate that the work is not otherwise available from the private sector and provide written documentation citing the specific statutory authority and contractual authority, if http://www.darpa.mil/work-with-us/additional-baa relevant, establishing their ability to propose to Government solicitations and compete with industry. This information is required for Government Entities proposing to be awardees or subawardees.

c) Authority and Eligibility

At the present time, DARPA does not consider 15 U.S.C. § 3710a to be sufficient legal authority to show eligibility. While 10 U.S.C.§ 2539b may be the appropriate statutory starting point for some entities, specific supporting regulatory guidance, together with evidence of agency approval, will still be required to fully establish eligibility. DARPA will consider FFRDC and Government Entity eligibility submissions on a case-by-case basis; however, the burden to prove eligibility for all team members rests solely with the proposer.

2. Non-U.S. Organizations and/or Individuals

Non-U.S. organizations and/or individuals may participate to the extent that such participants comply with any necessary nondisclosure agreements, security regulations, export control laws, and other governing statutes applicable under the circumstances.

3. Classified Proposals

For classified proposals, applicants will ensure all industrial, personnel, and information systems processing security requirements are in place and at the appropriate level (e.g., Facility Clearance Level (FCL), Automated Information Security (AIS), Certification and Accreditation (C&A), and any Foreign Ownership Control and Influence (FOCI) issues are mitigated prior to submission. Additional information on these subjects can be found at http://www.dss.mil.

B. Organizational Conflicts of Interest

FAR 9.5 Requirements In accordance with FAR 9.5, proposers are required to identify and disclose all facts relevant to potential OCIs involving the proposer’s organization and any proposed team member (subawardee, consultant). Under this Section, the proposer is responsible for providing this disclosure with each proposal submitted to the BAA. The disclosure must include the proposer’s, and as applicable, proposed team member’s OCI mitigation plan. The OCI mitigation plan must include a description of the actions the proposer has taken, or intends to take, to prevent the existence of conflicting roles that might bias the proposer’s judgment and to prevent the proposer from having unfair competitive advantage. The OCI mitigation plan will specifically discuss the disclosed OCI in the context of each of the OCI limitations outlined in FAR 9.505-1 through

FAR 9.505-4.

Agency Supplemental OCI Policy In addition, DARPA has a supplemental OCI policy that prohibits contractors/performers from concurrently providing Scientific Engineering Technical Assistance (SETA), Advisory and Assistance Services (A&AS) or similar support services and being a technical performer.

Therefore, as part of the FAR 9.5 disclosure requirement above, a proposer must affirm whether http://www.dss.mil/ the proposer or any proposed team member (subawardee, consultant) is providing SETA, A&AS, or similar support to any DARPA office(s) under: (a) a current award or subaward; or (b) a past award or subaward that ended within one calendar year prior to the proposal’s submission date.

If SETA, A&AS, or similar support is being or was provided to any DARPA office(s), the proposal must include:

The name of the DARPA office receiving the support;

The prime contract number;

Identification of proposed team member (subawardee, consultant) providing the support; and An OCI mitigation plan in accordance with FAR 9.5.

Government Procedures In accordance with FAR 9.503, 9.504 and 9.506, the Government will evaluate OCI mitigation plans to avoid, neutralize or mitigate potential OCI issues before award and to determine whether it is in the Government’s interest to grant a waiver. The Government will only evaluate OCI mitigation plans for proposals that are determined selectable under the BAA evaluation criteria and funding availability.

The Government may require proposers to provide additional information to assist the Government in evaluating the proposer’s OCI mitigation plan.

If the Government determines that a proposer failed to fully disclose an OCI; or failed to provide the affirmation of DARPA support as described above; or failed to reasonably provide additional information requested by the Government to assist in evaluating the proposer’s OCI mitigation plan, the Government may reject the proposal and withdraw it from consideration for award.

C. Cost Sharing/Matching

Cost sharing is not required; however, it will be carefully considered where there is an applicable statutory condition relating to the selected funding instrument. Cost sharing is encouraged where there is a reasonable probability of a potential commercial application related to the proposed research and development effort.

For more information on potential cost sharing requirements for Other Transactions for Prototype, see http://www.darpa.mil/work-with-us/contract-management#OtherTransactions.

IV. Application and Submission Information

A. Address to Request Application Package

This announcement, any attachments, and any references to external websites herein constitute the total solicitation. If proposers cannot access the referenced material posted in the announcement found at https://beta.sam.gov/ or www.darpa.mil, contact the administrative contact listed herein.

http://www.darpa.mil/work-with-us/contract-management#OtherTransactions https://beta.sam.gov/ http://www.darpa.mil/

B. Content and Form of Application Submission

All submissions, including abstracts and proposals must be written in English with type not smaller than 12-point font. Smaller font may be used for figures, tables, and charts. All hard copies must be on 8½ inch by 11 inch paper with 1” margins. Copies of all documents submitted must be clearly labeled with the DARPA BAA number, proposer organization, and proposal title/proposal short title. Electronic copies of the submissions shall be provided in a searchable PDF format. Proposers are encouraged to provide source documents to facilitate extraction of graphics and tables.

NOTE: Non-conforming submissions that do not follow the instructions, formats, or page counts specified herein may be rejected without further review.

1. Abstract Format

Proposers are strongly encouraged to submit an abstract in advance of a proposal.

Abstracts should follow the same general format as described for proposals (see Section IV.B.2, “Proposal Format”) but include ONLY Sections I and II of Volume I, Technical and Management Proposal. The cover sheet should be clearly marked “ABSTRACT,” and the total length should not exceed 5 pages. The maximum page count excludes the cover page in Volume I, Technical and Management Proposal, Section I, and official transmittal letter but does include any figures, tables, and charts. Official transmittal letter is not required.

Areas to be addressed are:

o Key elements of the envisioned technical approach including how the approach can achieve the program metrics, highlighting novel technologies, algorithms or other capabilities that enable the RACER vision o RACER development and test approach and how that will be implemented in performer-hosted demonstrations and at DARPA-hosted field experiments o Envisioned approach for rapidly establishing a field test capability including performer field test site and availability date, approach for assessing metrics, staffing, and other relevant information o Relevant qualifications and experience of the proposer and potential teaming partners, including ability to rapidly stand up a field test team o Top level schedule, including DARPA required events and performer defined events, as well as envisioned goals for each event.

2. Proposal Format

All proposals must be in the format given below. Proposals shall consist of two volumes:

1) Volume I, Technical and Management Proposal (composed of three parts), and 2) Volume II, Cost Proposal. The maximum page limit for Volume I is 40 pages. Bracketed numbers before each section denote recommended page limits.

Ensure that each section provides the detailed discussion of the proposed work necessary to enable an in-depth review of the specific technical and managerial issues. Specific attention must be given to addressing both risk and payoff of the proposed work that make it desirable to

DARPA.

a) Volume I, Technical and Management Proposal

Section I: Administrative (not included in page count) A. Cover Sheet to include:

(1) BAA number (HR001121S0004);

(2) ”RACER Volume 1, Technical and Management Proposal”;

(3) Lead organization submitting proposal;

(4) Type of organization, selected among the following categories: “LARGE

BUSINESS,” “SMALL DISADVANTAGED BUSINESS,” “OTHER SMALL

BUSINESS,” “HBCU,” “MI,” “OTHER EDUCATIONAL,” OR “OTHER

NONPROFIT”

(5) Proposer’s reference number (if any);

(6) Other team members (if applicable) and type of organization for each;

(7) Proposal title;

(8) Technical point of contact to include: salutation, last name, first name, street address, city, state, zip code, telephone, fax (if available), electronic mail (if available);

(9) Administrative point of contact to include: salutation, last name, first name, street address, city, state, zip code, telephone, fax (if available), electronic mail (if available);

and;

(10) Date proposal was submitted.

B. Official transmittal letter

Section II: Summary of Proposal

A. {3} Executive-level summary of technical rationale, technical approach, and constructive plan for accomplishment of technical goals in support of innovative claims and deliverable creation. The summary should also include a top-level schedule that outlines the proposer’s overall approach to executing proposed system development through demonstration testing. The summary should address the proposer’s overall RACER program technical approach and vision, initial RACER concept, initial RACER Development and Demonstration Plan (RDDP).

B. {1} Innovative claims for the proposed research. This section is the centerpiece of the proposal and should succinctly describe the uniqueness and benefits of the proposed approach relative to the current state-of-art alternate approaches.

C. {1} General discussion of other research in this area.

D. {1} A clearly defined organization chart for the program team which includes, as applicable: (1) the programmatic relationship of team member; (2) the unique capabilities of team members; (3) the task responsibilities of team members; (4) the teaming strategy among the team members; and (5) the key personnel along with the amount of effort to be expended by each key personnel during each year, expressed in percentages. DARPA requires key personnel identified in the proposal to be assigned as proposed, and the resulting contract/agreement will indicate no substitution shall be made without prior approval of the Government.

Section III: Detailed Proposal Information

A. {8} Technical Approach

Describe the proposer’s top-level RACER architecture and technical approach to developing algorithms that will enable UGVs to achieve the RACER program metrics.

Highlight key elements of the proposed approach along with key technical challenges.

Present substantiating data or analysis that indicates the potential feasibility and effectiveness of the approach for meeting the metrics. Describe how the proposer plans to leverage the DARPA provided GFX in their development approach. Describe the proposer’s systems engineering process to develop RACER system requirements that are traceable to the program metrics and objectives as well as portability to additional vehicles. Address the overall software development process, including how they will develop interfaces, track configuration, and assess progress. Include a discussion of the performer-hosted demonstration environments, the development tools the proposer plans to use and their experience using those tools to address relevant problems. Include a comparison with other ongoing research indicating advantages and disadvantages of the proposed effort. Include a discussion of proposer’s previous accomplishments and work in closely related research areas. Proposers are encouraged to outline in detail their specific approach to using simulation and how it contributes to field testing and achieving program metrics.

B. {8} Initial RACER Development and Demonstration Plan (RDDP)

Provide an initial RDDP, describing the plan for maturing RACER functionality and executing a compelling progression of RACER demonstrations, including performer-hosted demonstration and DARPA-hosted field experiments. Describe the schedule and activities required to achieve first live field demonstration, as well as the content, objectives, and timing of subsequent demonstrations. Describe the approach to decomposing the system-level requirements and metrics into component-level/technical requirements. Describe the program risks and how they will be reduced over the RACER development schedule in Phases 1 and 2. Describe the envisioned objectives for performance and functionality at DARPA-hosted field experiments and performer-hosted demonstrations to illustrate how the proposed progression will accomplish the Phase 1 technical approach and achieve the program metrics. Describe the data collection approach. Describe approach to the GFX maintenance and repair..