DARPA-PS-26-127_Perrseus_Attachment_B_Abstract_Instructions_and_Template.docx

Attachment B: DARPA-PS-26-127 Abstract Competition Sensitive Information – see 41 U.S.C. 2102 DARPA-PS-26-127: Perrseus Abstract Instructions and Template Use of this template is mandatory for all abstract submissions to this PS. Proposers must include Attachment A (Abstract Summary Slide Template) and Attachment B to constitute a full abstract submission. This document must include all components described herein and must be submitted in PDF or Microsoft Word formats. All submissions must be written in English, and all pages shall be formatted for printing on 8-1/2 by 11-inch paper with 1-inch margins and font size no smaller than 12 points. Font sizes of 8 or 10 points may be used for figures, tables, and charts. Axes in all charts should be clearly labeled. All schematics should be sure to include scale bars as appropriate.

Abstracts shall not exceed a maximum of 8 pages.

Detailed diagram/drawing of proposed processing steps (Optional)

Technical Papers (Optional, no more than 3)

Proposers are strongly encouraged but not required to submit an abstract before submitting a full proposal. DARPA will respond to abstracts with a statement as to whether DARPA:

a. recommends the proposer submit a full proposal or,

b. does not recommend the proposer submit a full proposal with a rationale for this decision.

Regardless of DARPA’s response to an abstract, proposers may submit a full proposal. DARPA will review all conforming full proposals using the published evaluation criteria and without regard to any comments resulting from the review of an abstract. Proposers should note that a favorable response to an abstract is not a guarantee that a proposal based on the abstract will ultimately be selected for award negotiation. It is DARPA policy to attempt to reply to abstracts within thirty calendar days. These official notifications will be sent via email to the Technical POC and/or Administrative POC identified on the abstract cover sheet.

Abstracts must be submitted per the instructions outlined herein and received by DARPA no later than the due date and time listed in the Overview Information. Abstracts received after this time and date may not be reviewed. Please visit Proposer Instructions and General Terms and Conditions and see Attachment M for instructions on how to submit your abstract through the Broad Agency Announcement Tool (BAAT).

COVER SHEET

[PRIME ORGANIZATION LOGO]

Abstract Title

Proposer Organization

Commercial and Government Entity (CAGE) code[footnoteRef:2] [2: A CAGE Code identifies companies doing or wishing to do business with the Federal Government.]

Mailing Address:

Telephone:

Email:

Mailing Address:

Telephone:

Email:

Organization:

Technical POC Name:

Organization:

Estimated Period of Performance

Identify any other solicitation(s) to which this concept has been proposed.

CMMC Certification Level (1, 2, or 3)

[ ] Pathway B (Requires Phase 0)

Table of Contents

Goals and Impact Submission of an abstract is optional but strongly encouraged as it provides a 'safe-harbor' opportunity for proposers to receive early, non-binding feedback from the Government. This feedback is intended to help proposers mitigate program risk and align their final proposals with the solicitation's specific objectives, particularly concerning the Intellectual Property (IP) and Commercialization Strategy and the teaming restrictions related to Organizational Conflicts of Interest (OCI).

Describe what is being proposed and what difference it will make (qualitatively and quantitatively) if successful. Describe the innovative aspects of the project in the context of existing capabilities and approaches, clearly delineating the relationship of this work to any other projects from the past and present.

· Proposers must include a rough schematic of the proposed µUHV system along with a schematic of the process(es) that will be needed to realize the system.

· What components are included in your proposed µUHV system, what is the component maturity, and how will they be integrated?

· Maturity is defined as: concept, working prototype, demonstrated integration in microscale package.

· If maturity is a concept or prototype, how will these components be manufactured and matured with enough manufacturing iteration during the period of performance?

· Are these components compatible with standard processes? If not, what are the steps required to make them compatible? If fundamentally incompatible, explain how to mitigate this manufacturing risk.

Technical Approach Provide answers to the following questions:

· What is new in your approach, and why do you think it will be successful?

· How would the Government testing community implement the proposed approach/work?

· What is your proposed approach for the integrated pressure sensor(s) covering the needed pressure range of operation?

· What is your proposed methodology for testing all the required vacuum parameters to track progress?

· What is your proposed methodology to validate device lifetime on a rapid timeframe, especially given potential nonlinear aging mechanisms of expected components?

· How much will it cost (rough order of magnitude), and how long will it take?

· Do you have access to the tools needed to meet the goals of the program?

· Would tools available at Government Labs, FRDCS, or UARCs assist your ability to carry out the proposed processes? If so, what and how?

Outline and address technical challenges inherent in the approach and possible solutions for overcoming potential problems. Provide appropriate measurable milestones (quantitative if possible) at intermediate stages of the project to demonstrate progress and a plan for achieving the milestones.

Capabilities/Management Plan Provide a summary of the team's expertise, including all subawardees and key personnel. Identify a Principal Investigator and describe the team’s organization and roles. While teaming arrangements need not be final, proposers must address the following:

· Team and Expertise: A summary of the team's expertise, including all key organizations and personnel, their roles, and how their combined capabilities are responsive to the multi-disciplinary nature of the Perrseus program.

· HVM Transition and Commercialization Approach: A brief summary of the intended approach to meet the High-Volume Manufacturing (HVM) commercialization requirement outlined in PS, including the intended pathway (e.g., Captive Fab or Fabless).

· OCI Disclosure for Government-Affiliated Teammates: Proposers must explicitly identify any intended team members that are Government Entities, National Laboratories, FFRDCs, or UARCs. This disclosure is required to allow DARPA to provide early, non-binding feedback regarding the strict prohibition on teaming with the Government's designated IV&V partner and whether potential Government Entities, National Laboratories, FFRDCs, or UARCs meet the criteria defined in the PS stated below. A formal letter of support is not required at the abstract stage.

· Critical, specialized capabilities such as tool accessibility, critical components or fabrication, characterization, testing, or measurement techniques. They must clearly demonstrate that the proposed work is not otherwise available from the private sector.

· Demonstration of active plans to transition supporting or enabling technology from the FFRDC, UARC, or Government Entity to the prime contractor on the Perrseus program.

· A letter of intent from the division director of the FFRDC, UARC, or Government Entity identifying the potential technologies and committing to transitioning the technology to the prime contractor is required at proposal submission. This may include an option for a non-exclusive license for any FFRDC, UARC, or Government Entity-developed technology or process steps required for successful Perrseus prototypes.

· If the FFRDC, UARC, or Government Entity presents hurdles for technology transition, then they may be removed from the program at the Government’s discretion.

· Share all data and measurements performed at the FFRDC, UARC, or Government Entity under DARPA funding in the Perrseus program with all Perrseus performers.

· Intellectual Property and Commercialization Strategy: Briefly describe how the team’s structure and expertise support the intended IP and commercialization strategy. State whether you intend to pursue the Baseline IP Rights Expectation or the Specially Negotiated License Rights (SNLR) pathway and how your team is positioned to meet the corresponding requirements.

· Team Synergy and Experience:

· Explain how the proposed team is responsive to the multi-disciplinary nature of the Perrseus program.

· Identify the team's past experience with developing and using Process Travelers and with manufacturing process development.

· Describe any custom tooling relevant to µUHV packaging that the team has previously developed.

Example Process Traveler (Optional) Proposers should provide a high-level summary of their anticipated manufacturing process flow. This summary should demonstrate a clear, logical sequence of the major fabrication, bonding, and testing steps that could be replicated by a non-expert. The following is a notional example of the expected level of detail; proposers should tailor the content to their unique technical approach.

Proposers may attach a previous example of a completed process traveler as evidence for process development experience. There is no page limit for any attached Process Travel. Attached process travelers will not be evaluated for technical content but as evidence of process development and manufacturing experience. Any relevant technical information relevant to the proposed technical approach must be included in the body of the abstract.

Example: Notional Information that may be found in a process traveler for a Hybrid Glass-Silicon µUHV Package. The more information the better.

· Step 1: Substrate Preparation

· 1.1: Procure 8-inch silicon wafer (prime grade, <100> orientation).

· 1.2: Fabricate electrical interconnects and MEMS sensor structures via standard CMOS foundry process (e.g., PolyMUMPS).

· 1.3: Deposit and pattern getter material (e.g., Titanium) in designated areas.

· Step 2: Housing Fabrication

· 2.1: Procure 8-inch borosilicate glass wafer.

· 2.2: Etch cavities for vacuum volume using deep reactive-ion etching (DRIE).

· 2.3: Deposit anti-permeation coating (e.g., Al₂O₃) on all surfaces via atomic layer deposition (ALD).

· Step 3: Wafer-Level Bonding

· 3.1: Align silicon and glass wafers in a high-vacuum (<10⁻⁷ mbar) wafer bonder.

· 3.2: Perform anodic bonding at 400°C to create a hermetic seal at the wafer level.

· Step 4: Pump-Down and Pinch-Off

· 4.1: Integrate micro-ion pump structures.

· 4.2: Activate getters and pumps during a high-temperature bake-out (250°C for 48 hours).

· 4.3: Perform final MEMS-scale pinch-off to seal the package.

· Step 5: Dicing and Final Test

· 5.1: Dice bonded wafer stack into individual µUHV packages.

· 5.2: Conduct initial pressure measurement using integrated high-Q MEMS resonator.

· 5.3: Perform He leak testing on a sample of diced packages to verify seal integrity.

Detailed Diagram/Drawing of Proposed Processing Steps (Optional) Proposers should include a single, clear, and well-annotated cross-sectional diagram that illustrates the key components and manufacturing steps of their proposed µUHV package. The diagram should visually correspond to the major steps outlined in the Process Traveler Summary. Its purpose is to provide a quick, intuitive understanding of the proposed architecture.

Example Description of a Good Diagram:

· A good diagram would be a 2D cross-section showing the substrate wafer at the bottom and the housing wafer on top.

· It would clearly label key materials (e.g., “Silicon Substrate,” “Glass Housing,” “Al₂O₃ Coating”).

· It would show the location of critical components described in the main solicitation, such as the “Getter Material,” the “MEMS Sensor Structure,” and the “Photonic/Electrical Interconnects” passing through the sealed boundary.

· Annotations or arrows could be used to indicate key processes, like “Bond Interface” or “Laser Weld Point.”

(Note: Proposers should embed the diagram directly into the abstract document.)

Bibliography Provide a brief (no more than 2 pages) bibliography with links to relevant papers, references, reports, etc.