ACTUV Initial Q and A.pdf

ACTUV BAA 10‐43

Questions and Answers

March 5, 2010

Q: Is there a particular a target award/Phase 1 start date that proposers should use for cost proposals?

A: Please assume a Phase 1 start date of September 1, 2010.

Q: Is the ACTUV platform limited to unmanned vehicles that always operate on the ocean surface?

A: No, there is not a requirement that the vessel always operate on the ocean surface, however, proposers should carefully consider the impacts to system complexity in light of the endurance objectives when weighing the benefit of unconventional modes of operation.

Q: Is it acceptable for the ACTUV vehicle to carry lethal weapons, at least for self defense?

A: Proposers should not presume authorization to carry lethal weapons within the scope of the DARPA ACTUV program, but design allocations for future weaponization are acceptable.

Q: In Sections 1.0 and 5.1.1 the BAA refers to “concept adaptability” and “system adaptability to future threats and missions”. How important an evaluation criterion for determining success in Phase 1 will such adaptability be?

A: While the ACTUV program is focused on a specific operational mission, there is a desire to develop a system which could be adapted to other missions of interest to the Navy. For example, it has been postulated that if successfully developed for an ASW trail mission, the Undersea UNV concept could be adapted to carry other payloads in lieu of ASW sensors and/or fuel. For full scope proposals, the adaptability of a concept will be assessed as part of the “Technical Merit of the Concept” evaluation criteria, which is equally weighted against the other criteria.

Q: In Section 1.0 the BAA refers to “clean sheet design based on no person stepping aboard in its operating cycle.” Does its operating cycle include a maintenance period? How deeply engaged in the vessel must a person be to be considered “aboard”?

A: The term operating cycle is intended to represent all system states including deployment preparation, operational deployment, routine post deployment maintenance, and inter‐deployment storage (major refit periods such as mid‐life refurbishment may be reasonably excluded). This statement is not intended to imply that no human maintenance is required during non‐deployed states. The intent is that platform design should leverage unique unmanned system architectures, and need not make internal volume allocations for maintenance access if alternate approaches that offer improved efficiency and platform performance can be achieved.

Q: Can DARPA give us guidance on what the appropriate security reference documents are for transferring classified information/documents among ACTUV industry team members if no DD Form 254 is to be issued?

A: Contrary to the guidance provided at Industry Day, security policies have been codified such that DARPA will now issue a DD Form 254 to any recipient of the classified annex, in conjunction with receiving the annex. Consistent with the related guidance presented at Industry, a DD Form 254 is not required to submit classified proposals, and will be provided only in conjunction with the receipt of classified material from DARPA.