HR001117S0004.pdf

HR001117S0004

Broad Agency Announcement

Next-Generation Sensor for Measuring Winds Aloft in the

Stratosphere

Tactical Technology Office

January 17, 2017

Contents

PART I: OVERVIEW INFORMATION

PART II: FULL TEXT OF ANNOUNCEMENT

I. Funding Opportunity Description II. Award Information

A. General Award Information B. 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

PART I: OVERVIEW INFORMATION

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

Funding Opportunity Title – Next-Generation Sensor for Measuring Winds Aloft in the Stratosphere

Announcement Type – Initial announcement Funding Opportunity Number – HR001117S0004 Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers (CFDA) – Not applicable Dates o Posting Date: January 17, 2017 o Questions Due Date: February 3, 2017 at 1600 EST o Abstract Due Date and Time: February 8, 2017 at 1600 EST o Proposal Due Date and Time: March 7, 2017 at 1600 EST

Concise description of the funding opportunity – Develop promising technology for in-situ direct measurement of winds aloft in the stratosphere

Total amount anticipated to be awarded – $4 million Anticipated individual awards – The Government anticipates one award; however, it reserves the right to make multiple awards or no awards based on the quality of responses received.

Types of instruments that may be awarded – Procurement contract or other transaction.

Agency contact o Points of Contact

The BAA Coordinator for this effort can be reached at:

HR001117S0004@darpa.mil

DARPA/TTO

ATTN: HR001117S0004

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 is soliciting innovative proposals in the following technical area: in-situ direct measurement of winds aloft in the stratosphere.

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.

The Next-Generation Sensor for Measuring Winds Aloft in the Stratosphere study will assess and apply promising technology to rapidly mature and deploy a lightweight, low-power sensor prototype capable of directly measuring wind speed and direction in a prescribed volume surrounding a stratospheric vehicle. A vehicle’s ability to effectively and efficiently steer by riding opportunistic wind vectors at different altitudes in the stratosphere is a key mission enabler that is dependent upon the availability of real-time in-situ measurements of wind speed and direction. Today, guidance is incorporated in flight planning using winds aloft data from sparse weather balloon soundings and remote satellite measurements. Conventional anemometers and weather radar equipment applied to these altitudes suffer from poor signal-to-noise ratio, due to low air density and insufficient aerosol scattering. The state-of-the-art in commercial electro-optical sensors, such as scanning laser Doppler interferometers, overcome these conditions, but do so at the cost of high power (hundreds to thousands of watts) and mass (tens of kilograms) that limit them to off-platform measurements.

This solicitation assumes a reference system architecture composed of a stratospheric vehicle traveling with the prevailing winds at altitudes above 60,000 feet. The vehicle has the ability to change its altitude to exploit opportunistic wind vectors for the purpose of guidance.

The objective is to develop a compact, scanning onboard sensor prototype capable of delivering to the vehicle’s on-board guidance system, in near-real time (e.g., latency less than 15 minutes), a map of wind speed and direction in a volume of air surrounding it. With this knowledge, the vehicle may achieve guidance with greater energy efficiency (i.e., a lesser quantity of smaller altitude changes) than what is otherwise possible with the sparse forecast data available today.

To meet future requirements, DARPA envisions a sensor prototype with the following performance metrics:

1. Measure wind speed and direction at discrete nodes within a forward-facing, three-dimensional hemispherical flow field oriented approximately normal to the vector of vehicle travel and unobstructed by the lift gas envelope. The flow field assumes a radius (range) of 5 km with radial (r) spacing (pitch) of 333 m, azimuthal (theta) pitch of pi/6 radians, and meridional (elevation, phi) pitch of pi/4 radians, assuming a spherical coordinate system centered at the sensor datum as designated by the designer.

2. Store repeated measurements on board in an appropriate data structure for memory-efficient statistical processing leading to timely delivery of median wind speed and direction values with 3-sigma error bars at each node, assuming a Gaussian distribution.

3. Engineer the sensor system such that it is capable of mapping the flow field at altitudes ranging from 60,000 to 120,000 feet.

4. The sensor system is expected to be designed to a threshold mass of 25 kg and an objective mass of 5 kg.

5. The sensor is also expected to draw 100 W average power from the vehicle bus at a maximum 25% duty cycle and need not have an internal power source.

6. No signal processing may occur on the ground or aboard alternate platforms external to the vehicle.

7. Use of ejected consumable materials in direct measurements is discouraged, but may be permissible if the proposed approach is deemed feasible following a technical evaluation that considers factors such as material composition, environmental health and safety, and subsystem size, weight and power.

DARPA is interested in proposals that present a program of engineering design, analysis, and prototyping, leading to demonstrations of a functional sensor aboard a vehicle (Government furnished equipment, or GFE) in not more than two Government-sponsored flight tests.

Intermediate laboratory demonstrations of prototypes are strongly encouraged.

Sharing of information with performers of other Government contracts may be required.

This information will be limited to that which is needed to ensure cost-effective, efficient integration with vehicles being developed.

A notional study schedule is shown below:

Figure 1. Notional Study Schedule

The anticipated duration of the study is 18 months and is anticipated to be contracted as a single phase.

The schedule in Figure 1 is notional. Each proposer must make their own determination as to which milestones are applicable to their technology development effort. Project plans should include a means for DARPA to evaluate technical progress throughout the proposed development effort through a combination of program management milestones, prototype flight demonstrations, and reports. DARPA desires efforts that incorporate rigorous test and analysis as a means of validating performance.

II. Award Information

A. General Award Information

The Government anticipates one award; however, it reserves the right to make multiple awards. 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 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 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 http://www.darpa.mil/work-with-us/contract-management#OtherTransactions 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. 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 either cannot be met by proposers intending to perform fundamental research or the proposed research is anticipated to present a high likelihood of disclosing performance characteristics of military systems or manufacturing technologies that are unique and critical to defense. Therefore, the Government anticipates restrictions on the resultant research that will require the contractor 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 select award instrument type and to negotiate all instrument terms and conditions with selectees. Appropriate clauses will be included in resultant awards for non-fundamental research to prescribe publication requirements and other restrictions, as appropriate. This clause can be found at www.darpa.mil/work-with-us/additional-baa.

For certain research projects, it may be possible that although the research being performed by the awardee is restricted research, a subawardee may be conducting fundamental research. In those cases, it is the awardee’s responsibility to explain in their proposal why its subawardee’s effort is fundamental research

III. Eligibility Information

A. Eligible Applicants http://www.darpa.mil/work-with-us/additional-baa

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 citing the specific authority establishing their eligibility to propose to Government solicitations and compete with industry, and their compliance with the associated FFRDC sponsor agreement’s terms and conditions. This information is required for FFRDCs proposing to be awardees or subawardees.

All proposers are expected to address transition (see proposal format under Section IV.B); 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 relevant, establishing their ability to propose to Government solicitations.

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.

c) Authority and 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.

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 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 www.darpa.mil, contact the administrative contact listed herein.

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. Copies of all documents submitted must be clearly labeled with the DARPA BAA number, proposer organization, and proposal title/proposal short title.

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.

2. Proposal Format

All proposals must be in the format given below. The typical proposal should express a consolidated effort in support of one or more related technical concepts or ideas. Disjointed efforts should not be included into a single proposal. Proposals shall consist of two volumes: 1) http://www.darpa.mil/

Volume I, Technical and Management Proposal (composed of three parts), and 2) Volume II, Cost Proposal. 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.

NOTE: Non-conforming submissions that do not follow the instructions herein may be rejected without further review.

a) Volume I, Technical and Management Proposal

Section I: Administrative

(a) Cover Sheet to include:

(1) BAA number (HR001117S0004);

(2) Technical area;

(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);

(10) Total funds requested from DARPA, and the amount of cost share (if any); and

(11) Date proposal was submitted.

(b) Official transmittal letter

Section II: Summary of Proposal

A. {3} Technical rationale, technical approach, and constructive plan for accomplishment of technical goals in support of innovative claims and deliverable creation. (In the proposal, this section should be supplemented by a more detailed plan in Section III of the Technical and Management Proposal.)

B. {4} 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. {2} Deliverables associated with the proposed research and the plans and capability to accomplish technology transition and commercialization.

a. Technical deliverables, such as reports, technical design reviews, hardware deliveries, etc.

b. Technology Transition deliverables, such as business case, value stream map, and transition story.

Proposers responding to this BAA must submit a separate list of all technical data or computer software that will be furnished to the Government with other than unlimited rights. The Government will assume unlimited rights if proposers fail to identify any intellectual property restrictions in their proposals. Include in this section all proprietary claims to the results, prototypes, intellectual property, or systems supporting and/or necessary for the use of the research, results, and/or prototype. If there are no proprietary claims, this should be stated. For forms to be completed regarding intellectual property, see Section IV.B.3.g of this BAA. There will be no page limit for the listed forms.

D. {2} General discussion of other research in this area.

E. {2} 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 of 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 person during each year. 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. {10} Statement of Work (SOW) – In plain English, clearly define the technical tasks/subtasks to be performed, their durations, and dependencies among them. The page length for the SOW will be dependent on the amount of the effort. For each task/subtask, provide:

A general description of the objective (for each defined task/activity);

A detailed description of the approach to be taken to accomplish each defined task/activity;

Identification of the primary organization responsible for task execution (prime, sub, team member, by name, etc.);

The completion criteria for each task/activity - a product, event or milestone that defines its completion.

Define all deliverables (reporting, data, reports, software, etc.) to be provided to the Government in support of the proposed research tasks/activities; and Clearly identify any tasks/subtasks (to be performed by either an awardee or subawardee) that will be accomplished on-campus at a university, if applicable.

Note: It is recommended that the SOW should be developed so that each Phase of the program is separately defined.

Do not include any proprietary information in the SOW.

B. {5} Description of the results, products, transferable technology, and expected technology transfer path to supplement information included in the summary of the proposal. This should also address mitigation of life-cycle and sustainment risks associated with transitioning intellectual property for U.S. military applications, if applicable. See also Section IV.B.3.g of this BAA., “Intellectual Property.”

C. {8} Detailed technical approach enhancing and completing the Summary of Proposal.

D. {2} Comparison with other ongoing research indicating advantages and disadvantages of the proposed effort.

E. {2} Discussion of proposer’s previous accomplishments and work in closely related research areas.

F. {1} Description of the facilities that would be used for the proposed effort.

G. {1} Detail support enhancing that of Summary of Proposal, including formal teaming agreements which are required to execute this program.

H. {3} Provide description of milestone cost and accomplishments, including estimates of cost for each task in each year of the effort delineated by the primes and major subcontractors, total cost, and any company cost share. (Note: Measurable milestones should capture key development points in tasks and should be clearly articulated and defined in time relative to start of effort.) Where the effort consists of multiple portions that could reasonably be partitioned for purposes of funding, these should be identified as options with separate cost estimates for each. Additionally, proposals should clearly explain the technical approach(es) that will be employed to meet or exceed each program metric and provide ample justification as to why the approach(es) is/are feasible. The milestones must not include proprietary information.

b) Volume II, Cost Proposal

All proposers, including FFRDCs, must submit the following:

Cover sheet to include:

(1) BAA number (HR001117S0004);

(2) Technical area;

(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;

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

(10) Award instrument requested: cost-plus-fixed-fee (CPFF), cost-contract—no fee, cost sharing contract – no fee, or other type of procurement contract (specify) or Other Transaction;

(11) Place(s) and period(s) of performance;

(12) Total proposed cost;

(13) Total proposed cost separated by fiscal year;

(14) Name, address, and telephone number of the proposer’s cognizant Defense Contract

Management Agency (DCMA) administration office (if known);

(15) Name, address, and telephone number of the proposer’s cognizant Defense Contract

Audit Agency (DCAA) audit office (if known);

(16) Date proposal was prepared;

(17) DUNS number;

(18) TIN number;

(19) CAGE Code;

(20) Subawardee Information; and

(21) Proposal validity period.

Additional Cost Proposal Information

A. Supporting Cost and Pricing Data

The proposer should include supporting cost and pricing information in sufficient detail to substantiate the summary cost estimates and should include a description of the method used to estimate costs and supporting documentation. The Government strongly encourages that tables included in the cost proposal also be provided in an editable (e.g., MS Excel) format with calculation formulas intact to allow traceability of the cost proposal numbers across the prime and subcontractors.

B. Cost Breakdown Information and Format

Detailed cost breakdown to include:

Total program costs broken down by major cost items (direct labor, including labor categories; subcontracts; materials; other direct costs; overhead charges, etc.) and further broken down by task and phase

Major program tasks by fiscal year An itemization of major subcontracts and equipment purchases.

Documentation supporting the reasonableness of the proposed equipment costs

(vendor quotes, past purchase orders/purchase history, detailed engineering estimates, etc.) shall be provided.

An itemization of any information technology (IT) purchase, as defined by FAR

2.101 – Documentation supporting the reasonableness of the proposed equipment costs (vendor quotes, past purchase orders/purchase history, detailed engineering estimates, etc.) shall be provided, including a letter stating why the proposer cannot provide the requested resources from its own funding for prime and all sub-awardees.

A summary of projected funding requirements by month The source, nature, and amount of any industry cost-sharing Identification of pricing assumptions of which may require incorporation into the resulting award instrument (e.g., use of Government Furnished Property/Facilities/Information, access to Government Subject Matter experts, etc.)

Tables included in the cost proposal in editable (e.g. MS Excel) format with calculation formulas intact. NOTE: If PDF submissions differ from the Excel submission, the PDF will take precedence.

Per FAR 15.403-4, certified cost or pricing data shall be required if the proposer is seeking a procurement contract award per the referenced threshold, unless the proposer requests and is granted an exception from the requirement to submit cost or pricing data. Certified cost or pricing data” are not required if the proposer proposes an award instrument other than a procurement contract (e.g., an other transaction.)

a. Subawardee Proposals

The awardee is responsible for compiling and providing all subawardee proposals for the Procuring Contracting Officer (PCO)/Agreements Officer (AO), as applicable. Subawardee proposals should include Interdivisional Work Transfer Agreements (ITWA) or similar arrangements. Where the effort consists of multiple portions that could reasonably be partitioned for purposes of funding, these should be identified as options with separate cost estimates for each.

All proprietary subawardee proposal documentation, prepared at the same level of detail as that required of the awardee’s proposal and that cannot be uploaded with the proposed awardee’s proposal, shall be provided to the Government either by the awardee or by the subawardee organization when the proposal is submitted. Subawardee proposals submitted to the Government by the proposed awardee should be submitted in a sealed envelope that the proposed awardee will not be allowed to view. The subawardee must provide the same number of copies to the PCO/AO as is required of the awardee. See Section IV.B.4.b of this BAA for proposal submission information.

b. Other Transaction Requests

The Government may award either a Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) based contract or an Other Transaction for Prototype (OT) agreement for prototype system development.

All proposers requesting an OT must include a detailed list of milestones. Each milestone must include the following:

milestone description, completion criteria, due date, and payment/funding schedule (to include, if cost share is proposed, awardee and Government share amounts).

It is noted that, at a minimum, milestones should relate directly to accomplishment of program technical metrics as defined in the BAA and/or the proposer’s proposal. Agreement type, expenditure or fixed-price based, will be subject to negotiation by the Agreements Officer.

Do not include proprietary data.

3. Additional Proposal Information

a) Proprietary Markings

Proposers are responsible for clearly identifying proprietary information. Submissions containing proprietary information must have the cover page and each page containing such information clearly marked with a label such as “Proprietary.” NOTE: “Confidential” is a classification marking used to control the dissemination of U.S. Government National Security Information as dictated in Executive Order 13526 and should not be used to identify proprietary business information.

b) Security Information

(1) Unclassified Submissions

DARPA anticipates that submissions received under this BAA will be unclassified.

However, should a proposer wish to submit classified information, an unclassified e-mail must be sent to the BAA mailbox requesting submission instructions from the Technical Office PSO.

If a determination is made that the award instrument may result in access to classified information, a SCG and/or DD Form 254 will be issued by DARPA and attached as part of the award.

c) Human Research Subjects/Animal Use

Proposers that anticipate involving Human Research Subjects or Animal Use must comply with the approval procedures detailed at www.darpa.mil/work-with-us/additional-baa.

d) Approved Cost Accounting System Documentation

Proposers that do not have a Cost Accounting Standards (CAS) complaint accounting system considered adequate for determining accurate costs that are negotiating a cost- type procurement contract must complete an SF 1408. For more information on CAS compliance, see http://www.dcaa.mil/cas.html. To facilitate this process, proposers should complete the SF 1408 found at http://www.gsa.gov/portal/forms/download/115778 and submit the completed form with the proposal. To complete the form, check the boxes on the second page, then provide a narrative explanation of your accounting system to supplement the checklist on page one. For more information, see http://www.dcaa.mil/preaward_accounting_system_adequacy_checklist.html.

e) Small Business Subcontracting Plan

Pursuant to Section 8(d) of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. § 637(d)) and FAR 19.702(a)(1), each proposer who submits a contract proposal and includes subcontractors might http://www.darpa.mil/work-with-us/additional-baa http://www.dcaa.mil/cas.html http://www.gsa.gov/portal/forms/download/115778 http://www.dcaa.mil/preaward_accounting_system_adequacy_checklist.html be required to submit a subcontracting plan with their proposal. The plan format is outlined in

FAR 19.704.

f) Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act (29 U.S.C. § 749d)/FAR 39.2

All electronic and information technology acquired or created through this BAA must satisfy the accessibility requirements of Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act (29 U.S.C. § 749d)/FAR 39.2.

g) Intellectual Property

All proposers must provide a good faith representation that the proposer either owns or possesses the appropriate licensing rights to all intellectual property that will be utilized under the proposed effort.

(1) For Procurement Contracts

Proposers responding to this BAA requesting procurement contracts will need to complete the certifications at DFARS 252.227-7017. See http://www.darpa.mil/work-with-us/additional-baa for further information. If no restrictions are intended, the proposer should state “none.” The table below captures the requested information:

Technical Data Computer

Software To be Furnished With

Restrictions

Summary of Intended Use in the Conduct of the Research

Basis for Assertion

Asserted Rights Category

Name of Person Asserting

Restrictions

(LIST) (NARRATIVE) (LIST) (LIST) (LIST)

(2) For All Non-Procurement Contracts

Proposers responding to this BAA requesting a Grant, Cooperative Agreement, Technology Investment Agreement, or Other Transaction for Prototypes shall follow the applicable rules and regulations governing these various award instruments, but, in all cases, should appropriately identify any potential restrictions on the Government’s use of any Intellectual Property contemplated under the award instrument in question. This includes both Noncommercial Items and Commercial Items. Proposers are encouraged use a format similar to that described in Paragraph (1). above. If no restrictions are intended, then the proposer should state “NONE.”

h) System for Award Management (SAM) and Universal Identifier Requirements

All proposers must be registered in SAM unless exempt per FAR 4.1102. FAR 52.204-7, “System for Award Management” and FAR 52.204-13, “System for Award Management Maintenance” are incorporated into this BAA. See www.darpa.mil/work-with-us/additional-baa for further information.

http://www.darpa.mil/work-with-us/additional-baa

4. Submission Information

DARPA will acknowledge receipt of all submissions and assign an identifying control number that should be used in all further correspondence regarding the submission. DARPA intends to use electronic mail correspondence regarding HR001117S0004. Submissions may not be submitted by fax or e-mail; any so sent will be disregarded.

Submissions will not be returned. An electronic copy of each submission received will be retained at DARPA and all other non-required copies destroyed. A certification of destruction may be requested, provided the formal request is received by DARPA within 5 days after notification that a proposal was not selected.

For abstract and proposal submission dates, see Part I., Overview Information.

Submissions received after these dates and times may not be reviewed.

The proposal must be received at DARPA/TTO, 675 North Randolph Street, Arlington, VA 22203-2114 (Attn.: HR001117S0004) on or before March 7, 2017 at 1600 EST in order to be considered during the initial round of selections; however, proposals received after this deadline may be received and evaluated up to six months (180 days) from date of posting on FedBizOpps (https://www.fbo.gov). The ability to review and select proposals submitted after the initial round deadline specified in the BAA or due date otherwise specified by DARPA will be contingent on availability of funds. Proposers are warned that the likelihood of available funding is greatly reduced for proposals submitted after the initial closing date deadline.

a) Abstract Submission

Proposers who choose to use abstracts are strongly encouraged to submit an abstract in advance of a proposal. This procedure is intended to minimize unnecessary effort in proposal preparation and review. The time and date for submission of abstracts is specified in Part I., Overview Information. DARPA will acknowledge receipt of the submission and assign a control number that should be used in all further correspondence regarding the abstract.

Unclassified abstracts sent in response to this BAA may be submitted via DARPA's BAA Website (https://baa.darpa.mil). Please refer to the Proposal Submission section below for additional details. All abstracts submitted electronically through the DARPA BAA Submission website must be uploaded as zip files (.zip or .zipx extension). The final zip file should only contain the document(s) requested herein and must not exceed 50 MB in size. Only one zip file will be accepted per abstract; abstracts not uploaded as zip files will be rejected by DARPA.

Refer to Section VI.A.1 for DARPA response to abstract submissions.

b) Proposal Submission

Refer to Section VI.A.2 for how DARPA will notify proposers as to whether or not their proposal has been selected for potential award.

https://www.fbo.gov/

Unclassified proposals sent in response to this BAA may be submitted via DARPA's BAA Website (https://baa.darpa.mil). Note: If an account has already been created for the DARPA BAA Website, this account may be reused. If no account currently exists for the DARPA BAA Website, visit the website to complete the two-step registration process.

Submitters will need to register for an Extranet account (via the form at the URL listed above) and wait for two separate e-mails containing a username and temporary password. After accessing the Extranet, submitters may then create an account for the DARPA BAA website (via the "Register your Organization" link along the left side of the homepage), view submission instructions, and upload/finalize the proposal. Proposers using the DARPA BAA Website may encounter heavy traffic on the submission deadline date; proposers should start this process as early as possible.

All unclassified concepts submitted electronically through DARPA’s BAA Website must be uploaded as zip files (.zip or .zipx extension). The final zip file should be no greater than 50 MB in size. Only one zip file will be accepted per submission, and submissions not uploaded as zip files will be rejected by DARPA.

Technical support for DARPA's BAA Website may be reached at BAAT_Support@darpa.mil, and is typically available during regular business hours, Eastern Time.

Proposers may submit hard copies of their proposal. Proposers opting to submit hard copies must submit an original and two hard copies of the proposal and two (2) electronic copies of the proposal [in PDF (preferred)] on a CD-ROM. Each copy must be clearly labeled with HR001117S0004, proposer organization, proposal title (short title recommended), and Copy _ of

2. All hard copies must be on 8 ½ by 11 paper.

For a proposal that includes both classified and unclassified information, the proposal may be separated into an unclassified portion and a classified portion. The proposal should use the unclassified portion to the maximum extent reasonable. The unclassified portion can be submitted through the DARPA BAA Website, per the instructions above. The classified portion must be mailed separately. Should a proposer wish to submit classified information, an unclassified e-mail must be sent to the BAA mailbox requesting submission instructions from the Technical Office PSO.

When a proposal includes a classified portion, and when able according to security guidelines, we ask that proposers send an e-mail to HR001117S0004@darpa.mil as notification that there is a classified portion to the proposal. When sending the classified portion via mail according to the instructions provided after e-mailing the BAA mailbox, proposers should submit an original and two hard copies of the classified portion of their proposal and two (2) CD-ROMs containing the classified portion of the proposal as a single searchable Adobe PDF file.

Please ensure that all CDs are well-marked. Each copy of the classified portion must be clearly labeled with HR001117S0004, proposer organization, proposal title (short title recommended), and Copy _ of _.

https://baa.darpa.mil/ mailto:BAAT_Support@darpa.mil

5. Funding Restrictions

Not Applicable

6. Other Submission Requirements

DARPA will post a consolidated Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) document. To access the posting go to: http://www.darpa.mil/work-with-us/opportunities. Under the HR001117S0004 summary will be a link to the FAQ. Submit your question/s by e-mail to HR001117S0004@darpa.mil. Questions must be received by the Questions due date listed in Part I, Overview Information.

V. Application Review Information

A. Evaluation Criteria

Proposals will be evaluated using the following criteria, listed in descending order of importance:

1. Overall Scientific and Technical Merit

The proposed technical approach is innovative, feasible, achievable, and complete.

The proposed technical team has the expertise and experience to accomplish the proposed tasks.

Task descriptions and associated technical elements provided are complete and in a logical sequence with all proposed deliverables clearly defined such that a final outcome that achieves the goal can be expected as a result of award. The proposal identifies major technical risks and planned mitigation efforts are clearly defined and feasible.

The proposer's prior experience in similar efforts clearly demonstrates an ability to deliver products that meet the proposed technical performance within the proposed budget and schedule. The proposed team has the expertise to manage the cost and schedule. Similar efforts completed/ongoing by the proposer in this area are fully described including identification of other Government sponsors.

2. Potential Contribution and Relevance to the DARPA Mission

The potential contributions of the proposed effort are relevant to the national technology base. Specifically, DARPA’s mission is to make pivotal early technology investments that create or prevent strategic surprise for U.S. National Security.

The proposer clearly demonstrates its capability to transition the technology to the research, industrial, and/or operational military communities in such a way as to enhance U.S.

defense. In addition, the evaluation will take into consideration the extent to which the proposed http://www.darpa.mil/work-with-us/opportunities intellectual property (IP) rights structure will potentially impact the Government’s ability to transition the technology to the research, industrial, and operational military communities.

3. Cost Realism

The proposed costs are realistic for the technical and management approach and accurately reflect the technical goals and objectives of the solicitation. The proposed costs are consistent with the proposer's Statement of Work and reflect a sufficient understanding of the costs and level of effort needed to successfully accomplish the proposed technical approach. The costs for the prime proposer and proposed subawardees are substantiated by the details provided in the proposal (e.g., the type and number of labor hours proposed per task, the types and quantities of materials, equipment and fabrication costs, travel and any other applicable costs and the basis for the estimates).

It is expected that the effort will leverage all available relevant prior research in order to obtain the maximum benefit from the available funding. For efforts with a likelihood of commercial application, appropriate direct cost sharing may be a positive factor in the evaluation. DARPA recognizes that undue emphasis on cost may motivate proposers to offer low-risk ideas with minimum uncertainty and to staff the effort with junior personnel in order to be in a more competitive posture. DARPA discourages such cost strategies.

B. Review of Proposals

1. Review Process

It is the policy of DARPA to ensure impartial, equitable, comprehensive proposal evaluations based on the evaluation criteria listed in Section V.A and to select the source (or sources) whose offer meets the Government's technical, policy, and programmatic goals.

DARPA will conduct a scientific/technical review of each conforming proposal.

Conforming proposals comply with all requirements detailed in this BAA; proposals that fail to do so may be deemed non-conforming and may be removed from consideration. Proposals will not be evaluated against each other since they are not submitted in accordance with a common work statement. DARPA’s intent is to review proposals as soon as possible after they arrive;

however, proposals may be reviewed periodically for administrative reasons

Award(s) will be made to proposers whose proposals are determined to be the most advantageous to the Government, consistent with instructions and evaluation criteria specified in the BAA herein, and availability of funding.

2. Handling of Source Selection Information

DARPA policy is to treat all submissions as source selection information (see FAR 2.101 and 3.104), and to disclose their contents only for the purpose of evaluation. Restrictive notices notwithstanding, during the evaluation process, submissions may be handled by support contractors for administrative purposes and/or to assist with technical evaluation. All DARPA support contractors performing this role are expressly prohibited from performing DARPA-sponsored technical research and are bound by appropriate nondisclosure agreements.

Subject to the restrictions set forth in FAR 37.203(d), input on technical aspects of the proposals may be solicited by DARPA from non-Government consultants/experts who are strictly bound by the appropriate non-disclosure requirements.

3. Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information (FAPIIS)

Per 41 U.S.C. 2313, as implemented by FAR 9.103 and 2 CFR § 200.205, prior to making an award above the simplified acquisition threshold, DARPA is required to review and consider any information available through the designated integrity and performance system (currently FAPIIS).