HR001117S0007.pdf

HR001117S0007

Microsystems Technology Office Broad Agency Announcement

A MEchanically Based Antenna (AMEBA)

HR001117S0007

December 15, 2016

Table of Contents

PART I: OVERVIEW INFORMATION

PART II: FULL TEXT OF ANNOUNCEMENT

I. Funding Opportunity Description A. Background B. Program Description C. Program Structure D. Technical Areas E. Elements of a Successful Technical Proposal F. Schedule/Milestones G. Deliverables H. Government Furnished Equipment/Property/Information I. Intellectual Property

II. Award Information A. General Award Information B. Fundamental Research

III. Eligibility Information A. Eligible Applicants

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

2. Non-U.S. Organizations and/or Individuals B. Organizational Conflicts of Interest C. Cost Sharing/Matching D. Other Eligibility Criteria

1. Collaborative Efforts IV. Application and Submission Information

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

1. Abstract Format

2. Full Proposal Format

3. Proprietary Information

4. Security Information

a. Unclassified Submissions

b. Classified Submissions

5. Human Research Subjects/Animal Use

6. Approved Cost Accounting System Documentation

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

8. Grant Abstract

9. Small Business Subcontracting Plan

10. Intellectual Property

a. For Procurement Contracts

b. For All Non-Procurement Contracts

11. Patents

12. System for Award Management (SAM) and Universal Identifier Requirements

13. Funding Restrictions C. Submission Information

1. Submission Dates and Times

a. Abstract Due Date

b. Full Proposal Date

c. Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)

2. Abstract Submission Information

3. Proposal Submission Information

a. For Proposers Requesting Grants or Cooperative Agreements:

b. For Proposers Requesting Contracts or Other Transaction Agreements

c. Classified Submission Information

4. Other Submission Requirements

V. Application Review Information A. Evaluation Criteria

1. Overall Scientific and Technical Merit

2. Proposer’s Capabilities and/or Related Experience

3. Potential Contribution and Relevance to the DARPA Mission

4. Cost and Schedule Realism

B. Review and Selection Process

1. Review Process

2. Handling of Source Selection Information

3. Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information (FAPIIS)

VI. Award Administration Information A. Selection Notices

1. Abstracts

2. Proposals

B. Administrative and National Policy Requirements

1. Meeting and Travel Requirements

2. FAR and DFARS Clauses

3. Controlled Unclassified Information (CUI) on Non-DoD Information Systems

4. Representations and Certifications

5. Terms and Conditions

C. Reporting D. Electronic Systems

1. Wide Area Work Flow (WAWF)

2. i-Edison

VII. Agency Contacts VIII. Other Information

A. Proposers Day

ATTACHMENT 1: Cost Volume Proposer Checklist ATTACHMENT 2: Proposal Summary Slide Template

PART I: OVERVIEW INFORMATION

Federal Agency Name – Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), Microsystems Technology Office (MTO) Funding Opportunity Title – A MEchanically Based Antenna (AMEBA)

Announcement Type – Initial Announcement Funding Opportunity Number – HR001117S0007 Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers (CFDA) – 12.910 Research and

Technology Development Dates (All times listed herein are Eastern Time) o Posting Date: December 15, 2016 o Proposers Day: January 6, 2017 (See Section VIII, “Other Information”) o Abstract Due Date: January 17, 2017 o FAQ Submission Deadline: March 8, 2017 o Proposal Due Date: March 22, 2017 o Estimated period of performance start: August 8, 2017

Funding Opportunity: DARPA seeks innovative proposals to develop mechanically-driven transmitters producing radio frequency (RF) signals at carrier frequencies below 30 kHz. The program will develop the basic technologies and demonstrate the feasibility of low-size, weight, and power (SWaP) transmitters satisfying the requirements of representative DoD missions. 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.

Anticipated Funding Available for Award: It is anticipated that $23M of total funding will be awarded across all technical areas, approximately partitioned as follows:

o $9.5M for Technical Area 1 (TA1), three phases, 45 months;

o $13.5M for Technical Area 2 (TA2), three phases, 45 months.

Anticipated individual awards – Multiple awards are anticipated in all Technical Areas.

Anticipated funding type - 6.1 Types of instruments that may be awarded – Procurement contract, grant, cooperative agreement or other transaction.

Agency contact:

o Dr. Troy Olsson, Program Manager BAA Coordinator: HR001117S0007@darpa.mil

DARPA/MTO

ATTN: HR001117S0007

675 North Randolph Street Arlington, VA 22203-2114 mailto:name@darpa.mil

PART II: FULL TEXT OF ANNOUNCEMENT

I. Funding Opportunity Description

The Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) often selects its research efforts through the Broad Agency Announcement (BAA) process. This BAA is being issued, and any resultant selection will be made, using the procedures under Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 6.102(d)(2) and 35.016 and 2 C.F.R. § 200.203. Any negotiations and/or awards will use procedures under FAR 15.4, Contract Pricing. Proposals received as a result of this BAA shall be evaluated in accordance with evaluation criteria specified herein through a scientific review process.

DARPA BAAs are posted on the Federal Business Opportunities (FedBizOpps) website, http://www.fbo.gov/, and, as applicable, the Grants.gov website at http://www.grants.gov/. The following information is for those wishing to respond to the BAA.

The Microsystems Technology Office at DARPA seeks innovative proposals to develop mechanically-driven transmitters producing RF signals at carrier frequencies below 30 kHz. The program will develop the basic technologies and demonstrate the feasibility of low-SWaP transmitters satisfying the requirements of representative DoD missions. 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. Background

The A MEchanically Based Antenna (AMEBA) program explores a fundamentally new approach of building antenna transmitters based on mechanical motion of magnetic dipoles and electric monopoles/dipoles to induce time-varying magnetic fields. The program will develop mechanically-driven transmitters to produce radio frequency (RF) signals at carrier frequencies below 30 kHz.

Radio frequencies at the very low end of the electromagnetic spectrum are attractive for a number of defense applications. Ultra-Low Frequencies (ULF), occupying the range from 300 Hz to 3 kHz, are particularly useful for penetration of signals through conductive media such as water, metal, soil, rock, and building materials. Penetration is possible due to the relatively large skin depth in these materials which grows as the carrier frequency is reduced. The Very Low Frequency (VLF, 3-30 kHz) band is likewise of interest for defense communications because signals in this frequency range couple to the ionosphere-ground waveguide surrounding the Earth. The waveguide can facilitate the long range propagation of signals around the globe with very little attenuation. However, the free-space wavelengths of electromagnetic fields at ULF and VLF frequencies measure tens to thousands of kilometers in length, resulting in either very large or severely inefficient transmitter structures when constructed using conventional antenna approaches. Such transmitters are impractical in many operational scenarios, especially those requiring mobility. In contrast, the transmitters developed in AMEBA will consume less than 20 W http://www.fbo.gov/ http://www.grants.gov/ of power and weigh less than 10 kg, making them suitable for man-portable wireless communications. Presently, such capabilities do not exist.

The AMEBA program will invest in basic research and development towards low-loss, precision controlled mechanical RF transmitter systems. AMEBA will also develop electric and magnetic materials that enable practical realizations of the mechanical transmitter concepts and designs. The program will develop the basic technologies and demonstrate the feasibility of low-SWaP transmitters satisfying the requirements of representative DoD missions.

B. Program Description

AMEBA takes a radically different approach from traditional electrical current based transmitter antennas. A baseline implementation employs electrets (an electrically polarized material created by trapping fixed charges in a dielectric media) or permanent magnets which are then moved mechanically. Preliminary survey and analysis of possible approaches indicates that implementations based on oscillatory or rotational motion of electrically or magnetically polarized bulk materials, or on mechanically induced reorientation of material polarization have the greatest potential of meeting the program goals. Therefore, such mechanically mediated implementations are broadly referenced throughout this BAA. However, the overall program goals and the program metrics defined in Section I.D are not specific to these approaches. Alternative methods will be considered provided that they clearly demonstrate meeting the AMEBA goals as delineated in Section I.D, namely:

Produce steady-state magnetic fields levels at a specified distance from the transmitter;

Efficiently modulate the produced field to achieve wireless transmission at DoD relevant data rates, as specified;

Meet the system SWaP and operational requirements, as specified in this BAA.

The AMEBA transmitter will exploit the magnetic component of the electromagnetic (EM) field because it is the magnetic field which is capable of penetrating conductive media. Furthermore, in the frequency ranges of interest, the background clutter for the magnetic field is lower than that of the electric field. Thus, the goal of AMEBA is to maximize the magnetic component of the EM field, regardless of the source mechanism.

AMEBA will focus on developing low-SWaP transmitters optimized for the strength of the magnetic field produced. The following research topics are specifically excluded under the program:

Pulsed systems – The program aims to develop continuously operating transmitters.

Solutions relying on discharging energy in short intervals of time or any other operation that does not meet the average steady-state magnetic field goals of the program will not be considered.

Cryogenically cooled systems – The program aims to develop transmitters with optimal overall efficiency and SWaP characteristics. Solutions requiring cooling well below room temperature will not be considered. Temperature control to maintain an operational temperature range is permitted, as long as the power consumption is included in the overall system power budget specified in the BAA.

Receivers – Magnetic receivers with excellent sensitivity and clutter suppression in the frequency range of interest already exist. AMEBA will only focus on transmitter development. A baseline receiver with 1 fT/√Hz noise and clutter floor can be assumed in any estimates or simulations for the purpose of this proposal.

A successful AMEBA proposal will include in-depth analysis and identify technical solutions to the critical challenges discussed in this BAA. The proposals must be comprehensive, addressing all the anticipated challenges for a complete AMEBA transmitter. Partial solutions will not be considered.

C. Program Structure

AMEBA is a 45-month program, broken into three, progressively more difficult phases. Phase 1 (Base) will be 18 months in duration, Phase 2 (Option) will be 15 months, and Phase 3 (Option) will be 12 months.

AMEBA is divided into two technical areas: TA1: Penetrating RF (< 3 kHz) and TA2: Propagating RF (3 kHz – 30 kHz). A single proposal may address:

(a) Only Technical Area 1 (Penetrating RF)

(b) Only Technical Area 2 (Propagating RF)

(c) Both Technical Areas 1 and 2 (Penetrating and Propagating RF)

D. Technical Areas

Technical Area 1: Penetrating RF (< 3 kHz). There are many DoD-relevant applications within this frequency range that can benefit from the penetrating properties of low-frequency EM fields.

Examples include, but are not limited to:

Underwater communications at distances to hundreds of meters;

Through-earth communications at distances of hundreds of meters though soil and rock of heterogeneous composition and moisture content.

These near-field applications, generally operating below 3 kHz, drive the scope and the goals of Technical Area 1: Penetrating RF. The three significant challenges for transmitters at these frequencies are:

(a) Generating enough field strength at the location of the receiver such that the signals are sufficiently above the receiver’s noise floor and the background clutter;

(b) Efficiently modulating the carrier RF frequency in order to achieve useful information bandwidth; and

(c) Low SWaP for the transmitter package.

These challenges cannot be addressed by applying traditional antenna design approaches (e.g., monopole, dipole and loop antennas). Such approaches will result in transmitter systems with large physical dimensions and substantial power consumption. The AMEBA approach will enable realization of transmitters with size and power consumption compatible with man-portable applications and capable of enabling communication links through conductive or partially conductive media.

Technical Area 2: Propagating RF (3 kHz – 30 kHz). This frequency range, referred to as VLF, is well-known for the ability of EM waves to couple to the naturally occurring Earth-ionosphere waveguide. This coupling enables propagation of signals with very little attenuation around the globe. The Earth’s waveguide is formed between the ground and the different layers of the ionosphere at 75-85 kilometers above the Earth’s surface. At 10 kHz, the EM wavelength measures 30 km and the far-field starts at ~5 km from the source. Once the VLF EM field is coupled to the waveguide, it can propagate over very long distances, which allows over-the-horizon messaging.

This is in contrast to high-frequencies that require line-of-sight, relaying or bouncing off the ionosphere. The AMEBA approach will enable the deployment of transmitters with size and power consumption compatible with man-portable applications and capable of closing communication links at distances greater than 100 km. The far-field applications, generally in the 3-30 kHz frequency range, define the scope and the goals of Technical Area 2: Propagating RF.

Each of the Technical Areas and their corresponding phases have defined quantitative goals driven by achieving DoD-relevant performance in portable transmitters for low-frequency RF. Note that the metrics for size, weight, and power defined below are inclusive of all components required for a complete transmitter solution, as illustrated in Figure 1. No component will be exempt from these requirements.

AMEBA TransmitterBattery or Power Supply

2W (TA1)

20W (TA2)

Data Port Specify

Interface and Input Format

RF at ULF or VLF

Entire transmitter system subject to BAA size, weight, and power metrics

Power RF Electronics

Matching Networks

Emitting Materials

Mechanical Drivers

Antenna Structures

Thermal Control

Anything Else Required

Packaging and Reinforcement

Figure 1. The AMEBA transmitter has two inputs, one from a power source and another from a data port supplying the signal to be modulated. Using these two inputs AMEBA produces RF at the targeted frequency band with the communications data modulated onto the RF carrier. All required components to achieve the transmitter operation are subject to the SWaP requirements by Technical Area and by Phase as defined in this BAA. (The list of components is notional: none of them are required, and there may be others, not listed, depending on the proposed approach.)

Technical Area 1 (TA1): Penetrating RF (< 3 kHz) The goal of TA1 is to demonstrate an RF transmitter at 1 kHz and lower with a system mass not to exceed 10 kg and a total power consumption not to exceed 2 W. TA1 is broken into three phases with progressively more difficult end-of-phase metrics. Phase 1 will be 18 months in duration, Phase 2 will be 15 months, and Phase 3 will be 12 months. Weight and volume metrics are for the transmitter only and do not include the power source.

Phase 1 – The goal of phase 1 is to demonstrate a 1 fT magnetic field strength at a 1 km free-space distance from the transmitter. This field strength is intended to demonstrate the capability of messaging underground with ~100 meters of through-earth propagation. The operational temperature range should include small variations around room temperature (typical indoor environment). No ruggedization is expected at the conclusion of Phase 1. Additional metrics are detailed in Table 1 below.

Phase 2 – The goal of phase 2 is to demonstrate a 10 fT magnetic field strength at a 1 km free-space distance from the transmitter. This field strength is intended to demonstrate the capability for messaging underwater with ~30 meters through seawater propagation. The operational temperature range should include small variations around room temperature (typical indoor environment). The transmitter should be able to maintain integrity during transport while the system is not in operation. To fulfill this requirement, additional securing/locking mechanisms are allowed. Additional metrics are detailed in Table 1 below.

Phase 3 – The goal of phase 3 is to demonstrate a 100 fT magnetic field strength at a 1 km free-space distance from the transmitter. This field strength is intended to demonstrate the end-of-program capability of messaging underwater at up to 100 m and messaging underground at up to 600 m. The operational temperature range required is 0-70C. The transmitter should be able to maintain integrity during transport/stowage at up to 2 g peak acceleration. Additional metrics are detailed in Table 1 below.

Table 1. Technical Area 1 (TA1): Penetrating RF – Program Metrics Phase 1 2 3

Frequency Range (kHz) 1 0.75 – 1 0.1 – 1

Steady State Magnetic Field Produced at 1 km (fT) 1 10 100

Maximum Steady State Input Power (W) 2 2 2

Maximum Input Energy to Reach Steady State Operation (J) 200 2,000 5,000

Modulation Rate (Hz/sec)* 1 10 50

Modulation Energy (J/Hz)* 0.05 0.05 0.01

Max. Linear Dimension (cm) 15 30 60

Max. Volume (cm3) 30 300 3,000

Maximum Weight (kg) 3 3 10

Minimum Continuous Operating Time (hr) 1 1 1

Minimum Operating Lifetime (days) 1 10 100

Operating Temperature Range (C) 20-30 20-30 0-70

Peak Acceleration (g) 2

* If the proposed modulation is not based on frequency modulation (FM), define an equivalent metric and discuss the achievable data rates.

Technical Area 2 (TA2): Propagating RF (3 kHz – 30 kHz) The goal of TA2 is to demonstrate an RF transmitter in the VLF frequency band with a system power consumption not exceeding 20 W. TA2 is broken into three phases with progressively more difficult end-of-phase metrics. Phase 1 will be 18 months in duration, Phase 2 will be 15 months, and Phase 3 will be 12 months. Weight and volume metrics are for the transmitter only and do not include the power source.

Phase 1 – The goal of phase 1 is to demonstrate a 1 fT magnetic field strength at a 1 km free-space distance from the transmitter. The operational temperature range should include small variations around room temperature (typical indoor environment). No ruggedization is expected at the conclusion of Phase 1. Additional metrics are detailed in Table 2 below.

Phase 2 – The goal of phase 2 is to demonstrate a 1 fT magnetic field strength at a 10 km free-space distance from the transmitter. This field strength is intended to demonstrate a capability for voice communication at 1 km in free-space. The operational temperature range should include small variations around room temperature (typical indoor environment). The transmitter should be able to maintain integrity during transport while the system is not in operation. To fulfill this requirement, additional securing/locking mechanisms are allowed. Additional metrics are detailed in Table 2 below.

Phase 3 – The goal of phase 3 is to demonstrate a 100 fT magnetic field strength at a 10 km free-space distance from the transmitter. This field strength is intended to demonstrate an end-of-program capability of messaging at up to 150 km, and voice communications at up to 100 km in free-space. The operational temperature range required is 0-70C. The transmitter should be able to maintain integrity during transport/stowage at up to 2 g peak acceleration. Additional metrics are detailed in Table 2 below.

Table 2. Technical Area 2 (TA2): Propagating RF – Program Metrics Phase 1 2 3

Minimum Frequency (kHz) 5 5 10

Maximum Frequency (kHz) 30 30 30

Steady State Magnetic Field Produced (fT) 1 (@ 1 km) 1 (@ 10 km) 100 (@ 10 km)

Maximum Steady State Input Power (W) 20 20 20 Maximum Input Energy to Reach Steady State Operation (J) 500 5,000 20,000

Modulation Rate (Hz/sec)* 10 100 500

Modulation Energy (J/Hz)* 0.05 0.03 0.02

Max. Linear Dimension (cm) 15 40 60

Max. Volume (cm3) 30 300 3,000

Maximum Weight (kg) 3 3 10

Minimum Continuous Operating Time (hr) 1 1 1

Minimum Operating Lifetime (days) 1 10 100

Operating Temperature Range (C) 20-30 20-30 0-70

Peak Acceleration (g) 2

* If the proposed modulation is not based on frequency modulation (FM), define an equivalent metric and discuss the achievable data rates.

Steady state magnetic field strength measurements:

This guidance is for both TA1 and TA2. The field strength metric in Tables 1 and 2 refers to Root Mean Square (RMS) values. All magnetic field measurements must be performed with a calibrated magnetometer. If test ranges and/or sufficiently sensitive magnetometers are not available to all potential performers, the performers will be allowed to take measurements at closer ranges and extrapolate the results. At a minimum, the performers will be required to measure the magnetic fields strength at distances from the transmitter as follows (Figure 2):

5 m, 10 m, and 30 meters in Phase 1;

10 m, 30 m, and 100 meters in Phase 2; AND 10 m, 30 m, 100 m, 300 m, and 1,000 meters in Phase 3.

Figure 2. Measurement of magnetic field strength as a function of distance from the transmitter and extrapolating the result with a free-space propagation model.

Circled numbers correspond to program phases.

Measurements at additional intermediate distances are encouraged. Performers with access to test ranges are encouraged to perform measurments at or beyond the distances in the BAA specifications in Tables 1 and 2 in addition to the required tests above. From the measured points, the magnetic field strength should be extrapolated and verified against the metrics in Tables 1 and 2 using applicable free-space models.1 The model used should be included and justified in the proposal.

E. Elements of a Successful Technical Proposal

Successful proposals must address the following research questions in sufficient depth to demonstrate understanding of the fundamental physics challenges and practical limitations of their proposed program:

a) What is the physics-based mechanism that generates the electric/magnetic field at the transmitting element and how does your approach benchmark against a traditional electric dipole or a current loop to produce an equivalent field strength? Specify the amount of energy required to reach steady state at the designed RF carrier frequency.

Preliminary physics-based analysis has shown that utilizing permanent polarization/ magnetization in materials with mechanical reorientation of the resulting dipole at RF frequencies can be orders of magnitude more energy efficient in creating time varying electromagnetic (EM) dipoles when compared to using electrical current in a conductor. For example, estimates show that the power required to replicate the static magnetic field found in

1 One suggested model can be found in Wangsness, R. K., Electromagnetic Fields, 2-nd Edition, pp 477-486, Wiley & Sons (1986) a readily available 3,000 cm3 NdFeB magnet using current in a coil of similar dimensions exceeds 100 kW. Oscillating the polarization of a magnet through mechanical motion is predicted to consume many orders of magnitudes less power at AMEBA size scales.

While permitted, any proposed approach not employing the baseline mechanical concept must be thoroughly evaluated with respect to efficiency, including a quantitative analysis supported by modeling and simulation results with clearly defined assumptions.

b) What innovation is required in your program in order to realize the approach proposed in a) above?

Discuss any advancements required in materials development, manufacturing methods, reproducibility, packaging, handling, and storage. Provide direct and quantitative comparison to currently available, state-of-the-art materials in terms of the amount of dipole moment per unit volume and the lifetime of the polarized state of the material. Does the material require periodic reconditioning/recharging? How often and at what energy cost? Describe the anticipated recharging procedure compatible with the execution of a typical DoD mission.

Define the critical milestones in material development and associated methods by phase of the program and outline a clear plan for achieving these milestones.

c) How would the proposed solution scale to progressively meet the AMEBA program requirements by phase? Conceptually, how would it scale beyond the final program goal if more resources are allowed based on a less SWaP restrictive DoD application? What is ultimately limiting the scalability of the proposed approach?

In some mechanical implementations it may require less input power to actuate an array of smaller devices when compared to a single large mechanical structure of equivalent volume.

If the proposed approach employs such arraying, the proposal must address the degree of uniformity and synchronization required in the array.

Any proposed approach not employing the baseline mechanical concept, while permitted, must be thoroughly evaluated with respect to scalability including a quantitative analysis supported by modeling and simulation results with clearly defined assumptions.

d) What is your modulation approach to achieve the required data transmission and how is it implemented?

It is expected that elements of an AMEBA transmitter, as specified by the program metrics, will exhibit exceptionally high quality factors which could limit the achievable information bandwidth. Identify the expected challenges and proposed solutions for achieving the required communications data rate in such a transmitter. Specify the modulation format used in your proposed approach and the achievable data rate (in bits-per-second) transmitted. Quantify the energy required to transmit a bit of information and compare to the steady state power consumption.

Any proposed approach under both technical areas must be thoroughly evaluated with respect to these classical limitations to include quantitative analysis supported by modeling and simulations with clearly defined assumptions.

e) How does your approach couple energy to the radiation field (TA2 only)?

The primary objective in the VLF band is to effectively couple the energy from the mechanical source to the radiation far-field. Traditional electrically small antennas are characterized by very low radiation resistance and high reactance. The reactance is typically addressed by introducing an additional impedance-matching circuit. At VLF frequencies, however, the additional and unavoidable ohmic resistance introduced by the impedance matching inductors exacerbates the already intractable radiation resistance problem. In electrically small antennas, these two factors are responsible for producing highly inefficient antennas.

The preliminary analysis of a baseline mechanical system for AMEBA exhibits an entirely different parameter space for impedance matching to free space. For example, a rotating shaft with electric or magnetic polarization can be designed with an almost vanishing reactive component, thereby allowing the transmitter to operate at very low frequencies. In addition, the motional resistance, which manifests as mechanical damping, can be extremely low with state-of-the-art low-loss mechanical suspensions. With the low reactance and damping benefits combined, a mechanical transmitter is projected to be orders of magnitude more efficient at coupling energy to the far-field when compared to a traditional small VLF antenna approach.

Any proposed approach not employing the baseline mechanical concept, while permitted, must be thoroughly evaluated in the context of impedance matching to include quantitative analysis supported by modeling and simulations with clearly defined assumptions.

F. Schedule/Milestones

AMEBA is a 45-month program with an anticipated start in August 2017. Program kickoff and review sessions are mandatory and represent an opportunity to interact with the Government on planned work, specifics of the technical approach, and any technical or programmatic items of concern. The end-of phase reviews will be scheduled within the last month of the corresponding program phase. In addition to the review sessions, there will be:

A preliminary project review approximately four months after the kickoff date. The review will be held between the Performer and the Government to review in detail the AMEBA approach and to discuss any potential risks to meeting program metrics going forward. To this end, it is expected that the Performer will have completed necessary diligence in validating the considered approach, such as simulations, operational environments, assumptions, and risks/mitigation strategies for completing all phases of the program.

A detailed mid-phase project review to be held approximately seven months after the kickoff date as part of a program wide meeting. It is expected that any issues arising from earlier reviews will be resolved by in sufficient detail by the mid-phase review to proceed to construction of hardware and demonstration of Phase 1 metrics.

Technical reports and teleconferences every quarter.

Monthly financial reports.

Occasional site visits by Government staff.

G. Deliverables

For all technical areas, expected deliverables include quarterly technical and monthly financial update reports. Upon the completion of each phase, Performers in both technical areas must provide to the Government reports covering, a) a description of the principles of operation of the AMEBA system, b) component lab and field test results, and c) charts and explanations of how well the system meets, exceeds, or falls short of specified program goals (as described in this

BAA).

Performers may, but will not be required to, deliver working hardware that is developed under the program.

H. Government Furnished Equipment/Property/Information

No Government Furnished Equipment, Property, or Information will be provided.

I. Intellectual Property

Any use of proposer-defined intellectual property (patents, proprietary information, etc.) should be clearly marked as such within the proposal. Include all proprietary claims to the results, prototypes, intellectual property, or systems supporting the effort 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.10.

II. Award Information

A. General Award Information

Multiple 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 at the end of one or more of the phases, as applicable.

Awards under this BAA will be made to proposers on the basis of the evaluation criteria listed below (see section labeled “Application Review Information,” Sec. V.), and program balance to provide overall value to the Government. 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.2., “Representations and Certifications”). The Government reserves the right to remove proposers from award consideration should the parties fail to reach agreement on award terms, conditions and cost/price within a reasonable time or the proposer fails to timely provide requested additional information. 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 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.

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 can be met by proposers intending to perform fundamental research and does not anticipate applying publication restrictions of any kind to individual awards that result from this BAA.

Notwithstanding the above, the Government shall have sole discretion to select award instrument type and to negotiate all instrument terms and conditions with selectees.

III. Eligibility Information

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

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

A. Eligible Applicants

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

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.

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.

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.

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.

D. Other Eligibility Criteria

1. Collaborative Efforts

Collaborative efforts/teaming are strongly encouraged. As the program emphasizes multidisciplinary approaches, a successful proposal must demonstrate sufficient expertise in all requisite technical specialties. At a minimum, excellent credentials must be demonstrated in:

Electromagnetics and ULF/VLF communications in particular;

Mechanical and electromechanical systems and in particular low-loss suspensions, actuation and arraying with emphasis on uniformity and synchronous actuation;

Advanced materials and in particular ferromagnetic, electret (charged dielectrics), piezoelectric (including, but not limited to pyroelectric and ferroelectric), and/or multiferroic materials.

Additional areas of expertise may be required depending on the specifics of the proposed technical approach. In all cases, complete and self-sufficient teams are required to support the full scope of the effort, since partial solutions will not be accepted.

IV. Application and Submission Information

PROPOSERS ARE CAUTIONED THAT EVALUATION RATINGS MAY BE LOWERED

AND/OR PROPOSALS REJECTED IF PROPOSAL PREPARATION (PROPOSAL FORMAT,

CONTENT, ETC.) AND/OR SUBMITTAL INSTRUCTIONS ARE NOT FOLLOWED.

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

Prior to submitting a full proposal, proposers are encouraged to first submit an abstract, which will be subject to review and feedback by the Government Team.

1. Abstract Format

Abstracts should follow the format described below in this section. The cover sheet should be clearly marked “ABSTRACT” and the total length of Section II, “Abstract Details,” should not exceed 8 pages, including all figures, tables, and charts. All pages shall be printed on 8-1/2 by 11-inch paper with type not smaller than 12 point. Smaller font may be used for figures, tables and charts. No formal transmittal letter is required. All abstracts must be written in English.

http://www.darpa.mil/

Section I. Administrative

A. Cover sheet to include:

(1) BAA number (HR001117S0007);

(2) Technical area(s);

(3) Lead Organization submitting abstract;

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

Large Organization, Small Disadvantaged Organization, Other Small Organization, HBCU, MI, Other Educational, Other Nonprofit;

(5) Proposer’s internal 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 (+4), telephone, fax (if available), electronic mail;

(9) Administrative point of contact to include:

Salutation, last name, first name, street address, city, state, zip code (+4), telephone, fax (if available), electronic mail;

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

(11) Date proposal abstract was submitted.

(Note: An official transmittal letter is not required when submitting an abstract.)

Section II. Abstract Details

B. Innovative Claims Summary of innovative claims for the proposed research. This section is the centerpiece of the abstract and should succinctly describe the uniqueness and benefits of the proposed approach relative to the current state-of-art alternate approaches. This section should be no more than 1-page long.

C. Technical Approach Technical rationale, technical approach, and constructive plan for accomplishment of technical goals in support of innovative claims and deliverable production. The abstract must provide a detailed analysis of how the proposed approach will meet the DARPA metrics and goals. The abstract must address a complete solution; partial solutions will not be considered. All proposed solutions, including approaches not employing the baseline mechanical transmitter concept, must be thoroughly evaluated with respect to efficiency, scalability, data-rate, final system SWaP, and the ability to deliver the requisite magnetic field levels at the distances specified in the BAA metrics tables. Include as much quantitative analysis supported by modeling and simulations as possible with clearly defined assumptions.

This section should touch on the “Elements Of A Successful Technical Proposal” listed in Section I.E.

D. Teaming Plan

A clearly defined organization chart for the program team which includes, as applicable: (1) the programmatic relationship of the team members, (2) the unique capabilities of organization and team members, and (3) allocation of the requested funds among team members. The proposal must demonstrate sufficient expertise in all requisite technical specialties to support the full scope of the effort. This section should be no more than 1-page long.

2. Full Proposal Format

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

Volume I – Technical and Management Proposal (3 sections), and Volume II – Cost Proposal (4 sections). The submission of other supporting materials along with the proposals is strongly discouraged and will not be considered for review. All pages shall be printed on 8-1/2 by 11-inch paper with type not smaller than 12 point. Smaller font may be used for figures, tables and charts.

The page limitation for full proposals includes all figures, tables, and charts.

Section II of Volume I, Technical and Management Proposal, shall not exceed 20 pages for a single TA1 or TA2 proposal, and 25 pages for proposals combining TA1 and TA2. There is no page limit for Volume II, Cost Proposal. All full proposals must be written in English.

A summary slide of the proposed effort, in PowerPoint format, should be submitted with the proposal. A template slide is provided as Attachment 2 to the BAA. Submit this PowerPoint file in addition to Volumes I and II of your full proposal. This summary slide does not count towards the total page count.

Proposals combining TA1 and TA2 MUST be easily separable in case the Government chooses to exercise partial awards. Therefore, such proposals must:

Contain a separate and independent Statement of Work for Each Technical Area.

Contain separate stand alone cost estimates for each Technical Area by Phase.

(NOTE: This estimate is in addition to the full cost proposal for a combined TA1+TA2 that includes any cost savings to the government realized by funding both technical areas in a single proposal.)

a. Volume I, Technical and Management Proposal

Section I. Administrative

A. Cover sheet to include:

(1) BAA number (HR001117S0007);

(2) Technical area(s);

(3) Lead Organization submitting proposal;

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

Large Organization, Small Disadvantaged Organization, Other Small Organization, HBCU, MI, Other Educational, Other Nonprofit;

(5) Proposer’s internal 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 (+4), telephone, fax (if available), electronic mail;

(9) Administrative point of contact to include:

Salutation, last name, first name, street address, city, state, zip code (+4), telephone, fax (if available), electronic mail;

(10) Total funds requested from DARPA, the per phase and per technical area breakdown of funds requested, and the amount of cost share (if any); AND

(11) Date proposal was submitted.

B. Official transmittal letter.

The transmittal letter should identify the BAA number, the proposal by name, and the proposal reference number (if any), and should be signed by an individual who is authorized to submit proposals to the Government.

Section II. Detailed Proposal Information

A. Executive Summary A one-page executive summary outlining the proposed effort. The executive summary must contain:

1. A high-level overview of the proposed work;

2. Metrics used to define success;

3. Milestones (both DARPA-mandated and proposed-defined);

4. Operational scenarios relevant to the proposed approach; AND

5. Innovations made by the proposed work.

B. Technical Approach A detailed description of the technical approach, technical rationale, and constructive plan for accomplishment of technical goals in support of the innovative claims and deliverables. This section is the centerpiece of the proposal and should succinctly describe the uniqueness and benefits of the proposed approach. Proposers must include adequate detail and justification for any performer-defined metrics and goals.