HR001118S0007.pdf

Broad Agency Announcement Agile Small-Satellite Experimental Telescope (ASSET)

STRATEGIC TECHNOLOGY OFFICE

HR001118S0007

November 30, 2017

ASSET

TABLE OF CONTENTS

PART I: OVERVIEW INFORMATION

PART II: FULL TEXT OF ANNOUNCEMENT

1. FUNDING OPPORTUNITY DESCRIPTION

1.1. PROGRAM OVERVIEW

1.2. PROGRAM TECHNICAL OBJECTIVES

1.3. PROGRAM SCHEDULE AND BUDGET

1.4. PROGRAM METRICS

2. AWARD INFORMATION

2.1. GENERAL AWARD INFORMATION

2.2. FUNDAMENTAL RESEARCH

3. ELIGIBILITY INFORMATION

3.1. ELIGIBLE APPLICANTS

3.2. ORGANIZATIONAL CONFLICTS OF INTEREST

3.3. COST SHARING/MATCHING

3.4. OTHER ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

4. APPLICATION AND SUBMISSION INFORMATION

4.1. ADDRESS TO REQUEST APPLICATION PACKAGE

4.2. CONTENT AND FORM OF APPLICATION SUBMISSION

4.3. FORMATTING CHARACTERISTICS

4.4. SUBMISSION DATES AND TIMES

4.5. FUNDING RESTRICTIONS

4.6. OTHER SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS

5. APPLICATION REVIEW INFORMATION

5.1. EVALUATION CRITERIA

5.2. REVIEW AND SELECTION PROCESS

6. AWARD ADMINISTRATION INFORMATION

6.1. SELECTION NOTICES AND NOTIFICATIONS

6.2. ADMINISTRATIVE AND NATIONAL POLICY REQUIREMENTS

6.3. REPORTING

6.4. ELECTRONIC SYSTEMS

7. AGENCY CONTACTS

8. OTHER INFORMATION

8.1. INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY

9. APPENDIX 1: PROPOSAL SLIDE SUMMARY

10. APPENDIX 2: VOLUME 1 COVER SHEET TEMPLATE

VOLUME I, TECHNICAL AND MANAGEMENT PROPOSAL

11. APPENDIX 3: VOLUME 2 COVER SHEET, CHECKLIST AND SAMPLE

TEMPLATES

PART I: OVERVIEW INFORMATION

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

Funding Opportunity Title – Agile Small-Satellite Experimental Telescope Announcement Type – Initial Announcement Funding Opportunity Number – HR001118S0007 Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers (CFDA) – Not Applicable Dates o Posting Date: November 30, 2017 o Proposal Abstract Due Date and Time: December 21, 2017, 4pm (ET) o Questions Due Date: January 4, 2018, 4pm (ET) o Proposal Due Date and Time: February 2, 2018, 4pm (ET) o BAA Closing Date: May 29, 2018

Concise description of the funding opportunity – This program will develop low-cost agile optical telescopes for use on small-satellites

Number of Awards – Multiple awards are anticipated Types of instruments that may be awarded - Procurement contract or other transaction Agency contact o Points of Contact The BAA Coordinator for this effort may be reached at:

HR001118S0007@darpa.mil

DARPA/STO

ATTN: HR001118S0007

675 North Randolph Street Arlington, VA 22203-2114 mailto:HR001118S0007@darpa.mil

PART II: FULL TEXT OF ANNOUNCEMENT

1. FUNDING OPPORTUNITY DESCRIPTION

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

The Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) is soliciting innovative proposals to develop infrared telescopes with size, weight, and low recurring cost suitable for use on small satellites, and which also have the capability for rapidly steering the telescope instantaneous field-of-view over a large angular field-of regard. Proposed research should investigate innovative approaches that enable revolutionary advances in the technology available for small-satellite remote sensing systems. Specifically excluded is research that primarily results in evolutionary improvements to the existing state of practice.

1.1. PROGRAM OVERVIEW

Small satellites operating in low-earth-orbit can image with higher resolution and with smaller aperture optics than those in higher orbits. Smaller optics and a smaller satellite bus lead to lower cost satellites that can be designed and delivered on shorter time scales. Providing persistent, on-demand remote sensing from low-earth orbit can require a large number (e.g., 100) of satellites, which makes it imperative to keep the satellite cost low (for example, ~$5M recurring cost) so that a large constellation will be affordable. To realize imaging satellites in this cost range, the sensor payload cost must be kept in the few million dollar range and the payload size and weight must be small to keep the satellite bus cost low.

Competing with the objective of low cost and small size is the need to achieve high performance from the sensors. Performance includes not only factors like spatial resolution, which drives the need for larger diffraction-limited apertures, but also capabilities to rapidly re-image areas widely distributed over the field-of-regard available to a given satellite. For example, a satellite might be able to perform imaging out to fairly large off-nadir angles (for example, within a 60 degree half-angle cone around the nadir vector), but a practical telescope design that is affordable (and also has an affordable focal plane) might provide diffraction-limited staring imagery over only a few degrees of field-of-view. There are tradeoffs between the angular field-of-view of a telescope, the effective use of the aperture size (and weight), achievable resolution, and availability and cost of focal planes. Today, microsatellites with staring, visible imaging sensors generally have optical telescopes which are re-pointed over a much larger field-of-regard by body-steering a fixed telescope using a satellite’s reaction wheels or control-moment gyros.

While this works well in many scenarios, and is simple and cost-effective, it is not satisfactory if the sensor must be rapidly re-directed to several different locations over the large field-of-regard.

For example, a single satellite may have a field-of-regard on the earth of a few thousand km in diameter, and there may be many spatially-separated locations within that field-of-regard that require frequent re-imaging. Rather than relying exclusively on re-pointing the spacecraft bus, it would be advantageous to have an optical system design in which the line-of-sight of the telescope could be rapidly repointed. A number of approaches are possible in principle, including moving the telescope on a gimbal, use of scan mirrors, and other methods. However, at the current time none of these technologies have been developed to a level of maturity where a small-satellite system designer has a low-cost agile pointing telescope in the “technology toolbox” ready for use in either demonstration or operational missions.

The purpose of the ASSET program described in this BAA is to design and demonstrate telescopes with an agile steerable field-of-view and which are affordable and suitable for use on small satellites. Successful demonstration of prototypes will reduce the risk for using this technology on future experimental or operational satellite systems. If these agile telescopes perform well and can be manufactured at low cost, they will transform the types of missions that are feasible on small satellites.

1.2. PROGRAM TECHNICAL OBJECTIVES

The objective of this program will be to build a prototype agile telescope, designed for use on small satellites, whose instantaneous field-of-view can be rapidly steered over a much larger field-of-regard. The best design for a rapidly steerable optical telescope depends on a number of mission-dependent system design requirements such as the operating wavelength and bandwidth, desired field-of-regard, step-and-settle times, required resolution and aperture size, allowable mass and volume of the optics, tolerable reaction moments that can be imparted to the spacecraft, and cost.

While there are many interesting DoD applications for agile-steering optical payloads which might drive different optimal solutions, this BAA will focus on some specific challenging design objectives representative of what might be needed for future small satellite missions. Design objectives are summarized in Table 1. The Table is meant to show the general class of telescope size and performance of interest, and is not a requirements specification. Proposers should use this as a general guideline and may make tradeoffs in their design to offer a better technical/cost solution.

Parameter Value Comments Telescope aperture 30 cm Representative of optics size of interest. Desire diffraction-limited performance consistent with the aperture size

Telescope field of view (FOV) >3 degrees Circular FOV for near diffraction-limited image.

Tradeoffs with focal plane cost.

Telescope design pass-band 3-5 um IR design. Would like to be able to use cooled optics when low self-emission is needed, which creates some challenges.

Band-pass filter Yes Optical design should accommodate a low self-emission band-pass filter which can select a portion of the full pass-band. A single filter is OK, but ability to switch in two or more filters is desirable, and could be included in the proposal as a priced option.

Scanning field +/-30 degrees Telescope field-of-view can be rapidly steered in two axes, without satellite body pointing.

Tradeoffs possible.

Optical system scan and settle time

<0.5 s A “settling metric” might be: pointing knowledge <16 urad, residual settling motion <160 urad/s, and within 100 microradians of desired pointing direction

Angular disturbance to spacecraft from optics repointing

Minimize while keeping design simple

Ideally moving masses will be minimized, as will sudden jerks. Approaches which require coordination with spacecraft attitude control system are permissible, when reasonably implementable.

Optical system mass <38 kg As light as possible while balancing recurring unit cost and prototype development risk and cost

Target recurring manufacturing cost

<$2M By quantity >20 units.

Table 1: General Design Objectives

Specifically, DARPA is interested in designs which are capable of functioning in the mid-wave- IR portion of the spectrum with passively cooled optics (i.e., telescope and scanner optics) to minimize self emission. We believe that such systems impose some unique design challenges which require creative solutions. For example, if the optical system is to be passively cooled to low temperatures (for, example in the 200-240K range) then it may be difficult to provide high thermal conductance to a passive radiator if the entire telescope must be repointed by moving it on a gimbal; in contrast, using full-aperture scan mirrors would simplify thermal control, as well as imparting less reaction force during rapid motions, but this approach comes with its own design challenges. A design capable of broadband imaging in the IR with low optics self-emission also constrains choices for any refractive elements that may be in the optical path.

While visible-band optical telescope systems capable of agile repointing are also of interest, as well as dual-band (vis/IR) approaches, the primary objective for this BAA is for an IR-only implementation, since we believe that the IR system will have unique challenges. The design should be simple for low recurring-cost, as well as minimizing the initial design cost and simplifying the design requirements for this demonstration, so designs are not required to support visible imaging. That said, there are many visible imaging applications for which a telescope with similar specifications (wavelength aside) is needed, and it is certainly desirable if the general optical and field steering design can be substantially re-usable (e.g., easily modifiable) to make visible-band versions of the telescope. DARPA is interested in very broadband designs (visible-MWIR) if they do not incur large penalties in cost, field-of-view, or optical performance.

If a proposer is considering more than one design approach (with different tradeoffs), and they submit a proposal abstract which discusses the proposed approaches and tradeoffs, DARPA can provide feedback on the concepts in the abstract before final proposal preparation.

There may also be trade-offs in the proposed risk and cost depending on whether a proposer chooses to use only relatively mature designs and manufacturing technologies or to push the envelope on program risk by using technologies requiring more development but offering the potential for significant improvements in recurring cost. DARPA is willing to consider riskier design approaches and higher prototype development costs, but will carefully weigh the benefits of those proposed approaches against program risk and cost. The main payoff from this program will come from the system-level benefits of having demonstrated a successful and affordable agile telescope for small satellites, so approaches that will not lead to a timely and practical demonstration are not of primary interest. Significant technical challenge and room for innovation exists for clever system design and engineering of an agile telescope system tailored for small satellites, even while using standard materials, well-developed manufacturing technologies, proven design approaches, and lessons-learned from prior space systems.

This prototype optical system is not targeted for a specific satellite mission, and as such, no specifications are being provided for spacecraft interface, flight mechanical loads, or space environment. The proposer should define reasonable interfaces, estimated flight loads and other environmental specifications to drive their design so that the resulting telescope should be suitable for a small-satellite application. While the program is underway, a flight opportunity may become available. Ideally, the prototype agile optical system would be useable for flight after undergoing qualification.

The resulting agile telescope system should include telescope optics, agile pointing systems, and a focal plane. Basic electronics will also be required to drive any electromechanical or optoelectronic systems used for field-of-view repointing. It is also expected that a focal plane (integrated dewar cooler assembly) will be included in the telescope. Ideally, the focal plane will be of large-enough format (size and pixel count) to provide diffraction-limited performance over the full field of view. Proposers may suggest focal plane alternatives, which mitigate substantial cost or schedule issues.

To demonstrate and test the telescope, supporting electronics and a user interface will be needed to allow FOV pointing, image acquisition, image display, and image quality analysis. For this effort there is no requirement to build “flight” or even “flight-like” electronics; there is no need to package electronics into a small form factor or engage in light-weighting, to use flight design practices for circuitry or circuit boards, to select flight-worthy electronic parts, or to flight-qualify electronics. However, the general electrical/electronic design concept should be consistent with ultimately building flight electronics (reasonable component weights, power needs, etc.).

1.3. PROGRAM SCHEDULE AND BUDGET

A total program duration of 24 months is anticipated. Within the first six months a detailed design of the agile telescope system should be developed, culminating in a high-fidelity Preliminary Design Review (PDR). It is expected that final design detailing and long-lead component procurements could then begin. System specifications for the expected agile telescope optical and mechanical performance should be available at PDR. By approximately 22 months after the program start, a complete flight-like integrated optical system (telescope, scanning system, and focal plane) should be ready for final testing in a laboratory environment.

The final two months of the program would be spent on laboratory characterization of imaging and pointing performance, as well as any final optimizations. The program should complete 24 months after starting.

The base program budget should be prepared for a program that will culminate in demonstration, optical characterization, and delivery of a flight-quality agile telescope system, but with non-flight electronics. Options may also be proposed for tasks that the proposer believes will be of interest to DARPA but may not be essential for the base technology demonstration program.

Examples might include performing additional testing (such as more extensive environmental qualification of optics or enhanced optical testing), providing desirable enhancements to optical performance, focal plane options, specific demonstrations, or undertaking supporting technology developments which significantly reduce future recurring manufacturing costs.

If the proposed program has very high risk or speculative designs, proposers are encouraged to divide their program into separately costed options. This will make it easier for DARPA to elect to fund early risk reduction work and to make decisions to fund subsequent options after key risks are retired.

1.4. PROGRAM METRICS

Performers will design, build, and characterize an agile IR telescope system which can be cooled for low self-emission, will have agile re-pointing capabilities, and is intended to be useable on a small LEO satellite. Table 1 provides key technical goals representative of the class of telescope of interest for this BAA. Since the Table is intended to illustrate the general class of telescope size and performance of interest, versus being a specification, proposers should be specific about the detailed design that they intend to build, and should include measurable threshold and stretch goals for performance.

Depending on the specific technical approach undertaken by a proposer, the appropriate milestones will vary. As part of the proposal, proposers are expected to identify key measurable milestones tied to completion of specific design tasks (completion of optical design tasks, design analysis, PDR), reduction of key risks (such as prototype hardware demos), assembly of key subsystems, imaging demonstrations, and performance characterization. Progress in meeting these milestones and in providing data that shows that the design is likely to meet performance goals will be used by DARPA to measure progress and determine whether to continue the program.

The program is expected to culminate in a laboratory demonstration of the agile telescope, and in a data package which summarizes the optical and optomechanical performance achieved. One additional data deliverable from the program will be an estimate of the recurring cost to build production telescopes at various volume levels, including data to support the reasonableness of those cost estimates.

2. AWARD INFORMATION

2.1. 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, 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 6.2.10., “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/or cost/price within a reasonable time, and 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 http://www.darpa.mil/work-with-us/contract-management#OtherTransactions.

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

2.2. 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:

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

‘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 awardee to seek DARPA permission before publishing any information or results relative to the program.

Proposers should indicate in their proposal whether they believe the scope of the research included in their proposal is fundamental or not. While proposers should clearly explain the intended results of their research, the Government shall have sole discretion to 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 http://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

3. ELIGIBILITY INFORMATION

3.1. ELIGIBLE APPLICANTS

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

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

3.1.1.1. 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.

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

3.1.1.2. 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.

3.1.1.3. 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.

3.1.2. Non-U.S. Organizations

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

3.1.3. Applicants Considering Classified Submissions

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

3.2. ORGANIZATIONAL CONFLICTS OF INTEREST

FAR 9.5 Requirements In accordance with FAR 9.5, proposers are required to identify and disclose all facts relevant to potential OCIs involving the proposer’s organization and any proposed team member (subawardee, consultant). Under this Section, the proposer is responsible for providing this disclosure with each proposal submitted to the BAA. The disclosure must include the proposer’s, and as applicable, proposed team member’s OCI mitigation plan. The OCI mitigation plan must include a description of the actions the proposer has taken, or intends to take, to prevent the existence of conflicting roles that might bias the proposer’s judgment and to prevent the proposer from having unfair competitive advantage. The OCI mitigation plan will specifically discuss the disclosed OCI in the context of each of the OCI limitations outlined in FAR 9.505-1 through FAR 9.505-4.

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

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

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

The name of the DARPA office receiving the support;

The prime contract number;

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

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

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

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

3.3. 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.

3.4. OTHER ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

3.4.1. Collaborative Efforts

Collaborative efforts/teaming are encouraged.

4. APPLICATION AND SUBMISSION INFORMATION

4.1. 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.

4.2. CONTENT AND FORM OF APPLICATION SUBMISSION

4.2.1. Security And Proprietary Issues

NOTE: If proposals are classified, the proposals must indicate the classification level of not only the proposal itself, but also the anticipated award document classification level.

a. Proprietary Information 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 Classified submissions shall be transmitted in accordance with the following guidance.

Additional information on the subjects discussed in this section may be found at http://www.dss.mil/.

If a submission contains Classified National Security Information as defined by Executive Order 13526, the information must be appropriately and conspicuously marked with the proposed classification level and declassification date. Similarly, when the classification of a submission is in question, the submission must be appropriately and conspicuously marked with the proposed classification level and declassification date. Submissions requiring DARPA to make a final classification determination shall be marked as follows:

“CLASSIFICATION DETERMINATION PENDING. Protect as though classified____________________________(insert the recommended classification level, e.g., Top Secret, Secret or Confidential)”

NOTE: Classified submissions must indicate the classification level of not only the submitted materials, but also the classification level of the anticipated award.

Proposers submitting classified information must have, or be able to obtain prior to contract award, cognizant security agency approved facilities, information systems, and appropriately cleared/eligible personnel to perform at the classification level proposed. All proposer personnel performing Information Assurance (IA)/Cybersecurity related duties on classified Information Systems shall meet the requirements set forth in DoD Manual 8570.01-M (Information Assurance Workforce Improvement Program).

http://www.darpa.mil/ http://www.dss.mil/

Proposers choosing to submit classified information from other collateral classified sources (i.e., sources other than DARPA) must ensure (1) they have permission from an authorized individual at the cognizant Government agency (e.g., Contracting Officer, Program Manager); (2) the proposal is marked in accordance with the source Security Classification Guide (SCG) from which the material is derived; and (3) the source SCG is submitted along with the proposal.

DARPA anticipates that submissions received under this BAA will be unclassified. However, should a proposer wish to submit classified information, an unclassified email must be sent to the BAA mailbox requesting submission instructions from the Technical Office PSO.

Security classification guidance and direction via a Security Classification Guide (SCG) and/or DD Form 254, “DoD Contract Security Classification Specification,” will not be provided at this time, since DARPA is soliciting ideas only. 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.

Confidential, Secret and Top Secret Information Use transmission, classification, handling, and marking guidance provided by previously issued SCGs, the DoD Information Security Manual (DoDM 5200.01, Volumes 1 - 4), and the National Industrial Security Program Operating Manual, including the Supplement Revision 1, (DoD 5220.22-M and DoD 5200.22-M Sup. 1) when submitting Confidential, Secret, and/or Top Secret classified information.

Confidential and Secret Confidential and Secret classified information may be submitted via ONE of the two following methods:

Hand-carried by an appropriately cleared and authorized courier to the DARPA CDR.

Prior to traveling, the courier shall contact the DARPA Classified Document Registry (CDR) at 703-526-4052 to coordinate arrival and delivery.

OR

Mailed via U.S. Postal Service (USPS) Registered Mail or USPS Express Mail. All classified information will be enclosed in opaque inner and outer covers and double-wrapped. The inner envelope shall be sealed and plainly marked with the assigned classification and addresses of both sender and addressee.

The inner envelope shall be addressed to:

Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency ATTN: Strategic Technology Office, Ronald Jones Reference: BAA HR001118S0007 675 North Randolph Street Arlington, VA 22203-2114

The outer envelope shall be sealed with no identification as to the classification of its contents and addressed to:

Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency Security & Intelligence Directorate, Attn: CDR 675 North Randolph Street Arlington, VA 22203-2114

Top Secret Information Top Secret information must be hand-carried by an appropriately cleared and authorized courier to the DARPA CDR. Prior to traveling, the courier shall contact the DARPA CDR at 703-526-4052 to coordinate arrival and delivery.

Sensitive Compartmented Information (SCI) SCI must be marked, managed and transmitted in accordance with DoDM 5105.21 Volumes 1

- 3. Questions regarding the transmission of SCI may be sent to the DARPA Technical Office PSO via the BAA mailbox or by contacting the DARPA Special Security Officer (SSO) at 703- 812-1970.

Successful proposers may be sponsored by DARPA for access to SCI. Sponsorship must be aligned to an existing DD Form 254 where SCI has been authorized. Questions regarding SCI sponsorship should be directed to the DARPA Personnel Security Office at 703-526-4543.

Special Access Program (SAP) Information SAP information must be marked in accordance with DoDM 5205.07 Volume 4 and transmitted by specifically approved methods which will be provided by the Technical Office Program Security Officer (PSO) or their staff.

Proposers choosing to submit SAP information from an agency other than DARPA are required to provide the DARPA Technical Office PSO written permission from the source material’s cognizant Special Access Program Control Officer (SAPCO) or designated representative. For clarification regarding this process, contact the DARPA Technical Office PSO via the BAA mailbox or the DARPA SAPCO at 703-526-4102.

Additional SAP security requirements regarding facility accreditations, information security, personnel security, physical security, operations security, test security, classified transportation plans, and program protection planning may be specified in the DD Form 254.

NOTE: prior to drafting the submission, if use of SAP Information Systems is to be proposed, proposers must first obtain an Authorization-to-Operate from the DARPA Technical Office PSO (or other applicable DARPA Authorization Official) using the Risk Management Framework (RMF) process outlined in the Joint Special Access Program (SAP) Implementation Guide (JSIG), Revision 3, dated October 9, 2013 (or successor document).

4.2.2. Proposal Abstract Information

Proposers are strongly encouraged to submit a proposal 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 proposal abstracts is specified in Section 4.4.1 below. DARPA will acknowledge receipt of the submission and assign a control number that should be used in all further correspondence regarding the proposal abstract.

Unclassified abstracts sent in response to HR001118S0007 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 abstract. Proposers using the DARPA BAA Website may encounter heavy traffic on the submission deadline date; proposers should start this process as early as possible.

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.

4.2.3. Proposal Information

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.

Restrictive notices notwithstanding, proposals may be handled, for administrative purposes only, by a support contractor. This support contractor is prohibited from competition in DARPA technical research and is bound by appropriate nondisclosure requirements. Proposals and/or proposed abstracts may not be submitted by fax or e-mail; any so sent will be disregarded.

Proposals not meeting the format described in the BAA may not be reviewed.

Unclassified full proposals sent in response to HR001118S0007 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.

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

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.

Classified submissions and proposals requesting assistance instruments should NOT be submitted through DARPA's BAA Website (https://baa/darpa.mil), though proposers will likely still need to visit https://baa/darpa.mil to register their organization (or verify an existing registration) to ensure the BAA office can verify and finalize their submission.

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.

DARPA will acknowledge receipt of the unclassified submission and assign a control number that should be used in all further correspondence regarding the submission.

Submissions will not be returned. The original 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 at this office within 5 days after notification that a proposal was not selected.

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, according to the instructions outlined in the “Security Information” section above. If a classified proposal may not be partitioned into classified and unclassified portions, then submit according to the instructions outlined in the “Security Information” section above.

When a proposal includes a classified portion, and when able according to security guidelines, we ask that proposers send an e-mail to HR001118S0007@darpa.mil as notification that there is a classified portion to the proposal. When sending the classified portion via mail according to the instructions outlined in the “Security Information” section above, proposers should submit two

(2) 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 HR001118S0007, proposer organization, proposal title (short title recommended), and Copy _ of 2.

All administrative correspondence and questions on this solicitation, including requests for information on how to submit a proposal to this BAA, should be directed to one of the administrative addresses below; e-mail is preferred.

BAA Administrator E-mail: HR001118S0007@darpa.mil https://baa/darpa.mil https://baa/darpa.mil mailto:BAAT_Support@darpa.mil

DARPA/STO

ATTN: HR001118S0007

675 North Randolph Street Arlington, VA 22203-2114 Office Website: http://www.darpa.mil/about-us/offices/sto Opportunities Page: http://www.darpa.mil/work-with-us/opportunities

DARPA intends to use electronic mail for correspondence regarding HR001118S0007. Proposals and proposal abstracts may not be submitted by fax or e-mail; any so sent will be disregarded.

DARPA encourages use of the Internet for retrieving the BAA and any other related information that may subsequently be provided.

4.2.4. Restrictive Markings on Proposals

All proposals should clearly indicate limitations on the disclosure of their contents. Proposers who include in their proposals data that they do not want disclosed to the public for any purpose, or used by the Government except for evaluation purposes, shall-

(1) Mark the title page with the following legend:

This proposal includes data that shall not be disclosed outside the Government and shall not be duplicated, used, or disclosed-in whole or in part-for any purpose other than to evaluate this proposal. If, however, a contract is awarded to this proposer as a result of, or in connection with, the submission of this data, the Government shall have the right to duplicate, use, or disclose the data to the extent provided in the resulting contract. This restriction does not limit the Government's right to use information contained in this data if it is obtained from another source without restriction. The data subject to this restriction are contained in sheets [insert numbers or other identification of sheets]; and

(2) Mark each sheet of data it wishes to restrict with the following legend:

Use or disclosure of data contained on this sheet is subject to the restriction on the title page of this proposal.

Markings like "Company Confidential" or other phrases that may be confused with national security classifications shall be avoided. See Section 6.0, for additional information.

4.3. FORMATTING CHARACTERISTICS

4.3.1. Proposal Abstract Format

Proposal abstracts are encouraged in advance of proposals in order to provide potential proposers with a rapid response to minimize unnecessary effort. Proposal abstracts should follow the format provided below. The cover sheet should be clearly marked “PROPOSAL ABSTRACT” and the total length should not exceed 10 pages, excluding cover page and official transmittal letter. 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 proposal http://www.darpa.mil/about-us/offices/sto http://www.darpa.mil/work-with-us/opportunities abstracts includes all figures, tables, and charts. No formal transmittal letter is required. All proposal abstracts must be written in English.

While proposal abstracts should be kept within the page limit, proposers do have flexibility in how they structure their response, and whether they include all the following sections. The most important goal in the proposal abstract is to provide a concise but content-rich summary of the proposed work so that DARPA can provide helpful feedback before proposal submission, or discourage proposal submission if the proposed approach does not appear well aligned with program goals. A possible format is provided below; numbers in brackets (e.g., {1}) provide a estimate length limit for a section.

4.3.1.1. {1} Cover sheet to include:

1. BAA number

2. Technical area (see Sec 1.1)

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. Abstract 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. Estimated funds requested from DARPA for the base program and any proposed options and the total estimated proposed cost; and the amount of cost share (if any)

11. Date abstract was prepared.

4.3.1.2 {1} Executive Summary:

Includes a title and an abstract that provides a concise summary of work to be performed and basic approaches to be used.

4.3.1.3 {5} Summary of Technical Approach and Innovative Claims:

The technical rationale, technical approach, and constructive plan for accomplishments of technical goals in support of innovative claims and deliverable production should be summarized. Succinctly describe the uniqueness and benefits of the proposed approach relative to the current state-of-art and alternative approaches.

4.3.1.4 {1} Organization and Teaming Chart:

A clearly defined organization chart for the program team that includes, as applicable:

1. programmatic relationship of team members;

2. unique capabilities of team members;

3. task responsibilities of team members;

4. teaming strategy among the team members;

5. key personnel along with the amount of effort to be expended by each person during each year.

4.3.1.5 {1} Summary of Deliverables and Approach to Intellectual Property:

Deliverables associated with the proposed research and the plans and capability to accomplish technology transition and commercialization. Include in this section all proprietary claims to 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.

This section should list all technical data, computer software, or computer software documentation to be provided with other than unlimited rights in accordance with DFARS Clause 252.227-7017 IDENTIFICATION AND ASSERTION OF USE, RELEASE, OR

DISCLOSURE RESTRICTIONS (JUNE 1995).

4.3.1.6 {1} Summary of Estimated Cost, Schedule, and Milestones:

Summarize, in table form,…