HR001119S0032.pdf

Broad Agency Announcement Strategic Technologies

STRATEGIC TECHNOLOGY OFFICE

HR001119S0032

March 1, 2019

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. FUNDING OPPORTUNITY DESCRIPTION

1.1 PROGRAM OVERVIEW

1.1.1 Mosaic Technologies

1.1.2 Mosaic Effects Web Services (EWS)

1.1.3 Mosaic Experimentation

1.1.4 Foundational Strategic Technologies and Systems

2. AWARD INFORMATION

2.1 Fundamental Research

3. ELIGIBILITY INFORMATION

3.1 ELIGIBLE APPLICANTS

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

3.1.2 Non-U.S. Organizations

3.1.3 Applicants Considering Classified Submissions

3.2 Organizational Conflicts of Interest

3.3 COST SHARING/MATCHING

3.4 OTHER ELIGIBILITY REQUIREMENTS

3.4.1 Collaborative Efforts

4. APPLICATION AND SUBMISSION INFORMATION

4.1 ADDRESS TO REQUEST APPLICATION PACKAGE

4.2 CONTENT AND FORM OF APPLICATION SUBMISSION

4.2.1 Security and Proprietary Issues

4.2.2 Executive Summary, Abstract, and Proposal Information

4.2.3 Restrictive Markings on Proposals

4.2.4 Disclosure of Information and Compliance with Safeguarding Covered

Defense Information Controls

4.3 FORMATTING CHARACTERISTICS

4.3.1 Executive Summary Format

4.3.2 Proposal Abstract Format

4.3.3 Proposal Format

4.4 SUBMISSION DATES AND TIMES

4.4.1 Executive Summary, Abstract, and Proposal Submission Deadline

4.5 FUNDING RESTRICTIONS

4.6 OTHER SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS

5. APPLICATION REVIEW INFORMATION

5.1 EVALUATION CRITERIA

5.1.1 Overall Scientific and Technical Merit

5.1.2 Potential Contribution and Relevance to the DARPA Mission

5.1.3 Cost Realism

5.2 REVIEW AND SELECTION PROCESS

6. AWARD ADMINISTRATION INFORMATION

6.1 SELECTION NOTICES and notifications

6.1.1 Executive Summaries

6.1.2 Abstracts

6.1.3 Proposals

6.2 ADMINISTRATIVE AND NATIONAL POLICY REQUIREMENTS

6.2.1 Meeting and Travel Requirements

6.2.2 FAR and DFARS Clauses

6.2.3 Human Subjects Research (HSR)/Animal Use

6.2.4 Grant Abstract

6.2.5 Subcontracting

6.2.6 Electronic and Information Technology

6.2.7 System for Award Management (SAM) and Universal Identifier

Requirements

6.2.8 Controlled Unclassified Information (CUI) on Non-DoD Information

Systems

6.2.9 Terms and Conditions

6.2.10 Representations and Certifications

6.3 REPORTING

6.4 ELECTRONIC SYSTEMS

6.4.1 Wide Area Work Flow (WAWF)

6.4.2 i-EDISON

7. AGENCY CONTACTS

8. OTHER INFORMATION

8.1 INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY

8.1.1 Procurement Contract

8.1.2 Nonprocurement Contract

9. APPENDIX 1: PROPOSAL SLIDE SUMMARY

10. APPENDIX 2: VOLUME 1 COVER SHEET TEMPLATE

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 – Strategic Technologies Announcement Type –Initial announcement Funding Opportunity Number – HR001119S0032 Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers (CFDA) - Not Applicable Dates o Posting Date: March 1, 2019 o BAA Closing Date: February 28, 2020

Anticipated individual awards - Multiple awards are anticipated.

Types of instruments that may be awarded - Procurement contract, grant, cooperative agreement, or other transaction.

Agency contact o Points of Contact The BAA Coordinator for this effort may be reached at:

HR001119S0032@darpa.mil

DARPA/STO

ATTN: HR001119S0032

675 North Randolph Street Arlington, VA 22203-2114 mailto:HR001119SXXXX@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.

Proposed research should investigate approaches that enable revolutionary advances in science, devices, or systems. The Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) anticipates funding a limited number of proposals under this BAA. Specifically excluded are existing mature solutions and research that primarily results in evolutionary improvements to existing technologies.

1.1 PROGRAM OVERVIEW

DARPA’s Strategic Technology Office (STO) is seeking innovative ideas and disruptive technologies that provide the U.S. military increased lethality in an era of eroding dominance.

For decades, the U.S. military has enjoyed overwhelming dominance in all domains by virtue of the performance and sophistication of its weapon systems. Unfortunately, this dominance is being challenged by peer competitors, who have had decades to study our strengths, and are hard at work developing counters to degrade the advantages we currently possess.

It is becoming evident that the U.S. cannot solve this dilemma by continuing legacy practices of building the next bigger, faster, more powerful, more survivable version of what came before. A new paradigm is needed that values “lethality” over monolithic system dominance. Whereas dominance is measured by comparing capabilities across systems, lethality is measured by the ability to deliver a desired effect at will, regardless of the system or systems of systems involved.

DARPA/STO aims to provide the U.S. military lethality using a strategy called Mosaic Warfare:

fast, scalable, adaptive joint multi-domain lethality. It is the disaggregation of effects chain functions (e.g., Find, Fix, Target, Track, Engage, and Assess or F2T2EA) across a heterogeneous mix of manned and unmanned platforms from all domains. Furthermore, it is the ability to compose and recompose effects chains at high speed without a priori knowledge of which systems will provide which function(s) of a given effects chain. The result presents an adversary with an overwhelming, diverse set of kinetic and non-kinetic effect decision dilemmas without common counters or failure modes.

To achieve this ambitious vision, DARPA/STO is seeking innovative ideas and disruptive technologies within the focus areas of the broader Mosaic Warfare objective: Mosaic Technologies, Mosaic Effects Web Services (EWS), and Mosaic Experimentation.

Research supporting any of STO's broad mission objectives identified in the Funding Opportunity Description above may be submitted under this BAA. Topic areas of specific interest include, but are not limited to, the following:

1.1.1 Mosaic Technologies

For the past several years, DARPA/STO has been developing technology to fight as a distributed network of heterogeneous capabilities – a system of systems. Recently, DARPA/STO expanded the concept to make system of systems adaptable at mission speed - a mosaic. Instead of manually integrating elements into a rigid, monolithic system of systems architecture, we strive to develop all of the infrastructure technologies needed to compose specific, fleeting system of systems implementations with a confederated collection of capabilities. In the ultimate vision, the warfighter can arrive at the battlespace and immediately compose a desired effect from whatever capabilities are available.

To continue the progression toward Mosaic Warfare, new technology is needed to enable warfighters to select between and reconfigure effects chains at mission speed rather than as development activities. Ultimately, DARPA/STO’s goal is to provide tools to enable commanders to build and operate effects chains on-the-fly with whichever capabilities are present in the battlespace.

To understand the range of capabilities required to make “Mosaic Warfare” real, one may think of technologies or capabilities that fall within one or more of three functional areas: Planning and Composition, Interoperability, and Execution. DARPA/STO is seeking technologies that can provide solutions to automate or accelerate the following functions.

1.1.1.1 Planning and Composition

A commander leading a Mosaic Warfare-based force needs automated decision aids and other tools to determine what that basic force should look like. These technologies should empower a theater commander to perform at campaign planning time what today occurs through years of operations analysis, war gaming, exercises, requirements analysis, and doctrine development.

These tools need to answer questions including, but not limited to:

Effects: What effects applied where provide the best likelihood of meeting campaign objectives? How can deterrence and de-escalation be achieved? How can deterrent effects be created while preserving surprise?

Force Composition: How should a commander provision assets for the battle? What elements should be used to deliver a desired effect? How should these assets be organized? How can we understand logistics flow and readiness to know how and when these assets will be available? How can the probability of success of a given effects chain be “verified” against situation uncertainties?

Strategy and Mission Planning: How would different effects chains be employed at different times during a campaign? What information is needed to make these decisions and plan the effects? How can this information be acquired?

1.1.1.2 Interoperability

Once a commander has decided upon a Mosaic Warfare force package, a range of new technologies are needed to implement this new warfighting architecture, specifically technology for machine-to-machine interoperability. The ultimate vision is to replace what occurs today after years of mostly manual system engineering with global interoperability at mission speed.

DARPA/STO is particularly interested in approaches to global interoperability that do not rely upon the creation of and adherence to rigid global standards. To achieve this vision, technology is needed to address issues such as the following:

Communications: How do we provide assured high-capacity mobile communication capabilities in space, air, ground, sea surface, and underwater environments (to include systems with and without access to infrastructure)? How can we better communicate across physical domains? Are there ways to create a greater density of links, potentially leveraging indigenous infrastructure and non-traditional communication channels? Are there ways to make heterogeneous links more interoperable, even when they have different physical-layer protocols? Are there ways to make links more discoverable and configurable to support dynamic networking? Are there new radio and device technologies that can enable faster integration of new waveforms, greater adaptability, and more options to serve as gateways between networks?

Networking: How can we improve network availability, increase network capacity and scaling, enable tolerance to network degradation, mitigate extremely high levels of man-made and natural electromagnetic interference, defeat network and RF exploitation techniques, and counter denial of service techniques? How can we rapidly create new “networks of networks” by creating secure virtual networks over a collection of heterogeneous communications paths? What are ways to automate the configuration and management of these virtualized networks; i.e. “C2 of C”? Can this network management be tied to mission and information needs in a way that adapts to changing combat situations? What are novel approaches to securing the confidentiality and integrity of data on these networks? Are there new approaches to managing information flow across security levels and enclaves? How can we ensure interoperability with coalition partners and other allies while providing the greatest amount of adaptability and ease of configuration and protecting operations and the integrity of U.S. networks?

Software Integration: Assuming messages can be passed between systems, how can they understand each other if there exists no common data standard? Can non-native software be made to run on various system elements? How can integration, testing, and risk management certification be accelerated or automated? Can execution be monitored and verified in real-time to prevent natural errors and malicious cyberattacks? How do we enable forwards and backwards compatibility with legacy and future systems?

1.1.1.3 Execution

Once a Mosaic Warfare force package has been defined and integrated, technology is needed to operate it at scale. This should involve a combination of battle management decision support technology combined with machine autonomy. Technology is needed to address challenges such as the following:

Resource Management: How should assets be assigned to a particular effects chain at a given moment in a battle? How can we re-allocate capabilities at combat speed? How can this be “optimized” when there are multiple simultaneous objectives across different commands and domains competing for the same pool of resources? How can assets be “abstracted” at this level, so that minimal detailed knowledge is needed to make resource allocation decisions? How can resource management be made more hierarchical, to manage complexity across a force (e.g., swarm controllers that do not need to understand theater-level objectives, theater-level decision support that does not need to know how to control elements of a swarm)? How can resource management tools be made more adaptable and tailorable to the needs of a specific conflict or mission? What are software infrastructures to support faster development and integration of new plans and systems (e.g. based upon commercial “agile” or “DevOps” principles)?

Task Planning: How do we develop fine-scale tactics automatically? Can these fine-scale tactics learn and adapt to the combat situation? How should tasks be assigned to specific systems (e.g. within a swarm or constellation)? How can this tasking and supporting information be translated into a message framework each system will understand? How can both autonomous machines and human combat units maintain coherent task coordination and execute missions at the edge when communications is degraded or denied?

Training: How will human warfighters operate with new mosaic elements without prior training? Are there novel ways to train Artificial Intelligence (AI) synergistically with training of the human operator to instill human context and intuition into the AI while avoiding human bias? How can we train human operators fast and minimize operator burden? Can new systems be developed with streamlined, more intuitive human-machine interfaces? How can more of the mechanical tasks of operating a new system (i.e., “button pushing”) be automated to minimize learning requirements and enable warfighters to focus on more cognitive functions? How can we enable humans and machines to share tasks at the edge? What are approaches to managing the level of autonomy? How do we develop trust within human-machine teams?

1.1.2 Mosaic Effects Web Services (EWS)

DARPA/STO has a legacy of developing advanced mission systems technologies: sensors, seekers, and electronic warfare. Generally, these systems are thought of as providing a component capability, or service, of an effects chain. In recent years, DARPA/STO has been developing these systems to enable and be enabled by a system of systems. In the context of Mosaic Warfare, these capabilities are ‘tiles’ within the mosaic, or Mosaic Effects Web Services (EWS). For example, DARPA/STO is currently developing payloads and processing that provide new distributed sensing and electronic warfare. DARPA/STO is seeking technologies that expand upon this set of tools, placing an increased emphasis on novel sensors and effectors that are consistent with the Mosaic Warfare strategy. DARPA/STO wishes to expand the sensing emphasis to the “find and fix” portions of the kill chain, and emphasize offensive non-kinetic effects to be employed against peer adversaries.

1.1.2.1 Sensing

DARPA/STO continues to seek new, innovative methods for finding difficult targets in contested environments that could include combining existing or new sensor modalities, novel in-sensor Automatic Target Recognition (ATR) techniques, new algorithms, and new system concepts and processing techniques. These capabilities may include sensing modalities and signal processing that help avoid or defeat adversary deception and countermeasures. DARPA/STO is also interested in new approaches for the design of low-cost, adaptable sensors that leverage commercial technologies and processes to reduce development time and cost and increase adaptability and technology refresh rate of sensor systems.

Of specific interest to DARPA/STO are capabilities that can perform the initial finding and cueing of potential, likely targets. Certain legacy DARPA/STO programs that are focused on the “target and engage” portions of the kill chain assume that likely targets are cued, so U.S.

platforms can get on target quickly and deliver effects without needing to loiter to perform searches. Unfortunately, many future conflict scenarios do not have a good means to perform this “find” cueing function. Existing National Technical Means (NTM) are not well-suited to supporting tactical kill chains, and legacy airborne intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR) systems are not survivable in a highly contested environment, leaving the warfighter no ability to “find”.

DARPA/STO is interested in new ways to perform the “find” function of the effects chain and to connect the subsequent phases of the effects chain more seamlessly. Note that the objective is not to replace the function of all existing ISR. Instead, in the spirit of Mosaic Warfare, we will pursue a hybrid approach that focuses new “find” capabilities on just finding the most critical targets. Providing focused lethality to negate these systems provides a “hedge” that then allows more conventional, less survivable capabilities to back-fill and provide capacity. DARPA/STO is interested in this type of sensing capability across all domains, to include air, land, surface, and undersea. New sensor design and signal processing approaches should support deploying “find” functionality of small, low-cost, “disadvantaged” platforms, so technology that enables low size, weight, power, and cost is highly desirable.

Finding and prosecuting targets with effects chains requires the ability to detect, track, and maintain custody of targets across widely distributed sensors with different functions residing in various domains. DARPA/STO is interested in automated processing technologies that can ensure chain of custody between sensors of different sensing modalities in different domains to increase confidence and accuracy as targets are passed between sensors to effects in cross-domain effects chains.

1.1.2.2 Non-Kinetic Effects

DARPA/STO is seeking methods to provide warfighters a range of scalable options to win against a peer adversary in a major conflict situation by providing a complex diversity of dilemmas. The focus is on using non-kinetic effects for offensive purposes, such as directly degrading or defeating an adversary capability, delaying an adversary’s advance, or creating confusion and uncertainty to deter the adversary and drive them to deescalate. “Effects” may also be applied at different levels of intensity and can include capabilities spanning the electromagnetic spectrum (such as directed energy) that can provide scalable, mission-dependent effects. Of particular interest are modeling tools that enable tailoring of precise non-kinetic effects, even when target knowledge is highly uncertain.

1.1.3 Mosaic Experimentation

There is currently a strong demand signal from the Services for new ways to do experimentation, particularly driven by the Department-wide interest in Joint Multi-Domain Battle. A major focus of this interest is on multi-domain command and control (MDC2) experimentation. This aligns very well with the DARPA/STO technology portfolio, as MDC2 is at the heart of Mosaic Warfare. Furthermore, as a stand-alone technology, MDC2 capability, more than anything else, becomes intrinsically tied to tactics. In a mission-focused model for the Department of Defense (DoD), innovative tactics are developed iteratively with the supporting technology.

Unfortunately there are not many opportunities to conduct this type of experimentation today.

Existing experimentation infrastructure is oriented toward high-fidelity but narrowly focused system testing, or it is very low-fidelity oriented toward training. The more capable, campaign-level modeling and simulation (M&S) tools tend not to be used for experimentation, but rather focus on capability analysis and requirements and program development and justification.

Furthermore, this existing infrastructure is extremely stove-piped by Service, mission area, classification, and even industry vendor.

DARPA/STO is interested in capabilities that apply the principles of “mosaic” to experimentation infrastructure. Building dedicated infrastructure is very expensive to build and even more expensive to sustain. Instead of adding a new stove-pipe to do MDC2 experimentation, DARPA/STO is interested in developing new ways to compose experimentation environments using infrastructure that already exists and then layer new capability on top.

DARPA/STO seeks integration technology and approaches to interoperate various M&S and experimentation environments. Such environments would provide opportunities to conduct MDC2 experiments and deliver tools and architectures to enable rapid composition of new experiment environments as the “mosaic” concepts evolve within the Services. Most existing Service experimentation or M&S efforts already use a common data standard, but their models and actual user environments are incompatible. DARPA/STO is looking for tools and techniques to make it easier to modify and integrate models and M&S engines for greater interoperability.

Additionally, DARPA/STO seeks the integration of the following technology elements:

Higher-fidelity human behavior: Most existing M&S systems either use crudely scripted operator behavior or rely upon burdensome virtual simulations with human operators playing the elements in the simulation.

Automated, run-time advanced analytics: Most experiments today tend to involve a large, expensive campaign based upon pre-planned test points and mission scripts, followed afterward by an extensive analytical effort to examine recorded data and generate conclusions.

DevOps infrastructure: MDC2 technology is intrinsically interdependent with tactics.

Details of MDC2 tools ideally need to be modifiable while a MDC2 experiment is being conducted. This type of infrastructure would also provide a direct path from tool development to experimentation and tactics development to operations.

1.1.4 Foundational Strategic Technologies and Systems

DARPA/STO is seeking innovative ideas for systems and Mosaic Warfare architectures incorporating disruptive technologies that offer significant potential capability improvement across multiple DARPA/STO focus areas as described above. This could include technologies that would enable dramatic reduction in size, weight, power, or cost of systems, technologies that allow for adaptability and/or rapid refresh, technologies that offer the potential for significant advances in system level performance, and approaches to demonstrating the military utility of these systems and technologies. This can include aperture, components, hardware, firmware, software, or power mechanisms to reduce size, weight, power, cost, enable multiple modes, and simplify porting of signal processing waveforms and capabilities amongst multiple platforms with varying constraints, means to manage and control modes of operation, and/or means to collect performance information from multiple networks.

2. 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 6.2.8., “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, 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 accordance with 10 U.S.C. § 2371b(f), the Government may award a follow-on production contract or Other Transaction (OT) for any OT awarded under this BAA if: (1) that participant in the OT, or a recognized successor in interest to the OT, successfully completed the entire prototype project provided for in the OT, as modified; and (2) the OT provides for the award of a follow-on production contract or OT to the participant, or a recognized successor in interest to the OT.

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.

2.1 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 cannot identify whether the work under this BAA may be considered fundamental research and may award both fundamental and non-fundamental research.

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 determine whether the proposed research shall be considered fundamental and to select the award instrument type. Appropriate language will be included in resultant awards for non-fundamental research to prescribe publication requirements and other restrictions, as appropriate. This language 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 to be performed by a potential awardee is non-fundamental research, its proposed subawardee’s effort may be fundamental research. It is also possible that the research performed by a potential awardee is http://www.darpa.mil/work-with-us/contract-management#OtherTransactions http://www.darpa.mil/work-with-us/contract-management#OtherTransactions http://www.darpa.mil/work-with-us/additional-baa fundamental research while its proposed subawardee’s effort may be non-fundamental research.

In all cases, it is the potential awardee’s responsibility to explain in its proposal which proposed efforts are fundamental research and why the proposed efforts should be considered fundamental research.

3. ELIGIBILITY INFORMATION

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

3.1 ELIGIBLE APPLICANTS

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.

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. This information is required for Government Entities proposing to be awardees or subawardees.

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 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 http://www.dss.mil/

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 REQUIREMENTS

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 http://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.

Prior to sending any classified submissions, performers must provide http://www.darpa.mil/ advance notification to the BAA Coordinator via HR001119S0032@darpa.mil.

For instructions on how to provide advanced notification at an unclassified level, refer to Section 4.2.2.

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

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.

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 http://www.dss.mil/ 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).

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 and 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 and/or Secret classified information.

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 Reference: HR001119S0032

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 Use 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). 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 PSO or their staff.

Proposers choosing to submit SAP information from an agency other than DARPA are required to provide the DARPA Technical Office Program Security Officer (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: All proposals containing Special Access Program (SAP) information must be processed on a SAP information technology (SAP IT) system that has received an

Approval-to-Operate (ATO) from the DARPA Technology Office PSO, or other applicable DARPA SAP IT Authorizing Official. The SAP IT system ATO will be based upon the Risk Management Framework (RMF) process outlined in the Joint Special Access Program Implementation Guide (JSIG), current version, (or successor document).

(Note: A SAP IT system is any SAP IT system that requires an ATO. It can range from a single laptop/tablet up to a local and wide area networks.)

The Department of Defense mandates the use of a component’s SAP enterprise system unless a compelling reason exists to use a non-enterprise system. The DARPA Chief Information Officer (CIO) must approve any performer proposal to acquire, build, and operate a non-enterprise SAP IT system during the awarded period of performance. Use of the DARPA SAP enterprise system, SAVANNAH, does not require CIO approval.

SAP IT disposition procedures must be approved by the DARPA Senior Authorizing Official, or SAPCO, IAW the OSD SAPCO Memorandum, “Disposition of DoD Special Access Program Information Technology Devices”, July 27, 2017.

4.2.2 Executive Summary, Abstract, and Proposal Information

For all responses to this BAA, the responder must clearly identify the technical topic area(s) the proposed effort seeks to address.

In order to reduce the administrative burden on proposers and the Government and in an attempt to mitigate unnecessary costs associated with the generation of proposals that are not of interest to DARPA/STO, described herein is the Government’s process for submittal of information for evaluation. Any responsible proposer is encouraged to respond.

Proposers are strongly encouraged to submit an executive summary prior to proposal abstracts or full proposals. The recommended order of submissions is executive summary, abstract, proposal. Please note it is not mandatory to submit an executive summary and/or abstract before submitting a full proposal. This procedure is intended to minimize unnecessary effort in proposal preparation and review. The time and date for submissions 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 submission.

Unclassified executive summaries, abstracts, and proposals sent in response to HR001119S0032 may be submitted via DARPA's BAA Website (https://baa.darpa.mil). Proposals may not be submitted by fax or email; any so sent will be disregarded. 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; it is highly advised that submission process be started as early as possible.

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

Technical support for DARPA's BAA Website may be reached at BAAT_Support@darpa.mil, and is typically available during regular business hours, (9:00 AM- 5:00 PM EST Monday - Friday).

Proposers requesting grants or cooperative agreements must submit proposals through one of the following methods: (1) electronic upload per the instructions at https://www.grants.gov/applicants/apply-for-grants.html; or (2) hard-copy mailed directly to DARPA. If proposers intend to use Grants.gov as their means of submission, then they must submit their entire proposal through Grants.gov; applications cannot be submitted in part to Grants.gov and in part as a hard-copy. Proposers using Grants.gov do not submit hard-copy proposals in addition to the Grants.gov electronic submission.

Submissions: Proposers must submit the three forms listed below.

SF 424 Research and Related (R&R) Application for Federal Assistance, available on the Grants.gov website at https://apply07.grants.gov/apply/forms/sample/RR_SF424_2_0-V2.0.pdf. This form must be completed and submitted.

To evaluate compliance with Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 (20 U.S.C.

A§ 1681 Et. Seq.), the Department of Defense is using the two forms below to collect certain demographic and career information to be able to assess the success rates of women who are proposed for key roles in applications in science, technology, engineering, or mathematics disciplines. Detailed instructions for each form are available on Grants.gov.

Research and Related Senior/Key Person Profile (Expanded), available on the Grants.gov website at https://apply07.grants.gov/apply/forms/sample/RR_KeyPersonExpanded_2_0-V2.0.pdf.

This form must be completed and submitted.

Research and Related Personal Data, available on the Grants.gov website at https://apply07.grants.gov/apply/forms/sample/RR_PersonalData_1_2-V1.2.pdf. Each applicant must complete the name field of this form, however, provision of the demographic information is voluntary.