HR001121S0033.pdf

HR001121S0033 MINT 1

Broad Agency Announcement Morphogenic Interfaces (MINT)

Defense Sciences Office

HR001121S0033

July 1, 2021

HR001121S0033 MINT 2

Table of Contents I. Funding Opportunity Description

A. Introduction B. Background C. Program Description D. Program Structure E. Schedule/Milestones F. Deliverables G. Other Program Objectives and Considerations

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

III. Eligibility Information A. Eligible Applicants B. Organizational Conflicts of Interest C. Cost Sharing/Matching

IV. Application and Submission Information A. Address to Request Application Package B. Content and Form of Application Submission C. Submission Dates and Times D. Funding Restrictions E. Other Submission Requirements

V. Application Review Information A. Evaluation Criteria B. Review and Selection Process C. Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information (FAPIIS)

VI. Award Administration Information A. Selection Notices B. Administrative and National Policy Requirements C. Reporting

VII. Agency Contacts VIII. Other Information

A. Proposers Day B. Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) C. Collaborative Efforts/Teaming

BAA Attachments:

Attachment A: ABSTRACT SUMMARY SLIDE TEMPLATE Attachment B: ABSTRACT TEMPLATE Attachment C: PROPOSAL SUMMARY SLIDE TEMPLATE Attachment D: PROPOSAL TEMPLATE VOLUME 1: TECHNICAL & MANAGEMENT Attachment E: PROPOSAL TEMPLATE VOLUME 2: COST Attachment F: MS ExcelTM DARPA COST PROPOSAL SPREADSHEET Attachment G: PROPOSAL TEMPLATE VOLUME 3: ADMINISTRATIVE & NATIONAL POLICY REQUIREMENTS

HR001121S0033 MINT 3

PART I: OVERVIEW INFORMATION

Federal Agency Name: Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), Defense Sciences Office (DSO)

Funding Opportunity Title: Morphogenic Interfaces (MINT)

Announcement Type: Initial Announcement

Funding Opportunity Number: HR001121S0033

Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) Number(s): 12.910 Research and Technology Development

Dates (All times listed herein are Eastern Time.)

o Posting Date: July 1, 2021 o Proposers Day: July 9, 2021. See Section VIII.A.

o Abstract Due Date: July 23, 2021, 4:00 p.m.

o FAQ Submission Deadline: August 23, 2021, 4:00 p.m. See Section VIII.B.

o Full Proposal Due Date: September 2, 2021, 4:00 p.m.

Anticipated Individual Awards: DARPA anticipates multiple awards in both Focus Areas 1 (FA1) and 2 (FA2)

Types of Instruments that May be Awarded: Procurement contracts, cooperative agreements, or Other Transactions. Award instruments will be limited to procurement contracts and Other Transactions for Proposers whose proposed solution includes Controlled Unclassified Information (CUI).

Agency contacts o Technical POC: Dr. Vishnu Sundaresan, Program Manager, DARPA/DSO o BAA Email: MINT@darpa.mil o BAA Mailing Address:

DARPA/DSO

ATTN: HR001121S0033

675 North Randolph Street Arlington, VA 22203-2114 o DARPA/DSO Opportunities Website: http://www.darpa.mil/work-with-us/opportunities

Teaming Information: See Section VIII.C for information on teaming opportunities.

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ): FAQs for this solicitation may be viewed on the DARPA/DSO Opportunities Website. See Section VIII.B for further information.

Security: MINT is an UNCLASSIFIED program. Proposers are required to assess and describe export-control implications of proposed efforts. Refer to Section IV.B.5 for more information.

mailto:MINT@darpa.mil https://www.darpa.mil/work-with-us/opportunities?oFilter=DSO https://www.darpa.mil/work-with-us/opportunities?oFilter=DSO

HR001121S0033 MINT 4

PART II: FULL TEXT OF ANNOUNCEMENT

I. Funding Opportunity Description

This Broad Agency Announcement (BAA) constitutes a public notice of a competitive funding opportunity as described in Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 6.102(d)(2) and 35.016 as well as 2 C.F.R. § 200.203. Any resultant negotiations and/or awards will follow all laws and regulations applicable to the specific award instrument(s) available under this BAA, e.g., FAR

15.4 for procurement contracts.

A. Introduction

The Defense Sciences Office (DSO) at the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) is soliciting innovative research proposals for the application of morphogenesis to design electrochemical interfaces. The Morphogenic Interfaces (MINT) program seeks to enhance the persistence of high performance electrochemical systems by developing self-regulating interfaces that exploit detrimental local gradients to preserve interface function. To achieve this, MINT approaches should minimize irreversible morphological degradation that occurs at the functional interface1 between different materials in batteries and surface protection coatings/alloys. Proposed research should (1) develop mathematical models that can precisely predict the evolution of interface morphology informed by novel in operando characterization of electrochemical interfaces, (2) design/discover novel interface materials that can self-regulate their morphology and function, and (3) demonstrate the application of these interface materials to realize persistent, high performance electrochemical systems. Specifically excluded is research that primarily results in evolutionary improvements to the existing state of practice.

B. Background

Electrochemical interfaces regulate the conversion of electrochemical gradients into ionic currents and, therefore, play a critical role in various applications, such as batteries, anticorrosion coatings, fuel cells, chemical separation, catalysts, etc. They are classified by the phase of materials forming the interface and their charge transport function. For example, solid/solid interfaces are designed to support ion transport in solid-state batteries and other energy storage/conversion devices, while solid/liquid and solid/vapor interfaces are typically designed to minimize dissolution of metals in corrosion resistant coatings in marine, exhaust, and plasma environments; minimize adhesion of spores in antifouling coatings; or regulate chemical kinetics for chemical separation, purification of metals, etc.

Electrochemical interfaces are tailored to either maximize or minimize charge transport (e.g., maximize ion transport for high power, charging/discharging rate in batteries; minimize dissolution for corrosion protection; or minimize adhesion of spores in antifouling coatings).

Irrespective of design intent, electrochemical gradients at the interface in all electrochemical

1 Interfaces are classified by the materials forming the interface and ion transport function. For example, (1) solid/solid interfaces are designed to maximize ion transport in solid-state batteries and other energy storage/conversion devices and (2) solid/liquid and solid/vapor interfaces are typically designed to (a) control adhesion and/or dissolution reactions for antifouling, corrosion resistant coatings; (b) regulate chemical kinetics as catalysts for chemical separation, purification of metals, etc.; and/or (c) control material dissolution in plasma environments.

HR001121S0033 MINT 5

systems lead to continuous evolution of interface morphology and accumulation of local energy gradients (stress, electrochemical potential, electrical potential, etc.). In high performance electrochemical systems, these local energy gradients lead to significant morphological changes, accelerating the degradation of materials and charge transport function at the interface. For example, solid/solid charge transfer interfaces develop voids that lead to a dramatic drop in maximum capacity and cycle life (>90% drop within ~50 cycles) in high specific energy solid-state batteries. Similarly, pitting corrosion in structural alloys leads to the formation of cracks that affect fatigue strength (>80% drop) in aggressive corrosive environments.

Persistence is defined as the lifespan (time, number of cycles, etc.) during which hardware maintains its performance at its design specification. For example, persistence of a battery is the number of charge/recharge cycles during which it can operate within a specific tolerance of its initial capacity. Persistence of a corrosion resistant coating/alloy is the number of cycles up to which the structural material retains a specific fatigue stress (e.g., 50%, 70%, etc.) in a corrosive environment as compared to an inert environment. Notwithstanding the improvements in the properties of bulk materials, there is an emerging consensus that challenges in our current understanding of interfaces limit the ability to engineer persistent, high performance electrochemical systems. Interfaces are typically only a few atoms to a few nanometers thick and are often located deep within the material. This has limited the ability to directly or indirectly image 3D morphology, i.e., spatially correlated functional properties (currents, volume flow) and morphological changes (mass loss) with the required spatiotemporal resolution as well as the ability to develop a mathematical framework to model emergent phenomenon at the interface using realistic 3D representations of interfaces.

These limitations further impede the design/discovery of novel interface materials that can continuously restore their morphology for optimal charge transport function. Hence, current design approaches consider the loss of morphology as an incontrovertible reality, and designers employ a number of techniques (increased thickness, pressure, hardness, hydrophobic/ hydrophilic coatings, texture, etc.) that trade-off performance to increase persistence.

C. Program Description

The goal of the MINT program is to disrupt the trade-off between performance and persistence in the design of electrochemical systems by developing novel electrochemical interface materials for solid/solid, solid/liquid, and solid/vapor interfaces. The new insights in the MINT program take their inspiration from morphogenesis, which explains the evolution of morphology due to diffusion of and chemical reaction between chemical species in biological systems far from equilibria. This concept, mathematically explained by Alan Turing in “The Chemical Basis of Morphogenesis,”2 and further extended by mathematical biologists, provides a framework to model the evolution of patterns in reactive systems. Specifically, local gradients that are detrimental to cell function are used as a stimuli to maintain morphological homeostasis.3 The

2 Turing, Alan Mathison. "The chemical basis of morphogenesis." Bulletin of mathematical biology 52.1-2 (1952):

153-197.

3 Nijhout, H. F., & Davidowitz, G. (2003). Developmental perspectives on phenotypic variation, canalization, and fluctuating asymmetry. Developmental instability: causes and consequences, 3-13.

HR001121S0033 MINT 6

MINT program will extend this concept to electrochemical interfaces through the following three technical areas (TAs):

TA1 - Interface Modeling and Characterization TA2 - Morphogenic Interface Materials – Design and Discovery TA3 - System Level Demonstration

Approaches in the three TAs should be tailored to address the technical challenges relevant to one of two application-centric focus areas (FAs):

FA 1 - Focus area 1 (FA1) will be focused on solid/solid charge transfer interfaces to enable solid-state batteries with unprecedented combinations of energy density and cycle life FA2 - Solid/liquid and solid/vapor interfaces to enable high performance corrosion resistant coatings and alloys with superior fatigue strength in a corrosive environment

Proposers may propose to both FAs in separate proposals, but each proposal must include all three TAs for the selected FA.

D. Program Structure

MINT is a two-phase program with each phase lasting 24 months. Proposals should clearly address how the proposed concept will meet the goals of the selected FA through specific advances in all three TAs over the course of the program. Proposers should structure the proposal with a 24-month Phase 1 as the base period and with a 24-month Phase 2 as an option. Proposals must include a schedule that clearly shows which TAs will be pursued during each month of the program and sufficient detail in the Statement of Work to explain the research tasks to be performed in each phase. All proposers should clearly outline the concept central to their approach to design morphogenic interface materials and identify innovation in each of the TAs towards deliverables that meet or exceed the program metrics, found in Section I.D, Tables 2 and 3.

The organization of the three TAs into FAs in MINT is shown in Table 1.

Table 1. Focus Areas (FA) and Technical Areas (TA) Overview

TA

FA1

Solid/solid charge transfer interfaces for solid-state battery

FA2

Solid/liquid and solid/vapor interfaces for corrosion resistant alloys and coatings

TA1 - Interface Modeling and Characterization

Predict evolution of morphology and local gradients in solid/solid charge transfer interfaces

Predict evolution of compositional change and ionic gradients in solid/liquid and solid/vapor interfaces

TA2 - Morphogenic Interface Materials - Design and Discovery

Design/discover novel interfacial materials that maintain stable 3D morphology

Design/discover novel structural materials/coatings that can

HR001121S0033 MINT 7

and maximize ionic current via self-regulation exploit local gradients to minimize corrosion current

TA3 - System Level Demonstration

Demonstrate solid/solid morphogenic interfaces in solid-state battery test samples with combinations of high energy density and long cycle life

Demonstrate solid/liquid and solid/vapor morphogenic interfaces that increase number of alternating loading cycles of structural materials in a corrosive environment

1. Technical Areas (TA)

TA1 - Interface Modeling and Characterization The objective of TA1 is to develop multiscale mathematical models informed by characterization techniques that can report electrochemical function correlated to morphology and evolution of morphology with sufficient spatiotemporal resolution.

Electrochemical interfaces are driven, open systems that exhibit multiple phases due to time-varying composition, structure, electrochemical potential windows, temperature, and phase stability. The interactions that couple morphology with various forcing functions lead to phase separation and changes in composition that occur in 3D over a range of 10 nanometers to 100 microns. While simulation capabilities have dramatically improved due to advances in high-performance computing hardware, the models for interfaces are still in 1D, which limits our understanding of the evolution of geometry, local gradients, and onset of mechanical defects.

To address these challenges, proposals should outline the approach to developing models that can predict the evolution of interface morphology in 3D, local energy gradients, and onset of phase instability over relevant orders of lengthscale (few nanometers up to microns). It is anticipated that proposers will build upon known morphogenic models (e.g., reaction-diffusion model, Gray-Scott model, etc.), to capture the evolution of morphology. Proposers should explain how these models will be validated from initial morphologies of fabricated prototypes. It is anticipated that proposers will use emerging characterization techniques such as e-beam holography, atom probe tomography, X-ray phase contrast imaging, transmission electron microscopy (TEM), scanning probe microscopies, or X-ray nano and micro tomography to validate the models. Since no single characterization technique spans the entirety of lengthscales, proposals must clearly identify the combination of experimental approaches that will be used for model validation. In addition, proposals should identify how the models will capture (1) origin of spatial inhomogeneities and their rate of propagation, (2) limiting conditions for phase separation, and (3) operating envelope to avoid detrimental changes at the interface.

All proposals should quantify the anticipated TA1 improvements over the state of the art (SOA).

TA2 - Morphogenic Interface Materials – Design and Discovery The objective of TA2 is to develop novel interface materials, referred to as morphogenic interface materials, that can maintain optimal charge transport function over their design operational lifetime.

HR001121S0033 MINT 8

Interfaces in electrochemical systems are formed in situ as two reactive materials are brought together and are designed to maintain optimal charge transport. The evolution of interface morphology due to charge transport leads to accumulation of localized energy gradients (stress, electrical, electrochemical, etc.) that accelerate material degradation. In high performance electrochemical systems, the reactivity of materials at the interface leads to rapid material degradation that contemporary materials cannot recover from and results in a dramatic drop in persistence.

To address this limitation, MINT proposals should design/discover morphogenic interface materials that can exploit local and global gradients to self-regulate their morphology or composition and preserve their charge transport function. For example, a morphogenic solid/solid interface material in a solid-state battery should maintain its ionic conductivity independent of the state of charge. Similarly, a morphogenic solid/liquid or solid/vapor interface material should exploit local gradients and minimize dissolution of coatings/alloys into its environment. Since morphogenic interface materials should exploit local gradients to regulate morphology and preserve charge transport function, it is anticipated that morphogenic interface materials will exhibit multi-domain coupling (e.g., thermomechanical, piezoelectric, electrorheological, electrochemical, chemomechanical, etc.). Proposals should identify components of TA1 that will inform the evolution of local gradients to TA2 for design/discovery of morphogenic interface materials. Proposers may choose to perform design and discovery using traditional approaches or leverage recent advances, such as materials informatics, computational screening, and other approaches for materials design/discovery. Irrespective of the approach, proposals should clearly identify the technical merits of the design or discovery and explain the scientific basis for kinetics of morphological regulation. Proposals should discuss the feasibility of fabrication for any proposed morphogenic interfaces. Proposals should also provide a test plan to assess performance against TA2 metrics as described in Section I.D, Tables 2 and

3. It is anticipated that materials design and discovery approaches in TA2 could involve computational approaches to characterize material properties. Proposals should clearly outline a mix of computational approaches and physical experiments to test the material properties. All proposals should justify the appropriateness of their TA2 approach to their proposed FA and outline a test plan to characterize material properties. In addition, all proposals should also address risks inherent in their TA2 approach as well as appropriate mitigation strategies.

TA3 – System Level Demonstration The objective of TA3 is to demonstrate the application of novel electrochemical interface materials and closed-loop regulation of interface morphology and function in solid-state batteries and corrosion resistant coatings/alloys.

Proposals should clearly identify the relationship between the three TAs by mapping specific activities and use inter-related activities to explain the design considerations for system level demonstration in TA3. Proposals should discuss specific design attributes at a system level that explain how local gradients will be exploited for regulation of morphology. Sufficient detail should also be provided in the proposal to explain spatiotemporal kinetics of morphology regulation and its relation to restoring charge transport function. If more than one local energy gradient dominates the response at a system level, proposals should explain the rationale behind using one, few, or all of the gradients to restore morphology and increase persistence. Additional

HR001121S0033 MINT 9

guidance on system design considerations for TA3 specific to each focus area is provided in Sections I.D.2 and I.E.

2. Focus Area (FA) Descriptions

FA1: Solid/solid charge transfer interfaces for solid-state batteries The goal of FA1 is to enable the development of novel solid-state charge transfer interfaces and demonstrate an increase in persistence of high-specific energy solid-state batteries. All FA1 proposals should detail technical progress in each of the technical areas that leads to system level demonstration in a laboratory scale test cell.

MINT FA1 proposals can be based on (1) any rechargeable battery chemistry that can meet program metrics and is not restricted to lithium all solid-state batteries (Li-ASSB) and (2) any solid-state battery architecture (anodeless, metal anode). In the case of battery architectures with metal anodes, proposed designs should match the capacity of the anode and the cathode.

MINT FA1 proposals cannot (1) include any external pressurization devices or thermal devices to meet MINT metrics and/or (2) include any gel or liquid electrolyte in the proposed architecture. Proposals that include external pressurization devices, thermal devices, gel, or liquid electrolyte will be non-conforming to the goals of FA1.

The target metrics for FA1 are organized by each TA and are listed in Table 2. The target capacity of the cells in this program is 0.1 to 0.5 Ah for Phase 1 and 2.0 Ah for Phase 2. Hence, FA1 proposals should provide the feasibility to fabricate laboratory scale test pouch cells that can meet program metrics. Proposals should clearly explain these considerations in relation to their proposed choice of solid-state battery chemistry and architecture. Proposals must provide a clear description of anticipated test samples using engineering drawings, schematics, and other relevant details that demonstrate the feasibility of the proposed research products. The target specific energy, C-rate, and persistence of laboratory scale test cells is 300 Wh/kg (at 0.5C rate for 500 cycles) and 400 Wh/kg (at 1C rate for 1000 cycles) measured at room temperature in Phase 1 and Phase 2, respectively. The entire cell including its packaging will be used for estimating the specific energy of the cell. It is anticipated that independent verification and validation (IV&V) tests will start three months before the end of the period of performance in both Phase 1 and Phase 2. Proposals should accommodate this requirement for IV&V in Government labs. Government IV&V labs may also deconstruct the cells to characterize materials composition during various stages of testing and establish degradation mechanisms of the bulk materials and interfaces in the cell. Any additional details on test protocols will be provided by Government IV&V partners during program kick-off.

Table 2 Metrics for MINT FA1 – Solid/solid charge transfer interfaces for solid-state batteries

TA Phase 1 Phase 2

TA1 - Interface Modeling and Characterization

Model interfacial processes over 10nm-100µm with 80% accuracy†

Improve models to span 1nm-1000µm with 90% accuracy†

HR001121S0033 MINT 10

TA2 - Morphogenic Interface Materials - Design and discovery

Design/discover morphogenic solid/solid interface materials to maintain ionic conductivity of 5 mS/cm using local gradients

Improve interface materials to maintain ionic conductivity of 10 mS/cm using local gradients

TA3 - System Level Demonstration

Achieve 500 discharge/recharge cycles at 0.5C in a 300 Wh/kg* SSB pouch cell at with 90% retention of initial capacity

Improve to 1000 discharge/recharge cycles at 1C in a 400 Wh/kg* SSB pouch cell with 90% retention of initial capacity

† Accuracy of mathematical models is obtained from comparing model results with appropriate experimental data.

* Energy density calculations will include packaging and are calculated from charge/discharge tests performed at room temperature without any external pressurization device.

FA2: Solid/liquid and solid/vapor interfaces for surface protection coatings The goal of FA2 is to enable the development of alloys and surface protection coatings with superior corrosion resistant properties. The test samples of novel alloys or base metal with novel corrosion resistant coatings should have mechanical properties comparable to structural materials used in maritime and aerospace applications. All FA2 proposals should detail technical progress in each of the technical areas that lead to fatigue testing.

MINT FA2 proposals can be based on solid/liquid and solid/vapor, where liquid and vapor phase could be 3.5% NaCl or other equivalent environment. Proposers can choose one or more principal element(s) for the alloy, and the proposal should clearly explain the mechanism of self-passivation that exploits the ionic gradients between the metal and liquid/vapor phase in its corrosive environment. The metrics for FA2 listed in Table 3 are for 3.5% NaCl environment at room temperature. FA2 proposals that target a different reducing or oxidizing environment should clearly identify current SOA and equivalent Phase 2 metrics for TA2 (for example, 10x decrease in corrosion current) and TA3 (for example, 50x increase in persistence during fatigue loading in corrosive environment). Proposers should also provide and justify appropriate Phase 1 TA2 and TA3 metrics. One of the potential approaches is to exploit the design envelope offered by entropy stabilized alloys (MPEA, CCA, and HEA) in TA2 to discover novel alloy compositions. However, other approaches to design morphogenic solid/liquid and solid/vapor interfaces will be considered. Hence, proposers should provide a clear description of the alloy composition, anticipated mechanical properties, and outline fabrication methods for samples.

Proposals should identify characterization methods to establish that the composition of the alloy resulting from design/discovery matches the fabricated sample.

The description of test samples is outlined in Section I.F. Test samples for IV&V may be required up to 3 months before the end of the period of performance in both Phase 1 and the proposed workplan should accommodate this requirement. For FA1, Government IV&V labs will deconstruct the test prototypes to perform materials characterization. For FA2, Government IV&V labs may characterize materials composition during various stages of testing to establish

HR001121S0033 MINT 11

degradation mechanisms for the bulk materials and/or coatings in a corrosive environment. Any additional details on test protocols will be provided by Government IV&V labs during program kick-off.

Table 3 Metrics for MINT FA2 – Solid/liquid and solid/vapor charge transfer interfaces for corrosion resistant surfaces

TA Phase 1 Phase 2

TA1 - Interface Modeling and Characterization

Model interfacial processes over 10nm-100µm with 80% accuracy

Improve models to span 1nm-1000µm with 90% accuracy

TA2 - Morphogenic Interface Materials - Design and discovery

Design/discover morphogenic solid/liquid, solid/vapor interface materials that maintain corrosion current <0.1 µA/cm2, >0.5V

Improve interface materials to maintain corrosion current <0.01 µA/cm2, >1V

TA3 - System Level Demonstration

Achieve 107 cycles at 10 Hz with a retention of 50% fatigue load in a corrosive environment relative to inert environment

Achieve 107 cycles at 10 Hz with a retention of 70% of fatigue load in a corrosive environment relative to inert environment

3. Independent Verification and Validation (IV&V)

Government personnel will serve as technical advisors and IV&V partners throughout the program, providing DARPA an assessment of performer capabilities and also validating experimental data and/or system performance. Performers will be expected to work openly and regularly with Government IV&V teams throughout the program. Performers will be required to provide details of their systems, including, but not limited to, engineering drawings, operating methods and instructions, software, datasets, and samples, to DARPA and/or any designated Government IV&V member or organization upon request. Proposals should include a task to reflect interaction with Government teams and delivery of requested information, data hardware, software, and materials. This BAA does not solicit Government IV&V participation.

Government personnel interested in learning more about MINT or potentially participating in IV&V activities should contact MINT@darpa.mil.

E. Schedule/Milestones

Proposers should provide a technical and programmatic strategy that conforms to the entire program schedule and presents an aggressive plan to fully address all program goals, metrics, milestones, and deliverables. The task structure must be consistent across the proposed schedule, Statement of Work, and cost volume. A target start date of March 2022 may be assumed for planning purposes. Schedules will be synchronized across performers, as required, and monitored/revised as necessary throughout the program.

All proposals must include the following meetings and travel in the proposed schedule and costs:

To continue integration and development between TAs and FAs, foster collaboration mailto:MINT@darpa.mil

HR001121S0033 MINT 12

between teams, and disseminate program developments, a two-day Principal Investigator (PI) meeting will be held approximately every six months with locations split between the East and West Coasts of the United States. For budgeting purposes, plan for seven two-day meetings over the course of 48 months: four meetings in the Washington, D.C. area and three meetings in the San Francisco, CA area.

Regular teleconference meetings will be scheduled with the Government team for progress reporting as well as problem identification and mitigation. Proposers should anticipate at least one site visit per phase by the DARPA Program Manager during which they will have the opportunity to demonstrate progress towards agreed-upon milestones.

F. Deliverables

The deliverables from the MINT program corresponding to the three TAs for FA1 and FA2 are summarized in Table 4 and Table 5, respectively. For TA1 in both FAs, the modeling software and code base should be shared with Government partners for IV&V, and proposals should include a separate task that outlines the approach to sharing the developed software. TA2 and TA3 deliverables are specific to the FAs, and proposals should identify a feasible plan to share the outcomes of materials development and standalone characterization.

Table 4 Deliverables for MINT FA1 organized by TAs

TA Phase 1 Phase 2 TA1 - Interface Modeling and Characterization

Validated mathematical models and characterization techniques

TA2 - Morphogenic Interface Materials - Design and Discovery

Novel materials composition, fabrication methods, test protocols, and samples that demonstrate standalone regulation of morphology and ion transport function

TA3 - System Level Demonstration

5 pouch cells with a capacity of

0.1 to 0.5 Ah and without any external pressurization device and/or heating source

10 pouch cells with a capacity of

2.0 Ah and without any external

pressurization device and/or heating source

FA2, TA3 proposals should include engineering drawings of tensile test samples required to characterize corrosion fatigue. For proposals that consider a different corrosive environment other than 3.5% NaCl, deliverables should include a complete description of the environment.

Table 5 Deliverables for MINT FA2 organized by TAs

TA Phase 1 Phase 2 TA1 - Interface Modeling and Characterization

Validated mathematical models and characterization techniques

HR001121S0033 MINT 13

TA2 - Morphogenic Interface Materials - Design and Discovery

3 test samples (alloy or base metal with morphogenic interface coating) measuring at least 1cm x 1cm with composition, fabrication methods and test protocol.

10 test samples (alloy or base metal with morphogenic interface coating) measuring at least 5cm x 5cm with composition, fabrication methods and test protocol.

TA3 - System Level Demonstration

3 tensile test specimens (alloy or base metal with morphogenic interface coating) on samples measuring at least 1mm at the narrowest section, meeting phase 1 metrics.

5 tensile test specimens (alloy or base metal with morphogenic interface coating) on samples measuring at least 3mm at the narrowest section, meeting phase 2 metrics.

In addition to deliverables above, performers will be expected to provide the following deliverables:

Comprehensive quarterly technical reports due within ten days of the end of the given quarter, describing progress made on the specific milestones as laid out in the Statement of Work.

A phase completion report submitted within 30 days of the end of each phase, summarizing the research done.

Other negotiated deliverables specific to the objectives of the individual efforts. These may include registered reports; experimental protocols; publications; data management plan;

intermediate and final versions of software libraries, code, and APIs, including documentation and user manuals; and/or a comprehensive assemblage of design documents, models, modeling data and results, and model validation data.

Reporting as outlined in Section VI.C.

G. Other Program Objectives and Considerations

1. Collaboration

Throughout the course of the program, it is likely to be necessary for all performers to share relevant information regarding their research and development to support the larger program goals. DARPA expects all program performers to work collaboratively with one another to realize the program objectives outlined herein, so proposers should carefully review the goals for the entire program in order to fully understand the context of each program objective, performer category, and TA/FA within the overall program structure. All proposals should provide a management and teaming plan describing the roles and responsibilities of each performer on the proposed team. Proposals that fail to include these plans may be deemed non-conforming and removed from consideration.

2. Intellectual Property Proposers should note that the Government does not own the intellectual property or technical data/computer software developed under Government contracts. The Government acquires the right to use the technical data/computer software. Regardless of the scope of the Government’s rights, awardees may freely use their same data/software for their own commercial purposes (unless restricted by U.S. export control laws or security classification). Therefore, it is desired

HR001121S0033 MINT 14

that all noncommercial software (including source code), software documentation, hardware designs and documentation, and technical data generated by the program be provided as deliverables to the Government with a minimum of Government Purpose Rights (GPR), as lesser rights may adversely impact the lifecycle costs of affected items, components, or processes.

If proposers desire to use proprietary computer software or technical data or both as the basis of their proposed approach, in whole or in part, they should (1) clearly identify such software/data and its proposed particular use(s), (2) explain how the Government will be able to reach its program goals (including transition) within the proprietary model offered, and (3) provide possible nonproprietary alternatives in any area that might present transition difficulties or increased risk or cost to the Government under the proposed proprietary solution. Proposers expecting to use, but not to deliver, commercial open source tools or other materials in implementing their approach may be required to indemnify the Government against legal liability arising from such use.

All references to "Unlimited Rights" or "Government Purpose Rights" are intended to refer to the definitions of those terms as set forth in the Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement

(DFARS) 227.

II. Award Information

A. General Award Information

DARPA anticipates multiple awards. The level of funding for individual awards made under this BAA will depend on the quality of the proposals received and the availability of funds. Awards will be made to proposers4 whose proposals are determined to be the most advantageous to the Government, all evaluation factors considered. See Section V for further information.

The Government reserves the right to:

select for negotiation all, some, one, or none of the proposals received in response to this solicitation;

make awards without discussions with proposers;

conduct discussions with proposers if it is later determined to be necessary;

segregate portions of resulting awards into pre-priced options;

accept proposals in their entirety or select only portions of proposals for award;

fund awards in increments with options for continued work at the end of one or more phases;

request additional documentation once the award instrument has been determined

(e.g., representations and certifications); and remove proposers from award consideration should the parties fail to reach agreement on award terms within a reasonable time or the proposer fails to provide requested

4 As used throughout this BAA, “proposer” refers to the lead organization on a submission to this BAA. The proposer is responsible for ensuring that all information required by a BAA--from all team members--is submitted in accordance with the BAA. “Awardee” refers to anyone who might receive a prime award from the Government, including recipients of procurement contracts, cooperative agreements, or Other Transactions. “Subawardee” refers to anyone who might receive a subaward from a prime awardee (e.g., subawardee, consultant, etc.).

HR001121S0033 MINT 15

additional information in a timely manner.

Proposals identified for negotiation may result in a procurement contract, cooperative agreement, or Other Transaction (OT), depending upon the nature of the work proposed, the required degree of interaction between parties, 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 solicitation 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.

B. Fundamental Research

It is DoD policy that the publication of products of fundamental research will remain unrestricted to the maximum extent possible. National Security Decision Directive (NSDD) 189 defines fundamental research as follows:

‘Fundamental research’ means basic and applied research in science and engineering, the results of which ordinarily are published and shared broadly within the scientific community, as distinguished from proprietary research and from industrial development, design, production, and product utilization, the results of which ordinarily are restricted for proprietary or national security reasons.

As of the date of publication of this solicitation, the Government expects that program goals as described herein may be met by proposed efforts for fundamental research and non-fundamental research. Some proposed research may present a high likelihood of disclosing performance characteristics of military systems or manufacturing technologies that are unique and critical to defense. Based on the anticipated type of proposer (e.g., university or industry) and the nature of the solicited work, the Government expects that some awards will include 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 determine whether the proposed research shall be considered fundamental and to select the award http://www.darpa.mil/work-with-us/contract-management#OtherTransactions http://www.darpa.mil/work-with-us/contract-management#OtherTransactions

HR001121S0033 MINT 16

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 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.

III. Eligibility Information

A. Eligible Applicants

All responsible sources capable of satisfying the Government's needs may submit a proposal for DARPA’s consideration.

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

a. FFRDCs

FFRDCs are subject to applicable direct competition limitations and cannot propose to this solicitation 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, that (a) cites the specific authority establishing their eligibility to propose to Government solicitations and compete with industry, and (b) certifies the FFRDC’s compliance with the associated FFRDC sponsor agreement’s terms and conditions. These conditions are a requirement for FFRDCs proposing to be awardees or subawardees.

b. Government Entities

Government Entities (e.g., Government/National laboratories, military educational institutions, etc.) are subject to applicable direct competition limitations. Government Entities must clearly demonstrate that the work is not otherwise available from the private sector and provide written documentation citing the specific statutory authority and contractual authority, if relevant, establishing their ability to propose to Government solicitations and compete with industry. This information is required for Government Entities proposing to be awardees or subawardees.

c. Authority and Eligibility

At the present time, DARPA does not consider 15 U.S.C. § 3710a to be sufficient legal authority to show eligibility. While 10 U.S.C.§ 2539b may be the appropriate statutory starting point for some entities, specific supporting regulatory guidance, together with evidence of agency approval, will still be required to fully establish eligibility. DARPA will consider FFRDC and Government Entity eligibility submissions on a case-by-case basis; however, the burden to prove eligibility for all team members rests solely with the proposer.

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

HR001121S0033 MINT 17

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

B. Organizational Conflicts of Interest

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

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

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

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

The name of the DARPA office receiving the support;

The prime contract number;

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

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

Include any OCIs affirmations and disclosures in Attachment G: VOLUME 3:

ADMINISTRATIVE & NATIONAL POLICY REQUIREMENTS.

C. Cost Sharing/Matching

HR001121S0033 MINT 18

Cost sharing is not required; however, it will be carefully considered where there is an applicable statutory condition relating to the selected funding instrument (e.g., OTs under the authority of 10 U.S.C. § 2371). Cost sharing is encouraged where there is a reasonable probability of a potential commercial application related to the proposed research and development effort.

For more information on potential cost sharing requirements for Other Transactions for Prototype, see http://www.darpa.mil/work-with-us/contract-management#OtherTransactions.

IV. Application and Submission Information

Prior to submitting a full proposal, proposers are strongly encouraged to first submit an abstract as described below. This process allows a proposer to ascertain whether the proposed concept is (1) applicable to the MINT BAA and (2) currently of interest. For the purposes of this BAA, applicability is defined as follows:

The proposed concept is applicable to the technical areas described herein.

The proposed concept is important to DSO’s current investment portfolio.

The proposed concept investigates an innovative approach that enables revolutionary advances, i.e., will not primarily result in evolutionary improvements to the existing state of practice.

The proposed work has not already been completed (i.e., the research element is complete but manufacturing/fabrication funds are required).

The proposer has not already received funding or a positive funding decision for the proposed concept (whether from DARPA or another Government agency).

Abstracts and full proposals that are not found to be applicable to the MINT BAA as defined above may be deemed non-conforming5 and removed from consideration. All abstracts and full proposals must provide sufficient information to assess the validity/feasibility of their claims as well as comply with the requirements outlined herein for submission formatting, content and transmission to DARPA. Abstracts and full proposals that fail to do so may be deemed non-conforming and removed from consideration. Proposers will be notified of non-conforming determinations via letter.

A. Address to Request Application Package

This document contains all information required to submit a response to this solicitation.