HR001123S0021-Amendment-01.pdf

HR001123S0021 ZENITH 1

Broad Agency Announcement Zenith

Defense Sciences Office

HR001123S0021

Amendment 1

January 31, 2023

HR001123S0021 ZENITH 2

Table of Contents I. Funding Opportunity Description

A. Introduction B. Background C. Program Description/Scope D. Program Structure E. Technical Challenges F. Schedule/Milestones G. Deliverables H. 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. Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) B. Sample ACA Clause

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

HR001123S0021 ZENITH 3

PART I: OVERVIEW INFORMATION

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

Funding Opportunity Title: Zenith Phases I and II

Announcement Type: Amendment

Funding Opportunity Number: HR001123S0021

Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) Number(s): Not Applicable

Dates (All times listed herein are Eastern Time.)

o Posting Dates:

Initial Announcement: January 20, 2023 Amendment 1: January 31, 2023 o Abstract Due Date: February 10, 2023, 4:00 p.m.

o FAQ Submission Deadline: March 16, 2023, 4:00 p.m. See Section VIII.A.

o Full Proposal Due Date: March 23, 2023, 4:00 p.m.

Anticipated Individual Awards: See Section II.A.

Types of Instruments that May be Awarded: Procurement contracts or Other Transaction for Prototypes (OTs).

Agency contacts o Technical POC: Dr. Michael Nayak, Program Manager, DARPA/DSO o BAA Email: Zenith@darpa.mil o BAA Mailing Address:

DARPA/DSO

ATTN: HR001123S0021

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

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

Security: The Zenith program will be unclassified, with Phase II efforts expected to generate Controlled Unclassified Information (CUI). Proposals are expected to be unclassified. For further details, please see sections IV.B.4 and IV.B.5.

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

HR001123S0021 ZENITH 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. 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 related to methods by which a telescope, comprising a reflective liquid primary surface held in a light-focusing shape, may be compelled to maintain that shape even if tilted out-of-plane. These mirrors will be tiltable, scalable, damage-resilient, dual-use (defined as suitable for both space and ground telescope applications), and in monolithic and segmented designs that require no motion to operate. Zenith is pursuing ground-based telescope systems only.

Proposed research should investigate innovative approaches that enable revolutionary advances in science, devices, or systems. Specifically excluded are solutions that require thrust or rotation of the primary mirror to work and research that primarily results in evolutionary improvements to the existing state of practice.

B. Background

Today, astronomy and Space Domain Awareness (SDA) are limited by the size of available telescope optics, which in turn is related to the cost of exquisitely ground and polished glass primary mirrors. This results in the “cost-size scaling law” of optics: as the primary gets larger, the cost grows exponentially, limiting mass manufacturing, proliferation, and commercialization at Very Large-aperture Telescope (VLT) sizes. Space-based mirrors are additionally vulnerable to catastrophic damage from hypervelocity debris impacts, which are anticipated to drastically increase in the near-future; and limited by payload fairing size, forcing cannot-fail, unfolding, segmented mirror designs. It is possible that liquid mirrors (LMs) may present a solution, but they have different limitations based on ground or space operation.

When rotated at a constant angular velocity about a vertical rotation axis, the equipotential surface of a fluid in equilibrium takes the form of a paraboloid. This is the principle behind a liquid mirror telescope (LMT): light incident upon a reflective liquid surface spinning at a constant angular velocity converges at an effective prime focal point. A 3m diffraction-limited

HR001123S0021 ZENITH 5

LMT has been demonstrated for orbital debris observations.1 However, fundamental limitations remain. Traditional LMTs can only point straight upward (zenith-restricted) and are, therefore, limited in the imagery they can gather. Since any movement out-of-plane disrupts the light focusing shape, they have only been applied to isotropic sky surveys, a limitation that has prevented LMTs from being widely used. Space-based LMTs have never flown for a number of reasons, to include complexities around spin-rotation and thrust-for-gravity required to form a coherent liquid mirror surface.

Today’s LMTs possess three advantages over traditional glass telescopes: (1) they are easier to “fabricate”, since they are merely spun up without grinding or polishing, and do not require custom facilities for manufacturing or periodic re-polishing, (2) they can be up to two orders of magnitude cheaper than conventional parabolic glass telescopes2, and (3) they can be relatively impact damage-resilient (if in the space environment, potentially “self-healing” in the aftermath of an orbital debris impact). Considering this, a breakthrough in LMTs away from the zenith restriction may allow today’s limitations, for both astronomy and SDA applications, to be addressed.

The Zenith program will investigate and develop modeling tools, materials, surface and field controls, and structures to eliminate these limitations to facilitate demonstration of a 2 m diameter liquid mirror telescope system (LMT) and a 1 m diameter segmented liquid mirror (LM)3 that may be pointed at off-zenith (out-of-plane tip/tilt) angles, and determine if the described advantages of LMs persist. These designs will target primary mirror fluid control methods that do not intrinsically require motion or gravity to create the mirror surface for future applications in the space environment. If successful, Zenith can result in LMs and LMT systems that can be used in a way more analogous to traditional point-and-slew telescopes, at significantly larger aperture sizes, and have applicability to both ground and space.

C. Program Description/Scope

The primary goals of the Zenith program are to design, build and prove ground-based, tiltable, scalable, damage-resilient liquid mirrors to support future ground and space systems. Zenith solutions are to operate anywhere in the spectral band from 350 nm – 950 nm.

1. Develop the requisite surface and field control techniques to allow an LM to be tilted off-axis and slew, while maintaining imaging quality wavefront error levels, without a functional dependence on rotation, gravity, or thrust.

1 Cabanac, R. A., Borra, E. F. & Beauchemin, M. A Search for Peculiar Objects with the NASA Orbital Debris Observatory 3 Meter Liquid Mirror Telescope. Astrophys. J. 509, 309–323 (1998).

2 Brousseau, D., Borra, E. F., Jean-Ruel, H., Parent, J. & Ritcey, A. A magnetic liquid deformable mirror for high stroke and low order axially symmetrical aberrations. Opt. Express 14, 11486 (2006) 3 Proposers should note the difference between usage of LM (liquid mirror – primary lens only) and LMT (liquid mirror – the full telescope assembly) in this BAA. Performers should plan to demonstrate the mechanism by which to create a light-focusing LM, and propose mechanisms to measure the resultant wavefront to meet program metrics, but do not need to demonstrate systems associated with an LMT (such as adaptive optics, baffling or secondary mirrors), unless directly relevant to the LM lens design, until Phase III, which will be solicited separately.

HR001123S0021 ZENITH 6

2. Develop the open-source modeling tools required to successfully design and predict LM optical performance for a pointable LMT.

3. Develop both monolithic (single primary mirror) and segmented liquid mirror designs with associated surface control, modeling, out-of-plane tip/tilt/slew, and imaging quality wavefront error levels.

4. Demonstrate ground-based laboratory and on-sky LM imaging, with a 2 m diameter lens and 25 out-of-plane tilt and tip4 angles.

5. Demonstrate ground-based laboratory and on-sky LM imaging, with a 1 m diameter segmented lens and 25 out-of-plane tilt and tip5 angles.

Additionally, performers should develop the modeling and simulation (M&S) tools and numerical approximations to evaluate the hydrodynamic motion of a liquid material while under the influence of an electromagnetic field (or other actuating/control force). The technical challenge is to understand how to model, simulate, and predict the evolution of the liquid mirror surface as a function of the near-field source, and then apply that to a changing vector gravity scenario given changing tip/tilt angles and slew motion of the mirror. Performers will develop M&S tools to sufficient fidelity to be able to perform mirror material trades, design of experiments, and ultimately, support the Phase II M&S and laboratory-scale demonstrations.

Validation, and confidence in the fidelity of these M&S tools, will be established first through inspection by the program’s Government Independent Verification and Validation (IV&V) team, and then by release to the wider astronomy community for peer-review.

Proposed research should investigate innovative approaches that exploit revolutionary advances in material science, electromagnetic field control, optics, optical devices, or systems. Specifically not of interest to Zenith is research or designs that would require motion or rotation to form the light-focusing surface.

Zenith is purely a ground-based program. Solutions do not need to operate in space. Zenith will only conduct ground-based testing and ground-based on-sky validation. Space-environment testing is not within the scope of Zenith. Zenith is intended to prove the concept of size-scalable, damage-resilient liquid mirrors that can be pointed off-vertical.

On September 15, 2022, DARPA hosted a workshop to discuss potential solutions to the liquid mirror imaging problem (DARPA-SN-22-46). Proposers may find an introductory recording to the workshop posted at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IjsHTn1HpZ4.

D. Program Structure

4 For a mirror-centered coordinate frame, where the z-axis is out of the mirror along the exit pupil plane, and x- and y-axes lie in the mirror plane, tip and tilt refer to motions along the x- and y-axes (equivalent to pitch and roll of the optic).

5 For a mirror-centered coordinate frame, where the z-axis is out of the mirror along the exit pupil plane, and x- and y-axes lie in the mirror plane, tip and tilt refer to motions along the x- and y-axes (equivalent to pitch and roll of the optic).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IjsHTn1HpZ4

HR001123S0021 ZENITH 7

Zenith is a 50-month research and development effort comprising five demonstrations of increasing complexity and three phases: an 8-month Phase I (base), an 18-month Phase II (option), and a notional 24-month Phase III.

0.5

Zenith will use a Phased Acquisition Approach. Both Phase I and Phase II are being solicited under this BAA; proposals that only address Phase I may be deemed non-conforming.

Proposers must address all phases by providing details for Phase I (base) and Phase II (option).

The option period should be costed out at the same level of detail as that of the base period.

Proposers must include a draft Statement of Work (SOW) and Rough Order of Magnitude (ROM) cost for Phase III, as outlined in Part I, Section F, below. The Phase III draft SOW and ROM are for planning purposes only, and will not be evaluated.

Upon favorable review, and subject to the availability of funds, a successful proposal may result in a Phase I (base) award with a Phase II (option). Participation in Phase I does not guarantee funding in Phase II; progression to Phase II will be contingent on evaluation of the Preliminary Design presented during Phase I and availability of funds.

DARPA will request proposals for Phase III from Phase II performers during Phase II. While Phase III of the program requires larger material solutions, due to the opportunity for teaming as Phase II draws to a close, DARPA encourages all parties capable of meeting the Phase II goals to propose solutions under this solicitation, even if they currently anticipate being unable to participate in Phase III of the program.

Participation in Phase II does not guarantee funding in Phase III; progression to the next phase will be contingent on evaluation of Phase III proposals and availability of funds. The Phase III evaluation criteria will be consistent with the evaluation criteria in this solicitation, but may be tailored to the Phase III request for updated proposals. Phase III proposal evaluations will be conducted through a scientific and technical review process in accordance with Section V.A and V.B. The Government reserves the right to issue a new solicitation for Phase III with a new award instrument if programmatic circumstances dictate.

The end of each phase is marked by a design review or a demonstration. These will be closely coordinated with the Government Test and Evaluation (T&E) and IV&V team. The Government team (not being solicited under this BAA) will independently evaluate performer deliverables;

ensure reasonable assumptions and equitable comparisons with other performers; provide assessments of the prototype systems developed across the program, to include open-source

HR001123S0021 ZENITH 8

modeling tools developed in Phase I and II; coordinate and monitor all demonstrations for official T&E scoring; ensure fair and representative measurement of relevant program metrics;

and assist with engagements to the user community. The Government team consists of DoD, NASA and civilian organizations to facilitate transition of LMT designs to applications across the spectrum of military, civil, and commercial astronomy.

E. Technical Challenges

To meet the goals of the Zenith program, teams must meet the following metrics and milestones:

Phase I (Base):

PDR-level design and simulated results of a scalable liquid mirror lens, with associated material development and field control, to enable a 0.5 m diameter liquid mirror lens with the following properties:

o Out-of-plane tip and tilt angles of greater than 10.0 degrees o 1 deg/s slew rate6 o Wavefront control7 correctable to /4 for = 550 nm

Phase II (Option):

Lab demonstration of Phase I design with the following additional properties:

o Fluid component reflectivity of greater than 0.65

Phase II will also include a demo in a M&S environment, to demonstrate the expected performance of a simulated LM lens with the following properties:

o Aperture size of 3 m diameter o Out-of-plane tip and tilt angles of greater than 25.0 degrees o 3 deg/s slew rate o Wavefront control correctable to /8 for = 550 nm o Fluid component reflectivity of greater than 0.65

The M&S demo will baseline expected performance for larger-scale LMs; performers should outline the magnetohydrodynamic, fluid mechanics, electromagnetic field interaction, or other applicable physics-based M&S capabilities that will be required to accurately predict hardware and optical performance. Performers are also encouraged to schedule M&S development and the

6 Slew rate is defined as the rate of movement of the mirror surface to track a moving target or observe a different part of the sky; the mirror must therefore be accompanied by a method (such as a motor) by which to create slew and slew rate.

7 Wavefront control is defined as the maximum allowable aberration of the optical wavefront. The vibration environment and real-time fluid control must permit this level of wavefront control or error rejection.

HR001123S0021 ZENITH 9

M&S demo for timelines that permit parallel material purchasing for the lab-scale hardware demo. It is anticipated that a selection of performers with diverse material, field control, and lens design choices will help inform the feasibility and success of future phases of the program.

The goals and metrics for the full program are listed below (Phase III is not solicited under this

BAA).

Performer approaches are expected to be technically diverse, and DARPA encourages all innovative solutions to the problem of out-of-plane dual-use LMs. Each proposal must contain the following:

Description of the specific innovative method by which figure control of an out-of-plane ground-based LM may be achieved, where out-of-plane is defined as greater than 10.0 degrees of mirror tip and tilt, without the use of rotation of the primary mirror.

Description of any complementary M&S capability that would require development to:

advance mirror design, build PDR-level predictions of performance with a given method (Phase I), and build a laboratory-scale hardware demonstration of the same method (Phase II).

Description of the likely scaling of a given method to larger aperture sizes.

Details of the hardware build for the laboratory-scale demo for Phase II.

Trade studies are specifically in scope for Phase I; proposers should address anticipated effects, possible mitigations, and available trade space. Theoretical and M&S work on the chosen material media is of direct interest, particularly as applied electromagnetic fields increase in strength.

Additionally, all proposers should address the following essential questions:

An order of magnitude calculation demonstrating an actuating force at least half an order of magnitude greater than that of gravity for a 0.5-meter diameter LM while at greater than 10 degrees of mirror tip and tilt and slewing at a rate of 1 degree/second;

HR001123S0021 ZENITH 10

Proposed methods to mask or compensate for edge effects on the mirror;

First-order or better estimate of the expected optical aberrations during out-of-plane imaging and slewing operations, to include any non-standard aberrations; a comparison to diffraction-limited performance; and possible mitigations;

Similar to liquid sloshing in a low tub, does the proposed design likely require new edge designs and post-processing techniques optimized to “wavy” LMs that are in constant angular rotation but now experience an out-of-plane rotation component?

First-order estimate for the gradient of field or force expected from one end of the LM to the other. If highly localized fields are desired (particularly near the edges of the LM), proposers should address the impact of field bleedover and their scaling with field strength required and possible mitigations.

Is it reasonable to expect that the resultant optical aberrations will be minor enough that a given design can achieve a /4 wavefront? If not, what is an estimate for the maximum slew rate and maximum out of plane angle at which a /4 wavefront is still achievable?

Finally, proposers should include a draft SOW and ROM budget estimation for Phase III.

Identify any teammates or subcontractors expected to comprise the team. Identify their roles, any key personnel, and how their previous projects and qualifications will contribute to the technical approach. Finally, please identify any expertise not on the Phase I and II team that may be needed for Phase III; teaming at the end of Phase II is expected, in order to form larger teams capable of executing the hardware build goals of Phase III.

It is an important part of the Zenith program vision to create the capability for the broader astronomy community to investigate, validate, build, and proliferate LMTs for civil and commercial experimentation and use. The above-described M&S code developed during Phases I and II must be open-source and provided as a deliverable to DARPA together with in-code comments, and instructions for use. These code bases will be made publicly available;

proprietary M&S codes are not acceptable. For the purposes of the Zenith program, DARPA defines open-source as any model built, whether custom-built or coded in a commercial solver, that can be released to the greater community. Software that is proprietary to the performer is not considered open source. Software that anybody can access with a basic license or subscription is considered open source (e.g., COMSOL code, MatLab code, code posted to GitHub, etc.).

F. Schedule/Milestones

Zenith proposals should include a cost and program schedule that includes the following Milestones. Unless otherwise specified, please assume the performer is responsible for described activities.

1. Phase I (Base, 8 months). Sprint effort to measure the feasibility of a large number of possible methods to enable out-of-plane LM control. By the end of Phase I, demonstrate a Preliminary Design Review (PDR)-level design for the Phase II laboratory LM demo, and preliminary modeling tools for coupled fluid-electromagnetic control performance predictions while at out-of-plane angles and slewing.

HR001123S0021 ZENITH 11

1-month milestone: Present general approach to the out-of-plane LM problem, to include plans for any performer-determined bench-level testing.

3-month milestone: PI meeting #1. Present end-to-end second-order physical models to model the LM, to include fluid inertia, edge effects, and electromagnetic field interactions.

5-month milestone: Delivery of draft report on M&S results and Version 0 of computer code8.

6-month milestone: Preliminary Design Review (PDR) at performer location. Present in M&S and technically justify the projected wavefront performance and optical coherence of the LM, aberration control or correction mechanisms (if any), and liquid surface cohesion during slew and pointing, while at out of plane tip and tilt angles (per program metrics). Present hardware purchasing plan for Phase II laboratory-scale demo, including requisition timelines.

7-month milestone: DARPA approval of hardware purchasing plan for approved Phase II performers.

8-month milestone: Deliver end-of-phase report, M&S results, and Version 1 of proprietary and non-proprietary computer code embodying all results8.

2. Phase II (Option, 18 months). Advance modeling methods and selected concepts to hardware prototype assembly. Initially, Phase II will focus on a modeling challenge, centered on a 3 m LM aperture simulation demo, while allowing time for long-lead material purchases. During this modeling challenge, build a simulation predictor, identify hardware and mirror free-surface control challenges early, and ensure scaling to VLT sizes is preserved in the design.

Conduct the first out-of-plane LM hardware demo in a laboratory setting. Phase II will culminate in a 0.5 m LM lens at 10 tip and tilt and 1 deg/sec of slew rate.

8-month milestone: Place orders for hardware with long delivery timelines; present hardware delivery plan that adheres to laboratory demo timelines.

10-month milestone: Support PI meeting in conjunction with a LM session at a peer-reviewed conference; present M&S results to date. Support subsequent closed-session PI meeting #2.

17-month milestone: Deliver draft report on M&S results and Version 1.5 of computer code8.

18-month milestone: PI meeting #3 and Critical Design Review (CDR). Present in M&S and technically justify the projected wavefront performance and optical coherence of the LM, aberration control or correction mechanisms (if any), and liquid surface cohesion

8 All computer code delivery must include in-code comments, instructions for use, and any other code documentation, embodying all results to date, for IV&V verification that quality of simulations is meeting/not meeting program needs.

HR001123S0021 ZENITH 12

during slew and pointing, while at out of plane tip and tilt angles (per program metrics).

20-month milestone: Deliver draft report on M&S predicted results and Version 2 of proprietary and non-proprietary computer code embodying all results8. Pre-register expected performance of laboratory hardware demo based on M&S. Submit test plan for lab demo to DARPA.

21-month milestone: M&S Demo. Demonstrate a simulated 3 m diameter LM lens that can maintain a /4 wavefront at up to 25 out of plane (tip and tilt). Predict surface settling time during mirror spin up and optical performance while tracking a simulated target at a slew rate of no less than 3 deg/sec. Update interim report.

23-month milestone: DARPA Program Manager (PM) site visit. Display bench-level setup for lab demo. All hardware deliveries complete; integration ongoing. Proposal instructions for Phase III released.

25-month milestone: Laboratory-scale hardware demo. IV&V measurement against program metrics. Submit plan for M&S tool advancement to answer key questions in the Scaling Challenge (questions to be provided as part of Phase III proposal instructions).

26-month milestone: Deliver end-of-phase final report and Version 3 of computer code embodying complete performer approach to the problem8.

3. Phase III (24 months) (not solicited under this BAA). Rapidly advance Phase II designs from the laboratory to an on-sky (real-world) demonstration, while expanding in aperture size and out-of-plane tip/tilt angle and diversifying designs to include segmented liquid apertures. While only Phase I and II are solicited under this BAA, the goals for Phase III are listed below to aid in rough order of magnitude (ROM) cost estimation for Phase III and planning for potential future work:

Continuous (non-segmented) aperture LM. Develop and demonstrate, first in a laboratory demo, then in an on-sky demo, a 2 m diameter non-segmented LM.

Continuous (non-segmented) aperture LMT. Integrate 2 m primary LM into an end-to-end functioning telescope system (the LM and additional optical hardware as required9) to prove diffraction-limited performance.

Segmented aperture LM. Develop and demonstrate a 1 m diameter LM that contains multiple (≥ 6) LM sub-apertures.

Scaling Challenge. A M&S-centered challenge to understand how ground-based LMTs might be extended to 20m-50m aperture sizes and set the baseline for cost and technical performance of such a future VLT system, based on learned constraints from real-world demonstrations in Phases II and III.

9 Some examples (not all-inclusive or required) include curved support structure, secondary mirror(s), adaptive optics, wavefront sensor(s), baffles, etc.

HR001123S0021 ZENITH 13

Other proposal properties

Proposers should provide a technical and programmatic strategy that conforms to the Phase I and II schedule and presents an aggressive plan to fully address all program goals, metrics, milestones, and deliverables.

Proposers may include optional component-level testing, bench demo(s), or interim demo(s) as a build-up step to milestone demo(s), but this must not occur at the expense of the overall program timeline specified above.

As a specific line item in the SOW, all proposals must include confirmation of understanding that M&S code developed under Phases I and II will be open-source and provided as a deliverable to DARPA. Real-world performance results for as-built designs in Phase II will fall under CUI restrictions (BAA Sections IV.B.4 and IV.B.5), but the general modeling tools developed under Zenith must be made open-source for sharing with and peer-review by the broader astronomy community.

The task structure must be consistent across the proposed schedule, SOW, and cost volume. Costs should be broken out for each task specified in the SOW, which should correlate (to the maximum extent practical) to the Milestones described above.

A target start date of June 2023 may be assumed for planning purposes.

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

o To foster collaboration 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 four two-day meetings over the course of 26 months: two meetings in the Washington, D.C., area and two meetings in the San Francisco, California, area.

o To facilitate sharing of results with the broader astronomical community, teams should plan to attend and present at the SPIE Astronomical Telescopes and Instrumentation conference in June 2024, located in Yokohama, Japan, budgeting for a maximum of four attendees per team. Other conference travel using DARPA funding will only be approved on a case-by-case basis.

o Reviews and simulation/laboratory demonstrations will be held at the performer location.

o 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 separate from scheduled reviews/demonstrations, during which they will have the opportunity to demonstrate progress towards agreed-upon milestones.

HR001123S0021 ZENITH 14

G. Deliverables

Performers will be expected to provide at a minimum the following deliverables:

Open-source M&S codes developed during Phases I and II, to include user-friendly manuals and well-documented8 instructions for use.

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 SOW.

Reports, briefings, media, etc. to document the results of Zenith modeling, demonstrations, and/or findings, as requested by the Government.

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.

Final CUI protection plan due within 60 days of contract award to be updated annually.

Reporting as outlined in Section VI.C.

All as-built designs, and results of wavefront control measurements, must be protected at the CUI/CTI level. Therefore, Phase II is expected to generate CUI/CTI; a CUI guide will be issued to performers no later than the start of Phase II. The Government anticipates restrictions (BAA Section VI.B.6) that will require the awardee to seek DARPA permission before publishing any information or results relative to specific items in the CUI guide. The Government does not anticipate any publication restrictions on research or information that does not fall under these specific items, and does not anticipate any CUI/CTI to be generated in Phase I. Proposers should review BAA Section IV.B.4 regarding DoD requirements related to protection of CUI and CTI.

H. Other Program Objectives and Considerations

1. Collaboration

It is likely that in order for the Zenith program to be successful, all performers will need 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 and performer category within the overall program structure. All proposals should describe plans for ensuring transparency of their processes to enable interactions with other program performers;

Phase II teams will be required to sign data sharing agreements. Proposals that fail to include

HR001123S0021 ZENITH 15

these plans may be deemed non-conforming and removed from consideration. To facilitate collaboration, all performer contracts will include an Associate Contractor Agreement (ACA) clause for portions of the contracts requiring joint participation in the accomplishment of the program requirements. This provision will become a material requirement for any contracts awarded as a result of this BAA. The ACA clause will include the basis for sharing information, data, technical knowledge, expertise and/or resources essential to the integration of the program technical areas and components. This clause will ensure appropriate coordination and integration of work by program contractors, ensure complete compatibility between data, tools and services, and prevent unnecessary duplication of efforts and maximize commonality. Without exception, all ACAs must be in place within three months of contract award. See Section VIII.B for a sample ACA clause.

2. Intellectual Property

As discussed above, there is an emphasis on creating and using open-source technologies and architectures, making data sharing and collaboration key aspects of this program. Therefore, intellectual property rights asserted by proposers are strongly encouraged to be aligned with open-source regimes. See Section VI.B.4 for more information related to intellectual property.

Proposers must provide a statement acknowledging their understanding of the requirement for M&S code bases to be open-source.

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 proposers10 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;

10 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 or Other Transactions. “Subawardee” refers to anyone who might receive a subaward from a prime awardee (e.g., subawardee, consultant, etc.).

HR001123S0021 ZENITH 16

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 additional information in a timely manner.

Proposals identified for negotiation may result in a procurement contract 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. § 4022(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.

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

HR001123S0021 ZENITH 17

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 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 that shall be considered by DARPA. Historically Black Colleges and Universities, Small Businesses, Small Disadvantaged Businesses and Minority Institutions are encouraged to submit proposals and join others in submitting proposals; however, no portion of this announcement will be set aside for these organizations’ participation due to the impracticality of reserving discrete or severable areas of this research for exclusive competition among these entities.

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, with specific details, that the proposed work, expertise, and facilities are not otherwise available from the private sector, and (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 http://www.darpa.mil/work-with-us/additional-baa

HR001123S0021 ZENITH 18

subawardees. FFRDC proposals that do not include these elements may be deemed non-conforming and removed from consideration.

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.§ 4892 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 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.

HR001123S0021 ZENITH 19

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

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. § 4022). 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 Zenith 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 goals described herein.

The proposed concept does not require rotation or motion of the LM in order to generate an optically coherent surface.

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

HR001123S0021 ZENITH 20

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 Zenith BAA as defined above may be deemed non-conforming11 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. No additional forms, kits, or other materials are needed except as referenced herein. No request for proposal or additional solicitation regarding this opportunity will be issued, nor is additional information available except as provided at the SAM.gov website (https://sam.gov/), or referenced herein.

B. Content and Form of Application Submission

1. Abstract Information and Formatting

As stated above, proposers are strongly encouraged to submit an abstract in advance of a full proposal to minimize effort and reduce the potential expense of preparing an out of scope…