MAEGLIN_Phase_2_BAA_Draft.pdf

INSTRUCTIONS

This Draft Broad Agency Announcement (BAA) is NOT a formal request for proposal.

Proposals are NOT being requested or evaluated at this time. A Final BAA will be released at a later date for which interested parties may submit proposals.

The Intelligence Advanced Research Projects Activity (IARPA) is seeking interested parties to thoroughly review the Draft BAA Funding Opportunity Description and provide comments, questions, suggested changes, and feedback by April 30, 2018 in the format provided below.

IARPA does not anticipate posting responses to any comments, questions, suggested changes, and/or feedback received; however, all input will be considered in developing the Final BAA.

Additionally, the Draft BAA Funding Opportunity Description is subject to change in the development of the Final BAA as a result of IARPA’s consideration of the input received from interested parties in response to the Draft BAA, as well as other considerations

Please submit all comments, questions, suggested changes, and feedback to the designated procurement email address: dni-iarpa-baa-18-04@iarpa.gov using the format below.

Interested parties will be given the opportunity to submit questions and comments in writing for IARPA response once the Final BAA is issued.

Comment Sheet for Draft Funding Opportunity Description BAA #IARPA-BAA-18-04.

BAA

Section/Sub- Section

Subject/Title Page Number

Contractor Comment/Question

OVERVIEW

SECTION 1: FUNDING OPPORTUNITY DESCRIPTION

The Intelligence Advanced Research Projects Activity (IARPA) often selects its research efforts through the Broad Agency Announcement (BAA) process. The use of a BAA solicitation allows a wide range of innovative ideas and concepts through full and open competition. The BAA, as well as Questions and Answers and any amendments, will be posted on the FedBizOpps website, http://www.fedbizopps.gov, and then linked to the IARPA website at http://www.iarpa.gov. The following information is for those wishing to respond to this program BAA.

IARPA is seeking innovative solutions for Phase 2 of the Molecular Analyzer for Efficient Gas- Phase Low-power Interrogation (MAEGLIN) program. Phase 2 of the MAEGLIN program is envisioned to begin in January 2019 and end by July 2020.

1.A. Program Overview

1.A.1 Introduction and Concept of Operations Chemical detection is a priority for the Intelligence Community (IC) with applications such as forensic analysis, border/facility protection, and stockpile/production monitoring. In particular, the IC has an interest in long term monitoring of a chemical environment without human oversight.

The technology necessary for local and continuous monitoring of this type must provide high sensitivity and accuracy, be robust in the presence of complex chemical mixtures, and be contained in a small, ruggedized package with autonomous operation. Unfortunately, current technology cannot simultaneously meet these requirements.

The overall MAEGLIN program intends to develop an ultra-low-power chemical analysis capability for the detection and identification of explosives, chemical weapons, industrial toxins and pollutants, narcotics, and nuclear materials in chemical environments with significant background and interferents. In Phase 1 the MAEGLIN program developed component technology for chemical collection, separation, and identification. In Phase 2, MAEGLIN will demonstrate integrated prototype systems in two capability tracks: Chemical Identification, and Chemical Detection. Systems in the Chemical Identification track will be able to collect target chemicals at concentrations potentially several orders of magnitude lower than the ambient chemical background, separate these chemicals from interferents, and perform a full analysis of the complex mixture with positive identification of a broad range of species. The ability to screen for multiple chemical targets will allow for analysis of subtle changes in the overall chemical effluent from monitored locations – especially when there are several possible target molecules. Systems in the Chemical Detection track will be able to collect a moderately complex chemical mixture, screen out common background materials and interferents, and provide a warning of the presence of a robust library of chemical targets. Detection systems will not have to provide positive chemical identification with forensic accuracy, but must have a high probability of detection for target chemicals, and a low false alarm rate in the presence of common interferents.

For the Chemical Identification track, MAEGLIN Phase 2 program goals include definitive chemical identification of molecules with an atomic mass under 500amu; a system footprint of less than or equal to 1.5 liters; a weight of less than or equal to 7kg, including sufficient power and, if necessary, consumables for two-year operation with daily sample analysis; and autonomous operation that includes calibration.

For the Chemical Detection track, MAEGLIN Phase 2 program goals include detection of molecules in the target list (without definitive ID required) with PD > 95%, coupled with a PFA of <1% for molecules not in the target class; detection of a range of target chemicals with an atomic mass under 300amu; a system footprint of less than or equal to 0.5 liters; a weight of less than or equal to 1.5kg, including sufficient power and, if necessary consumables for six month operation with daily sample analysis; and autonomous operation that includes calibration.

For either track autonomous collection and analysis of gases is a required capability; modular, interchangeable input units enabling the analysis of bulk liquid, solid, and particulate aerosol samples (either introduced by a user or collected autonomously) are desirable additional capabilities.

Chemicals of interest in the MAEGLIN program include, but are not limited to, the following classes:

explosives and energetics; including military, commercial, and home-made varieties, as well as common oxidizers and fuels;

chemical weapons, precursors, and byproducts;

poisonous or toxic environmental chemicals and industrial pollutants;

narcotics; including illicit, prescription, and designer drugs of abuse;

nuclear fuel cycle materials and related chemicals;

signatures indicative of common natural and industrial chemical processes, such as:

combustion, petroleum fractionation, and pesticide manufacturing; and chemicals associated with the manufacture and deployment of biological warfare agents.

Detection of bio-agent species directly is not a goal of the MAEGLIN program, however, chemical signatures of bio-agent production and weaponization may be detectable. Table 1 provides some representative examples of potential MAEGLIN applications. These examples are intended to motivate an understanding of the goals and metrics and should not be taken as either a comprehensive list of potential applications or as a definitive set of specific applications that will be used for program test and evaluation (T&E).

Table 1: Representative MAEGLIN Applications User/Application Description

Domestic Counterterrorism

Monitoring effluent from suspected explosives, chemical agent, or bio-agent manufacture or storage sites. Screening/early warning at large public gatherings.

Transportation Security

Testing cargo holds and package storage areas for illegal substances and explosives.

Drug Enforcement

Monitoring effluent from suspected drug manufacturing sites for warrant issuance and evidence collection.

Food and Pharmaceutical

Security

Autonomous monitoring of food and drug production and storage to ensure safety and quality standards and lack of tampering

Mining & Other Confined Spaces

Autonomous monitoring of safety conditions in mineshafts and other confined spaces.

Environmental Safety

Monitoring of industrial and nuclear sites to enforce public safety and compliance standards. Serve as early warning system for inadvertent or intentional release. Monitoring remote areas for illicit dumping of materials, unusual uses, and early warning system for forest fires. Monitoring petroleum harvesting sites.

Early warning system for volcanic eruptions.

In Phase 1 of the MAEGLIN program, IARPA funded three separate Thrust Areas to develop the component technologies that will enable an integrated prototype demonstration in Phase 2:

Collection, Separation, and Identification. It is anticipated that proposals which successfully address all aspects of the Phase 2 requirements will require a multidisciplinary team. Proposals must encompass an integrated prototype demonstration to be funded. Proposers may propose to either the Chemical Identification track, the Chemical Detection track, or both. Page limits associated with proposing to each track separately, or both tracks in the same document are provided in Section 4. If offerors choose to propose to both tracks in a single proposal, determine the costs separately, and clearly identify any overlap or savings associated with funding both tracks.

1.A.2 Current Approaches and Motivation Current chemical detection field techniques range from those that require transporting samples to a laboratory for analysis to small point sensors that identify the presence of a particular chemical (or chemical class) in relatively clean environments. Both passive and active optical sensors have been developed that search the ground for chemical targets from an airborne platform. Each technique has both strengths and limitations.

Figure 1 summarizes the current state of the art in chemical detection and identification technology in terms of portability and performance.

Figure 1: Summary of Current Chemical Analysis Capabilities and Limitations

MAEGLIN

Identification

Track

MAEGLIN

Detection

Track

Figure 1 Legend FTIR – Fourier Transform Infrared Spectroscopy IMS/DMS – Ion Mobility Spectrometry / Differential Mobility Spectrometry IR/Raman – Infrared / Raman Spectroscopy GC – Gas Chromatography LC / IC – Liquid Chromatography / Ion Chromatography MS – Mass Spectrometry NMR – Nuclear Magnetic Resonance TOF MS – Time of Flight Mass Spectrometry XRD – X-Ray Diffraction

Laboratory analysis techniques, such as Nuclear Magnetic Resonance (NMR) spectroscopy, Fourier Transform Infrared (FTIR) spectroscopy, and various types of mass spectrometry (MS) are incredibly precise, but are large, stationary, and do not allow for analysis at the site of sample collection. These techniques require time for sample transportation to the laboratory, followed by time consuming sample preparation and/or separation steps, then analysis in instruments that range from desktop to room size. In return, these forensic gold-standard laboratory techniques can uniquely identify a single chemical from a library of 100,000+ spectra. A trained spectroscopist can also deduce the structure of unknown compounds from their spectra. Due to their lower detection thresholds, MS techniques (ng-pg sample size) are most commonly used to analyze samples collected in the field. FTIR requires g range sample size and NMR milligram range sample sizes.

Field portable techniques, including portable MS systems and alternative non-MS detection systems, sacrifice gold standard laboratory performance for portability. The MS-based systems tend to exhibit a monotonic trade-off between size/power requirements and sensitivity, specificity, and library size. Smaller systems rarely include a separation front-end, so are susceptible to interferents and clutter. Non-MS-based approaches, such as ion mobility spectrometry (IMS), fluorescence spectrophotometry, and Raman spectroscopy, have issues with sensitivity, long-term calibration, and cross-sensitivity to interferents. Many of these devices are also not reliable for true chemical discrimination and work best when used as screening tools for target-class detection.

Ultraportable techniques, including test strips and colormetric sensors as well as other types of small point detectors, tend to be single-use and single-target (specific for particular chemicals or chemical classes).

In summary, there is a significant capabilities gap for persistent long term, field-based, high-fidelity detection and identification of a broad range of chemical species.

1.A.3 MAEGLIN – Phase 1 In Phase 1 (IARPA-BAA-16-01), the MAEGLIN program was structured into three Thrust Areas (listed below) with specific metrics for each Thrust Area independent of the others:

Collection – Low-power, reversible gas phase collection/storage/release technology.

Optional modular front end sampling adaptor for additional capability for liquid and particulate aerosol and/or bulk liquid and solid phase collection and volatilization.

Separation – Low-power, non-destructive separation of chemical mixtures with a broad concentration range, potentially including the ability to “bleed off” all or part of the collected sample if desired. System will use minimal (preferably no) consumables.

Identification – Low-power, high-accuracy identification of chemicals as pure compounds or low-count mixtures with a large library. System will use minimal (preferably no) consumables.

Performers in Phase 1 of the MAEGLIN program developed innovative solutions to component level technology. The program consisted of four approaches to the Collection thrust area, three approaches to the Selection thrust area, and four approaches to the Identification thrust area.

Combined thrust area technologies were developed by two performers. In Phase 1, program metrics were defined for specific thrust areas, while Phase 2 metrics are defined for the integrated system performance.

MAEGLIN Phase 2 is a separate, fully open solicitation distinct from MAEGLIN Phase 1.

Participation in MAEGLIN Phase 1 as a prime or subcontractor MAEGLIN Phase 1 is not a requirement for participation in MAEGLIN Phase 2. Because MAEGLIN Phase 2 is an integration phase culminating in a prototype demonstration, it is expected that the majority of the component technology proposed for MAEGLIN Phase 2 will have been developed past the proof of concept stage either through funding in MAEGLIN Phase 1, or through similar levels of development via private funding or funding by other government development efforts. While some developmental research at the component level is not precluded in MAEGLIN Phase 2, the majority of the component technology proposed for Phase 2 integrated prototypes should already be at the proof of concept level with laboratory performance data.

A data package summarizing the Phase 1 system performance and the Government testbed used to validate this performance will be provided to all Phase 2 proposers upon registration on the IARPA IDEAS website to submit a proposal to the MAEGLIN Phase 2 BAA. Information on the Government testbed and Phase 1 test protocol will be prepared by the Phase 1 Government test and evaluation team. Information about the technical approaches and performance results for each of the nine MAEGLIN Phase 1 performers will be supplied to the Government for posting by the Phase 1 performers themselves. The amount of Phase 1 information that each performer desires to share will be determined by the performers themselves, but at a minimum will include a non-proprietary overview of the performer’s technical approach, key system performance parameters, and point of contact information for potential teaming discussions. Phase 1 performers will be encouraged to provide as much information as possible on projected system capabilities and interface requirements to facilitate teaming, but the content, completeness, and accuracy of each performer’s data package will not be stipulated or verified by the Government. The data package is provided by the Government as an aid to Phase 2 teaming and discussions, but is not an endorsement of any particular performer or type of approach.

1.A.4 Program Goals and Phase 2 Approach The overall MAEGLIN program intends to develop an ultra-low power chemical analysis capability for remote site detection and identification of explosives, chemical weapons, industrial toxins/pollutants, narcotics, and nuclear materials in the presence of significant background and interferents. In Phase 2, MAEGLIN will demonstrate integrated prototype systems in two capability tracks: Chemical Identification, and Chemical Detection. Systems in the Chemical Identification track will be able to collect target chemicals at concentrations potentially several orders of magnitude lower than the ambient chemical background, separate these chemicals from interferents, and perform a full analysis of the complex mixture with positive identification of a broad range of species. The ability to screen for multiple chemical targets will allow for analysis of subtle changes in the overall chemical effluent from monitored locations – especially when there are several possible target molecules. Systems in the Chemical Detection track will be able to collect a moderately complex chemical mixture, screen out common background materials and interferents, and provide a warning of the presence of a robust library of chemical targets.

Detection systems will not have to provide positive chemical identification with forensic accuracy, but must have a high probability of detection for target chemicals, and a low false alarm rate in the presence of common interferents.

For the Chemical Identification track, MAEGLIN Phase 2 program goals include definitive chemical identification of molecules with an atomic mass under 500amu; a system footprint of less than or equal to 1.5 liters; a weight of less than or equal to 7kg, including sufficient power and, if necessary, consumables for two-year operation with daily sample analysis; and autonomous operation that includes calibration.

For the Chemical Detection track, MAEGLIN Phase 2 program goals include detection of molecules in the target list (without definitive ID required) with PD > 95%, coupled with a PFA of <1% for molecules not in the target class; detection of a range of target chemicals with an atomic mass under 300amu; a system footprint of less than or equal to 0.5 liters; a weight of less than or equal to 1.5kg, including sufficient power and, if necessary consumables for six month operation with daily sample analysis; and autonomous operation that includes calibration.

Autonomous collection and analysis of gases is a required capability for either track; modular, interchangeable input units enabling the analysis of bulk liquid, solid, and particulate aerosol samples (either introduced by a user or collected autonomously) are desirable additional capabilities.

Table 2: Top-Level Overview of the MAEGLIN Program Structure Phase 1, 18 month duration, IARPA-BAA-16-01

Track Collection Separation Identification

Goals

Low power, reversible gas phase collection, storage, release technology. An optional modular front end sampling adaptor to add additional capability for liquid or particulate aerosol and/or bulk liquid and solid phase collection and volatizilation.

Low power, non-destructive separation of chemical mixtures with a broad concentration range, potentially including the ability to

“bleed off” all or part of the collected sample if desired. System will use minimal (preferably no) consumables.

Low power, high-accuracy identification of large library of chemicals from pure compounds or low-count mixtures. System will use minimal

(preferably no) consumables.

Phase 2, 18 month duration, IARPA-BAA-18-04 Track Chemical Detection Chemical Identification

Goals

Low power, high accuracy, integrated system capable of collecting complex chemical mixtures, screen backgrounds and interferents, and provide warning based on a robust chemical library. No definitive ID required.

Low power, high accuracy, integrated system capable of collecting and identifying target chemicals at low concentrations (potentially several orders of magnitude below ambient background). Full analysis of complex mixtures with positive identification of a broad range of species, including multiple target chemicals.

In Phase 2 (IARPA-BAA-18-04), the MAEGLIN program is focused on system integration and both tracks will culminate in a prototype. Unlike in Phase 1, the metrics have been devised for complete systems without regard to individual component specifications. The program is designed to specify preferred performance characteristics, not technological approaches. While some specific technological approaches may be discussed in this solicitation as reference exemplars, this in no way indicates a bias towards these particular technologies. It is IARPA’s goal to develop novel, low-power remote site sensors with the ability to detect or identify a broad range of chemical targets. Accomplishing these goals will require significant innovations, not limited to those made in Phase 1 of the MAEGLIN program.

In summary, the major difference between the MAEGLIN goals and previous systems (such as miniaturized chromatography/mass spectrometers) is the emphasis on both low power and broad chemical identification in the presence of a significant amount of interferents and background.

MAEGLIN does not restrict the sensor package to a chip scale device, but instead specifies that the final prototype must fit into the overall 0.5 liter (Chemical Detection track) or 1.5 liter volume, which includes power and consumables. There is significant flexibility in the analysis and processing timelines.

1.A.6 Team Expertise IARPA anticipates offeror teams may include, but are not limited to, experts in the following technical areas:

preconcentrators or trap and purge devices;

Sorbents;

aerosol, liquid, and solid concentration and separation;

gas chromatography;

liquid chromatography;

flow cytometry;

ion mobility spectrometry;

ionization techniques;

mass spectrometry;

micro-electro-mechanical (MEMS) device design and fabrication;

optical spectroscopy;

micro-fluidics;

computational fluid dynamics;

spectral library development and use;

chemical detection and clutter filter algorithms;

miniature vacuum pumps;

low power electronics;

device size, weight, and power (SWaP) optimization; and batteries, fuel cells, and other power sources.

1.A.7 Out of Scope The following are examples of topics considered out of scope for this program.

Solutions that address component technology instead of an integrated system prototype;

Research that does not have strong theoretical and experimental foundations or plausible scientific support for the offeror’s claims;

Approaches that propose or are likely to result in only incremental improvements over the current state of the art;

Approaches that require significant or exotic consumables or present safety hazards incompatible with remote, unattended operation;

Approaches with significantly limited operation parameters such as: not accommodating day/night, indoor/outdoor, or variable climate operation; and

Development of component technology that is not required for the offeror’s proposed approach.

1.B Program Structure, Metrics, and Milestones

1.B.1 Program Phases The MAEGLIN program is envisioned as a 3.5 year total effort. Phase 1 of the program (IARPA- BAA-16-01) began in February 2017 with a period of performance of 18 months. Phase 1 was structured as component technical development in three separate Thrust Areas. Phase 2 of the program (covered by this solicitation) will last 18 months as well, with the goal of an integrated prototype demonstration in each of the tracks. The overarching goal of MAEGLIN Phase 2 is not just development of prototypes that can meet sensitivity or capability requirements in a controlled laboratory setting, but to develop fully integrated proof-of-concept demonstration systems that can detect or identify target chemicals at mission relevant concentrations in the field with a real-world cluttered background.

1.B.2 Program Metrics and Milestones The Government will use the following Program Milestones and Metrics (Table 2) to assess the effectiveness of proposed solutions in each track at achieving the stated program objectives. The metrics and constraints are intended to circumscribe the scope of the effort, while affording maximum flexibility, creativity, and innovation in proposing solutions to the stated problem.

Proposals with a plan to surpass the listed metrics in one or more categories are desirable, provided that all of the other metrics are met, and the offerors provide clear justification as to why their proposed approach will be able to meet the enhanced metric(s).

Table 2: MAEGLIN Programmatic Metrics and Milestones 2.A: Chemical Detection Track

Category Metrics # of Compounds 50 targets, 200 backgrounds

Compound Scope polar, non-polar, volatile, semi-volatile compounds

Compound Mass Range Threshold: 30 – 250 amu Goal: 3 – 300 amu

Input Required (base component): gas-phase samples in ambient air Optional: liquid or particulate aerosol, bulk liquid or solid

Output Automated compound detection (not real time) Concentration Range 500 pg/cm3 to 10 g/cm3

Sampling Duration Minimum: 5 minutes Maximum: 4 hours

Detection Capability

Collect a mixture of up to 25 chemicals from the combined target and background library, provide warning of presence of any target chemical in this mixture with a concentration of 1% of the total chemical mixture volume or greater with PD > 95%, PFA < 1%. Detection systems do not have to identify specific target chemicals, only the presence of chemical on target list.

Reusability Threshold: 100 X Goal: 500 X

Size 0.5 Liters Weight Less than or equal to 1.5 kg

Power Threshold: < 7.5 J per analysis run Goal: < 1.5 J per analysis run

Consumables

Minimal consumables (none preferred); no exotic consumables

– must be safe and transportable; sufficient consumables for

100 cycles must be included in package size and weight evaluation

Form Factor of Optional Aerosol or Bulk Collectors

Modular, removable adaptor attached to base gas phase collector; may increase SWaP by 0.25L, 1kg, including consumables

2.B: Chemical Identification Track Category Metrics

# of Compounds 100 targets, 200 backgrounds, 10 true unknowns Compound Scope polar, non-polar, volatile, semi-volatile compounds

Compound Mass Range Threshold: 30 – 350 amu Goal: 3 – 500 amu

Input Required (base component): gas-phase samples in ambient air Optional: liquid or particulate aerosol, bulk liquid or solid

Output Automated compound identification (not real time) Concentration Range 50 pg/cm3 to 500 g/cm3

Sampling Duration Minimum: 30 minutes Maximum: 24 hours

Limit of Identification (neat compound) 10 ng/cm3

Response Range to a Single Compound

Threshold: 1000 X Goal: 10,000 X

Analysis Capability Identification of all neat library compounds at 10g/cm3 concentration

Size 1.5 Liters Weight Less than or equal to 7 kg

Power Threshold: < 7.5 J per analysis run Goal: < 1.5 J per analysis run

Consumables

Minimal consumables (none preferred); no exotic consumables

– must be safe and transportable; sufficient consumables for

730 cycles must be included in package size and weight evaluation

Form Factor of Optional Aerosol or Bulk Collectors

Modular, removable adaptor attached to base gas phase collector; may increase SWaP by 0.25L, 1kg, including consumables

Table 2 – Legend

Target: specific chemical of interest identified in the GFI library listing.

Background: specific non-target chemical identified in the GFI library listing.

Background compounds include synthesis precursors, decomposition products, and common contaminants associated with target compounds, signatures to be expected as clutter or interferents in the natural environmental background, and signatures that have very similar spectral features to the target compounds.

True Unknown: a compound provided in a physical test sample that does not appear as either a target or background chemical in the GFI library listing. True unknowns will be individual chemical species selected from the International Union of Pure and Applied Chemistry (IUPAC) catalog of known, named chemicals. The Government will not use new, custom synthesized compounds as true unknowns.

Threshold: minimum performance baseline for offeror to satisfy the given metric.

Goal: desired performance level for a given metric.

A more detailed description of the Government Furnished Information/Government Furnished Equipment (GFI/GFE) provided to facilitate system development and testing can be found in 1.B.4. At month 17 of Phase 2, a test/demonstration of the performers’ systems against Government provided data sets and/or samples will be held in order to assess performance against the metrics. Details of these tests are provided in 1.B.5.

The compound library will include challenges for both physical (retention time, ionization cross section, etc.) and functional (similar spectra) characteristics. No proposals that involve chemical reactions or degradation during storage or sample release will be considered. Isotopic analysis is desirable in the Chemical Identification track, but not required.

In addition to the Government-specified metrics, offerors should provide a clear listing with supporting modeling and/or calculations of other metrics relevant to their particular chemical approach. Table 3 is a non-inclusive list of metrics that may be relevant to anticipated component technologies. See the MAEGLIN Phase 1 BAA (IARPA-BAA-16-01) for more details on some of these metrics.

Table 3: Non-inclusive list of potential metrics for prototype components Collection Separation Identification release efficiency resolution mass resolution (per mass range increment) heat time to target temperature dynamic range vacuum requirements (if needed) volume of air (or time) required to present the chemical bolus to the separation component response range detailed performance metrics of analyzer subcomponents effective percentage of bolus delivered to exit orifice pressure drop required library and collection approach thermal control (overshoot) stationary phase chemistry details of chemical identification and library search algorithms thermal uniformity during desorption stationary phase uniformity processor requirements effective or practical desorb flow rate peak resolution processing time resilience to refractory particle loading retention times for select compounds

Kovats retention index stationary phase thermal stability optimum carrier gas flow rate carrier gas type requirements stationary phase selectivity/chemical types that are separable injection chemical capacity total time required for separation

1.B.3 Waypoints Proposals must include offeror-defined waypoints as task-driven intermediate steps toward a milestone. The waypoints should be quantitative accomplishments reflected in the work plan and depicted on the schedule that indicate progress toward milestones and reduction of program risk.

Waypoints are how the offeror clearly explains to the Government the quantitative and timely progress that must be made for their overall concept to meet end-of-phase milestones. In other words, the intent of these waypoints is to provide a clear measure of progress towards meeting the program milestones so the Program Manager and advisors can provide more effective guidance and assistance to the offerors. Performance against these waypoints will be reviewed throughout the program, and the Program Manager and advisors will use performance against the waypoints to assess whether course corrections are needed to ensure program success. In addition to demonstrating the milestones listed in 1.B.2, offerors are expected to develop means and methods to quantify how their systems support the broader goals of the program. Depending on an offeror’s specific approach, progress toward a milestone is not necessarily expected to be linear.

Offerors will support an initial kickoff meeting and technical reviews at months 4, 7, 11, 13, and

17. Progress will be presented against the proposed waypoints. The reviews at months 4 and 11 will be held at the offeror’s site. The kickoff and reviews at months 7, 13, and 17 will be technical interchange meetings (TIMs) held in the Washington metro area (WMA). Offerors should plan to send no more than 2-3 key technical personnel to the WMA review meetings.

Offeror waypoints must include specific performance goals against the program metrics. Offerors shall include waypoints which address each metric category and provide quantitative performance checks. Each waypoint should be distinct and demonstrate progress in longer-term research activities. These offeror-defined waypoints may include the execution of key experiments and successful integration of key capabilities. For guidance, a top-level anticipated Phase 2 performance schedule is provided in Table 4 below. This schedule is intended as a guide, not a specific prescription.

Table 4: Top-Level Anticipated Performance Schedule Months After Kickoff Performance

5 Component design complete, long-lead fabrication started. System design showing traceability to SWaP requirements

9 Test components against a subset of Phase 2 library 14 Test integrated system against a subset of Phase 2 library 17 Meet all Phase 2 Milestones/Metrics

A synopsis of the offeror’s technical and programmatic waypoints shall be listed and described. A table format (see Table 5) is strongly preferred. Offerors should include a rationale, definition, criteria, and an evaluation plan for each waypoint, and describe how their research advances shall be incorporated into successive implementations.

Table 5: Sample Waypoint Table Months After Program Start Description Metric Success Criteria

1.B.4 Government Furnished Information/Equipment (GFI/GFE) At kickoff, the Government will provide performers with a list of the target and background compounds in each track. Performers will be responsible for any characterization of these compounds that is necessary to choose system materials and components, or build libraries for compound identification.

At months 9 and 14, performers will travel to Government-selected test and evaluation (T&E) facilities and undergo a series of tests that will measure their system performance against the metrics described in Table 2. A comprehensive description of the tests to be conducted will be provided to the performers two months prior to each test. For planning purposes, performers should allow two days of testing in the Washington DC metro area for month 9 and the same for month 14.

1.B.5 Test and Evaluation In month 17, performers will travel to a Government-selected T&E facility and undergo a series of tests that will provide an end-of-phase assessment of their system performance against the metrics for Government review and evaluation. These tests will be a more comprehensive battery of the tests performed at months 9 and 14. For planning purposes, performers should allow three to five days of testing in the Washington DC metro area.

1.C Program Timeline and Deliverables The Government will use the following timeline (Table 6) with programmatic gates to help the program maintain its 18 month Phase 2 schedule. In addition to reviewing the technical progress, technical reviews will assess programmatic progress against the research work plan. The offeror may add other deliverables in addition to the minimum set listed in Table 7.

Table 6: High Level Schedule Month 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Kickoff

WMA Review Site Visits

WMA Workshop Library List

Benchmark Test Final Test

Independent Gov. Eval.

Table 7: List of Deliverables Deliverable Month

Kickoff meeting. Corrected slide package provided within 15 days after meeting date. 0

WMA technical reviews. Corrected slide packages provided within 15 days after meeting date. 7, 13

On-site technical reviews. Corrected slide packages provided within 15 days after meeting date. 4,11

Benchmark testing at Government T&E facility. 9, 14 WMA workshop 13 Demonstration of Phase 2 Milestones per 1.B.5 17 System available for independent Government testing/evaluation 17 Final report. Format provided upon contract award. 18 Demonstration hardware and software 18

Monthly technical and financial reports Monthly, by 10th day of the following month