DARPA BAA 10 87 Final for Posting

8/3/2019 DARPA BAA 10 87 Final for Posting

1/54

Persistent Close Air Support (PCAS)

Broad Agency Announcement (BAA) Solicitation 10-87

DATE: September 16, 2010

Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency

DARPA/TTO3701 N. Fairfax Drive

Arlington, VA 22203-1714


2/54

2

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Part One: Overview Information .................................................................................................... 4Part Two: Full Text of Announcement ........................................................................................... 6I. Funding Opportunity Description ........................................................................................... 6A. Program Overview ........................................................................................................... 6

B. Program Goals .................................................................................................................. 6C. Program Plan for Task A .................................................................................................. 7

1. Task A: PCAS System Measures of Performance........................................................ 72. Task A: Phase I Objectives ......................................................................................... 113. Task A: Phase II Objectives ....................................................................................... 124. Task A: Phase III Objectives ...................................................................................... 135. Task A: Phase I Schedule and Deliverables ............................................................... 136. Task A: Program Phase Milestones ............................................................................ 14

D. Program Plan for Task B ................................................................................................ 161. Task B: Measures of Performance.............................................................................. 162. Task B: Objectives...................................................................................................... 173. Task B: Schedule and Deliverables ............................................................................ 18

II. Award Information................................................................................................................ 18III. Eligibility Information ....................................................................................................... 19

A. Eligible Applicants ......................................................................................................... 191. Procurement Integrity, Standards of Conduct, Ethical Considerations, andOrganizational Conflicts of Interest ...................................................................................... 20

B. Cost Sharing/Matching ................................................................................................... 21IV. Application and Submission Information .......................................................................... 21

A. Address to Request Application Package....................................................................... 21B.

Content and Form of Application Submission ............................................................... 21

1. Task A: Proposal Information .................................................................................... 212. Task B: Proposal Information..................................................................................... 32

C. Submission Dates and Times ......................................................................................... 411. Task A and Task B Proposal Date .............................................................................. 41

D. Intergovernmental Review ............................................................................................. 42E. Funding Restrictions ...................................................................................................... 42

V. Application Review Information .......................................................................................... 42A. Evaluation Criteria: Task A ............................................................................................ 42

1. PCAS Operational Concept and Derived A-10 Demonstration ................................. 432. Overall Scientific and Technical Merit ...................................................................... 433.

Management and Program Team ................................................................................ 44

4. Potential Contribution and Relevance to the DARPA Mission .................................. 445. Cost Realism ............................................................................................................... 44

B. Evaluation Criteria: Task B ............................................................................................ 451. Overall Scientific and Technical Merit ...................................................................... 452. Potential Contribution and Relevance to the DARPA Mission .................................. 453. Management and Program Team ................................................................................ 454. Cost Realism ............................................................................................................... 45


3/54

3

C. Review and Selection Process ........................................................................................ 46VI. Award Administration Information ................................................................................... 46

A. Award Notices ................................................................................................................ 46B. Administrative and National Policy Requirements ........................................................ 47

1. Meeting and Travel Requirements ............................................................................. 472.

Human Use ................................................................................................................. 47

3. Animal Use ................................................................................................................. 484. Publication Approval .................................................................................................. 485. Export Control ............................................................................................................ 496. Subcontracting ............................................................................................................ 507. Electronic and Information Technology ..................................................................... 518. Employment Eligibility Verification .......................................................................... 51

C. Reporting ........................................................................................................................ 51D. Electronic Systems ......................................................................................................... 51

1. Central Contractor Registration (CCR) ...................................................................... 512. Representations and Certifications ............................................................................. 513.

Wide Area Work Flow (WAWF) ............................................................................... 52

4. i-Edison ....................................................................................................................... 52

E. Agency Contacts ............................................................................................................ 52VII. Other Information .............................................................................................................. 52

A. Intellectual Property ....................................................................................................... 521. Procurement Contract Proposers ................................................................................ 52

B. Non-Procurement Contract Proposers Noncommercial and Commercial Items(Technical Data and Computer Software) ................................................................................ 53C. All Proposers - Patents ................................................................................................... 54

1. All Proposers Intellectual Property Representations ............................................... 54


4/54

4

Part One: Overview Information

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

Funding Opportunity Title Persistent Close Air Support (PCAS)

Announcement Type Initial Announcement

Funding Opportunity Number Broad Agency Announcement (DARPA-BAA-10-87)

Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers (CFDA) (N/A)

Dates:

o Posting Date: September 16, 2010o Deadline for Questions: October 1, 2010o Proposal Due Date: November 2, 2010

Description of the funding opportunity: The Persistent Close Air Support (PCAS)program will demonstrate a new capability in Close Air Support (CAS) to providefirepower at the fingertips of the ground troops in contact. Key improvements are a

positively controlled kill chain, digitally connected equipment for the Joint TerminalAttack Controller (JTAC), and a system growth capable architecture to support bothcurrent and future CAS systems.

The program goal is to demonstrate the capability for a JTAC to visualize, select andemploy weapons at the time of his choosing from an airborne platform. The airbornesystem then responds autonomously to the JTAC request for CAS weapons delivery.This provides a JTAC the ability to rapidly request and control airborne fire support. ThePCAS system will provide the capability to deliver accurate weapons on target(s) withina shortened time limit.

The primary focus of the PCAS program is to develop and demonstrate a system with airand ground components that employ weapons from an unmanned airborne platform. Thisemployment will be based on machine-to-machine, direct inputs from JTAC equipment.The program will develop a standard architecture for interoperability between a JTACand an airborne unmanned system to provide CAS services. The developed JTAC kitwill interface with the airborne platform to increase information exchange to reduce time-to-target, visualize available weapons and their effects, and pass-off digital targetinginformation for weapons delivery. The JTAC equipment should be small enough to becarried by a dismounted controller whose only means of transportation is on foot.

While the operational concept is envisioned to improve CAS for any airborne system atany level of autonomy, the PCAS program will demonstrate functionality with an A-10autonomous response to JTAC direction of CAS services. This includes live-fireweapons employment from the aircraft against targets normally found on the battlefield.These targets may be stationary or in motion.

The PCAS program is divided into two separate tasks. Task A proposers will be systemsintegrators who will develop and demonstrate the PCAS system. Task B proposers willdevelop critical technology components for the PCAS system.


5/54

5

Total amount of money to be awarded: The total planned budget for award is $20M inPhase I, $13M in Phase II, and $27M in Phase III.

Anticipated individual awards:For Task A: Multiple awards are anticipated, with no more than two (2) performers inPhase I at approximately $7M each. At the end of Phase I, the Government will

determine whether to exercise one (1) performers option for Phase II. Performers arecautioned that the inclusion of an option in the contract does not guarantee that theGovernment will exercise the option. The exercise of the option is subject to availabilityof funds. At the end of Phase II, the Government anticipates exercising the option for nomore than one (1) performer for Phase III.For Task B: Multiple awards are anticipated, with no more than six (6) criticaltechnology component performers (each award limited to approximately $1M).

Types of instruments that may be awarded: Procurement contract or OtherTransaction.

No cost sharing is required for this BAA See Section III-B

Agency technical contact:Mr. Stephen WallerDARPA/Tactical Technology OfficeATTN: BAA-10-873701 North Fairfax DriveArlington, VA 22203-1714Fax: (703) 696-8401 or 2204Electronic mail: [email protected]


6/54

6

Part Two: Full Text of Announcement

I. Funding Opportunity DescriptionThe Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency often selects its research efforts through theBroad Agency Announcement (BAA) process. The BAA will appear first on the FedBizOppswebsite, http://www.fedbizopps.gov, then the agency website ofhttp://www.darpa.mil/tto/solicitations.htm. The following information is for those wishing torespond to the BAA.

A. Program OverviewThe Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) is seeking innovative solutions toaid in the demonstration of a system capability that enables a Joint Terminal Attack Controller(JTAC) to visualize, select and employ weapons at the time of his choosing from an optionallymanned/unmanned A-10 platform.

The Persistent Close Air Support (PCAS) program will, at a minimum, develop and demonstratea system that enables autonomous weapons employment for a suite of weapons that engagevarious target sets. To achieve this, targeting information must be delivered to the airborneplatform from an integrated JTAC kit with the ability to easily and accurately designate targets,display supporting aircraft weapons availability, and show collateral damage estimates for aspecific target and weapon.

One (1) A-10C aircraft and one (1) spare parts aircraft, in addition to two (2) targeting pods, willbe provided as Government Furnished Equipment (GFE) for use by the performer(s) in thisprogram. In addition, all demonstration weapons used in the PCAS program will be provided as

GFE. The weapons will have been previously flight qualified (Seek Eagle-certified) on the A-10C.

The use of a BAA solicitation allows for a wide range of innovative ideas and concepts.Proposer(s) will have the flexibility to develop a tailored program plan that best advances thePCAS program goals.

B. Program GoalsThroughout the history of Close Air Support (CAS), unique technical challenges have permeatedall conflicts. CAS is conducted between multiple parties (aircraft, JTAC and several layers ofcommand) primarily over voice radios against mobile, elusive, and fleeting targets. The lack of

digital machine-to-machine and standardized architectures limits the ability to share situationalawareness and targeting across CAS systems. This can introduce errors in information transferand limit the speed and precision of information that is transmitted between CAS elements.

PCAS will reduce the response time to JTAC requests for CAS. It will improve the JTACssituational awareness and enable the JTAC to select the ordnance that best fits the target. Thiswill minimize collateral damage and fratricide. Reducing the CAS kill-chain timeline and


7/54

7

improving its efficiency will have a direct and positive contribution on the conduct of ournations wars.

The envisioned concept consists of a complete integrated system that uses an airborne nodecapable of responding autonomously to a direct JTAC request for CAS need. The second key

node is the JTAC equipment which interfaces with the airborne system allowing: (i) real-timesharing of sensor information including video feeds, (ii) display airborne platform weaponsavailability, (iii) the ability to visualize weapons effects for collateral damage estimation, and(iv) target location command hand-off.

The program will culminate in a live-fire demonstration initiated with a digital JTAC request andterminated with a commanded weapons release from an A-10 platform. Other advancedtechnologies may also be developed and demonstrated as required by the PCAS conceptspecified by proposers. The Government seeks proposals in two task areas:

Task A: PCAS Systems Integrator

Task B: Critical Enabling Technology Development and Demonstration

DARPA intends to provide Task A performers the opportunity to integrate critical technologycomponents designed by Task B performers into their preliminary design prior to the Task APreliminary Design Review (PDR) (notional schedule provided in Section I-D-1). At thecompletion of Phase I, Task A performers will recommend to Government which Task Bperformers technologies they would like to incorporate in their Phase II design. TheGovernment will have final decision authority on which Task B performers will be integratedwith Task A performers in follow-on phases. It is incumbent on Task B performers tocollaborate with Task A performers to encourage incorporation of their critical technologycomponent in the Task A effort. The Government will hold periodic collaboration meetings tofacilitate this effort.

C. Program Plan for Task A1. Task A: PCAS System Measures of Performance

Task A objectives:

Demonstrate rapid response of an autonomous aircraft to a JTAC digital request for CAS Demonstrate aircraft-to-ground shared sensor information enabling the JTAC to have

increased situational awareness and take timely action as the threat moves and changes Provide the JTAC visualization of available airborne weapons, their accuracy and

effectiveness, to include the ability to assess potential collateral damage prior to weaponsrelease

Demonstrate the capability for a dismounted JTAC to pull the trigger to accurately employordnance from an airborne system

The operational PCAS system is envisioned to be a networked interface capability betweenaircraft, dismounted ground controllers, and weapons. Task A proposers should develop their


8/54

8

solution set with a wide variety of potential transition users in mind. The intention is to developa standard interface that can become the blueprint between aircraft, ground controller, andweapons. The aircraft can be manned or unmanned, large or small. An example aircraft is thenext generation of weaponized UAVs (beyond MQ-1, MQ-9) which will be a persistent, deepmagazine, medium speed aircraft that can directly interface with ground troops in contact. Also,

current manned CAS platforms (F-16, A-10, F/A-18) could directly benefit from improvedinteraction with a JTAC to better share digital requests, sensor information, and coordinateweapons employment. It is incumbent on Task A proposers to present their PCAS operationalconcept and then derive the PCAS A-10 demonstration to show the core technical elements inthis program. The demonstration PCAS system should show traceability to the conceptualoperational PCAS system and meet the Task A Measures of Performance.

DARPA has established the following Measures of Performance (MoPs) for Task A proposers.These basic elements should be demonstrated by the PCAS system at the conclusion of theprogram. The MoPs are broken into four areas: overall system, A-10 demonstration platform,JTAC equipment, and ground station.

Task A: Measures of Performance

Overall System

Demonstrate positively controlled aircraft flight and weapons employment between

the three (3) nodes A-10, JTAC equipment, and aircraft ground station

Ensure reliable voice and data connectivity between the ground station, JTAC, and

safety pilot

Demonstrate that all data sharing is secure.

A-10 Demonstration Platform

Demonstrate autonomous flighto Fly to and hold in an orbit from a ground control station and/or JTAC commando Fly to respond to digital JTAC requests for CAS serviceso For an aircraft that is within 30nm from a target, respond and employ a weapon

on that target within six (6) minutes of a JTAC requesto Ensure safety of the aircraft and pilot within the flight envelope such that flight

loads are equivalent to manned maneuvers

Demonstrate consistent, high bandwidth, reliable communications capability

o Ensure constant reliable management, oversight and networking with groundstation and JTAC

o Within 30nm, provide two-way Line Of Sight (LOS) digital data sharing with

JTACo Network solution between JTAC, airborne platform, and ground station to provide

uplink/downlink of targeting information, voice to ground station and safety pilot,internet connection, and dual sensor video feeds

Ability to safely employ up to four GFE weapon types:

o Demonstrate accurate strafe with the GAU-8/A Avenger 30mm cannon at variousangles of attack and altitudes to replicate combat strafing conditions


9/54

9

o Demonstrate rocket salvo with either 2.75 unguided and/or guided rocketsagainst various threat scenarios. Demonstrate guided single-shot against variousthreat scenario targets.

o Demonstrate the ability to strike a target with a AGM-65E Laser Maverick thatis laser designated by a JTAC

o

Demonstrate ability to strike a target with a GBU-38 500lb Joint Direct AttackMunition (JDAM) based on GPS coordinates provided by a JTAC

Demonstrate the same level of situational awareness to the safety pilot as the ground

station

JTAC Equipment

Demonstrate an integrated system allowing for mobile dismounted ground

operations

Show that the system is useable in full daylight and at night

Demonstrate tasking and control of aircraft sensors (targeting pods)

Demonstrate ability to visualize weapons availability, designate, and direct weapons

release from an A-10 Demonstrate ability to accurately predict collateral damage estimates for weapons

Demonstrate ability to designate and geo-locate targets in support of JTAC mission,

both short range (0-5km) and long range (5-10km).

Incorporate tools for generating targeting coordinates (i.e. laser designator, GPS)

Generate Category 1 (0-20ft accuracy) targeting coordinates

Demonstrate ability to easily visualize and de-conflict airspace in JTACs mission

area

Demonstrate ability to designate multiple targets both stationary and moving during

the same targeting event

Demonstrate sufficient power supply and power management to support JTAC

missions. Two types of mission durations are: 1-24 hours averaging 8 missions and1-72 hours averaging 24 missions.

Ground Station

Demonstrate connectivity and information exchange with field nodes and the Global

Information Grid (GIG) Demonstrate airspace management to fly within standard military operating zones Demonstrate visualization of JTAC requests and commands to the A-10 and

provisions to consent to those requests and commands Demonstrate situational awareness of the A-10 to include fuel, position, weapons

and sensor feedsDesirable Features for PCAS Operational Concept These features are projected for theoperational system and may be considered in the design, which could aid in transition to theServices. However, these items are not required to be demonstrated in this program. Theseitems are not listed in any order of priority.

Rapid system boot capability from dormant modes for JTAC Central Processing Units(CPUs)


10/54

10

Intuitive information management and data recovery

System design that does not compromise a JTACs position

PCAS capability for JTAC heads up operation when needed

Intuitive, simple, easy to use operation for an operator in contact with the enemy

Mass storage capability for detailed area maps, cultural features, and digital terrain

elevation data Minimized number of independent CPUs Low weight and few operator interfaces for

all targeting functions

Demonstrate robustness to operate in battlefield operating conditions/environments

Tasking and control of organic JTAC Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS) sensors (i.e.WASP, Raven, etc.)

Legacy data link and Internet protocol based network interfaces

Reachback to the GIG for multiple applications through the airborne platform

Ability to display weather information

Leverage the current state-of-the-art JTAC software tools and architectures

Provide Government-owned software suite

Transportability of new or updated software that can run on multiple operating systems

Configuration and architecture to allow software cloning to maximize distribution to fieldusers

Show traceability to a next generation unmanned combat aircraft platformo Architectures should be consistent with DoD architecture efforts to enhance

transition to the Serviceso Consistent with DoD architectures to ease transition to Serviceso Delineate agnostic elements required to support future CAS systems from those

that require specific development for the PCAS demonstration

Proposers are asked to explore the design space defined by the Measures of Performance todevelop their PCAS operational concept. When exploring potential design solutions, it isimportant to consider military utility, operational mobility, reliability, and affordability. Basedon the operational concept, proposers will derive the PCAS A-10 demonstration and thetechnology maturation plan that outlines an overall risk strategy for the demonstration system,culminating in the live-fire demonstration.

The PCAS program for Task A will be conducted in three phases:

Phase I: System Requirements Definition and Preliminary System Design

Phase II: Risk Reduction and Critical Design Review

Phase III: System Fabrication, Integration, and Demonstration

Each phase will progressively mature the design and technologies required to validate the abilityto achieve the PCAS Measures of Performance described above. Figure 1 illustrates thetechnical approach and program timeline for Task A with anticipated major milestoneshighlighted. The following sections describe the specific technical objectives of each phase.


11/54

11

Figure 1. PCAS Task A Program Plan

2. Task A: Phase I ObjectivesThe top-level Phase I objectives for Task A are as follows:

Conduct detailed technology trade studies for the airborne system, the prototype kit forthe dismounted JTAC, and the rear ground control station

Develop a conceptual design of the operational PCAS system with a Conceptual DesignReview (CoDR) held approximately five (5) months from the beginning of Phase I

Derive and develop the demonstration PCAS system, with a System Requirement Review(SRR) of the demonstration system held roughly nine (9) months into Phase I

Develop a detailed Technology Maturation Plan (TMP) that provides an integrated riskreduction strategy and achieves the live fire demonstration goals of the PCAS system inPhase III

Develop initial test plans for the Phase III live-fire demonstration Conduct initial risk reduction activities to mature the design of the demonstration PCAS

system, with a Preliminary Design Review (PDR) held at the conclusion of Phase I

In Phase I, the performer will conduct design trade studies on the critical technologycomponents, with the objective to assess alternative technical approaches from the standpoint offeasibility, performance, and technological maturity to help meet the Measures of Performance


12/54


13/54


14/54

14

Phase II updated technical approach presentation and submittal, including Phase II SOWand IMS

Integration plan of Task B critical enabling technologies

Final TMP reviewREVIEW 5 Month18

Preliminary Design Review (PDR) of PCAS A-10 demonstration Phase I final report

In addition to the program reviews, DARPA will conduct Technical Interchange Meetings(TIMs) in Washington, D.C., on Months 2, 6, 10, and 14 to include other performers for thepurpose of collaboration.

6. Task A: Program Phase MilestonesThe Government defines program milestones to evaluate the effectiveness of proposed solutionsin achieving the stated Measures of Performance for Task A. These milestones will serve as thebasis for determining whether satisfactory progress is being made to warrant continued funding

of the program. The Government has identified these events with the intention of bounding thescope of the effort, while affording the maximum flexibility, creativity, and innovation indeveloping proposed solutions. The Government suggests the following milestones for Phases I,II and III of Task A.

Phase I:

The focus of Phase I is to define the PCAS operational concept and derive the A-10demonstration design for both the airborne system and JTAC kit and making initialselections/integrating of technologies for a preliminary design. A significant number of tradesmust be made to meet the Measures of Performance, while also considering the desirable

attributes that would ensure future transition to the Services. Critical milestone events areannotated to show the timing of significant items.

There are four (4) critical events in Phase I to show specific progress:

Conceptual Design Review (CoDR)

System Requirement Review (SRR)

Preliminary Design Review (PDR)

Phase I Final Report

Conceptual Design Review is used to determine the feasibility of the performers PCAS

operational concept. It is used to focus and tailor requirements to the achievable. It involvesconsidering as many approaches to the solution as possible and narrowing the scope to concludewith one or two options at the top level. Requirements for the A-10 demonstration, includingboth the aircraft and key component technologies for the JTAC kit, will be defined. Keysubsystems should be defined to the extent of determining availability of technology and impacton performance requirements of both the A-10 platform and the JTAC kit. There will also bediscussion of the initial Technology Maturation Plan (TMP) and risk reduction considerations.


15/54

15

System Requirements Review is conducted to evaluate the design optimization, traceability,correlation, completeness, and risk of the allocated requirements including corresponding testrequirements in fulfilling the system/subsystem requirements of the PCAS A-10 demonstrationsystem. The review encompasses the total system requirements. The proposer will confirmconvergence on and achievability of the demonstration PCAS system, with complete TMP

defined.

Preliminary Design Review (PDR) takes the A-10 demonstration solution to a more detailedlevel. The intent is to define a detailed program plan and cost for the remaining phases andprovide guidance for the detailed design effort. The PDR will assess technical and programmaticproducts.

Phase I Final Report will be an annotated briefing that details all Phase I activities, capturingthe top-level results of all technology trade studies, design performance analyses, and the designevolution of A-10 demonstration concepts for both the demonstration aircraft and JTAC kit.

Phase II:

Phase II is focused on refining the technology options from the preliminary A-10 demonstrationsystem derived in Phase I to a Critical Design Review (CDR) at the end of the Phase. Keyaircraft architecture integration, weapons employment via JTAC requests for CAS services,aircraft/JTAC interfaces via targeting pods, and JTAC kit hardware/software elements mustcome together in a producible design with sufficient evidence that they will integrate together.The key enabling technologies will be developed and tested to quantitatively show that they willwork in a full demonstration. As such, time and effort must be spent to not only on a completedCDR, but on risk reduction through component testing to show feasibility and function of keytechnology components. If there are advanced technology elements proposed in Phase I, theymust be proven feasible in Phase II.

There are two critical events in Phase II to show specific progress:

Critical Design Review (CDR)

Phase II Final Report

Critical Design Review (CDR) is a multi-disciplined technical review to ensure that the PCASdemonstration system can proceed into fabrication, test and demonstration; and meets the statedperformance requirements within cost, schedule, risk, and system constraints. Since PCAS is acomplex set of systems, it is to the responsibility of the proposer to recommend milestones forsubsystems which would lead to an overall PCAS system CDR.

Phase II Final Report will be an annotated briefing that details all of the Phase II activities,capturing top-level results of all technology trade studies, design performance analyses, and thePCAS A-10 demonstration concepts and component technologies.

Phase III:


16/54

16

Phase III is devoted to building, assembling, testing and demonstrating a PCAS system throughground testing, flight, and live-fire demonstration. This phase is focused on adhering to theprogram schedule and risk management of subcomponent completion to include verification oftheir function, testing of their performance, and assembly into a working system.

There are three (3) critical events in Phase III to show specific progress:

A-10 Autonomous Flight and Dry Weapons Employment Profiles

Test Readiness Review

Live-Fire Demonstration

A-10 Autonomous Flight and Dry Weapons Employment Profiles are precursors to the finalweapons demonstration. These flights are culmination missions where the planned weaponspasses are flown dry, without weapons loaded, and the safety pilot monitors and verifies thatthe aircraft can safely fly employment passes. The functional test is a recommended milestonethat should occur early enough in the phase so that issues arising from aircraft modifications can

be rectified in time for the flight demonstrations.

Test Readiness Review is a final check of the PCAS demonstration system for the live-firedemonstration at the end of the phase. Prior to the live-fire exercise, performers are expected tohave validated the demonstration aircraft controls architecture and field test the fabricated JTACkit hardware/software.

Live-Fire Demonstration will occur at the completion of the program on a government testrange using the fully integrated JTAC kit and A-10 demonstration aircraft in various scenariosunder rapid succession to simulate realistic CAS scenarios for the demonstration weapons.

D. Program Plan for Task B1. Task B: Measures of Performance

The objective of Task B is to develop and mature critical enabling technology components thatenable a PCAS Task A Systems Integrator to meet the Measures of Performance identified forTask A (Section I-C-1). Such enabling technologies could include, but are not limited to: flightcontrol software, JTAC viewing devices for visualization, compact long range targeting sub-systems, multi-source fusion software applications, targeting pod control applications, innovativesoftware applications for targeting, and high energy density/renewable power supplies for JTACapplications. The Measures of Performance (MoPs) for Task B are directly connected toassisting Task A performers meet their MoPs. A Task B performer should directly link theirtechnology to enabling a Task A system integrator to succeed at Task A MoPs. The Task B effortwill identify the technical risks and mature the technology through risk reduction activities to alevel at which it could be incorporated by Task A. It is strongly encouraged for Task Bproposers to achieve the highest level of maturity for their technology as possible by Month 18.Working prototypes, models, or test data are highly encouraged such that Task A incorporation isfeasible at the Task A PDR timeframe.


17/54

17

Task B for the PCAS program will be a one (1) phase effort. It is desired that the selected TaskB efforts be completed within 18 months of award to provide adequate time for collaborationefforts with Task A performers and subsequent selection by the Government for Phase II finalintegration in to the Task A CDR in Phase II. Figure 2 illustrates the notional timeline for TaskB in relation to Task A.

Figure 2. PCAS Task B Program Plan

2. Task B: ObjectivesThe top-level objectives for Task B are as follows:

Develop and execute a detailed Technology Maturation Plan (TMP) that provides a riskreduction strategy to achieve the performance goals, as defined by the performer, for theenabling technology component. This TMP should:

1) Identify and include a risk assessment of the critical component2) Identify major risk reduction tests and demonstrations, including subscale

component tests, required to validate the ability to achieve the desired performancegoals

3) Define credible intermediate performance objectives (milestone criteria) associatedwith critical tests and demonstrations


18/54

18

Mature the critical component design to a level (hardware fabrication, labdemonstrations, etc.) that supports incorporation into a Task A system at the end of theTask B effort.

3. Task B: Schedule and DeliverablesThe Government plans to hold periodic program reviews throughout the course of this Task. Asrequired, the Government team will also support informal meetings and/or teleconferences. Theproposer should define the program review schedule, specific deliverables for each review, andquantifiable metrics for assessing the progress of risk reduction activities. In addition to programreviews, DARPA will conduct Technical Interchange Meetings (TIMs) in Washington, D.C., onMonths 2, 6, 10, and 14 to include other performers for the purpose of collaboration. All riskreduction activities should be completed by the end of the effort with results available to theGovernment, along with a final report.

II. Award InformationMultiple awards are anticipated for both Task A and Task B. For planning purposes, the totalprogram funding for any one proposer for Task A will be approximately $47M with thefollowing breakdown. Phase I - $7M, Phase II - $13M, Phase III - $27M. It is anticipated thatthere will be multiple awards in Phase I. The contract will be executed by Phases. Phase II andPhase III will be managed as priced options. For Task B, the total program funding for any oneproposer will be approximately $1M. The amount of resources made available under this BAAwill depend on the quality of the proposals received and the availability of funds.

The Government reserves the right to select for negotiation all, some, one, or none of theproposals received in response to this solicitation, and to make awards without discussions withproposers. The Government also reserves the right to conduct discussions if it is later determined

to be necessary. If warranted, portions of resulting awards may be segregated into pre-pricedoptions. Additionally, DARPA reserves the right to accept proposals in their entirety or to selectonly portions of proposals for award. In the event that DARPA desires to award only portions ofa proposal, negotiations will be opened with that proposer. The Government reserves the right tofund proposals in phases with options for continued work at the end of one or more of thephases.

The Government intends to use this BAA to cover the entirety of the PCAS program and doesnot plan to conduct a new competition for Phases II or III of Task A.

Awards under this BAA will be made to proposers on the basis of the evaluation criteria listed

below (see section labeled Application Review Information, Section V), and program balanceto provide overall best value to the Government. Proposals identified for negotiation may resultin a Procurement contract or Other Transaction depending upon the nature of the work proposed,the required degree of interaction between parties, and other factors. Proposers should note thatthe required degree of interaction between parties, regardless of award instrument, will be highand continuous. The Government reserves the right to request any additional, necessarydocumentation once it makes the award instrument determination. Such additional informationmay include but is not limited to Representations and Certifications. The Government reserves


19/54

19

the right to remove proposers from award consideration should the parties fail to reachagreement on award terms, conditions and cost/price within a reasonable time or the proposerfails to timely provide requested additional information.

As of the date of publication of this BAA, DARPA expects that program goals for this BAA

cannot be met by proposers intending to perform 'fundamental research,' i.e., basic and appliedresearch in science and engineering, the results of which ordinarily are published and sharedbroadly within the scientific community, as distinguished from proprietary research and fromindustrial development, design, production, and product utilization the results of which ordinarilyare restricted for proprietary or national security reasons. Notwithstanding this statement ofexpectation, DARPA is not prohibited from considering and selecting research proposals that,regardless of the category of research proposed, still meet the BAA criteria for submissions. Inall cases, the contracting officer shall have sole discretion to select award instrument type and tonegotiate all instrument provisions with selectees.

III. Eligibility InformationA. Eligible Applicants

All responsible sources capable of satisfying the Government's needs may submit a proposal thatshall be considered by DARPA. Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs), SmallBusinesses, Small Disadvantaged Businesses and Minority Institutions (MIs) are encouraged tosubmit proposals and join others in submitting proposals; however, no portion of thisannouncement will be set aside for these organizations participation due to the impracticality ofreserving discrete or severable areas of this research for exclusive competition among theseentities.

Federally Funded Research and Development Centers (FFRDCs) and Government entities

(Government/National laboratories, military educational institutions, etc.) are subject toapplicable direct competition limitations and cannot propose to this BAA in any capacity unlessthey meet the following conditions. FFRDCs must clearly demonstrate that the work is nototherwise available from the private sector AND they also provide a letter on letterhead fromtheir sponsoring organization citing the specific authority establishing their eligibility to proposeto government solicitations and compete with industry, and compliance with the associatedFFRDC sponsor agreement and terms and conditions. This information is required for FFRDCsproposing to be prime or subcontractors. Government entities must clearly demonstrate that thework is not otherwise available from the private sector and provide written documentation citingthe specific statutory authority (as well as, where relevant, contractual authority) establishingtheir ability to propose to Government solicitations. At the present time, DARPA does notconsider 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 supportingregulatory guidance, together with evidence of agency approval, will still be required to fullyestablish eligibility. DARPA will consider eligibility submissions on a case-by-case basis;however, the burden to prove eligibility for all team members rests solely with the proposer.


20/54

20

Foreign participants and/or individuals may participate to the extent that such participantscomply with any necessary Non-Disclosure Agreements, Security Regulations, Export ControlLaws, and other governing statutes applicable under the circumstances.

Applicants considering classified submissions (or requiring access to classified information

during the life-cycle of the program) shall ensure all industrial, personnel, and informationsystem processing security requirements are in place and at the appropriate level (e.g., FacilityClearance (FCL), Personnel Security Clearance (PCL), certification and accreditation (C&A))and any Foreign Ownership Control and Influence (FOCI) issues are mitigated prior to suchsubmission or access. Additional information on these subjects can be found at:http://www.dss.mil.

1. Procurement Integrity, Standards of Conduct, Ethical Considerations,and Organizational Conflicts of Interest

Current federal employees are prohibited from participating in particular matters involvingconflicting financial, employment, and representational interests (18 U.S.C. 203, 205, and 208.).

The DARPA Program Manager for this BAA is Mr. Stephen Waller. Once the proposals havebeen received, and prior to the start of proposal evaluations, the Government will assess potentialconflicts of interest and will promptly notify the proposer if any appear to exist. (Please note theGovernment assessment does NOT affect, offset, or mitigate the proposers own duty to give fullnotice and planned mitigation for all potential organizational conflicts, as discussed below.)

All Proposers and proposed subcontractors must affirm whether they are providing scientific,engineering, and technical assistance (SETA) or similar support to any DARPA technicaloffice(s) through an active contract or subcontract. All affirmations must state which office(s)the proposer supports and identify the prime contract numbers. Affirmations shall be furnishedat the time of proposal submission. All facts relevant to the existence or potential existence of

organizational conflicts of interest (FAR 9.5) must be disclosed. The disclosure shall include adescription of the action the proposer has taken or proposes to take to avoid, neutralize, ormitigate such conflict. In accordance with FAR 9.503 and without prior approval or a waiverfrom the DARPA Director, a Contractor cannot simultaneously be a SETA and Performer.Proposals that fail to fully disclose potential conflicts of interests and/or do not have plans tomitigate this conflict will be rejected without technical evaluation and withdrawn from furtherconsideration for award.

If a prospective proposer believes that any conflict of interest exists or may exist (whetherorganizational or otherwise), the proposer should promptly raise the issue with DARPA bysending proposer's contact information and a summary of the potential conflict by email to themailbox address for this BAA at [email protected], before time and effort areexpended in preparing a proposal and mitigation plan. If, in the sole opinion of the Governmentafter full consideration of the circumstances, any conflict situation cannot be effectivelymitigated, the proposal may be rejected without technical evaluation and withdrawn from furtherconsideration for award under this BAA.


21/54

21

B. Cost Sharing/MatchingCost sharing is not required for this particular program; however, cost sharing will be carefullyconsidered where there is an applicable statutory condition relating to the selected fundinginstrument (e.g., for any Other Transactions under the authority of 10 U.S.C. 2371). Costsharing is encouraged where there is a reasonable probability of a potential commercial

application related to the proposed research and development effort.

IV. Application and Submission InformationA. Address to Request Application Package

This solicitation contains all information required to submit a proposal. No additional forms, kits,or other materials are needed. This notice constitutes the total BAA. No additional information isavailable, nor will a formal Request for Proposal (RFP) or additional solicitation regarding thisannouncement be issued. Requests for the same will be disregarded.

B. Content and Form of Application Submission1. Task A: Proposal Information

a) Security and Proprietary IssuesNOTE: If proposals are classified, the proposals must indicate the classification level of not

only the proposal itself, but also the anticipated award document classification level.

The Government anticipates proposals submitted under this BAA will be unclassified. However,if a proposal is submitted as Classified National Security Information as defined by ExecutiveOrder 13526, then the information must be marked and protected as though classified at theappropriate classification level and then submitted to DARPA for a final classification

determination.

Proposers choosing to submit a classified proposal from other classified sources must firstreceive permission from the respective Original Classification Authority in order to use theirinformation in replying to this BAA. Applicable classification guide(s) should also be submittedto ensure the proposal is protected at the appropriate classification level.

Classified submissions should be appropriately and conspicuously marked with the proposedclassification level and declassification date. Submissions requiring DARPA to make a finalclassification determination should be marked as follows:

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

Classified submissions should be in accordance with the following guidance:

Confidential and Secret Collateral Information: Use classification and marking guidanceprovided by previously issued security classification guides, the Information Security Regulation(DoD 5200.1-R), and the National Industrial Security Program Operating Manual (DoD 5220.22-


22/54

22

M) when marking and transmitting information previously classified by another OriginalClassification Authority. Classified information at the Confidential and Secret level may bemailed via appropriate U.S. Postal Service methods (e.g., (USPS) Registered Mail or USPSExpress Mail). All classified information will be enclosed in opaque inner and outer covers anddouble wrapped. The inner envelope should be sealed and plainly marked with the assigned

classification and addresses of both sender and addressee. The inner envelope should beaddressed to:

Defense Advanced Research Projects AgencyATTN: Tactical Technology OfficeReference: DARPA-BAA-10-873701 North Fairfax DriveArlington, VA 22203-1714

The outer envelope should be sealed with no identification as to the classification of its contentsand addressed to:

Defense Advanced Research Projects AgencySecurity & Intelligence Directorate, Attn: CDR3701 North Fairfax DriveArlington, VA 22203-1714

All Top Secret materials: Top Secret information should be hand carried by an appropriatelycleared and authorized courier to the DARPA CDR. Prior to traveling, the courier shall contactthe DARPA CDR at 571-218-4842 to coordinate arrival and delivery.

Special Access Program (SAP) Information: SAP information must be transmitted viaapproved methods. Prior to transmitting SAP information, contact the DARPA SAPCO at 703-526-4052 for instructions.

Sensitive Compartmented Information (SCI): SCI must be transmitted via approved methods.Prior to transmitting SCI, contact the DARPA Special Security Office (SSO) at 703-248-7213for instructions.

Proprietary Data: All proposals containing proprietary data should have the cover page andeach page containing proprietary data clearly marked as well as clearly marking specificproprietary information containing proprietary data. It is the proposers responsibility to clearlydefine to the Government what is considered proprietary data.

Security classification guidance via a DD Form 254 will not be provided at this time sinceDARPA is soliciting ideas only. After reviewing the incoming proposals, if a determination ismade that the award instrument may result in access to classified information a DD Form 254will be issued and attached as part of the award.

Proposers must have existing and in-place prior to execution of an award, approved capabilities(personnel and facilities) to perform research and development at the classification level they


23/54

23

propose. It is the policy of DARPA to treat all proposals as competitive information, and todisclose their contents only for the purpose of evaluation. Proposals will not be returned. Theoriginal of each proposal received will be retained at DARPA and all other non-required copiesdestroyed. A certification of destruction may be requested, provided the formal request isreceived at this office within 5 days after unsuccessful notification.

b) Proposal FormatAll Task A proposals must be in the following format. Nonconforming proposals may berejected without further review. Proposals must be on single-sided pages, written in English,with 1-inch margins (left, right, top, and bottom) in each page. A page is defined as being nolarger than 8.5 by 11.0. (Accordion-style foldouts will be counted as multiple pagesequivalent to the expanded size.) The body text of the Technical Proposal should contain nosmaller than 12 point font type. Information presented in tables/graphs and accordion-style fold-outs may use a type font smaller than 12 point as necessary to display such information; howeverrespondents are cautioned that excessive use of smaller fonts may adversely affect theGovernments ability to evaluate such information in a timely fashion. Graphic material should

be embedded in the Word document using GIF or JPEG format.

The Cost Proposal shouldcontain no smaller than 8-point font type. Larger font type for the Cost Proposal, up to 12 pointfont type, is desired, where possible.Paper copies of proposals should be stapled or submitted inloose-leaf binder, not bound. Electronic copies should be submitted on a PC-formatted CD-ROM in a format readable with Microsoft Office 2007 or earlier version.

A complete proposal should consist of two volumes - a Technical Proposal (Volume I) and aCost Proposal (Volume II). Proposers should submit a total of five (5) copies of Volume I andVolume II, in hardcopy, as well as two (2) copies of each proposal Volume in electronic format(CD-ROM) to DARPA. The electronic copies of both Volumes must match the hard copiespage-by-page, and should be fully integrated files to permit easy distribution to reviewers. All

graphics and tables, as well as the proposers IMS (in MS Project format) should be included inseparate electronic files and clearly named on the CDs. Respondents need only submit one (1)original signed proposal along with the copies and each submittal should reference DARPA-BAA-10-87. The submission of any additional supporting materials outside of the documentationrequested herein will not be considered for review. Sections II-III of the Technical Proposal(Volume I) should not exceed seventy-five (75) pages total, excluding the proposers Statementof Work (SOW), Integrated Master Schedule (IMS), and intellectual property rights assertion.This page count is to ensure enough page volume is provided for the technical substantiationsdesired for the PCAS operational concept and A-10 demonstration. The 75 page limitationincludes all figures, tables, and charts, unless otherwise noted. All pages that exceed themaximum page limit specified will be removed and will not be reviewed or considered in the

evaluation. The Cost Proposal (Volume II) does not have a page limit. Guidance regarding costtable formatting is provided in Appendix A.

c) Work Breakdown Structure (WBS) ExampleThe following is an example WBS to provide a common numbering system that ties all programelements together, in both the Integrated Master Schedule (IMS) and the Statement of Work(SOW). The WBS excerpt below is an example of a Level 3 WBS as viewed by the


24/54

24

Government. It is provided as guidance for the expected magnitude of WBS levels, but thespecific approach to numbering scheme and titles and content are left to the proposer.

Outline Level

Code 1 2 3

x x.x x.x.x

1. PCAS Operational Concept1.1. Advanced Unmanned Aircraft1.2. Envisioned field JTAC Equipment1.3. Envisioned Ground Station Function

2. PCAS A-10 Demonstration2.1. A-10 Demonstration Platform

2.1.1. Airframe control architecture2.1.2. Central processor system2.1.3. Vehicle management system

2.1.4.

Safety pilot interfaces and displays2.1.5. Targeting management system2.1.6. Weapons control and release system

2.2. JTAC Equipment2.2.1. Hardware architecture2.2.2. Displays and graphic user interfaces2.2.3. Power management2.2.4. Software architecture2.2.5. Communications2.2.6. Applications

d) Volume I, Technical Proposal for Task A ProposalsThe Volume I Technical Proposal should be organized into four parts as described below.

Part I. Administrative {not included in the page count}

A. Cover sheet to include:(1) BAA number (DARPA-BAA-10-87)(2) Task A and proposal title (short title recommended)(3) Lead Organization submitting proposal(4) Type of business, selected among the following categories: LARGE BUSINESS,

SMALL DISADVANTAGED BUSINESS, OTHER SMALL BUSINESS, HBCU,MI, OTHER EDUCATIONAL, OR OTHER NONPROFIT

(5) Contractors reference number (if any)(6) Other team members (if applicable) and type of business for each(7) Technical point of contact to include: salutation, last name, first name, street address, city,

state, zip code, telephone, fax (if available), electronic mail (if available)(8) Administrative point of contact to include: salutation, last name, first name, street address,

city, state, zip code, telephone, fax (if available), electronic mail (if available)


25/54

25

(9) Total funds requested from DARPA, and the amount of cost share (if any) AND(10) Date proposal was submitted.(11) Affirmation of existing scientific, engineering, and technical assistance (SETA) or

similar support to any DARPA technical office(s) through an active contract orsubcontract (see III.A.1). If none, state None.

B. Official transmittal letter.

C. Table of Contents: The table of contents should be keyed to the page numbers of the proposalsections in the electronic (CD-ROM) submissions.

D. Additional front matter such as List of Figures, List of Acronyms, etc., if desired.

Part II. Executive Summary {Part II+Part III not to exceed 75 pages}

This section should provide a short overview of the proposers proposed PCAS program,

including a summary of the PCAS operational concept, A-10 demonstration goals, technicalapproach, relevant experience, and a top-level description of tasks, schedule, and cost for eachphase.

Note: The Executive Summary should not have any unique information not contained in the

Detailed Proposal Information.

A. Innovation. Succinctly describe the uniqueness and benefits of the PCAS operationalconcept relative to the current state-of-art or alternate approaches. Provide a basicdescription of the scientific or technical basis for the innovative claims.

B. Demonstration. Provide a short description of the envisioned PCAS A-10 demonstrationthat will be delivered to the Government at the end of the program. The proposer should alsoinclude a list of specific capabilities that are envisioned to be demonstrated in the final phaseof the program.

C. Technical Approach. Provide a short description of the technical approach and constructiveplan for accomplishment of the program technical goals in support of innovative claims anddeliverable production. Provide a top-level description of tasks to be conducted in eachphase.

D. Experience. Provide a short general discussion of other research by corporate team membersin the proposed technology area.

E. Cost. Cost,schedule, and measurable milestones for the proposed research, includingestimates of cost for each task in each year of the effort delineated by the prime and majorsubcontractors, total cost and company cost share, if applicable. (Note: Measurablemilestones should capture key development points in tasks and should be clearly articulatedand defined in time relative to start of effort.)

Part III. Detailed Proposal Information {Part II+Part III not to exceed 75 pages}

This section provides the detailed discussion of the specific technical aspects of the proposal.Part III should be organized into the following sections:


26/54

26

PCAS Operational Concept and A-10 Demonstration

Technology Maturation Plan

Phase I Statement of Work (SOW) and Integrated Master Schedule (IMS)

Phase II and Phase III Program Plans

Potential Contribution and Relevance to DARPA Mission Program Management

A. PCAS Operational Concept and A-10 Demonstration

1. PCAS Operational Concept. The proposer should provide a general description oftheir notional PCAS operational concept that will serve as the starting point for theirconceptual design in Phase I. The intent of providing a notional concept is todemonstrate that the proposer understands the program objectives, PCAS systemperformance goals, and the associated technical challenges.

2. PCAS A-10 Demonstration. The proposer should provide a description of their

intended demonstration that represents key features of their operational concept.3. Technical Rationale. Proposal features in the operational concept and A-10

demonstration should be expanded to the core technical elements to make it succeed.The operational concept should be substantiated with first-order analysis, at aminimum, illustrating the feasibility of meeting the program Measures of Performance.

4. Technical Approach. The proposer should provide an overview of the technicalapproach to progressively derive the A-10 demonstration of the proposed set oftechnologies from their PCAS operational concept. This overall plan will set thestructure for a credible technology maturation plan to culminate in a successfuldemonstration with the time and resource constraints of the program.

B.

Technology Maturation

1. Critical Technology Risk Identification and Tracking. The proposer should providean initial list of critical technology risk areas. This will form the basis of theirTechnology Maturation Plan (TMP).

2. Risk Reduction. The proposer should also provide the risk reduction approach for theidentified risk areas.

3. Applicable Technologies. The proposer should also describe the process foridentifying and evaluating the applicable technologies available from other Governmentand Industry R&D programs.

C.

Phase I Statement of Work (SOW) and Integrated Master Schedule (IMS)

1. Phase I SOW.{Not included in page count} The Phase I SOW will describe all of thetasks the proposer will perform in order to achieve the Phase I milestones. This sectionwill define the tasks to be performed to WBS level 3 (or more detailed if desired), withtask descriptions included. Phase I deliverables should be clearly defined. Do notinclude any proprietary information in the SOW.


27/54

27

2. Phase I IMS. {Not included in page count} The Phase I IMS should provide adetailed integrated schedule of all Phase I activities, with the critical path identified.

D. Phase II and III Program Plans

1.

Schedule. The proposer should include top-level schedules for Phase II and Phase IIIbased on the initial proposed risk reduction strategy.2. Cost Estimate. The Phase II and III program plans should include cost estimates for

each phase to assist the Government in assessing resource requirements for future phases.It is highly desirable for the proposer to submit as detailed as possible cost informationfor Phases II and III.

E. Potential Contribution and Relevance to DARPA Mission

The potential contributions of the proposed effort with relevance to the National technologybase will be evaluated. Specifically, DARPA's mission is to maintain the technological

superiority of the U.S. military and prevent technological surprise from harming our Nationalsecurity by sponsoring revolutionary, high-payoff research that bridges the gap betweenfundamental discoveries and their military use. Proposers are encouraged to showtraceability of those elements of their proposed system that will directly benefit the Servicesupon successful completion of a demonstration.

1. Mission Utility. The conceptual design should be closely coupled to the Government-presented Concept of Employment (CONEMP) that provides military utility.Information from Industry Day is available athttps://www.fbo.gov/index?s=opportunity&mode=form&id=bd6ee05a3f1087c53a5fe09402c179bc&tab=core&_cview=0. It is incumbent on the proposer to specify a projectionof how their technology would assist future combatants to accomplish a commandersobjective. The proposer may describe alternative uses and applications of the PCAStechnology. The proposer is also encouraged to specify any element of the operationwhich may create vulnerability or strength through the fielding of their technology. Anyother factors of the design that influence military utility should also be addressed in thissection.

2. Affordability. The proposer should specify what is the magnitude and impact of theirproposal in terms of production cost and fielding. In order for PCAS to field as acapability, the Government requires an understanding of the cost impact to acquire thetechnologies. This discussion should address both hardware and software and beconsistent with the intellectual property rights section of the proposal.

F. Program Management

1. Management Process. The proposer should describe the management process that willbe utilized during the program, including a description of how the team will function andshare technical and financial information among the team members and with theGovernment. This section should include explanation of the critical milestones such asCoDR, SRR, PDR and CDR.


28/54

28

2. Experience. Describe the unique capabilities of the corporate team members. Describethe proposers previous accomplishments and work in closely related research areas.

3. Facilities. The proposer should address facilities available across the team, including adescription of any unique facilities necessary for execution of the proposed effort.

4. Organization. The proposer should submit a clearly defined organization chart and

description for the program team with defined responsibilities of team members. Inaddition, the proposer should demonstrate the teams capability to perform all phases ofthe PCAS program. Short resumes should be provided for the Program Manager, ChiefEngineer, Risk Management Lead and lead personnel in key disciplines. In addition, thenumber of hours committed for each of these key personnel in Phase I should beprovided.

5. Intellectual Property Rights. {Not included in page count} The proposer shoulddescribe the proposed approach to intellectual property rights, together with supportingrationale of a solution eliminating or mitigating the technical and cost risk oftransitioning the technology to the military departments. This pertains to technical data,computer software, or computer software documentation associated with this research

effort in which the Government will acquire less than Government purpose rights. SeeSection VII-A for presentation guidance.

Part IV. Additional Information {No page limit}

Proposals should be self contained and include all relevant information required to review theproposed research effort. A brief bibliography of relevant technical papers and research noteswhich document the technical ideas upon which the proposal can be submitted. The proposermay include copies of not more than three (3) relevant papers in the submission as supportinginformation. Any additional information provided will be considered for informative purposesonly and will not be considered in the evaluation.

e) Volume II, Cost Proposal for Task A ProposalsThe Volume II Cost Proposal should be organized into two parts as described below.

Part I. Administrative

Cover sheet to include:1. BAA number;2. Lead Organization submitting proposal;3. Type of business, selected among the following categories: LARGE BUSINESS,

SMALL DISADVANTAGED BUSINESS, OTHER SMALL BUSINESS, HBCU,MI, OTHER EDUCATIONAL, OR OTHER NONPROFIT;

4. Contractors reference number (if any);5. Other team members (if applicable) and type of business for each;6. Proposal title (short title recommended) and Task A;7. Technical point of contact to include: salutation, last name, first name, street address,

city, state, zip code, country, telephone, and electronic mail;


29/54

29

8. Administrative point of contact to include: salutation, last name, first name, streetaddress, city, state, zip code, country, telephone, and electronic mail;

9. Award instrument requested: cost-plus-fixed-fee (CPFF), cost-contractno fee, costsharing contract no fee, or other type of procurement contract (specify), grant,cooperative agreement, or other transaction;

10.

Place(s) and period(s) of performance;11.Total proposed cost separated by basic award and option(s) (if any);12.Name, address, and telephone number of the proposers cognizant Defense Contract

Management Agency (DCMA) administration office (if known);13.Name, address, and telephone number of the proposers cognizant Defense Contract

Audit Agency (DCAA) audit office (if known);14.Date proposal was prepared;15.DUNS number;16.TIN number; and17.Cage Code; and18.Proposal validity period

Part II. Detailed Cost Proposal

A. Cost Proposal Format and Guidance1. Tables included in the cost proposal should also be provided in Microsoft Excel

format with calculations formulae intact to allow traceability of the cost proposalnumbers across the prime and subcontractors.

2. The prime contractor is responsible for compiling and ensuring all subcontractorproposals are submitted to the Procuring Contracting Officer (PCO).

3. Subcontractor proposals should include Interdivisional Work Transfer Agreements(IWTA) or similar arrangements.

4. Where the effort consists of multiple portions which could reasonably be partitionedfor purposes of funding, these should be identified as options

5. Each cost copy must be clearly labeled with the DARPA BAA number, proposerorganization, and proposal title (short title recommended).

B. Costs. Detailed cost breakdown to include:1. Provide the total program cost and costs broken down by the initial phase (Phase I),

with Phases II and III listed as priced options. Cost, schedules and measurablemilestones for the proposed research, including estimates of cost for each task in eachyear of the effort delineated by the primes and major subcontractors, total cost, andany company cost share. (Note: Measurable milestones should capture keydevelopment points in tasks and should be clearly articulated and defined in timerelative to start of effort.) Where the effort consists of multiple portions which couldreasonably be partitioned for purposes of funding, these should be identified asoptions with separate cost estimates for each. Additionally, proposals should clearlyexplain the technical approach(es) that will be employed to meet or exceed eachprogram metric and provide ample justification as to why the approach(es) is/arefeasible. The milestones must not include proprietary information.


30/54

30

2. Detailed Phase I cost breakdowns. Appendix A has been provided as guidance forsubmitting detailed cost breakdowns for Phase I. Use of this format is recommendedto facilitate timely Government evaluation of the proposal. The tables will showdetailed cost breakdown to include:

a. Total program cost summary broken down by major cost items (direct labor

including labor categories, subcontracts, materials, other direct costs,overhead charges, etc.) and further broken down by task and phase;b. Major program tasks and a summary of projected funding requirements by

month for fiscal quarters/year;c. Labor summary and labor rate summary;d. Itemization of major subcontracts and equipment purchases;e. Termination Liability Schedule, Other Direct Charges (ODCs), and any

GFE/GFI summaries needed.Other items needed but not named in the Appendix are: an itemization of anyinformation technology (IT) purchases;1 the source, nature, and amount of anyindustry cost-sharing, and identification of pricing assumptions which may require

incorporation into the resulting award instrument (e.g., use of Government FurnishedProperty/Facilities/Information, access to Government Subject Matter Experts, etc.).NOTE: for IT and equipment purchases, include a letter stating why the proposercannot provide the requested resources from its own funding.

3. Provide cost estimates for Phases II and III with as much detail as possible; costbreakdowns to include as a minimum:

a. Cost by major task/activities for each year of the effortb. Direct labor including labor categories and man-hoursc. Government Furnished Property/Facilities/Information

C. Supporting Cost Data. Supporting cost and pricing information:1. Provide sufficient detail to substantiate the summary cost estimates above.2. Include a description of the method used to estimate costs and supporting

documentation.3. All proprietary subcontractor proposal documentation should be prepared at the same

level of detail as that required of the prime and should be provided to the Governmentby email: [email protected]. The subject line of the email shouldcontain the lead organizations proposal title, lead organization name, leadorganization proposal submission date, and subcontractor name.

1 IT is defined as any equipment, or interconnected system(s) or subsystem(s) of equipment that is used in the automaticacquisition, storage, manipulation, management, movement, control, display, switching, interchange, transmission, or reception

of data or information by the agency. (a) For purposes of this definition, equipment is used by an agency if the equipment is usedby the agency directly or is used by a contractor under a contract with the agency which (1) Requires the use of suchequipment; or (2) Requires the use, to a significant extent, or such equipment in the performance of a service or the furnishing ofa product. (b) The term information technology includes computers, ancillary, software, firmware and similar procedures,services (including support services), and related resources. (c) The term information technology does not include (1) Anyequipment that is acquired by a contractor incidental to a contract; or (2) Any equipment that contains imbedded informationtechnology that is used as an integral part of the product, but the principal function of which is not the acquisition, storage,manipulation, management, movement, control, display, switching, interchange, transmission, or reception of data orinformation. For example, HVAC (heating, ventilation, and air conditioning) equipment such as thermostats or temperaturecontrol devices, and medical equipment where information technology is integral to its operation, are not informationtechnology.


31/54

31

4. Cost Pricing Data: Cost or pricing data as defined in FAR Subpart 15.4 is requiredif the proposer is seeking a procurement contract award of $650,000 or greater unlessthe proposer requests an exception from the requirement to submit cost or pricingdata. Cost or pricing data are not required if the proposer proposes an awardinstrument other than a procurement contract (e.g., a grant, cooperative agreement, or

other transaction.)

f) Instructions for Proposing an Other Transaction (OT) for Task AIf a proposer elects to submit an OT proposal, they should submit a third proposal volumeentitled, Volume III, OT Based Delta Proposal. Volume III should discuss how an OT wouldoffer a better value to the Government in the PCAS program. This volume must outline theextent to which the other transaction will contribute to a broadening of the technology andindustrial base available for meeting Department of Defense needs and the extent to which theother transaction will foster new relationships and practices within the technology and industrialbase that support the national security of the United States. Volume III should clearly identify

changes to the Volume I and II no-cost-share technical and cost proposals that result from use ofan OT. If there are no differences, the proposer should state this in Volume III of their proposal.After award selection, OT proposals from the successful proposer(s), if any, will be opened andevaluated. Any cost-share a proposer proposes in Volume III shall be constructed to includedistinct, significant, value-added activities covering the entire PCAS program and shouldleverage the flexibilities offered by OT provisions instead of providing only a general increase inlevel of effort.At a minimum, the following outline should be used for Volume III:

OT Technical Response: The proposer should clearly delineate all additional work that can be

performed within the OT agreement. The proposer should provide a top level summary as well asa red-lined Statement of Work (SOW) and Integrated Master Schedule (IMS) that highlightany additional tasks being performed as compared to the Volume I proposal. The proposershould ensure that any additional activities build upon the baseline Phase I program to providecompelling additional value to the program (e.g., additional risk reduction tasks anddemonstrations, earlier achievement of key milestones, etc.). Proposers must also include a top-level discussion of differences in Phase II and Phase III demonstration plans if executed under anOT.

OT Cost Response: The proposer should provide cost information in the format described inAppendix A. Proposers must also include a cost estimate of the potential cost of Phase II andPhase III efforts under an OT agreement, consistent with the Phase II and Phase III plans.

Company Investments: The proposer should provide a total estimated price for the major cost-share activities associated with the program. The proposer should clearly state whether theseinvestments are to be included within the agreement and will breakout each item (i.e., Cash,IR&D, capital, G&A, cost of money, etc). Proposer should also clearly mark items that are in theproposal that will not be owned by government and this effort.


32/54


33/54

33

information in replying to this BAA. Applicable classification guide(s) should also be submittedto ensure the proposal is protected at the appropriate classification level.

Classified submissions should be appropriately and conspicuously marked with the proposedclassification level and declassification date. Submissions requiring DARPA to make a final

classification determination should be marked as follows:

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

Classified submissions should be in accordance with the following guidance:

Confidential and Secret Collateral Information: Use classification and marking guidanceprovided by previously issued security classification guides, the Information Security Regulation(DoD 5200.1-R), and the National Industrial Security Program Operating Manual (DoD 5220.22-M) when marking and transmitting information previously classified by another Original

Classification Authority. Classified information at the Confidential and Secret level may bemailed via appropriate U.S. Postal Service methods (e.g., (USPS) Registered Mail or USPSExpress Mail). All classified information will be enclosed in opaque inner and outer covers anddouble wrapped. The inner envelope should be sealed and plainly marked with the assignedclassification and addresses of both sender and addressee. The inner envelope should beaddressed to:

Defense Advanced Research Projects AgencyATTN: Tactical Technology OfficeReference: DARPA-BAA-10-873701 North Fairfax DriveArlington, VA 22203-1714

The outer envelope should be sealed with no identification as to the classification of its contentsand addressed to:

Defense Advanced Research Projects AgencySecurity & Intelligence Directorate, Attn: CDR3701 North Fairfax DriveArlington, VA 22203-1714

All Top Secret materials: Top Secret information should be hand carried by an appropriatelycleared and authorized courier to the DARPA CDR. Prior to traveling, the courier shall contactthe DARPA CDR at 571-218-4842 to coordinate arrival and delivery.

Special Access Program (SAP) Information: SAP information must be transmitted viaapproved methods. Prior to transmitting SAP information, contact the DARPA SAPCO at 703-526-4052 for instructions.


34/54

34

Sensitive Compartmented Information (SCI): SCI must be transmitted via approved methods.Prior to transmitting SCI, contact the DARPA Special Security Office (SSO) at 703-248-7213for instructions.

Proprietary Data: All proposals containing proprietary data should have the cover page and

each page containing proprietary data clearly marked as containing proprietary data. It is theProposers responsibility to clearly define to the Government what is considered proprietarydata.

Security classification guidance via a DD Form 254 will not be provided at this time sinceDARPA is soliciting ideas only. After reviewing the incoming proposals, if a determination ismade that the award instrument may result in access to classified information a DD Form 254will be issued and attached as part of the award.

Proposers must have existing and in-place prior to execution of an award, approved capabilities(personnel and facilities) to perform research and development at the classification level they

propose. It is the policy of DARPA to treat all proposals as competitive information, and todisclose their contents only for the purpose of evaluation. Proposals will not be returned. Theoriginal of each proposal received will be retained at DARPA and all other non-required copiesdestroyed. A certification of destruction may be requested, provided the formal request isreceived at this office within 5 days after unsuccessful notification.

b) Proposal FormatAll Task B proposals must be in the following format. Nonconforming proposals may berejected without further review. Proposals must be on single-sided pages, written in English,with 1-inch margins (left, right, top, and bottom) in each page. A page is defined as being no

larger than 8.5 by 11.0. (Accordion-style foldouts will be counted as multiple pagesequivalent to the expanded size.) The body text of the Technical Proposal should contain nosmaller than 12 point font type. Information presented in tables/graphs and accordion-style fold-outs may use a type font smaller than 12 point as necessary to display such information; howeverrespondents are cautioned that excessive use of smaller fonts may adversely affect theGovernments ability to evaluate such information in a timely fashion. Graphic material shouldbe embedded in the Word document using GIF or JPEG format. The Cost Proposal shouldcontain no smaller than 8-point font type. Larger font type for the Cost Proposal, up to 12 pointfont type, is desired, where possible. Paper copies of proposals should be stapled or submitted inloose-leaf binder, not bound. Electronic copies should be submitted on a PC-formatted CD-ROM in a format readable with Microsoft Office 2007 or earlier version.

A complete proposal should consist of two volumes - a Technical Proposal (Volume I) and aCost Proposal (Volume II). Proposers should submit a total of five (5) copies of Volume I andVolume II, in hardcopy, as well as two (2) copies of each proposal Volume in electronic format(CD-ROM) to DARPA. The electronic copies of both Volumes must match the hard copiespage-by-page, and should be fully integrated files to permit easy distribution to reviewers. Allgraphics and tables, as well as the proposers IMS (in MS Project format) should be included inseparate electronic files and clearly named on the CDs. Respondents need only submit one (1)


35/54

35

original signed proposal along with the copies and each submittal should reference DARPA-BAA-10-87. The submission of any additional supporting materials outside of the documentationrequested herein will not be considered for review. Sections II-III of the Technical Proposal(Volume I) should not exceed twenty-five (25) pages total, excluding the proposers Statement ofWork (SOW), Integrated Master Schedule (IMS), and intellectual property rights assertion. The

25 page limitation includes all figures, tables, and charts, unless otherwise noted. All pages thatexceed the maximum page limit specified will be removed and will not be reviewed orconsidered in the evaluation. The Cost Proposal (Volume II) does not have a page limit.Guidance regarding cost table formatting is provided in Appendix A.

c) Volume I, Technical Proposal for Task BThe Volume I Technical Proposal for Task B proposals should be organized into four parts asdescribed below.

Part I. Administrative {not included in the page count}

A. Cover sheet to include:(1) BAA number (DARPA-BAA-10-87)(2) Task B and proposal title(3) Lead Organization submitting proposal(4) Type of business, selected among the following categories: LARGE BUSINESS,

SMALL DISADVANTAGED BUSINESS, OTHER SMALL BUSINESS, HBCU,MI, OTHER EDUCATIONAL, OR OTHER NONPROFIT

(5) Contractors reference number (if any)(6) Other team members (if applicable) and type of business for each(7) Technical point of contact to include: salutation, last name, first name, street address,

city, state, zip code, telephone, fax (if available), electronic mail (if available)(8) Administrative point of contact to include: salutation, last name, first name, street

address, city, state, zip code, telephone, fax (if available), electronic mail (if available),total funds requested from DARPA, and the amount of cost share (if any)

DARPA BAA 10 87 Final for Posting

Documents

Transcript of DARPA BAA 10 87 Final for Posting