Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
DARPA-BAA-16-45
Contents
PART I: OVERVIEW INFORMATION ............................................................................3
PART II: FULL TEXT OF ANNOUNCEMENT ...............................................................4
I.
Funding Opportunity Description..........................................................................4
II.
Award Information ..............................................................................................15
III. Eligibility Information .........................................................................................17
A.
Eligible Applicants ..........................................................................................17
B.
Procurement Integrity, Standards of Conduct, Ethical Considerations, and
Organizational Conflicts of Interest...........................................................................18
C.
Cost Sharing/Matching....................................................................................19
IV. Application and Submission Information ............................................................19
A.
Address to Request Application Package........................................................19
B.
Content and Form of Application Submission ................................................19
V.
Application Review Information .........................................................................31
A.
Evaluation Criteria ..........................................................................................31
B.
Review and Selection Process .........................................................................33
VI. Award Administration Information .....................................................................34
A.
Selection Notices .............................................................................................34
B.
Administrative and National Policy Requirements .........................................34
C.
Reporting .........................................................................................................40
D.
Electronic Systems ..........................................................................................40
VII. Agency Contacts ..................................................................................................40
VIII. Other Information ................................................................................................41
A.
Intellectual Property Procurement Contract Proposers ...................................41
B.
Non-Procurement Contract Proposers Noncommercial and Commercial
Items (Technical Data and Computer Software) .......................................................42
C.
All Proposers Patents....................................................................................43
D.
All Proposers Intellectual Property Representations....................................43
APPENDIX A DARPA Tailored Critical Design Review Criteria................................44
APPENDIX B Technical and Performance Data Sheets ................................................45
APPENDIX C Cost Summary Spreadsheet....................................................................48
DARPA-BAA-16-45
DARPA-BAA-16-45
PART II: FULL TEXT OF ANNOUNCEMENT
I.
The Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency often selects its research efforts
through the Broad Agency Announcement (BAA) process. This BAA is being issued, and
any resultant selection will be made, using procedures under Federal Acquisition
Regulation (FAR) 35.016. Any negotiations and/or awards will use procedures under FAR
15.4, Contract Pricing, as specified in the BAA. Proposals received as a result of this BAA
shall be evaluated in accordance with evaluation criteria specified herein through a
scientific review process. DARPA BAAs are posted on the Federal Business Opportunities
(FedBizOpps) website, http://www.fbo.gov/. The following information is for those
wishing to respond to the BAA.
DARPA is seeking innovative propulsion system solutions that will expand the
knowledge base and design capabilities for future hypersonic air vehicles. The use of a
BAA allows a wide range of innovative ideas and concepts, and proposer(s) will have the
flexibility to develop a tailored program plan that best meets Advanced Full Range Engine
(AFRE) program objectives.
The primary goal of the AFRE program is to develop and ground demonstrate a
reusable hydrocarbon propulsion system that can seamlessly operate over the full range of
speeds between Mach 0 and Mach 5+ to enable responsive hypersonic aircraft for missions
such as penetrating and providing unwarned Intelligence, Surveillance, and
Reconnaissance (ISR) in denied environments. Based on ongoing research and
development activities across the Government and industry hypersonic research and
development community, DARPA believes that a dual flowpath engine such as a Turbine
Based Combined Cycle (TBCC) system offers the best solution for a future hypersonic air
vehicle. A TBCC system combines a turbine engine for low-speed operations with a dual
mode ramjet (DMRJ) for high-speed operations via a common inlet and nozzle serving
both the low-speed and high-speed flowpaths. This design concept is enabled by advances
made in the previous AFRL/DARPA funded X-51 scramjet engine flight demonstration
program and the DARPA Falcon Combined-cycle Engine Technology (FaCET) program.
A recent DARPA study and industry IRAD efforts have shown promise in lowering the
Mach number operating range of the high-speed portion of the engine (the DMRJ). This
last development facilitates integration of the high- and low-speed flow paths and enables
a near term, affordable demonstration with existing turbine engine technology.
While the Government believes the TBCC offers the best approach for achieving
program objectives, proposers may propose alternative propulsion system concepts,
provided those concepts have the technical maturity to support the proposed demonstration
schedule and adequate performance margin to support future hypersonic air vehicle
applications. Successful proposers will propose robust AFRE conceptual designs that
could be modified and integrated into multiple aircraft designs versus a single point aircraft
solution. DARPA is only interested in proposals addressing full system solutions for
DARPA-BAA-16-45
AFRE. DARPA is not interested in lower Mach solutions such as a turbo-ramjet or
solutions that use accelerants.
Given the highly integrated nature of hypersonic airframes and propulsion systems,
DARPA is currently sponsoring air vehicle conceptual design studies to provide early
guidance and insights to the AFRE effort to ensure the demonstration system is relevant to
future hypersonic air vehicle designs. DARPA expects the AFRE program to be performed
by a collaborative team of propulsion system and airframe contractors. DARPA believes
this approach will maximize success on the program, offering the quickest path towards
enabling a future hypersonic vehicle flight demonstration.
A. Program Vision
Future U.S. military operations against peer/near-peer adversaries will be severely
hampered by erosion in the availability of timely information from airborne ISR. Fielding
of fifth generation aircraft equipped with capable air-to-air missiles, proliferation of highly
capable Integrated Air Defense Systems (IADS), and other long-range defensive
capabilities directly challenge the information superiority the U.S. has enjoyed with ISR
capabilities provided by airborne platforms. These platforms, developed for more
permissive threat environments, are unable to access more contested battlespaces. With
space also becoming contested, our unique ability to observe, orient, decide, and act
(OODA) within an adversaries OODA loop is diminishing, sacrificing U.S. decisionmaking superiority. Without a survivable airborne ISR capability to complement space
ISR capabilities, the effectiveness of future U.S. offensive strike operations may be limited.
To meet future requirements, DARPA envisions a survivable and affordable hypersonic
regional ISR aircraft with the following attributes:
Range greater than 1200 nm
Speed greater than Mach 5
60,000+ ft operation
AFRE is one of the key enabling technologies for this envisioned future aircraft
application. This program will address the critical technologies enabling the required
operating regimes and demonstrate the viability of the AFRE system to propel future
hypersonic aircraft into our most challenging environments. The program will focus on
consistently and seamlessly transitioning the propulsion system from low-speed to
supersonic to hypersonic speeds, and the reverse, in a safe and affordable manner. At a
minimum, the AFRE demonstration system must be full scale to be considered relevant to
this future hypersonic aircraft application. AFRE demonstration systems that show higher
degrees of traceability/maturity to a future flight capable engine will be viewed more
favorably, as they have higher relevance to the DARPA mission and program transition.
For the purposes of this BAA, full scale is defined to mean that for the AFRE
demonstration system, the high-speed flow path is matched to the selected off-the-shelf
turbine so as to have maximum relevance to a future hypersonic ISR flight vehicle and
potential to be further developed into a flight demonstration engine.
DARPA-BAA-16-45
B. System-Level Performance Capabilities and Propulsion System
Requirements
Based on the body of prior hypersonic air vehicle and propulsion system work, DARPA
believes that an AFRE must be consistent with the following system-level capabilities to
have adequate performance:
The proposer must develop specific metrics appropriate for their system approach,
provide rationale for how those metrics were derived, substantiate how their proposed
system meets those requirements, and provide requisite air vehicle design and performance
analysis that shows that their proposed design will yield a viable air vehicle system. Note
that certain specific performance metrics achievable by a particular design may be
classified. Proposers must read and adhere to the program classification guide in their
proposal response.
Outside the scope of this BAA, DARPA is sponsoring air vehicle conceptual design
trade studies that have a 6-month period of performance and are expected to be completed
during the first quarter of calendar year 2017. These studies will result in additional inputs
for consideration as the performer develops AFRE demonstrator system requirements
(performance, sizing, materials, etc.) for the inlet, nozzle, turbine, controls, and combustor.
It is expected that the AFRE performer will incorporate these requirements into their AFRE
design process and continue to iterate propulsion and air vehicle designs to ensure that the
propulsion system developed for the AFRE program ground demonstrations continues to
be relevant for the future hypersonic ISR aircraft application.
A non-proprietary Government baseline vehicle will also be developed and provide
another source of independent propulsion/aeropropulsion integration results and
systems/threat analyses. The results of the Government baseline system and threat analysis
will be made available to the performer. Differences in propulsion system performance
between the Government baseline and contractor concepts should be explored in the
performers design, analyses, and test plans.
DARPA-BAA-16-45
C. Program Plan
The AFRE program will be conducted in two phases (Phase I base period and Phase
II option) with a single performer team expected. DARPA plans to invest approximately
$65M over the two phases. Program continuation beyond Phase I (base) will depend on
promising Phase I results. DARPA has developed a notional baseline schedule, shown in
Figure 1, which includes the envisioned top-level program activities.
Phase I will be comprised of subscale and full scale component ground-based
testing. Phase I will progressively mature the design and component technologies
required to enable a full AFRE system-level demonstration and validate the ability to
achieve AFRE system performance. DARPA envisions a build-up demonstration
approach that provides incremental progress towards full scale component performance
validation traceable to meeting system-level objectives. For affordability, DARPA also
envisions that some or all of the full scale component hardware (inlet, DMRJ, Nozzle,
duct/turbine) developed and tested in Phase I can be reused and integrated into the Phase
II demonstration system. At the end of Phase I, DARPA will conduct a system-level
critical design review for the full scale AFRE demonstration system that incorporates the
results of the component testing. This review will enable the Government to assess
whether the Phase I component-level performance metrics have been achieved and
indicate that the AFRE performance goals are achievable and to determine whether it is
technically and fiscally prudent to continue with the Phase II full system demonstration.
Phase II will consist of incremental full scale system integration and testing, culminating
in integrated full AFRE system ground-based freejet testing.
DARPA-BAA-16-45
Proposers should propose their own more detailed schedule tailored to their unique
AFRE design and technology maturation approach. This schedule should contain
additional key program events such as System Requirements Review (SRR) and
Preliminary Design Review (PDR). It should be noted that DARPA is open to innovative
or high-value development approaches that achieve program goals more rapidly than the
notional schedule in Figure 1. The following sections describe the specific technical
objectives of Phase I and Phase II.
D. Government Furnished Equipment and Information (GFE/GFI)
Technical Information: As described above, DARPA will provide the performer
with the results of the Air Vehicle Conceptual Design Framing Studies as they become
available. DARPA will also provide the performer with analysis and test results from the
TBCC Maturation activities (Water Injection with an F405-RR-402 Turbine Engine and
the Low Mach DMRJ Free-Jet) as they become available.
Turbine Engine: The Government intends to provide an offthe-shelf F-405-RR402 turbine engine for integration into the AFRE demonstration system. Proposers may
elect to use an alternative turbine engine; however, the performer is responsible for
identifying the source and availability of the alternative engine, and any cost associated
with that engine will be counted against the total amount of funding available to the
performer. Information on the F-405-RR-402 turbine engine availability timeline and
associated technical data can be made available upon the proposers request to DARPABAA-16-45@darpa.mil.
Integrated Controls: The Government will provide NASA-developed autonomous
mode transition control laws/algorithms that will be experimentally validated for low Mach
mode transition of a representative integrated TBCC propulsion system using an off-theshelf turbine engine and an advanced dual mode ramjet (or simulator).
Test Facilities: If the performer agrees to share all test data with NASA with
Government Purpose Rights, NASA will waive facility costs for occupancy (test set up)
and operations for the following facilities: NASA Langley's 8-FT High Temperature
Tunnel, NASA Glenn's Propulsion System Laboratory (PSL) and NASA Glenn's 10X10
supersonic wind tunnel. The only costs that are not waived will be special test
equipment/fixtures, fuel, consumables, and power. These costs should be included as part
of the proposers cost estimate.
Any additional GFE, including test facilities and facility upgrades, must be
identified and priced in the proposal. These GFE items will count against the total funding
available.
E. Phase I (Base Period) Objectives
The primary objectives of Phase I are to:
DARPA-BAA-16-45
Conduct iterative airframe and propulsion system trade studies and analysis to
develop system-level AFRE demonstration system requirements and derive system
component performance requirements that meet program objectives
Conduct risk reduction and component-level performance validation activities
Develop a detailed system-level design to enable a system-level critical design at
the completion of Phase I, integrating the results of all of the component test
activities to validate the ability to achieve the AFRE demonstration system-level
objectives
Support ongoing Government program planning, documentation and transition
activities
DARPA-BAA-16-45
engine. For the low-speed flow path, risk reduction activities will be conducted for any
high risk integration or F-405-RR-402 modification activities or its equivalent.
In order to substantiate the feasibility and technology maturity to be able to meet the AFRE
demonstration system performance objectives, DARPA has established the following
minimum full scale component-level demonstration success metrics for Phase I:
Matched mass flow during mode transition matches total inlet mass capture within
2%
High-speed flow path combustion efficiency greater than 75% during mode
transition
High-speed flow path combustion efficiency greater than 80% at maximum Mach
number
Extended turbine operation while maintaining manufacturers specifications
Extended high-speed flowpath combustor operation down to Mach 2.5 minimum
with goal to demonstrate minimum Mach at light-off, minimum Mach for reduced
drag, and minimum Mach with thrust
Component manufacturing estimates consistent with vehicle design engine
allocation
The performer should supplement this list with additional demonstration objectives
to fully validate component-level performance for their unique AFRE demonstration
system design.
Detailed Design
The performer shall fully document their proposed system-level design and
interfaces. The Government anticipates rolling component-level critical design reviews
(CDRs) during Phase I to support full scale component fabrication and risk reduction
testing. The proposer must provide a disciplined and detailed rolling CDR approach that
tracks component design and interface requirements and feeds into the final full system
CDR and final Interface Control Document (ICD).
Support of Government Planning, Documentation and Transition Activities
The performer will participate in ongoing Government-related activities to assist in
maintaining program advocacy. The Government will internally maintain and update
ongoing air vehicle baseline designs to analyze and integrate AFRE program results. The
performer will support these design activities by providing periodic updated AFRE design
and performance information. The performer will also assist in the development of ROM
cost and schedule information to support future program planning.
F. Phase I (Base Period) Deliverables
DARPA desires that the program include quarterly program reviews at the
contractors facility. The objective of these reviews will be to assess progress, provide
feedback and stay abreast of any emerging technical, cost, or schedule issues. DARPA
will staff a team of subject matter experts from Government and support contractors to
10
DARPA-BAA-16-45
attend program reviews to provide feedback to the Program Manager. In addition to formal
program reviews, regular telecoms are encouraged to enhance communications with the
Government team. To successfully achieve the Phase I objectives, DARPA has developed
a minimum list of deliverables that must be included in the proposers Phase I program.
The desired content at each review is described below. Proposers should populate their
program schedule with these minimum deliverables and supplement this list with additional
deliverables/material to be presented at each quarterly review in accordance with their
unique program schedule and development approach. It is envisioned that routine system
design updates, technical status reviews, and results of any risk reduction
activities/component demonstrations will be provided at each quarterly review.
Kick-off Meeting
The objective of the kick-off meeting will be to discuss the performers approach
to the program and provide feedback to guide the performer in executing their Phase I
program. The Government and the performer will also establish the program review
schedule as well as a schedule of interim informal interactions, including routine
management and technical telecoms.
System Requirements Review (SRR)
An SRR will be conducted early in Phase I to review the results of the requirements
analysis and derivation process. The objective of SRR will be to determine the adequacy
of the AFRE demonstration system functional and performance requirements, and to
ensure the requirements and the demonstration system design will satisfy the program
objectives.
Preliminary Design Review (PDR)
A PDR will be conducted early in Phase I to assess the maturity of the AFRE
demonstration system design. The objective of PDR will be to ensure the AFRE
demonstration system preliminary design and architecture can be integrated into a system,
is ready for detailed design, and can be produced at an acceptable level of risk that satisfies
the technical objectives/capabilities within cost and schedule.
At this review, the Government will evaluate the progress, technical adequacy, and
risk of the AFRE demonstration system design; assess its compatibility with AFRE
performance requirements and demonstration objectives; and establish the existence and
compatibility of the physical and functional interfaces. For software items, the Government
will evaluate the consistency and technical adequacy of the design and test approach, and
compatibility between software requirements, test requirements and the preliminary
design. Specific PDR objectives are as follows:
Requirements (system, lower level, and interface) are derived/quantified and
verification methods defined
Preliminary design (hardware and software) is traceable to, consistent with, and
satisfies the demonstration system requirements
Performance capabilities are substantiated by analysis and/or test results that use
representative/achievable inputs
11
DARPA-BAA-16-45
The performer will report on the results of component-level risk reduction and
demonstration activities. Demonstration results should be presented at quarterly reviews
and include an assessment of performance with relation to the AFRE system-level
objectives. The performer shall provide a comparison of pre-test predictions with measured
data along with analysis of the implications of any differences. If the component-level
testing does not achieve desired performance, the performer shall describe potential
remediation activities.
Critical Design Review
At the completion of Phase I, the performer shall complete a system-level CDR
capturing the detailed design and performance predictions for the AFRE demonstration
system. The objective of the CDR will be to ensure the demonstration system critical
design and architecture can be integrated into a system, is ready for assembly, integration,
and test, and can be produced at an acceptable level of risk that satisfies the technical
objectives/capabilities within cost and schedule. This design review shall incorporate the
results of the component-level risk reduction to ensure that the detailed design solution
satisfies the baselined requirements derived from AFRE program objectives. This review
shall establish a build-to design, validate compatibility among the components, assess
component risk areas, demonstrate the capability to fabricate, code and integrate hardware
and software and review the hardware drawing and work packages. The Governments
expectations and success criteria for CDR are detailed in Appendix A.
Government Technical, Program Planning and Transition Data
The performer shall propose a nominal level of effort to generate data in support of
Government baseline vehicle analysis, future program planning, and transition discussions.
In Phase I, it is envisioned that the focus of these activities will be in establishing robust
system-level design and performance requirements for the AFRE demonstration system
that are traceable to the future hypersonic ISR vehicle application. The proposer should
propose the scope and timing of the information provided consistent with their program
schedule and budget.
12
DARPA-BAA-16-45
The performer shall propose a nominal level of effort to generate data in support of
Government baseline vehicle analysis, future program planning, and transition discussions.
The performer will continue to support baseline vehicle system design activities by
providing periodic updated AFRE design and performance information. The performer
will also assist in the development of ROM cost and schedule information to support future
program planning and other transition activities.
13
DARPA-BAA-16-45
H. Phase II (Option Period) Deliverables
In Phase II, DARPA desires the continuation of the quarterly program review and
routine teleconference schedule established in Phase I.
To successfully achieve the Phase II objectives, DARPA has developed a minimum
list of deliverables that must be included in the proposers Phase II program. The desired
content for these deliverables is described below. Proposers should populate their program
schedule with these minimum deliverables and supplement this list with additional
deliverables/material to be presented at each quarterly review in accordance with their
unique program schedule and development approach. It is envisioned that routine system
design updates, technical status reviews and results of any risk reduction
activities/component demonstrations will be provided at each quarterly review.
System Integration Incremental Testing and Full System Demonstration Results
The performer will report on the results of their system integration work as they
build up to their full AFRE demonstration system. This may include subsystem testing and
performance validation, system checkout testing or other interim activities. These results
should be presented at quarterly reviews and, as appropriate, the performer will also report
on all full AFRE demonstration system testing, including at a minimum the results of the
freejet test. For all test activities, the performer shall provide an assessment of performance
with relation to the AFRE system-level objectives. The performer shall provide a
comparison of pre-test predictions with measured data along with analysis of the
implications of any differences. If the test results do not achieve desired performance, the
performer shall describe potential remediation activities. Following completion of the
freejet testing, the performer shall provide a comprehensive technical report fully
documenting the integrating results of the AFRE test program. This report shall include
an analysis of the test data, including implications for full system performance and
operating envelope, additional development required, and impact on air vehicle
performance.
Government Technical, Program Planning and Transition Data
The performer shall propose a nominal level of effort to generate data in support of
Government baseline vehicle analysis, future program planning, and transition discussions.
In Phase II it is envisioned that these activities will focus on updated air vehicle
performance analysis and air vehicle integration and flight test planning. The proposer
should propose the scope and timing of the information provided consistent with their
program schedule and budget. At the completion of Phase II, the performer shall provide
an AFRE development roadmap outlining additional activities (if any) required to mature
the demonstration system to enable future flight demonstration.
I. Options
At this time, DARPA only intends to fund the basic Phase I and Phase II option
program. However, should additional funding become available, DARPA may elect to
fund additional optional activities, and ROM options will assist in program planning. The
14
DARPA-BAA-16-45
proposal instructions under IV.B.3.a provide guidance regarding the option information
that is desired in the proposal.
II.
Award Information
Number of Awards
A single award is anticipated. The amount of resources made available under this
BAA will depend on the quality of the proposals received and the availability of funds.
The Government reserves the right to select for negotiation all, some, one, or none
of the proposals received in response to this solicitation, and to make awards without
discussions with proposers. The Government also reserves the right to conduct discussions
if it is later determined to be necessary. If warranted, portions of the resulting award may
be segregated into pre-priced options. Additionally, DARPA reserves the right to accept
proposals in their entirety or to select only portions of proposals for award. In the event
that DARPA desires to award only portions of a proposal, negotiations may be opened with
that proposer. The Government reserves the right to fund proposals in phases with options
for continued work at the end of one or more of the phases.
Awards under this BAA will be made to proposers on the basis of the evaluation
criteria listed below (see section labeled Application Review Information, Sec. V.), and
program balance to provide overall value to the Government. The Government reserves
the right to request any additional, necessary documentation once it makes the award
instrument determination. Such additional information may include, but is not limited to,
Representations and Certifications and additional cost substantiation data. The
Government reserves the right to remove proposers from award consideration, should the
parties fail to reach agreement on award terms, conditions or cost/price within a reasonable
time or the proposer fails to provide requested additional information in a timely manner.
Proposals identified for negotiation may result in a procurement contract or other
transaction, depending upon the nature of the work proposed, the required degree of
interaction between parties, whether or not the research is classified as Fundamental
Research, and other factors.
In all cases, the Government contracting officer shall have sole discretion to select
award instrument type and to negotiate all instrument terms and conditions with selectees.
Proposers are advised that regardless of the instrument type proposed, DARPA personnel,
in consultation with the Government contracting officer, may select other award
instruments, as they deem appropriate. DARPA will apply publication or other restrictions,
as necessary, if it determines that the research resulting from the proposed effort will
present a high likelihood of disclosing performance characteristics of military systems or
manufacturing technologies that are unique and critical to defense. Any award resulting
from such a determination will include a requirement for DARPA permission before
publishing any information or results on the program. For more information on publication
restrictions, see the section below on Fundamental Research.
15
DARPA-BAA-16-45
Fundamental Research
It is DoD policy that the publication of products of fundamental research will
remain unrestricted to the maximum extent possible. National Security Decision Directive
(NSDD) 189 established the national policy for controlling the flow of scientific, technical,
and engineering information produced in federally funded fundamental research at
colleges, universities, and laboratories. The Directive defines fundamental research as
follows:
'Fundamental research' means basic and applied research in science and
engineering, the results of which ordinarily are published and shared broadly within
the scientific community, as distinguished from proprietary research and from
industrial development, design, production, and product utilization, the results of
which ordinarily are restricted for proprietary or national security reasons.
As of the date of publication of this BAA, the Government expects that program
goals as described herein either cannot be met by proposers intending to perform
fundamental research or the proposed research is anticipated to present a high likelihood
of disclosing performance characteristics of military systems or manufacturing
technologies that are unique and critical to defense. Therefore, the Government anticipates
restrictions on the resultant research that will require the contractor to seek DARPA
permission before publishing any information or results relative to the program.
Proposers should indicate in their proposal whether they believe the scope of the
research included in their proposal is fundamental or not. While proposers should clearly
explain the intended results of their research, the Government shall have sole discretion to
select award instrument type and to negotiate all instrument terms and conditions with
selectees. Appropriate clauses will be included in resultant awards for non-fundamental
research to prescribe publication requirements and other restrictions, as appropriate.
For certain research projects, it may be possible that although the research being
performed by the prime contractor is restricted research, a subawardee may be conducting
fundamental research. In those cases, it is the prime contractors responsibility to explain
in its proposal why its subawardees effort is fundamental research.
The following statement or similar provision will be incorporated into any resultant
non-fundamental research procurement contract or other transaction:
There shall be no dissemination or publication, except within and between
the contractor and any subawardees, of information developed under this contract
or contained in the reports to be furnished pursuant to this contract without prior
written approval of DARPAs Public Release Center (DARPA/PRC). All technical
reports will be given proper review by appropriate authority to determine which
Distribution Statement is to be applied prior to the initial distribution of these
reports by the contractor. With regard to subawardee proposals for Fundamental
16
DARPA-BAA-16-45
Research, papers resulting from unclassified fundamental research are exempt from
prepublication controls and this review requirement, pursuant to DoD Instruction
5230.27 dated October 6, 1987.
When submitting material for written approval for open publication, the
contractor/awardee must submit a request for public release to the DARPA/PRC
and include the following information: (1) Document Information: document title,
document author, short plain-language description of technology discussed in the
material (approx. 30 words), number of pages (or minutes of video) and document
type (e.g., briefing, report, abstract, article, or paper); (2) Event Information: event
type (conference, principal investigator meeting, article or paper), event date,
desired date for DARPA's approval; (3) DARPA Sponsor: DARPA Program
Manager, DARPA office, and contract number; and (4) Contractor/Awardee's
Information: POC name, email and phone. Allow four weeks for processing; due
dates under four weeks require a justification. Unusual electronic file formats may
require additional processing time. Requests may be sent either via email to
public_release_center@darpa.mil or by mail at 675 North Randolph Street,
Arlington VA 22203-2114, telephone (571) 218-4235. Refer to the following for
link
for
information
about
DARPAs
public
release
process:
http://www.darpa.mil/work-with-us/contract-management/public-release.
III.
Eligibility Information
All responsible sources capable of satisfying the Government's needs may submit a
proposal that shall be considered by DARPA.
A. Eligible Applicants
Federally Funded Research and Development Centers (FFRDCs) and Government
entities (e.g., Government/National laboratories, military educational institutions, etc.) are
subject to applicable direct competition limitations and cannot propose to this BAA in any
capacity unless they meet the following conditions: (1) FFRDCs must clearly demonstrate
that the proposed work is not otherwise available from the private sector; and (2) FFRDCs
must provide a letter on official letterhead from their sponsoring organization citing the
specific authority establishing their eligibility to propose to Government solicitations and
compete with industry, and their compliance with the associated FFRDC sponsor
agreements terms and conditions. This information is required for FFRDCs proposing to
be prime contractors or subawardees. Government entities must clearly demonstrate that
the work is not otherwise available from the private sector and provide written
documentation citing the specific statutory authority and contractual authority, if relevant,
establishing their ability to propose to Government solicitations. At the present time,
DARPA does not consider 15 U.S.C. 3710a to be sufficient legal authority to show
eligibility. While 10 U.S.C. 2539b may be the appropriate statutory starting point for
some entities, specific supporting regulatory guidance, together with evidence of agency
approval, will still be required to fully establish eligibility. DARPA will consider FFRDC
17
DARPA-BAA-16-45
and Government entity eligibility submissions on a case-by-case basis; however, the
burden to prove eligibility for all team members rests solely with the proposer.
All proposers are expected to address transition (see proposal format under IV.B.3);
transition is part of the evaluation criteria in Section V.A. However, given their special
status, FFRDCs should describe how and when a proposed technology/system will
transition to which Non-FFRDC organization(s).
Non-U.S. organizations and/or individuals may participate to the extent that such
participants comply with any necessary nondisclosure agreements, security regulations,
export control laws, and other governing statutes applicable under the circumstances.
B. Procurement Integrity, Standards of Conduct, Ethical
Considerations, and Organizational Conflicts of Interest
Current federal employees are prohibited from participating in particular matters
involving conflicting financial, employment, and representational interests (18 U.S.C.
203, 205, and 208). Once the proposals have been received, and prior to the start of
proposal evaluations, the Government will assess potential conflicts of interest and will
promptly notify the proposer if any appear to exist. The Government assessment does NOT
affect, offset, or mitigate the proposers responsibility to give full notice and planned
mitigation for all potential organizational conflicts, as discussed below.
Without prior approval or a waiver from the DARPA Director, in accordance with
FAR 9.503, a contractor cannot simultaneously provide scientific, engineering, technical
assistance (SETA) or similar support and also be a technical performer. As part of the
proposal submission, all members of the proposed team (prime proposers, proposed
subawardees, and consultants) must affirm whether they (their organizations and individual
team members) are providing SETA or similar support to any DARPA technical office(s)
through an active contract or subcontract. All affirmations must state which office(s) the
proposer, subawardees, consultant, or individual supports and identify the prime contract
number(s). All facts relevant to the existence or potential existence of organizational
conflicts of interest (FAR 9.5) must be disclosed. The disclosure must include a description
of the action the proposer has taken or proposes to take to avoid, neutralize, or mitigate
such conflict. If in the sole opinion of the Government after full consideration of the
circumstances, a proposal fails to fully disclose potential conflicts of interest and/or any
identified conflict situation cannot be effectively mitigated, the proposal will be rejected
without technical evaluation and withdrawn from further consideration for award.
If a prospective proposer believes a conflict of interest exists or may exist (whether
organizational or otherwise) or has questions on what constitutes a conflict of interest, the
proposer should send his/her contact information and a summary of the potential conflict
via email to the BAA email address before time and effort are expended in preparing a
proposal and mitigation plan.
18
DARPA-BAA-16-45
C. Cost Sharing/Matching
Cost sharing is not required; however, it will be carefully considered where there
is an applicable statutory condition relating to the selected funding instrument (e.g., for any
Other Transactions under the authority of 10 U.S.C. 2371). Cost sharing is encouraged
where there is a reasonable probability of a potential commercial application related to the
proposed research and development effort.
IV.
DARPA-BAA-16-45
Classified submissions shall be transmitted in accordance with the following
guidance. Additional information on the subjects discussed in this section may be found
at http://www.dss.mil/.
If a submission contains Classified National Security Information as defined by
Executive Order 13526, the information must be appropriately and conspicuously marked
with the proposed classification level and declassification date. Similarly, when the
classification of a submission is in question, the submission must be appropriately and
conspicuously marked with the proposed classification level and declassification date.
Submissions requiring DARPA to make a final classification determination shall be
marked as follows:
CLASSIFICATION DETERMINATION PENDING. Protect as though
classified____________________________
(insert
the
recommended
classification level, e.g., Top Secret, Secret or Confidential)
NOTE: Classified submissions must indicate the classification level of not only the
submitted materials, but also the classification level of the anticipated award.
Proposers submitting classified information must have, or be able to obtain prior to
contract award, cognizant security agency approved facilities, information systems, and
appropriately cleared/eligible personnel to perform at the classification level proposed. All
proposer personnel performing Information Assurance (IA)/Cybersecurity related duties
on classified Information Systems shall meet the requirements set forth in DoD Manual
8570.01-M (Information Assurance Workforce Improvement Program).
Proposers choosing to submit classified information from other collateral classified
sources (i.e., sources other than DARPA) must ensure (1) they have permission from an
authorized individual at the cognizant Government agency (e.g., Contracting Officer,
Program Manager); (2) the proposal is marked in accordance with the source Security
Classification Guide (SCG) from which the material is derived; and (3) the source SCG is
submitted along with the proposal.
The effort being solicited by this BAA is classified or otherwise involves access to,
or generation of, classified information. Security classification guidance via a Security
Classification Guide (SCG) and/or DD Form 254, DoD Contract Security Classification
Specification will be provided to eligible proposers upon request (see Section 2 below for
email address to send request). If the DD Form 254 or SCG is classified Confidential,
Secret, Confidential/Special Access Program (SAP), or Secret/SAP, they can only be
mailed to the requesters classified mailing address, which must be provided to the
Technical Office Program Security Officer or their staff. A DD Form 254 or SCG that is
classified as Sensitive Compartmented Information (SCI), collateral Top Secret, or Top
Secret/SAP must be hand-carried back to proposer locations via appropriately cleared and
authorized couriers.
Confidential and Secret Information
20
DARPA-BAA-16-45
Use transmission, classification, handling, and marking guidance provided by
previously issued SCGs, the DoD Information Security Manual (DoDM 5200.01,
Volumes 1 - 4), and the National Industrial Security Program Operating Manual,
including the Supplement Revision 1, (DoD 5220.22-M and DoD 5200.22-M Sup. 1)
when submitting Confidential and/or Secret classified information.
Confidential and Secret classified information may be submitted via ONE of the
two following methods:
Mailed via U.S. Postal Service (USPS) Registered Mail or USPS Express Mail.
All classified information will be enclosed in opaque inner and outer covers and
double-wrapped. The inner envelope shall be sealed and plainly marked with
the assigned classification and addresses of both sender and addressee.
The inner envelope shall be addressed to:
Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency
ATTN: DARPA/TTO
Reference: DARPA-BAA-16-45
675 North Randolph Street
Arlington, VA 22203-2114
The outer envelope shall be sealed with no identification as to the
classification of its contents and addressed to:
Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency
Security & Intelligence Directorate, Attn: CDR
675 North Randolph Street
Arlington, VA 22203-2114
21
DARPA-BAA-16-45
Sensitive Compartmented Information (SCI)
SCI must be marked, managed and transmitted in accordance with DoDM
5105.21 Volumes 1 - 3. Questions regarding the transmission of SCI may be sent to the
DARPA Technical Office PSO via the BAA mailbox or by contacting the DARPA
Special Security Officer (SSO) at 703-812-1970.
Successful proposers may be sponsored by DARPA for access to SCI.
Sponsorship must be aligned to an existing DD Form 254 where SCI has been authorized.
Questions regarding SCI sponsorship should be directed to the DARPA Personnel
Security Office at 703-526-4543.
Special Access Program (SAP) Information
SAP information must be marked in accordance with DoDM 5205.07 Volume 4
and transmitted by specifically approved methods, which will be provided by the
Technical Office PSO or their staff.
Proposers choosing to submit SAP information from an agency other than
DARPA are required to provide the DARPA Technical Office Program Security Officer
(PSO) written permission from the source materials cognizant Special Access Program
Control Officer (SAPCO) or designated representative. For clarification regarding this
process, contact the DARPA Technical Office PSO via the BAA mailbox or the DARPA
SAPCO at 703-526-4102.
Additional SAP security requirements regarding facility accreditations, information
security, personnel security, physical security, operations security, test security, classified
transportation plans, and program protection planning may be specified in the DD Form
254.
NOTE: prior to drafting the submission, if use of SAP Information Systems is to be
proposed, proposers must first obtain an Authorization-to-Operate from the DARPA
Technical Office PSO (or other applicable DARPA Authorization Official) using the Risk
Management Framework (RMF) process outlined in the Joint Special Access Program
(SAP) Implementation Guide (JSIG), Revision 3, dated October 9, 2013 (or successor
document).
2. Proposal Submission Information
Proposers must submit an original and three (3) copies of the full proposal and two
(2) electronic copies of the full proposal in searchable PDF on a CD-ROM. To the extent
possible, classified information should be submitted under separate cover from unclassified
information, such as in an annex and on a separate CD-ROM from unclassified
information. Cost volumes are expected to be unclassified and must be submitted on
separate CD-ROM from any classified proposal submission. The Statement of Work is
also expected to be unclassified and must be submitted separate from any classified
proposal submission. Each copy must be clearly labeled with DARPA-BAA-16-45,
proposer organization, proposal title (short title recommended), and Copy _ of _.
22
DARPA-BAA-16-45
DARPA intends to use electronic mail correspondence regarding BAA-16-45. All
administrative correspondence and questions on this solicitation, including requests for
information on how to submit a proposal to this BAA and requests for Proposers Day
presentation slides and related program information discussed at Proposers Day, should be
sent via e-mail to DARPA-BAA-16-45@darpa.mil. Proposals may not be submitted by fax
or e-mail; any so sent will be disregarded. DARPA encourages use of the Internet for
retrieving the BAA and any other related information that may subsequently be provided.
3. Proposal Format
The proposal shall be delivered in two volumes, Volume I Technical, and
Volume II Cost. Proposals not meeting the format described in this BAA may not be
reviewed.
The proposal shall include the following sections, each starting on a new page
(where a "page" is 8-1/2 by 11 inches with type not smaller than 12 point (charts may use
10 point font), margins not smaller than 1 inch, and line spacing not smaller than singlespaced). Fold-outs up to 11 by 17 inches may be used, but will be counted as two pages.
All submissions must be in English. The total page count for Proposal Volume I, Section
2 (Technical Details) is 50 pages, excluding the Statement of Work, Integrated Master
Schedule, table of contents, cover letter, and other front matter. Recommended page counts
for individual elements of the proposal are shown in braces { } below. The proposer may
reallocate page counts within Proposal Volume I, Section 2.
Ensure that each section provides a detailed discussion of proposed work to enable
an in-depth review of specific technical and managerial issues relevant to that section.
Specific attention must be given to addressing both risk and payoff of the proposed work
that make it desirable to DARPA.
a. Volume I, Technical and Management Proposal
Section 1. Administrative
A. Cover sheet to include:
(1) BAA number (DARPA-BAA-16-45);
(2) Technical area;
(3) Lead Organization submitting proposal;
(4) Type of organization, selected among the following categories: LARGE
BUSINESS, SMALL DISADVANTAGED BUSINESS, OTHER
SMALL BUSINESS, HBCU, MI, OTHER EDUCATIONAL, OR
OTHER NONPROFIT;
(5) Proposers reference number (if any);
(6) Other team members (if applicable) and type of organization for each;
(7) Proposal title;
23
DARPA-BAA-16-45
(8) 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);
(9) 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);
(10) Total funds requested from DARPA, and the amount of cost share (if any);
AND
(11) Date proposal was submitted.
B. Official transmittal letter.
Section 2. Technical Details
2.1 Executive Summary {5}:
This section shall provide an executive-level description of key elements and
unique features of the proposed AFRE program. The Executive Summary should also
include a top-level schedule that outlines the proposers overall vision and approach to
executing the full AFRE program through the Phase II demonstration system freejet test.
The proposer should also describe similar efforts completed/ongoing by the proposer in
this area, including identification of other Government sponsors.
2.2 AFRE Demonstration System Point of Departure Design {10}:
The proposer shall describe their point of departure AFRE demonstration design
that will serve as the foundation of their proposed effort. This section shall fully describe
the AFRE system physical characteristics and predicted system-level and component-level
performance. The proposal shall also describe the basis for these performance predictions
(e.g., modeling and simulation (M&S), empirical data, analogous system) and provide
substantiating data. To facilitate proposal review, the proposer shall complete the summary
technical and performance data sheets provided in Appendix B. The data sheets are not
included in the page count limitation.
2.3 AFRE Maturation Plan {20}:
The proposer shall provide an AFRE Maturation Plan that details their technical
approach for accomplishing the AFRE program objectives and serves as the basis for their
SOW, IMS, and Cost Volumes (described below). The AMP will provide an integrated
basis for maturing the AFRE demonstration system design and mitigating risk to enable
full system freejet testing by the end of FY20. The AMP will: 1) identify, assess and
prioritize critical technologies and system attributes that constitute the major technical and
system integration risks on the program; 2) identify major risk reduction tests and
demonstrations required to validate the ability to achieve AFRE component- and systemlevel performance goals, culminating with a full system freejet test at the end of Phase II;
3) describe each test activity proposed for Phase I and Phase II including rationale for the
test, test objectives, test scale, proposed test facility, and success metrics; and 4) provide
an assessment of the technical maturity achieved at the end of Phase II.
24
DARPA-BAA-16-45
2.4 Proposed Team {4}:
This section shall provide the qualifications of the proposed team and proposed
personnel. The proposer shall identify key personnel by name and include a description of
their role. Short resumes shall be provided for the Program Manager, Chief Engineer, Chief
Systems Engineer, Air Vehicle Design and Integration Lead, as well as any other personnel
deemed critical to the successful performance of the program. The proposer shall also
identify the number of hours committed for each of these key personnel in the program.
DARPA requires key personnel identified in the proposal to be assigned as proposed, and
the resulting contract/agreement will indicate no substitution shall be made without prior
approval of the Government.
2.5 Management Approach {6}:
The proposer shall provide a management plan that describes the proposed systems
engineering processes and management approach to support successful AFRE program
execution.
The proposer shall provide an overview of the systems engineering processes to be
used along with the organizational responsibilities and authority for the systems
engineering effort. The proposer shall describe their systems engineering approach to
complete the final AFRE demonstration system design and ensure that it meets program
objectives. The proposer shall describe how key system knowledge acquired during the
program will be captured, as well as describe the use of key tracking measures to enable
efficient assessment of program progress. The proposer shall also describe ongoing design
update activities including integration of test results and support to Government activities
as described in Section II.
The management plan shall describe the proposed teaming approach between
propulsion and air vehicle performers to ensure a relevant AFRE design and development
of planning information to support future Government development efforts. The proposer
shall describe how activities will be managed and integrated across geographically and/or
organizationally separate team elements. The proposer shall also describe their proposed
approach to subcontractor management, quality control, safety, and security. The proposer
shall describe their proposed level of Government interaction to facilitate efficient
interactions and streamlined decision making.
The management plan shall include the proposed programmatic approach to cost,
schedule, and risk management. Although formal Earned Value Management System
(EVMS) is not required for the program, the proposer must meet the intent and describe
how they will provide ongoing assessment of technical and programmatic progress against
the program plan, critical path, schedule and cost. The proposer shall define the content of
technical and financial progress reports that enables efficient program monitoring,
tracking, and reporting. Program management tools should be the same tools used
internally to manage the program. No additional unique information for the Government is
desired or required. The proposer shall provide a sample monthly report template along
with their proposal; the sample report will not be part of the page count.
25
DARPA-BAA-16-45
2.6 Relevance to DARPA Mission {5}
The proposer shall describe the relevance of their proposed AFRE demonstration
system design to the DARPA mission. In particular, the proposer shall describe the
relevance of their proposed AFRE demonstration system design and maturation plan to the
future hypersonic ISR air vehicle application. The proposer shall describe the level of
technology maturity that will be achieved if their proposed program is successful and
outline the remaining activities that would be required to fully mature an AFRE for flight
demonstration.
2.7 Intellectual Property {no page limit}
Per Section VIII.A below, proposers responding to this BAA must submit a
separate list of all technical data or computer software that will be furnished to the
Government with other than unlimited rights. The Government will assume unlimited
rights if proposers fail to identify any intellectual property restrictions in their proposals.
Include in this section all proprietary claims to results, demonstration systems, deliverables
or systems supporting and/or necessary for the use of the research, results, demonstration
systems and/or deliverables. If no restrictions are intended, then the proposer should state
NONE.
2.8 Statement of Work (SOW) {no page limit}:
The SOW shall clearly define the technical tasks/subtasks to be performed in Phase
I and Phase II, their durations, and dependencies among them. The SOW shall be detailed
to work breakdown structure (WBS) level 4. For each task/subtask, the SOW shall include:
A general description of the objective (for each defined task/activity);
A detailed description of the approach to be taken to accomplish each defined
task/activity;
Identification of the primary organization responsible for task execution (prime,
sub, team member, by name, etc.);
The completion criteria for each task/activitya product, event or milestone that
defines its completion; and
A definition of all deliverables (reports, data, software, hardware, demonstration
system elements, etc.) to be provided to the Government in support of the proposed
research tasks/activities. Include expected delivery date for each deliverable.
Do not include any proprietary information in the SOW or include any markings
placing limitations on distribution on the pages containing the SOW.
2.9 Integrated Master Schedule {no page limit}:
This section shall include an Integrated Master Schedule in MS Project format that
details all of the proposed program activities down to WBS level 4 and using the same
numbering scheme as the SOW. This section shall also include a critical path analysis to
identify key areas of schedule risk.
2.10 Government Furnished Equipment {no page limit}:
This section shall describe any GFE required to perform this effort. For GFE
described in Section II.I.D of this BAA, the proposer shall describe any assumptions
26
DARPA-BAA-16-45
regarding the content and availability of this GFE. For any additional GFE, the proposer
shall provide a description of each item, along with need date, estimated cost, and
Government point of contact information. Proposed GFE costs should be appropriately
substantiated in the cost proposal.
2.11 Subcontractor List
To facilitate Government conflict of interest determinations, proposers are required
to submit a complete list of organizations participating on their team, including all
subcontractors and their roles.
2.12 Options {page count not included in the Volume I, Technical Details page limit;
however, should not exceed 5 pages per option area}
To provide planning information to the Government in support of discussions with
additional funding partners and to provide opportunities to fund additional activities,
should additional resources become available, the Government encourages proposers to
propose ROM options in three areas:
Additional engine component(s)/long lead spares
Additional ground testing of the AFRE demonstration system
Additional and potentially parallel design maturation & risk reduction activities to
support future demonstration
If the proposer is proposing options, an overview of these options, rationale for
inclusion and value added shall be provided. Proposers should include ROM cost and
provide a schedule at the task level for options with multiple potential task areas as well as
recommended prioritization of these activities. For options where timing is critical within
the context of the Phase II demonstration schedule, proposers should provide "no later
than" exercise dates.
b. Volume II, Cost Proposal {No Page Limit}
All proposers, including FFRDCs, must submit the following:
Cover sheet to include:
(1) BAA number (DARPA-BAA-16-45);
(2) Technical area;
(3) Lead Organization submitting proposal;
(4) Type of organization, selected among the following categories: LARGE
BUSINESS, SMALL DISADVANTAGED BUSINESS, OTHER
SMALL BUSINESS, HBCU, MI, OTHER EDUCATIONAL, OR
OTHER NONPROFIT;
(5) Proposers reference number (if any);
(6) Other team members (if applicable) and type of organization for each;
(7) Proposal title;
(8) 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);
27
DARPA-BAA-16-45
(9) Administrative point of contact to include: salutation, last name, first name,
street address, city, state, zip code, telephone, fax (if available), and electronic
mail (if available);
(10) Award instrument requested: cost-plus-fixed-fee (CPFF), cost-contractno
fee, cost sharing contract no fee, or other type of procurement contract
(specify), grant, cooperative agreement, or other transaction;
(11) Place(s) and period(s) of performance;
(12) Total proposed cost separated by basic award and option(s) (if any);
(13) Name, address, and telephone number of the proposers cognizant Defense
Contract Management Agency (DCMA) administration office (if known);
(14) Name, address, and telephone number of the proposers cognizant Defense
Contract Audit Agency (DCAA) audit office (if known);
(15) Date proposal was prepared;
(16) DUNS number;
(17) TIN number;
(18) CAGE Code;
(19) Subcontractor Information; and
(20) Proposal validity period.
Note that nonconforming proposals may be rejected without review.
Proposers without an accounting system considered adequate for determining
accurate costs must complete an SF 1408 if a cost type contract is to be negotiated. To
facilitate this process, proposers should complete the SF 1408 found at
http://www.gsa.gov/portal/forms/download/115778 and submit the completed form with
the proposal. To complete the form, check the boxes on the second page, then provide a
narrative explanation of your accounting system to supplement the checklist on page one.
For more information, please see
http://www.dcaa.mil/preaward_accounting_system_adequacy_checklist.html.
Summary cost information shall be provided using the Excel spreadsheet provided
in Appendix C and using the same WBS at the same level of detail as the SOW and IMS.
In addition to the requested Excel spreadsheet under Appendix C, proposers may also
submit their own cost volume in their own format. The cost proposal and narrative shall
include:
1) total program cost broken down by all cost elements (direct labor, including labor
categories; indirect costs (fringe, overhead, G&A, etc.) subcontracts; materials;
travel; other direct costs; etc.) and further broken down by task and phase;
2) total program costs by contractor fiscal year and government fiscal year;
3) a single page integrated spreadsheet of summary program costs broken down by
WBS (e.g., direct labor, subcontractors, material, etc.)
4) a single page integrated spreadsheet of direct labor hours broken down by WBS;
5) a spreadsheet bill of materials providing materials itemized by WBS;
6) an itemization of major subcontracts and equipment purchases;
7) an itemization of any information technology (IT) purchases1;
28
DARPA-BAA-16-45
8) the source, nature, and amount of any industry cost-sharing;
9) identification of pricing assumptions which may require incorporation into the
resulting contract or other transaction (e.g., use of Government Furnished Property/
Facilities/Information, access to Government Subject Matter Experts, etc.)
Note that incomplete cost proposal information, especially for subcontractors and
materials, often results in significant delay in the negotiation of a proposal for award and
can adversely affect the program execution schedule. Please read and respond to the
following instructions carefully to ensure a complete cost proposal.
Supporting cost and pricing information shall be provided in sufficient detail to
substantiate the summary cost estimates above. The basis of estimate (BOE) should include
a description of the method used to estimate costs and supporting documentation.
Supporting documentation is required for all proposed materials with a total cost >$10K.
Material BOE should include bills of material for commercial items, vendor quotes, past
purchase orders or past invoices with explanation of any adjustment factors, such as
engineering estimates and complexity factors. The BOE and other supporting cost narrative
may be provided in the proposers format. The proposer shall also include in its proposed
price the identification and cost of any GFE or facilities required to complete the effort.
List the item/facility, the estimated cost, and basis for the estimate. These items should be
priced separately because the Government may determine it is more efficient to fund them
separately. With the exception of those items noted in Section II.D, GFE costs are
considered part of the total funding available from the Government.
The prime contractor is responsible for compiling and providing all subcontractor
proposals. Interdivisional Work Transfer Agreements (IWTA) or similar arrangements will
be assessed in the same way as subcontractors and require the same supporting material.
Subcontractor cost estimates must be substantiated by a subcontractor proposal including
statement of work and cost estimate. The subcontractor proposals must be fully
substantiated including basis of estimate for labor and materials. Fully disclosed
proprietary subcontractor cost proposals may be provided to the Government under
IT is defined as any equipment, or interconnected system(s) or subsystem(s) of equipment that is used in
the automatic acquisition, storage, analysis, evaluation, manipulation, management, movement, control,
display, switching, interchange, transmission, or reception of data or information by the agency. (1) For
purposes of this definition, equipment is used by an agency if the equipment is used by the agency directly
or is used by a contractor under a contract with the agency that requires (i) Its use; or (2) To a significant
extent, its use in the performance of a service or the furnishing of a product. (2) The term information
technology includes computers, ancillary equipment (including imaging peripherals, input, output, and
storage devices necessary for security and surveillance), peripheral equipment designed to be controlled by
the central processing unit of a computer, software, firmware and similar procedures, services (including
support services), and related resources. (3) The term information technology does not include any
equipment that (i) Is acquired by a contractor incidental to a contract; or (2) Contains imbedded
information technology that is used as an integral part of the product, but the principal function of which is
not the acquisition, storage, analysis, evaluation, manipulation, management, movement, control, display,
switching, interchange, transmission, or reception of data or information. For example, HVAC (heating,
ventilation, and air conditioning) equipment such as thermostats or temperature control devices, and
medical equipment where information technology is integral to its operation, is not information
technology.
1
29
DARPA-BAA-16-45
separate cover. Subcontractor proposals (and/or spreadsheet template) are required from
all subs or IWTAs, regardless of tier. The prime contractor must provide appropriate cost
or price analyses of subcontractor proposals to establish the reasonableness of proposed
subcontract prices. Subcontractor costs shall be broken down using the same WBS as the
SOW and IMS as the prime contractor.
If the total subcontract value is below $150K, the proposed subcontractor shall
complete the Excel spreadsheet provided under Appendix C, which only requires
completion of the summary table, materials, travel, equipment and other direct costs tabs
in the spreadsheet. If the value of the subcontractor effort exceeds $150K, the
subcontractor shall complete the Appendix C spreadsheet for all applicable fields,
providing the same level of detail as required by the prime and using the same WBS as the
prime. For minor Tier 2 and lower subcontractors, the spreadsheet submission is adequate
and a separate cost proposal is not required.
All proprietary subcontractor proposal documentation, prepared at the same level
of detail as that required of the prime, shall be provided to the Government either by the
prime contractor or by the subcontractor organization when the proposal is submitted.
Proprietary subcontractor proposals submitted to the Government by the prime contractor
should be submitted in a sealed envelope that the prime contractor will not be allowed to
view. The subcontractor must provide the same number of hard copies and/or electronic
proposals as is required of the prime contractor.
The Government may award either a Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) based
contract or an Other Transaction for Prototype (OT) agreement for prototype system
development.
If an OT is proposed, cost sharing may be required under applicable statutory
regulations for other transactions for prototype projects awarded under the authority of 10
U.S.C. 2371, Section 845 of Public Law 103-160, as amended. Proposers should review
the statutory language to see if they are required to provide a minimum of one-third (1/3)
cost share or if they meet the conditions for not providing cost share. Proposers must
substantiate how they propose to meet the OT legal provisions as part of their proposal. All
proposers requesting an Other Transaction (OT) for Prototypes must include a detailed list
of milestones. Each milestone must include the following: milestone description,
completion criteria, due date, and payment/funding schedule (to include, if cost share is
proposed, contractor and Government share amounts). It is noted that, at a minimum,
milestones should relate directly to accomplishment of program technical metrics as
defined in the BAA and/or the proposers proposal. Agreement type, fixed price or
expenditure based, will be subject to negotiation by the Agreements Officer; however, it is
noted that the Government prefers use of fixed price milestones with a payment/funding
schedule to the maximum extent possible. Do not include proprietary data in the proposed
payable milestone plan.
There is no page limit for the Cost Volume.
30
DARPA-BAA-16-45
4. Submission Dates and Times
The proposal must be submitted per the instructions outlined herein and received
by DARPA/TTO on or before September 28, 2016 at 4:00 P.M. Eastern Time in order to
be considered during the initial round of selections; however, proposals received after this
deadline may be received and evaluated up to six months (180 days) from date of posting
on FedBizOpps. The ability to review and select proposals submitted after the initial round
deadline specified in the BAA or due date otherwise specified by DARPA will be
contingent on availability of funds. Proposers are warned that the likelihood of available
funding is greatly reduced for proposals submitted after the initial closing date deadline.
Failure to comply with the submission procedures may result in the submission not being
evaluated.
DARPA will acknowledge receipt of complete submissions via e-mail and assign
control numbers that should be used in all further correspondence regarding proposals.
Questions may be submitted to DARPA-BAA-16-45@darpa.mil. DARPA will
answer all questions received through August 31, 2016. DARPA will strive to answer
questions in a timely manner and will post consolidated Question and Answer responses
as they are received.
5. Funding Restrictions
Not applicable.
6. Other Submission Requirements
Not applicable.
V.
Proposals will be evaluated using the following criteria: (a) Overall Scientific and
Technical Merit; (b) Potential Contribution and Relevance to the DARPA Mission; (c)
Proposers Capabilities and/or Related Experience; and (d) Cost Realism. Criteria are in
descending order of importance.
(a) Overall Scientific and Technical Merit
The proposed technical approach is feasible, achievable, complete and supported
by a proposed technical team that has the expertise and experience to accomplish the
proposed tasks.
31
DARPA-BAA-16-45
The following paragraphs describe the areas that will be considered when
evaluating the various aspects of the proposals Overall Scientific and Technical Merit.
These areas are not individual sub factors and are listed in no particular order of
importance.
AFRE Demonstration Point of Departure Design: The Government will review the
proposed AFRE demonstration system conceptual design (to include M&S, empirical data,
or other analysis) to assess the extent to which the design information provided
demonstrates innovation and confidence in the AFRE design and clear linkage and
traceability to a future hypersonic ISR air vehicle application.
AFRE Maturation Plan: The Government will review the AMP to assess whether
the plan adequately identifies and fully characterizes AFRE technical, schedule and cost
risks. The Government will also assess the extent to which the AMP includes a logical
progression of risk reduction activities to adequately validate key technologies and
attributes to mitigate Phase II full system demonstration freejet test risk. Lastly, the
Government will review the AMP to assess the overall level of risk reduction achieved
through the Phase II program.
Management Approach: The Government will review the proposers management
and systems engineering approach to assess the extent to which the proposer has a
comprehensive plan for effectively managing and executing all of the programmatic,
technical and cost elements of the program. The Government will review the proposed
approach for interacting with the Government team to assess whether the approach
represents a reasonable and effective level of collaboration.
Program Plan Completeness: The Government will also review the extent to which
proposed GFE/GFI is reasonable and consistent with program schedule and budget. The
SOW and IMS will be reviewed to assess whether they are credible, executable, and
address program objectives and deliverables. The Government will review the proposed
program schedule and quarterly review content to ensure that it provides adequate insight
into the technical progress of the program at appropriate interval levels and that the
deliverables are consistent with the program objectives.
(b) Potential Contribution and Relevance to the DARPA Mission
The potential contributions of the proposed effort are relevant to the national
technology base. Specifically, DARPAs mission is to maintain the technological
superiority of the U.S. military and prevent technological surprise from harming our
national security by sponsoring revolutionary, high-payoff research that bridges the gap
between fundamental discoveries and their application.
The focus of this criterion will be on assessing the extent to which the proposed
AFRE program advances the technology to enable a future hypersonic ISR air vehicle. The
AFRE demonstration system design will be reviewed to assess relevance to the future air
vehicle application and its performance objectives. The proposed demonstration program
content and the proposers assessment of additional development activities required
32
DARPA-BAA-16-45
following completion of the AFRE program will be reviewed to assess the extent to which
the proposed risk reduction activities, component and subsystem tests, and fully integrated
system freejet test advance the technical maturity of an AFRE to enable a future flight test
engine. In addition, the evaluation will take into consideration the extent to which the
proposed intellectual property (IP) rights will potentially impact the Governments ability
to transition the technology to the research, industrial, and operational military
communities.
(c) Proposers Capabilities and/or Related Experience
The proposer's prior experience in similar efforts clearly demonstrates an ability to
deliver products that meet the proposed technical performance within the proposed budget
and schedule. The proposed team has the expertise to manage the cost and schedule.
Similar efforts completed/ongoing by the proposer in this area are fully described,
including identification of other Government sponsors. The qualifications of key
personnel, including the Program Manager, Chief Engineer, Chief Systems Engineer, and
Air Vehicle Design and Integration Lead will be reviewed to assess their prior
programmatic experience on relevant propulsions system demonstration programs and/or
programs of similar scope and complexity to AFRE. The proposed level of effort of key
personnel will also be reviewed to assess whether the time commitment is consistent with
their proposed roles on the program.
(d) Cost Realism
The proposed costs are realistic for the technical and management approach and
accurately reflect the technical goals and objectives of the solicitation. The proposed costs
are consistent with the proposer's Statement of Work and reflect a sufficient understanding
of the costs and level of effort needed to successfully accomplish the proposed technical
approach. The costs for the prime proposer and proposed subawardees are substantiated by
the details provided in the proposal (e.g., the type and number of labor hours proposed per
task, the types and quantities of materials, equipment and fabrication costs, travel and any
other applicable costs).
The prime contractor has conducted independent price/cost analysis of proposed
subcontractor costs to substantiate the cost values included in their proposals. GFE costs
are itemized and appropriately substantiated. It is expected that the effort will leverage all
available relevant prior research in order to obtain the maximum benefit from the available
funding. For efforts with a likelihood of commercial application, appropriate direct cost
sharing may be a positive factor in the evaluation. DARPA recognizes that undue emphasis
on cost may motivate proposers to offer low-risk ideas with minimum uncertainty and to
staff the effort with junior personnel in order to be in a more competitive posture. DARPA
discourages such cost strategies.
B. Review and Selection Process
DARPA will conduct a scientific/technical review of each conforming proposal.
Proposals will not be evaluated against each other since they are not submitted in
accordance with a common work statement. DARPAs intent is to review proposals as
33
DARPA-BAA-16-45
soon as possible after they arrive; however, proposals may be reviewed periodically for
administrative reasons.
Award(s) will be made to proposers whose proposals are determined to be the
most advantageous to the Government, all factors considered, including the potential
contributions of the proposed work to the overall research program and the availability
of funding for the effort.
It is the policy of DARPA to ensure impartial, equitable, comprehensive proposal
evaluations and to select the source (or sources) whose offer meets the Government's
technical, policy, and programmatic goals. Pursuant to FAR 35.016, the primary basis for
selecting proposals for acceptance shall be technical, importance to agency programs, and
funding availability. In order to provide the desired evaluation, qualified Government
personnel will conduct reviews and (if necessary) convene panels of experts in the
appropriate areas.
For evaluation purposes, a proposal is the document described in Content and
Form of Application Submission, Section IV.B. Other supporting or background
materials submitted with the proposal will be considered for the reviewer's convenience
only and not considered as part of the proposal.
Restrictive notices notwithstanding, proposals may be handled for administrative
purposes by support contractors. These support contractors are prohibited from
competition in DARPA technical research and are bound by appropriate non-disclosure
requirements.
Subject to the restrictions set forth in FAR 37.203(d), input on technical aspects of
the proposals may be solicited by DARPA from non-Government consultants/experts who
are strictly bound by the appropriate non-disclosure requirements.
VI.
34
DARPA-BAA-16-45
2. Human Subjects Research
All research selected for funding involving human subjects, to include use of human
biological specimens and human data, must comply with the federal regulations for human
subjects protection. Further, research involving human subjects that is conducted or
supported by the DoD must comply with 32 CFR 219, Protection of Human Subjects (and
DoD Instruction 3216.02, Protection of Human Subjects and Adherence to Ethical
Standards
in
DoD-Supported
Research
(http://www.dtic.mil/whs/directives/corres/pdf/321602p.pdf).
Institutions awarded funding for research involving human subjects must provide
documentation of a current Assurance of Compliance with Federal regulations for human
subjects protection, such as a Department of Health and Human Services, Office of Human
Research Protection Federal Wide Assurance (http://www.hhs.gov/ohrp). All institutions
engaged in human subjects research, to include subawardees, must also hold a valid
Assurance. In addition, all personnel involved in human subjects research must provide
documentation of completion of human subjects research training.
For all proposed research that will involve human subjects in the first year or phase
of the project, the institution must provide evidence of or a plan for review by an
Institutional Review Board (IRB) upon final proposal submission to DARPA as part of
their proposal, prior to being selected for funding. The IRB conducting the review must
be the IRB identified on the institutions Assurance of Compliance with human subjects
protection regulations. The protocol, separate from the proposal, must include a detailed
description of the research plan, study population, risks and benefits of study participation,
recruitment and consent process, data collection, and data analysis. It is recommended that
you consult the designated IRB for guidance on writing the protocol. The informed consent
document must comply with federal regulations (32 CFR 219.116). A valid Assurance of
Compliance with human subjects protection regulations along with evidence of completion
of appropriate human subjects research training by all investigators and personnel involved
with human subjects research should accompany the protocol for review by the IRB.
In addition to a local IRB approval, a headquarters-level human subjects
administrative review and approval is required for all research conducted or supported by
the DoD. The Army, Navy, or Air Force office responsible for managing the award can
provide guidance and information about their components headquarters-level review
process. Note that confirmation of a current Assurance of Compliance with human subjects
protection regulations and appropriate human subjects research training is required before
headquarters-level approval can be issued.
The time required to complete the IRB review/approval process varies depending
on the complexity of the research and the level of risk involved with the study. The IRB
approval process can last between one and three months, followed by a DoD review that
could last between three and six months. Ample time should be allotted to complete the
approval process. DoD/DARPA funding cannot be used towards human subjects research
until ALL approvals are granted.
35
DARPA-BAA-16-45
3. Animal Use
Award recipients performing research, experimentation, or testing involving the
use of animals shall comply with the rules on animal acquisition, transport, care, handling,
and use as outlined in: (i) 9 CFR parts 1-4, Department of Agriculture rules that implement
the Animal Welfare Act of 1966, as amended, (7 U.S.C. 2131-2159); (ii) National
Institutes of Health Publication No. 86-23, "Guide for the Care and Use of Laboratory
Animals" (8th Edition); and (iii) DoD Instruction 3216.01, Use of Animals in DoD
Programs.
For projects anticipating animal use, proposals should briefly describe plans for
Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee (IACUC) review and approval. Animal
studies in the program will be expected to comply with the Public Health Service (PHS)
Policy on Humane Care and Use of Laboratory Animals, available at
http://grants.nih.gov/grants/olaw/olaw.htm.
All award recipients must receive approval by a DoD-certified veterinarian, in
addition to an IACUC approval. No animal studies may be conducted using DoD/DARPA
funding until the United States Army Medical Research and Materiel Command
(USAMRMC) Animal Care and Use Review Office (ACURO) or other appropriate DoD
veterinary office(s) grant approval. As a part of this secondary review process, the award
recipient will be required to complete and submit an ACURO Animal Use Appendix,
which
may
be
found
at
https://mrmcwww.army.mil/index.cfm?pageid=Research_Protections.acuro&rn=1.
4. Export Control
Per DFARS 225.7901-4, all procurement contracts, other transactions and other
awards, as deemed appropriate, resultant from this solicitation will include the DFARS
Export Control clause (252.225-7048).
5. Subcontracting
Pursuant to Section 8(d) of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 637(d)), it is the
policy of the Government to enable small business and small disadvantaged business
concerns to be considered fairly as subcontractors to contractors performing work or
rendering services as prime contractors or subcontractors under Government contracts, and
to assure that prime contractors and subcontractors carry out this policy. Each proposer
who submits a contract proposal and includes subcontractors is required to submit a
subcontracting plan in accordance with FAR 19.702(a)(1) and should do so with their
proposal. The plan format is outlined in FAR 19.704.
6. Electronic and Information Technology
36
DARPA-BAA-16-45
All electronic and information technology acquired through this solicitation must
satisfy the accessibility requirements of Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act (29 U.S.C.
794d) and FAR 39.2. Each proposer who submits a proposal involving the creation or
inclusion of electronic and information technology must ensure that Federal employees
with disabilities will have access to and use of information that is comparable to the access
and use by Federal employees who are not individuals with disabilities and members of the
public with disabilities seeking information or services from DARPA will have access to
and use of information and data that is comparable to the access and use of information
and data by members of the public who are not individuals with disabilities.
7. Employment Eligibility Verification
As per FAR 22.1802, recipients of FAR-based procurement contracts must enroll
as federal contractors in E-verify and use the system to verify employment eligibility of all
employees assigned to the award. All resultant contracts from this solicitation will include
FAR 52.222-54, Employment Eligibility Verification. This clause will not be included
in grants, cooperative agreements, or Other Transactions.
8. System for Award Management (SAM) and Universal Identifier
Requirements
Unless the proposer is exempt from this requirement, as per FAR 4.1102 or 2 CFR
25.110 as applicable, all proposers must be registered in the System for Award
Management (SAM) and have a valid Data Universal Numbering System (DUNS) number
prior to submitting a proposal. All proposers must maintain an active registration in SAM
with current information at all times during which they have an active Federal award or
proposal under consideration by DARPA. All proposers must provide the DUNS number
in each proposal they submit.
Information on SAM registration is available at www.sam.gov.
9. Reporting Executive Compensation and First-Tier Subcontract
Awards
FAR clause 52.204-10, Reporting Executive Compensation and First-Tier
Subcontract Awards, will be used in all procurement contracts valued at $25,000 or more.
A similar award term will be used in all grants and cooperative agreements.
10. Updates of Information Regarding Responsibility Matters
Per FAR 9.104-7(c), FAR clause 52.209-9, Updates of Publicly Available
Information Regarding Responsibility Matters, will be included in all contracts valued at
$500,000 or more where the contractor has current active Federal contracts and grants with
total value greater than $10,000,000.
37
DARPA-BAA-16-45
11. Representations by Corporations Regarding an Unpaid Delinquent
Tax Liability or a Felony Conviction under any Federal Law
The following representation will be included in all awards:
(a) In accordance with section 101(a) of the Continuing Appropriations Act, 2016
(Pub. L. 114-53) and any subsequent FY 2016 appropriations act that extends to FY 2016
funds the same restrictions as are contained in sections 744 and 745 of division E, title VII,
of the Consolidated and Further Continuing Appropriations Act, 2015 (Pub. L. 113-235),
none of the funds made available by this or any other Act may be used to enter into a
contract with any corporation that
(1) Has any unpaid Federal tax liability that has been assessed, for which all
judicial and administrative remedies have been exhausted or have lapsed, and that
is not being paid in a timely manner pursuant to an agreement with the authority
responsible for collecting the tax liability, where the awarding agency is aware of
the unpaid tax liability, unless the agency has considered suspension or debarment
of the corporation and made a determination that this further action is not necessary
to protect the interests of the Government; or
(2) Was convicted of a felony criminal violation under any Federal law
within the preceding 24 months, where the awarding agency is aware of the
conviction, unless the agency has considered suspension or debarment of the
corporation and made a determination that this action is not necessary to protect the
interests of the Government.
(b) The Offeror represents that
(1) It is [ ] is not [ ] a corporation that has any unpaid Federal tax liability
that has been assessed, for which all judicial and administrative remedies have been
exhausted or have lapsed, and that is not being paid in a timely manner pursuant to
an agreement with the authority responsible for collecting the tax liability,
(2) It is [ ] is not [ ] a corporation that was convicted of a felony criminal
violation under a Federal law within the preceding 24 months.
12. Cost Accounting Standards (CAS) Notices and Certification
As per FAR 52.230-2, any procurement contract in excess of the referenced
threshold resulting from this solicitation will be subject to the requirements of the Cost
Accounting Standards Board (48 CFR 99), except those contracts which are exempt as
specified in 48 CFR 9903.201-1. Any proposer submitting a proposal which, if accepted,
will result in a CAS compliant contract, must submit representations and a Disclosure
Statement as required by 48 CFR 9903.202 detailed in FAR 52.230-2. The disclosure
forms may be found at http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/procurement_casb.
38
DARPA-BAA-16-45
13. Controlled Unclassified Information (CUI) on Non-DoD
Information Systems
Controlled Unclassified Information (CUI) refers to unclassified information
that does not meet the standards for National Security Classification but is pertinent
to the national interests of the United States or to the important interests of entities
outside the Federal Government and under law or policy requires protection from
unauthorized disclosure, special handling safeguards, or prescribed limits on
exchange or dissemination. All non-DoD entities doing business with DARPA are
expected to adhere to the following procedural safeguards, in addition to any other
relevant Federal or DoD specific procedures, for submission of any proposals to
DARPA and any potential business with DARPA:
Do not process DARPA CUI on publicly available computers or post
DARPA CUI to publicly available webpages or websites that have access
limited only by domain or Internet protocol restriction.
Ensure that all DARPA CUI is protected by a physical or electronic
barrier when not under direct individual control of an authorized user and
limit the transfer of DARPA CUI to subawardees or teaming partners with a
need to know and commitment to this level of protection.
Ensure that DARPA CUI on mobile computing devices is identified
and encrypted and all communications on mobile devices or through wireless
connections are protected and encrypted.
Overwrite media that has been used to process DARPA CUI before
external release or disposal.
14. Safeguarding of Covered Defense Information and Cyber Incident
Reporting
Per DFARS 204.7304, DFARS 252.204-7012, Safeguarding of Covered Defense
Information and Cyber Incident Reporting, applies to this solicitation and all FAR-based
awards resulting from this solicitation.
15. Prohibition on Contracting with Entities that Require Certain
Internal Confidentiality Agreements
(a) In accordance with section 101(a) of the Continuing Appropriations Act, 2016
(Pub. L. 114-53) and any subsequent FY 2016 appropriations act that extends to FY 2016
funds the same restrictions as are contained in section 743 of division E, title VII, of the
Consolidated and Further Continuing Appropriations Act, 2015 (Pub. L. 113-235), none
of the funds appropriated (or otherwise made available) by this or any other Act may be
used for a contract with an entity that requires employees or subcontractors of such entity
seeking to report fraud, waste, or abuse to sign internal confidentiality agreements or
statements prohibiting or otherwise restricting such employees or contactors from
lawfully reporting such waste, fraud, or abuse to a designated investigative or law
39
DARPA-BAA-16-45
enforcement representative of a Federal department or agency authorized to receive such
information.
(b) The prohibition in paragraph (a) of this provision does not contravene
requirements applicable to Standard Form 312, Form 4414, or any other form issued by a
Federal department or agency governing the nondisclosure of classified information.
(c) Representation. By submission of its offer, the Offeror represents that it does
not require employees or subcontractors of such entity seeking to report fraud, waste, or
abuse to sign or comply with internal confidentiality agreements or statements
prohibiting or otherwise restricting such employees or contactors from lawfully reporting
such waste, fraud, or abuse to a designated investigative or law enforcement
representative of a Federal department or agency authorized to receive such information.
C. Reporting
In addition to the technical deliverables specified in Sections II.F and II.H, the
performer shall submit monthly technical and financial status reports. The reports shall be
prepared and submitted in accordance with the procedures contained in the award
document and mutually agreed on before award. A Final Report that summarizes the
project and tasks will be required at the conclusion of the performance period for the award,
notwithstanding the fact that the research may be continued under a follow-on vehicle, e.g.,
a Phase I final report and a Phase II final report. At least one copy of each report will be
delivered to DARPA and not merely placed on a SharePoint site.
D. Electronic Systems
i. Representations and Certifications
In accordance with FAR 4.1201, prospective proposers shall complete electronic
annual representations and certifications at www.sam.gov.
ii. Wide Area Work Flow (WAWF)
Unless using another means of invoicing, performers will be required to submit
invoices for payment directly to https://wawf.eb.mil. Registration in WAWF will be
required prior to any award under this BAA.
iii. i-Edison
The award document for each proposal selected for funding will contain a
mandatory requirement for patent reports and notifications to be submitted electronically
through i-Edison (https://public.era.nih.gov/iedison).
VII.
Agency Contacts
40
DARPA-BAA-16-45
Administrative, technical, or contractual questions should be sent via e-mail
DARPA-BAA-16-45@darpa.mil. All requests must include the name, e-mail address, and
phone number of a point of contact.
VIII.
Other Information
A. Intellectual Property Procurement Contract Proposers
1. Noncommercial Items (Technical Data and Computer Software)
Name of Person
Asserting Restrictions
DARPA-BAA-16-45
be Furnished With
Restrictions
(LIST)
Conduct of the
Research
(NARRATIVE)
(LIST)
(LIST)
(LIST)
Asserted Rights
Category
Name of Person
Asserting Restrictions
(LIST)
(LIST)
DARPA-BAA-16-45
determination that the proposal is not compliant with the BAA resulting in
nonselectability of the proposal.
C. All Proposers Patents
Include documentation proving your ownership of or possession of appropriate
licensing rights to all patented inventions (or inventions for which a patent application has
been filed) that will be utilized under your proposal for the DARPA program. If a patent
application has been filed for an invention that your proposal utilizes, but the application
has not yet been made publicly available and contains proprietary information, you may
provide only the patent number, inventor name(s), assignee names (if any), filing date,
filing date of any related provisional application, and a summary of the patent title, together
with either: (1) a representation that you own the invention, or (2) proof of possession of
appropriate licensing rights in the invention.
D. All Proposers Intellectual Property Representations
Provide a good faith representation that you either own or possess appropriate
licensing rights to all other intellectual property that will be utilized under your proposal
for the DARPA program. Additionally, proposers shall provide a short summary for each
item asserted with less than unlimited rights that describes the nature of the restriction and
the intended use of the intellectual property in the conduct of the proposed research.
43
DARPA-BAA-16-45
APPENDIX A DARPA Tailored Critical Design Review Criteria
ID
CDR-1a
CDR-1b
CDR-1c
Program Execution
CDR-1d
CDR-1e
CDR-1f
CDR-2a
CDR-2b
CDR-2c
CDR-2d
CDR-2e
CDR-2f
Baseline System
Documentation
CDR-2f
CDR-2g
CDR-2h
CDR-2i
CDR-2j
CDR-2k
CDR-2l
CDR-3a
CDR-3b
CDR-3c
CDR-4a
Risk Assessment
CDR-4b
AFRE demonstration system detailed design (hardware and software), including interface
descriptions, is complete and satisfies all baseline system requirements (allocated and derived)
with adequate margin and acceptable risk
Updated AFRE demonstration system performance assessment (engineering analysis or initial test
results) is representative of the baseline system architecture and indicates the potential for
demonstration success
Status of AFRE demonstration system modeling, simulation, and analysis is sufficient to validate
the baseline system
All AFRE demonstration system risk assessments and risk mitigation plans have been updated,
documented, formally addressed, and implemented.
AFRE demonstration system test plans account for risk mitigation activities and identify the
necessary integration activities, test resources, and schedule constraints to support risk mitigation.
44
DARPA-BAA-16-45
APPENDIX B Technical and Performance Data Sheets
Proposers should fully populate the following data tables to assist the government in
assessing the relevance of their point-of-departure propulsion system design. Please note
that the table entries regarding substantiation are notional only, providing examples of the
types of substantiating information that might be included. Proposers should tailor these
entries based on the data available on their unique design and program and appropriately
mark the table and data consistent with the SCG.
Table 1. Aeropropulsion System Design Maturity Summary
Design
TBCC
Technology Area
Integrated airframe
propulsion
performance
Maturity Level
Table X
Performance
Substantiation
6-DOF Analysis
Trajectory Figure Z
Inlet
Aero/Performance
Mass capture,
Inlet
Thermal/Structural
Performance/Weights
Analysis results,
margins, life
predictions,
Nozzle
Aero/Performance
Efficiency,
Nozzle
Thermal/Structural
Performance/Weights
Analysis results,
margins, life
predictions,
DMRJ
Aero/Performance
Combustion
efficiency
DMRJ
Thermal/Structural
Performance/Weights
Analysis results,
margins, life
predictions,
Thermal
Management
Fuel temps,
turbine duct
temp, coolant
weight/vol,
Aeropropulsion
software/controls
Analysis, sim,
bench testing,
Efficiency,
45
DARPA-BAA-16-45
Metric
Value(s)
Operational/Testbed
High-Speed Flowpath
(Inlet/Combustor/
Nozzle)Length,
Diameter, Weight,
and CG
Low-Speed Flowpath
(Duct/Turbine)Length,
Diameter, Weight,
and CG
Integrated Flowpath
(Low-Speed/HighSpeed)Length,
Diameter, Weight,
and CG
Net Thrust for min
acceleration
(Transonic/Mode
Transition)
Inlet Mass Capture/
Efficiency Required
Nozzle Efficiency
Required
Combustor Efficiency
Max Mach Turbine
Engine
Min Mach DMRJ
Expected Mach Range
for Mode Transition
46
Performance
Substantiation
DARPA-BAA-16-45
Turbine Engine
Temps Non
operating
Turbine Engine
Restart Conditions
Software/Controls
Diagram
Affordability ($X M /
vehicle)
Vehicle
Conceptual
Design
Unrefueled Range
with payload
(NM/KM) and cruise
L/D
May be NA for
testbed as appropriate
Payload
Weight/Volume
May be NA for
testbed as appropriate
Table X
Trajectory
Figure Z
DARPA-BAA-16-45
48