HelioCon RFP RFX-2024-10000_Round_2.pdf

Heliostat Technology Advancement

REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS (RFP)

RFP RFX-2024-10000

Submit proposals adhering to the template with page limits to HelioCon.RFP@nrel.gov by: 4:00 pm MT, Thursday, February 16, 2024. Additional information about the Heliostat Consortium can be found at:

https://www.heliocon.org

READ THIS DOCUMENT CAREFULLY

This solicitation is being conducted under the procedures for competitive subcontracts established by the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL).

NREL will award a subcontract based on the following.

BEST VALUE SELECTION

All Statement of Work (SOW) requirements being met with the best combination of:

* Technical factors (based on qualitative merit criteria), and

* Evaluated price (or cost).

IMPORTANT DATES

Issue Date: December 15, 2023

Solicitation Webinar: December 20, 2023, 4:00 p.m. MT

Deadline for Questions: January 11, 2024, 4:00 p.m. MT

Response Due Date: February 16, 2024, 4:00 p.m. MT

Award Selection Anticipated: March 2024

A webinar to address questions regarding the HelioCon RFP solicitation is scheduled for December 20, 2023 at 4:00 pm MT. Interested parties can participate in the webinar by registering at:

HelioCon RFP

RFP Issue Date: 12/15/2023

RFP Webinar 12/20/2023 4:00 p.m. MT

Submission Deadline for Full Proposal: All Topic Areas: 2/16/2024 4:00 p.m. MT

Expected Date for Selection Notifications: March 2024

Expected Time Frame for Award Negotiations: March 2024 – June 2024 https://www.heliocon.org/ https://nrel.zoomgov.com/meeting/register/vJItcu-prjMiHtbz5Pw_5yEkaELwEprnOGg https://nrel.zoomgov.com/meeting/register/vJItcu-prjMiHtbz5Pw_5yEkaELwEprnOGg

After registering, you will receive a confirmation email containing information about joining the webinar.

Please submit questions by January 11, 2024, to HelioCon.RFP@nrel.gov. Questions are permitted during the webinar via the webinar chat box. However, the official response to any and all questions submitted will be provided in a posted RFP Amendment.

1. Solicitation Type - Best Value Selection

Pricing Arrangement - Firm Fixed Price Subcontracts

Submit responses to and request information from the NREL RFP Contact below.

2. NREL RFP Contact:

Bill Peters Subcontract Administrator National Renewable Energy Laboratory 15013 Denver West Parkway, MS: RSF030 Golden, CO 80401-3393

Phone: (303) 284-4332

Email: HelioCon.RFP@nrel.gov

Electronic (PDF) copies of forms and appendices can be found at:

https://www.nrel.gov/workingwithus/standard-terms.html and https://www.nrel.gov/workingwithus/forms.html

Roadmap to Advance Heliostat Technologies for Concentrating Solar-Thermal Power https://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy22osti/83041.pdf

2023 Heliostat Consortium Annual Report https://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy24osti/87662.pdf

Table of Contents

1. REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS DESCRIPTION

HELIOSTAT CONSORTIUM BACKGROUND

SOLICITATION PURPOSE AND OBJECTIVES

2. TOPIC AREAS

Topic 1: Advanced Manufacturing

Topic 2: Metrology and Standards

Topic 3: Components and Controls

Topic 4: Field Deployment https://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy22osti/83041.pdf https://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy24osti/87662.pdf

Topic 5: Techno-Economic Analysis (TEA)

Topic 6: Resource, Training, and Education

3. AWARD INFORMATION

4. PRICE PARTICIPATION REQUIREMENTS

5. INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY

6. ELIGIBILITY

7. COMPETITIVE SOLICITATION USING BEST VALUE SELECTION

8. DATA SHARING

9. PROPOSAL RESPONSE CONTENT AND FORMAT

10. PROPOSAL EVALUATION

11. PRICE EVALUATION FOR BEST VALUE SELECTION

12. ADDITIONAL FACTOR FOR EVALUATION

13. EVALUATION PROCESS

14. PROPOSAL SELECTION

FORMATTING INSTRUCTIONS

Project Summary:

Technical Description, Innovation, Impact:

Project Objectives and Work Plan:

Team Composition, Coordination, and Capabilities:

Tasks and Deliverables .............................................................................. Error! Bookmark not defined.

1. REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS DESCRIPTION

HELIOSTAT CONSORTIUM BACKGROUND

The Heliostat Consortium (HelioCon) is led by the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) and includes partners Sandia National Laboratories (Sandia) and the Australian Solar Thermal Research Institute (ASTRI). HelioCon is a U.S. consortium to support research, development, validation, commercialization, and deployment of low-cost heliostats for concentrating solar power (CSP) and concentrating solar thermal (CST) applications. Heliostats are a critical component of CSP power tower technologies. A heliostat field represents 30%–50% of the direct system cost and can be a large component of plant operations and maintenance (O&M) costs. To meet the U.S. Department of Energy Solar Energy Technologies Office’s (DOE-SETO) target of 5 cents/kWh for baseload CSP configurations or

0.8 cents/kWh for thermal production, significant techno-economic improvements for heliostats will need to be realized—both a reduction in costs and an improvement in performance and reliability.

HelioCon works closely with DOE and a board of advisors composed of CSP developers, component suppliers, utilities, and international experts to achieve the DOE-SETO 2030 objectives for U.S.-manufactured heliostat cost, performance, and reliability. To further advance U.S. heliostat technologies, HelioCon engages with subject matter experts and general stakeholders for direct, project-level collaboration, external consulting, and mission-specific panels or workshops.

In the next five years, HelioCon aims to create:

• An engaged, active heliostat community to further advance heliostat technologies.

• A fully validated third-party performance assessment platform for an integrated heliostat and its components

• A series of modeling and testing guidelines and standards

• A publicly available, easily accessible suite of tools, models, and resources for the public

SOLICITATION PURPOSE AND OBJECTIVES

Through this solicitation, NREL aims to award subcontracts to fund research, development, validation, and deployment of low-cost heliostats for CSP and CST applications.

Projects supported by this Request for Proposals (RFP) will focus on lowering the cost of heliostats and heliostat technologies, improving technical performance and reliability, and creating new market opportunities for the heliostat industry, with the goal of enabling widespread deployment of concentrating solar to decarbonize the electricity grid and energy systems.

One of the goals of publicly funded applied R&D is to mitigate the inherent risk of novel solutions. Key to achieving that goal is a systematic, domain-specific evaluation methodology, such as design of experiments, action research, or verification and validation testing. The testing itself should be preceded by well-designed test plans that examine the expected range of operation and generate statistical confidence in the results. To assist in these aspects, capabilities at the national laboratories will be made available in support of the selected projects. Proposals may take advantage of national laboratory resources and expertise at NREL (Addendum A) or Sandia (Addendum B) to help advance the proposed work as needed. Consultation and assistance from other HelioCon members are also encouraged.

Engaging in R&D activities with the support of public funds comes with the responsibility to disseminate the outcomes to the nation’s researchers, its industry stakeholders, and the general public. It is a goal of this RFP to encourage broad, open, and lasting access to research results, including important data sets and software code, that the projects generate. To broaden and amplify the impact of the R&D work, SETO supports commercialization efforts for the diffusion of the technologies, intellectual property, and expertise developed by the funded projects.

Successful proposals to this RFP will address the critical gaps identified by industry members, stakeholders, and suppliers in the HelioCon Roadmap report. NREL will seek to select high-impact projects that are strategic in time, and that use or enhance lab capabilities. This RFP also aims to broaden the heliostat R&D community. HelioCon is interested in proposals supported by diversity in experience and perspectives. HelioCon also encourages applications from members of groups traditionally underrepresented in engineering and science. The HelioCon Roadmap identified six technical topic areas of research, each with tiered gaps and recommended pathways to address those gaps. The six topic areas include:

Topic Area 1: Advanced Manufacturing

Topic Area 2: Metrology and Standards

Topic Area 3: Components and Controls

Topic Area 4: Field Deployment

Topic Area 5: Techno-Economic Analysis

Topic Area 6: Resource, Training, and Education

Areas of interest for each of the topic areas are described below.

2. TOPIC AREAS (See SECTION 4, PRICE PARTICIPATION REQUIREMENTS for price participation requirements for different topic areas)

Within each topic area below, specific needs are highlighted that were identified in the HelioCon Roadmap and are of particular interest. Other areas of research that address needs of a topic area may also be proposed. Areas of interest listed for each topic area are not exhaustive, and many ideas may crosscut several topic areas. Please refer to the HelioCon Roadmap for further details on each topic area. It is strongly suggested that applicants review past awards to avoid duplication at HelioCon RFP awards, at DOE/SETO awards https://www.energy.gov/eere/solar/solar-energy-research-database and at the Heliostat Prize website. Additional research activities are summarized in the newly published HelioCon 2023 annual report for additional reference. Proposals must have a focus on near-term impact achievable within the period of performance presented in the Technical Volume.

Topic 1: Advanced Manufacturing

Heliostat manufacturing directly influences both solar field cost and revenue and is a major contributor to overall CSP economic performance. Efficient manufacturing begins with initial product design, https://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy22osti/83041.pdf https://www.nrel.gov/news/press/2023/news-release-heliostat-consortium-announces-funding-awards-aimed-at-lowering-costs-barriers-to-widespread-deployment.html https://www.nrel.gov/news/press/2023/news-release-heliostat-consortium-announces-funding-awards-aimed-at-lowering-costs-barriers-to-widespread-deployment.html https://www.energy.gov/eere/solar/solar-energy-research-database https://www.herox.com/heliostat/updates identifying a design that achieves high performance while also produced by an inherently efficient manufacturing process. It continues through supply chain, procurement, component manufacture, factory assembly, transportation, and field installation, and ends when a functional heliostat is installed in the field. This comprehensive perspective allows optimization of the entire process and design tradeoffs between component manufacture, subsystem assembly, full heliostat assembly, and field installation. Manufacturing, assembly, and installation processes occur throughout this process, presenting multiple opportunities for reducing cost to achieve DOE’s $50/m2 goal.

As detailed in the HelioCon Roadmap, several obstacles to efficient manufacturing exist. Innovative high-performing and low-cost heliostat mirror facet/array designs [1] are needed. Mirror array designs must satisfy a number of key functional criteria, including high optical accuracy, high stiffness, and durability across 25–30 years in harsh CSP environments. Light weight is a further advantage, reducing the cost of supporting structures. In addition to enabling efficient manufacturing, a cost-effective mirror array design must also consider the principles mentioned above to enable efficient manufacturing. There lacks, within the heliostat industry, sufficient mirror array fabrication process knowledge for high economic performance. Innovative supporting structure designs that reduce cost while achieving functional goals are also needed. Often, heliostat designs are not created for high productivity manufacturing at the outset. Finally, in many cases, there is a lack of experience in designing high-productivity manufacturing lines among heliostat developers.

The Areas of Interest for Topic Area 1 Advanced Manufacturing include but are not limited to:

• Advance Heliostat Facets - High-performance heliostat facet designs with associated high-volume manufacturing process designs. Facet manufacture and performance assessment should be demonstrated, including demonstration of critical manufacturing processes.

Demonstration of lightweight, high stiffness, high optical accuracy composite facets are of particular interest, but all facet technologies are allowed. Materials should be selected to support high durability, with field installation life of up to 30 years. National Laboratory facilities may be provided to support multiple cycles of learning with immediate high-precision feedback on optical performance under a range of operational conditions (such as temperature and humidity).

• Collaboration with Advanced Manufacturers - To better understand the suppliers and manufacturers of heliostat components in the U.S., a collaboration with advanced component and device manufacturers is of interest. Collaboration between high-volume manufacturing system integrators, component manufacturers, and heliostat designers/developers are sought to i) increase the supply of readily available components for heliostat manufacturing in the U.S.;

ii) develop/modify existing trackers, hydraulics, and heliostat structures to utilize high volume manufacturing and commoditized supply, and iii) increase the utilization of high-volume manufacturing processes in fabricating and assembling heliostats.

• Advanced processes applied to heliostat manufacture - Heliostats in a solar field offer the potential for a large volume of similar or exact components to be manufactured and assembled.

For example, large heliostat fields can have 100,000 heliostats with metal structures, pylons and fabrications. This lends itself to the need for manufacturing processes that can produce high volume, high precision, replicable parts. Advanced manufacturing processes which can produce components at scale are sought that can be applied to heliostat manufacturing; examples include but are not limited to shear assisted extrusion processing, roll forming, progressive die stamping, additive manufacturing, carbon fiber spin manufacturing, etc. This topic seeks novel and developing processes for heliostats that have not traditionally been utilized, which can with sufficient volume offer cost savings while maintaining performance requirements. Processes capable of variable-part manufacture are advantaged because they can potentially support design scenarios where heliostat mass is varied depending on field location to reduce costs while resisting expected wind loads, with different wind magnitudes expected at different field locations.

Topic 2: Metrology and Standards

Metrology, in the context of heliostats, is the application of measurement for performance assessment and heliostat quality assurance. It is a fundamental requirement of successful large scale CSP deployment. The nature of CSP, particularly achieving high temperatures via high solar concentration ratios, implicitly requires high optical accuracy. Appropriate measurement techniques and standards are fundamental for product design, prototyping, engineering, and improvement.

Opto-mechanical metrology (mirror slope error, mirror facet canting error and heliostat tracking error) is complex, error-prone, and requires high optical precision, necessitating rigorous validation between different technologies on the same measurement parameter(s). Metrology needs for the same set of measurement parameters will vary to a great extent under various conditions, such as a laboratory, an outdoor test site, and in-situ conditions.

Current gaps related to metrology include the lack of multiple (at least two) comparable viable metrology techniques for a given measurement parameter that are widely available to the CSP industry and the lack of validation for any metrology technique against either a trusted metrology technique or ground-truth article.

Proposals in this topic area must plan to use an available third-party platform for new tool validation.

Proposals must put forward a plan to make new tools available to the industry.

The Areas of Interest for Topic Area 2 Metrology and Standards include but are not limited to:

Subtopic 2a) Development/Automation

The Areas of Interest for Subtopic Area 2a include but are not limited to:

• The development of new opto-mechanical in-situ tools, or adoption/improvement of opto-mechanical in-situ tools (such as automation) for solar field operation. Attributes of such tools should include:

o Ability to measure shape deviation, slope error, canting error and tracking error o Automatic operation o Fast assessment speed

• The development of new opto-mechanical quality calibration, or adoption/improvement of opto-mechanical in-situ tools (such as automation) after installation that will provide quality assurance of an installed heliostat fields to achieve the target performance at the design point.

Attributes should include:

o Accommodating in-situ conditions during construction o Minimal manual operation or automatic operation o High-precision calibration o Fast calibration process

• The development of new opto-mechanical quality assurance tools, or adoption/improvement of opto-mechanical in-situ tools (such as automation) for mass production (may be specific to individual specific mass production line). Attributes of such tools should include:

o Ability to measure shape deviation, slope error and canting error o Automatic operation o Fast assessment speed

Subtopic 2b) Evaluation and commercialization

Areas of interest for Subtopic 2b include:

• The needs of standards supporting future deployment of heliostats and associated solar field technology has been identified as high priority (Tier 1 or 2) in the HelioCon roadmap study report. Addressing multiple standards and forming an international team are highly encouraged.

The efforts shall lay out a plan that may include:

o Forming an international team with stakeholders from research institutes and relevant industries, requiring at least one research institute and one industrial entity from the U.S.

o Drafting guidelines o Identifying available metrology tools and models o Organizing round robin tests of available metrology tools and models o Carrying out case studies o Engaging international societies such as the IEA SolarPACES and IEC

• Commercialization of tools and models developed or under development by HelioCon members, which are summarized in the newly released HelioCon annual report.

• Third party evaluation of new components, models, tools and heliostat products using capabilities available at HelioCon’s national lab members NREL and Sandia National Laboratories.

Topic 3: Components and Controls

Heliostats comprise static and dynamic components (reflective area, a control system, and the mounting and tracking mechanism) operating in a highly controlled manner to provide accurate solar flux pointing.

These components and their control represent numerous opportunities for cost control, both in actual cost and in reliability, maintenance costs, and lifetime.

Recent efforts have improved some component designs to lower the costs of customized components such as the drive system, which can account for up to one-third of the total heliostat cost1. Drives

1 Coventry, J. and Pye, J., 2014. Heliostat cost reduction–where to now?. Energy Procedia, 49, pp.60-70.

remain one of the most expensive components in a heliostat system, accounting for approximately 50% of the SETO’s $50/m2 cost target for heliostats. Mirror facets also account for a high proportion of heliostat component cost that could be improved to reduce levelized cost of energy and levelized cost of heat. Commercially available heliostat mirrors (including adhesives and supports) represent nearly 50% of SETO’s $50/m2 cost target2.

Alternative materials and components are being considered to reduce heliostat weight, while improving rigidity and control and reducing costs. Additionally, resilient control of the heliostat is required for adjustment of heliostat structure so it can accurately track sun position to reflect concentrated sunlight toward a receiver. Wireless and closed-loop controls have become increasingly attractive for new installations as they offer potential cost savings and enhanced performance. Heliostat durability and reliability are not well characterized but are of key importance to ensure high performance and safe operation over the designed lifetime. Component degradation, particularly for drives, mirrors, and electronics are also not well documented in literature but are critical for predicting long-term system performance and planning, as well as financing system O&M.

As detailed in the HelioCon Roadmap, several obstacles to reliable, low cost and high performing components and controls exist. Composite materials and other advanced structures are necessary to reduce weight, increase reliability and lifetime with lower costs associated with fabrication, transportation, and deployment. Lower cost mirror designs are needed with comparable performance to existing glass mirrors. Wireless control system approaches could reduce up-front capital expenditure through minimized wire and conduit use and installation as long as new failure or reliability issues are avoided. Additionally, the ability to use closed loop controls for automated calibration, could reduce commissioning time and O&M hours, reduce drive requirements, and reduce overall costs.

The Areas of Interest for Topic Area 3 Components and Controls include but are not limited to:

• Research that focuses on the development of structural composite mirrors where potential areas of interest are: A) performance improvements over the baseline solar-weighted specular reflectance of 93%3, B) reduced overall facet cost while maintaining baseline specular reflectivity of 93%, C) Demonstration of composite facet integration that can result in reductions to LCOE.

For example, a composite facet with increased reflectivity may cost more in terms of $/m2 but, if cost increase is minimized, can still result in LCOE reductions due to higher system performance.

• Research that focuses on demonstrating hardware and software for advanced controls which can achieve higher flux performance and auto alignment/calibration processes. Hardware can include the development of in-situ sensors that enable rapid auto alignment/calibration.

Topic 4: Field Deployment

Field deployment captures all activities required to establish a functioning solar field, from site selection.

capitalization and permitting, field layout, on-site assembly and field installation, field commissioning, operations and maintenance and end-of-life disposal/recycling. The non-trivial issue in field deployment optimization is that each deployment is site specific and heliostat specific, and for this reason

2 Gauche, P., Shultz, A., Stapp, D., Sullivan, S., Ho, C.K., Turchi, C., Zhu, G., Yellowhair, J. and Mehos, M., 2019. US DOE Gen3 and SunShot 2030 Concentrating Solar Power R&D: In search of $0.05/kWh autonomy and seasonal storage (No. SAND2019-14225C). Sandia National Lab.(SNL-NM), Albuquerque, NM (United States) 3 Solar-weighted specular reflectivity Is representative of unsoiled 4mm back-silvered glass mirrors. 1-mm or laminated glass mirrors can achieve higher specular reflectivities of 94%-96%.

innovations may not translate from one deployment to another. Still, through the gap analysis completed in the HelioCon Roadmap, field deployment cost reductions can derive from optimal learning rates, heliostat design features that facilitate ease of installation, and improvements in installation and O&M processes.

Primary obstacles to achieving optimized field deployments include the following:

• Investor risk: Deficits between projected and actual power production, installation time and quality, reliability issues, and past issues with permitting related to community opposition or wildlife encounters remain prominent in the minds of investors and utilities which demands increased rigor on the part of developers to provide assurance of performance and compliance with federal, state, and local land use requirements.

• Industrial process heat: CST may provide an economic means of producing decarbonized heat for industrial processes without the efficiency losses inherent in electric to thermal conversion.

However, heliostat fields and receiver towers may not be familiar to or well-conceptualized by the industries hoping to decarbonize. The opportunities and challenges of heliostats over other types of collectors or photovoltaics are not well understood and new industry-centric tools to quickly provide architypes, performance models, and technoeconomic analysis for new and retrofit industrial field layouts are needed to remove barriers for market adoption.

• Deployment-specific costs: Costs specific to field deployment and O&M are not well understood due to the limited number of deployments over a relatively long period of time and the uniqueness of each deployment. It is therefore difficult to quantitatively identify the most impactful opportunities for cost reductions such as automated washing systems, wireless communications, wireless photovoltaic power, and towerless calibration methods.

The Areas of Interest for Topic Area 4 Field Deployment include but are not limited to:

• Interactive mapping tools that improve site selection based on key performance and deployment criteria such as weather data, protected sites, water sources, and environmental factors.

• Feasibility studies for high-temperature (>500°C) industrial sites interested in replacing fossil fuel-based heating with solar thermal systems in existing industrial brownfields. Options can include a variety of solar energy sources, but must include at least one heliostat field and tower layout. Feasibility studies must include analysis of field deployment costs, operation and maintenance costs, and heliostat costs, as well as investigations of ordinance and permitting challenges. Priority consideration will go to proposals with a pathway to implementation.

• Waterless cleaning systems for heliostat facets. Solutions may be novel or may improve on previously developed technology.

• Reliability studies that analyze service life, failure modes, maintenance schedules impacting the delivered energy to the receiver over the lifetime of the plant. Studies should include technoeconomic and life-cycle analysis of life-extension programs informed by key findings.

Empirical studies on existing assets are of interest.

Topic 5: Techno-Economic Analysis (TEA)

TEA uses models and analysis to quantitatively assess the benefits of heliostat design, manufacturing, and operation concepts for HelioCon. A central objective of this topic is to relate the cost and performance of heliostats and heliostat components to the overall plant performance.

There are no items to address in this round of the HelioCon RFP. However, use of TEA or life cycle assessment (LCA) or other probabilistic modeling in proposals to other topic areas when beneficial is encouraged.

Topic 6: Resource, Training, and Education

Resource, Training, and Education encompasses resources, practices, programs, and opportunities to provide newcomers with an adequate knowledge base and training to conduct R&D efforts; help outsiders join the workforce; and foster a productive, healthy, and fulfilling environment for all workers.

Accessibility of institutional knowledge, training/reference material, and industry data among the existing and future workforce is key to supporting the growth of the industry. Supporting university and student involvement in the industry through professional development opportunities and curriculum development is necessary for establishing a stable workforce pipeline. Increasing public awareness of the technology area and future demand will help to expand the community involved in the industry.

Major gaps in RTE that have been identified include:

• Lack of programs and guidance for promoting Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion and engaging underserved communities in the industry

• Lack of heliostat technology related research projects in universities

• Little public awareness/visibility of heliostat technologies and CSP

• Available heliostat technology resources are not easily accessible to the public

• Little exposure of students in Science Technology Engineering Mathematics (STEM) fields to heliostat technologies and CSP

• Insufficient curriculum and training materials on heliostat fundamentals for newcomers to the field or new workers in R&D or plant O&M

The Areas of Interest for the Resources Training and Education Topic Area include but are not limited to:

• Development of publicly available online education modules teaching fundamentals of CSP and heliostats that can be incorporated into education institute course curriculum or can be used for training purposes for new workers. Proposals should leverage existing RTE resources, such as those available on https://heliocon.org/.

3. AWARD INFORMATION

AVAILABLE FUNDING: Up to $3 million in total funding is available to fund multiple projects solicited in this RFP pending appropriations, program direction, and go/no-go decision points. The total funding of $3 million is expected to fund 4 to 8 projects. Individual awards may vary between $250,000 and $1,000,000 total.

https://gcc02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fheliocon.org%2F&data=05%7C01%7CMark.Mehos%40nrel.gov%7Cf9ea2ef759c64d15545d08dbd4b0117a%7Ca0f29d7e28cd4f5484427885aee7c080%7C0%7C0%7C638337624902698020%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=te9%2B%2BCxKnYpptsPq0oKvTJjydw0h9i8sqNbynxKwkr4%3D&reserved=0

PERIOD OF PERFORMANCE: Proposals are requested for a 1-2 year period of performance. If a multi-year project is proposed, continuation beyond year 1 may be contingent upon several elements, including satisfactory performance and annual Go/No-Go decision review. At the Go/No-Go decision points, NREL would evaluate project performance, project schedule adherence, the extent milestone objectives are met, compliance with reporting requirements, and overall contribution to the program goals and objectives. As a result of this evaluation, NREL may, at its discretion, authorize the following actions: (1) continue to fund the project, contingent upon the availability of funds; (2) place a hold on go-ahead for the project, pending further supporting data or funding; or (3) end the subcontract because of insufficient progress, change in strategic direction, or lack of funding.

4. PRICE PARTICIPATION REQUIREMENTS

PRICE PARTICIPATION: The price participation for Topic Area 2, Metrology and Standards, Subtopic 2b) Evaluation and commercialization must be at least 50% of the total allowable costs for research and development projects (i.e., the sum of the Federally funded share, and the recipient share) and must come from non-federally funded sources. The price participation for all other topics/subtopics must be at least 20% of the total allowable costs for research and development projects (i.e., the sum of the Federally funded share, and the recipient share) and must come from non-Federally funded sources.

Offerors may propose higher amounts of price participation, which may be in the form of cash or in-kind contributions. Cash contributions include, but are not limited to personnel costs, fringe costs, supply and equipment costs, indirect costs, and other direct costs. Allowable in-kind contributions include but are not limited to the donation of time or the donation of space or use of equipment.

Example – 20% price participation: The following is an example of how to calculate price participation amounts for a project with $1,000,000 in federal funds with a minimum 20% non-federal price participation requirement:

• Formula: Federally funded share ($) divided by Federally funded share (%) = Total Project Cost o Example: $1,000,000 divided by 80% = $1,250,000

• Formula: Total Project Cost ($) minus Federally funded share ($) = non-federally funded share o Example: $1,250,000 minus $1,000,000 = $250,000

• Formula: Non-federally funded share ($) divided by Total Project Cost ($) = non-federally funded share (%) o Example: $250,000 divided by $1,250,000 = 20%

Upon selection for award negotiations, Offerors are required to provide additional information and documentation regarding their price participation contributions.

5. INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY

Successful Offerors to this Request for Proposals (RFP) will gain access to HelioCon activities, including workshops, annual review meetings, and seminars. Each selected awardee will be required to become a

HelioCon Consortium Member and sign on to the HelioCon Consortium Agreement and Non-Disclosure Agreement. Current Consortium Members working on the project have all signed the Consortium Agreement and are already Consortium Members. The provisions of the HelioCon Consortium Agreement have been designed to meet the needs of the HelioCon Consortium and are non-negotiable and no-changes will be accepted. The HelioCon Consortium Agreement is attached. Members are included in discussions on research needs, have distinct IP rights and obligations, and have regular contact with researchers at the national laboratories.

6. ELIGIBILITY

Offerors may include for-profit businesses, Educational Institutions, or non-profit businesses. Foreign entities are eligible to propose as a Prime Contractor for Subtopic 2b only. Foreign entities may propose as a subprime for all topics. Non-eligible entities include NREL, Sandia, U.S. Federally Funded Research and Development Centers, U.S. Federal Government Organizations, state or local government entities, foreign National Laboratories, and foreign Government organizations.

FAR 52.225-1 Buy American -Supplies may be applicable to this procurement if the Offeror is furnishing Supplies as defined by FAR 2.0. The 3 factors determining Buy American applicability are (1) the nation in which the supplies are manufactured (2) where the supplies are delivered or utilized, and (3) who pays for the supplies.

Multi-investigator teams may be needed to achieve the aggressive goals set forth by the HelioCon Roadmap report. Investigators are strongly encouraged to seek and describe links and intended collaborations with existing HelioCon supported researchers along with their engagement with the Heliostat Consortium. Information about existing HelioCon research can be found at https://www.heliocon.org.

Support from the national labs (NREL and Sandia) should be considered to assist with testing, consultation, and narrow analysis support. Support from the national labs should not constitute a joint research project. Note that NREL and Sandia will not be eligible to receive awards or subawards under this RFP, but the facilities and expertise at NREL and Sandia can be utilized to support projects. Lab scope will be negotiated upon selection to meet available resources. Please refer to Addendums A and B on national lab capabilities and for Lab Points of Contact.

7. COMPETITIVE SOLICITATION USING BEST VALUE SELECTION

This Solicitation shall be conducted using Best Value Selection that results in the selection of submitted proposals for potential subcontract award that is most advantageous to NREL based on the best value combination of (a) evaluated qualitative merit and (b) evaluated price of the proposals submitted.

Best Value Selection is based on the premise that, if all proposals are of approximately equal qualitative merit, the award will be made to those with the lowest evaluated price. However, NREL will consider selecting proposals with a higher evaluated price if the offer demonstrates the difference in price is commensurate with the higher qualitative merit. Conversely, NREL will consider selecting proposals with a lower evaluated qualitative merit if the price differential between it and other proposals warrants doing so.

8. DATA SHARING

All project proposals are required to include a plan to submit findability, accessibility, interoperability, and reusability (FAIR) compliant data.

9. PROPOSAL RESPONSE CONTENT AND FORMAT

Proposals must be submitted using the appropriate Word template attached to this document (Addendum C) and available at https://www.heliocon.org. Full Technical Proposals: Full technical proposals are strictly limited to 14 pages. References, 2-page resumes, letters of support, and current/pending support should be appended to the proposal file and are excluded from the page limit.

No information outside of the maximum page count will be considered. Anything after the page limit will be cut before the proposals are sent to review.

SECTION

MAXIMUM

PAGE COUNT DESCRIPTION

Technical Volume 15 See Section 9.1 below

Cover Page 1 See section 9.1.1 below.

Project Overview 1 The section should summarize the project goal and provide background on the Offeror’s organization. See Section 9.1.2

Technical Description, Innovation, and Impact

This section should be a summary of the proposed project’s technical relevance and expected outcomes, its technical feasibility, and the specific innovation and potential impact. See section 9.1.3

Project Work Plan 5

This section should include the following subsections:

I. Overview

II. Tasks & Deliverables

See section 9.1.4 below.

Project Team and

Resources

This section should include Team Qualifications and

Resources. See section 9.1.5 below.

Additional Supporting

Documentation See section 9.2 below.

Commented [WP1]: @Mehos, Mark Clarified with Jeff.

By page limit, do we mean maximum total page count or section page count? It’s been done both ways. We just need to make it clear.

Commented [MM2R1]: @Peters, William Total page count

Commented [WP3R1]: Changed.

mailto:mmehos@nrel.gov mailto:wpeters@nrel.gov

References and

Bibliography 2 See section 9.2.1 below.

Resumes/CVs 2 pages per person See section 9.2.2 below.

Letters of Commitment

1 page maximum for each

See section 9.2.3 below.

Proposed Deliverables

Milestone Payment

Schedule

1 page maximum for each

See section 9.2.4 below.

Price/Cost Proposal No Limit See Section 9.2.5 below

Representations &

Certifications for

Subcontracts/Purchase

Orders

N/A See section 9.2.6 below.

Conflicts of Interest

Representations/Disclosure N/A See section 9.2.7 below.

9.1 Technical Volume Section Descriptions – Total 15 pages maximum

9.1.1 Cover Page

The proposal must include a cover page that includes:

• The Request for Proposal title and number

• The Project Title

• The Lead organization’s name and principal investigator (with postal address, telephone numbers, and email address)

• A list of the Partners participating in the project and any other collaborating individuals or institutions. Note: NREL and Sandia will not be eligible to receive awards or subawards under this RFP, but the facilities and expertise at NREL and Sandia can be utilized to support projects.

• Any statements regarding confidentiality

• Acceptance or change/exception with reason to the Sample Subcontract Schedule, Appendix B Standard Terms and/or Appendix C intellectual property terms and conditions. The offeror shall explain any proposed change/exception with respect to the sample subcontract schedule and terms and conditions. Any proposed change/exception must contain sufficient amplification and justification to permit evaluation. Such proposed changes/exceptions will not, of themselves, automatically cause an offer to be termed unacceptable. However, many proposed changes/exceptions or one or more significant exceptions not providing any obvious benefit to the NREL or the Department of Energy may result in rejection of such offer as unacceptable. In addition, the cover letter shall include a summary statement indicating acceptance of the statement of work or any change with the reason(s). Also, indicate your intent to accept the HelioCon Consortium Agreement and Non-Disclosure Agreement as is.

• Anticipated period of performance. .

9.1.2 Project Overview

A Project Overview is suggested to include:

o Project Goal: The Offeror should explicitly identify the overarching goal of the project, including the HelioCon gap addressed by the project, the targeted improvements to the state-of-the-art, and the critical success factors in achieving the stated goal.

o Background: The Offeror should discuss the background of their organization, including the history, successes, and current research and development status (i.e., the technical baseline) relevant to the technical topic area being addressed.

9.1.3 Technical Description, Innovation, and Impact

In this section, give a detailed description of:

o Relevance and Outcomes: The Offeror should provide a detailed description of the technology or approach, including the scientific and other principles and objectives that will be pursued during the project. This section should describe the relevance of the proposed project to the goals and objectives of the RFP, including the potential to meet specific DOE technical targets or other relevant performance targets. The Offeror should clearly specify the expected outcomes of the project.

o Feasibility: The Offeror should demonstrate the technical feasibility of the proposed technology and capability of achieving the anticipated performance targets, including a description of previous work done and prior results.

o Innovation and Impacts: The Offeror should describe the current state of the art in the applicable field, the specific innovation of the proposed technology, the advantages of proposed technology over current and emerging technologies, and the overall impact on advancing the state of the art/technical baseline if the project is successful. Offerors should clearly define the target markets for the technology being developed, how the proposed technology relates to existing or competing technologies, and how the outcomes of the project will be made available to the private and/or public sector, including current members of HelioCon. Offerors should include data or references to support cost, performance or other relevant claims made in the proposal.

9.1.4 Statement of Project Work Plan

o Project Objectives: The Offeror should provide a clear and concise (high-level) statement of the goals and objectives of the project as well as the expected outcomes.

o Technical Scope Summary: The Offeror should provide a summary description of the overall work scope and approach to achieve the objective(s). The overall work scope is to be divided by performance periods that are separated by discrete, approximately annual decision points. The Offeror should describe the specific expected result of each performance period.

o Work Plan: The Workplan should describe the work to be accomplished and how the Offeror will achieve the milestones, will accomplish the final project goal(s), and will produce all deliverables. The Workplan is to be structured with a hierarchy of performance period (approximately annual), task and subtasks, which is typical of a standard WBS for any project. The Workplan shall contain a concise description of the specific activities to be conducted over the life of the project. Task descriptions should consist of: A distinct title, description of the activities, Potential risks or barriers and approaches for overcoming them, and Key personnel or resources.

o Milestone Summary: The Offeror should provide a summary of appropriate milestones throughout the project to demonstrate success. A milestone may be either a progress measure (which can be activity based) or a SMART technical milestone. SMART milestones should be Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Relevant, and Timely, and must demonstrate a technical achievement.

o Go/No-Go Decision Points: The Offeror should provide a summary of project-wide Go/No- Go decision points at appropriate points in the Workplan.

o End of Project Goal: The Offeror should provide a summary of the end of project goal(s). At a minimum, each project must have one SMART end of project goal.

9.1.5 Project Team and Resources

Teaming Overview: Strong team composition, available resources and capabilities, and effective leadership and coordination are vital components of a successful proposal. Please address the Project Leader and Key Personnel qualifications, including past experience and subject matter expertise. This section should clearly address the relevant evaluation criteria (see Section 10), highlighting the following:

• How this team is uniquely suited to achieve the project objectives

• Description of Offeror team member capabilities including any relevant materials and equipment that will be available at the start of the project.

• How the Offeror firm will make decisions (i.e., which research areas are most important to pursue, whether any new capabilities are needed, etc.)

• Identification of any non-federal resources that are expected to be leveraged by the consortium in pursuit of its goals (See Non-Federal Resources and Industry Effort below).

• If applicable, list lab support requested from national lab. List the capabilities within each lab that this proposal seeks to utilize (See Addendums A and B). Provide a brief rationale of the benefit to the project of the use of these capabilities.

9.2 Additional Supporting Documentation

9.2.1 References and Bibliography

Relevant references may be cited, but do not include copies of referenced articles in the electronic submission in response to this RFP.

9.2.2 Resumes/CVs

Abbreviated (2-page maximum per person) resumes should be supplied for at least the primary investigator at each Subcontractor institution and, optionally, the coinvestigator. (Submitted resumes shall not include Social Security Numbers). Resumes are not included in the final page count.

9.2.3 Letter of Commitment

Letters of Commitment from other entities listed in the proposal are suggested. Letters of commitment for the price participation are required If the price participation is coming from a 3rd party.

9.2.4 Tasks and Deliverables - Required from each Offeror

This section should specifically delineate what work each Offeror will perform. The price should reflect the scope of work requested in this RFP.

Deliverables:

Should a subcontract be awarded by NREL, the Offeror will be reimbursed for deliverables achieved by the project team and received by NREL during the negotiated period of performance (1 to 2 years). The deliverables should be challenging but achievable. They should also be achieved within the proposed period of performance (1-2 years) by the Offeror. It is important that the task structure supports the proposed deliverables and that the proposed deliverables are of high value. Deliverables will be reported directly to NREL.

In addition to project-specific deliverables, HelioCon requires several program-related deliverables to ensure objectives are met.

Note that the following deliverable requirements should be planned and budgeted:

• A deliverable that describes the current state of research, development, and/or product at the Offeror Organization is due within the first 4 months.

• Brief quarterly reports (max 10 pages) and presentations documenting progress, summarizing the current status of Subcontractor’s projects, tracking Subcontractor impacts on the industry and research community, and providing a financial update.

• Participation in meetings. These are held at approximately annual intervals with specific time and locations to be determined. Successful participation requires attendance, presentation (oral or poster), and submission of a project summary report. Travel to the two annual workshops is required.

• All projects are required to upload data to HelioCon and work with the data team to ensure full compliance with open data requirements.

• A Final Project Deliverable, due at month 12 or 24 or 36 (depending on Period of Performance, that includes:

o A final report, suitable for public dissemination, detailing the accomplishments of the project.

o A final deliverable that demonstrates the achieved level of progress with respect to the defined objectives.

Example Deliverable Table:

Deliverable No.

(Year #)

Associated

Task(s) No.

Deliverable

Description

Due Date

(Quarter, Year)

Proposed

Deliverable Payment

1.1 1 Initial Report Q0, Y1 $200,000

1.2 1 Quarterly Report Q1, Y1 $10,000

1.3 1 Quarterly Report Q2, Y1 $10,000

1.4 1, 2 Quarterly Report Q3, Y1 $10,000

1.5 1, 2 Quarterly Report Q4, Y1 $30,000

2.2 1 Project Specific

Deliverable

Q2, Y1 $50,000

2.6 1

Project Specific

Deliverable

Q4, Y1

$10,000

3.4 1, 2, 3 Final Project Report Q4, Y3 $10,000

3.5 1,2,3 Final Project Deliverable Q4, Y3 $100,000

9.2.5 Price/Cost Proposal (no limit)

A completed “Price/Cost Proposal Form” with a minimum 50% for Topic 2(b) and 20% price participation (cost share) for all other topics/subtopics in an electronic copy (converted to PDF file) is required.

Documentation to support all elements of your proposed price (cost) for the minimum price participation (cost share) but higher cost share is encouraged. What your organization chooses to submit should clearly show the price participation elements/components of your proposal. Letters of commitment for the price participation are required if the price participation is coming from a 3rd party.

An individual offeror’s price (cost) proposal standard format can be used if the data included is substantially the same as the NREL form. The offeror’s price (cost) and delivery terms must be valid for 120 days from the date of the offer. The price (cost) proposal should include support documentation for all categories of the proposed price (cost).