FINAL_Selection_Statement_8-6-15-signed.pdf

Game Changing Development Program

Selection Statement

NASA Research Announcement (NRA)

Space Technology – Research, Development, Demonstration, and Infusion – 2014 (SpaceTech-REDDI-2014)

NNH14ZOA001N

Appendix NNH14ZOA001N-14GCD-C1:

Advanced Energy Storage Systems Phase II

James Reuther, Selection Official

August 11, 2015

Program Description

The goal of the Space Technology Mission Directorate (STMD) is to create new technological capabilities for science, exploration, and the nation’s technology-based economic future. STMD focuses not only on the technological advances required for NASA’s future missions in science and exploration, but also on providing space technologies that can improve the capabilities and lower the cost of other government and commercial space activities.

The Game Changing Development Program (GCDP) within STMD focuses on developing radically new approaches to the Agency’s future space missions and the nation’s aerospace needs. Successful products from GCDP will provide or lead to revolutionary advances in capability. These advances will either enable missions that cannot otherwise be accomplished or will significantly enhance mission performance from current capabilities. The objective of the

GCDP is to mature technologies starting from a Technology Readiness Level (TRL) of three-four (3-4) to five-six (5-6).

The development of high specific energy storage devices will enable NASA’s future robotic and human-exploration missions. The need for advances in energy storage and power generation technologies is captured in various roadmaps and strategic investment plans. The National

Research Council (NRC), NASA Space Technology Roadmaps and Priorities, consistently called for the increase to available power and “the elimination of the constraint of power availability for space missions by improving energy generation and storage with reliable power systems that can survive the wide range of environments unique to NASA missions”, and highlighted it as a technology having great impact across all mission objective areas.

Solicitation and Evaluation Process

The solicitation process was initiated with the release of the umbrella NRA Space Technology –

Research, Development, Demonstration, and Infusion – 2014 (SpaceTech-REDDI-2014), NNH15ZOA001N, which was posted to NSPIRES on November 1, 2013. The GCDP, Advanced Energy Storage Systems Appendix Phase II (NNH14ZOA001N-14GCD-C1-Phase II) synopsis was issued on February 4, 2015 with the Request Letters being issued on February 24, 2015 to the four Phase I awardees. Three requests were received (March 24-31, 2015) from potential new offerors for information required to propose to Phase II. The Request Letters, as well as the original appendix and copies of the Phase I contracts, were provided to two potential new offerors on March 24, 2015 and one on March 31, 2015.

This Appendix seeks the development of transformational energy storage technologies that will enable space exploration. To achieve these long-term objectives, this Appendix aims to maximize specific energy while maintaining design approaches that simultaneously maximize safety, reliability, and duty cycles. This Appendix has been divided into two categories of interest. Category One, “High Specific Energy System Level Concepts” will focus on system level battery technologies such as packaging and cell integration. Category Two, “Very High

Specific Energy Devices” will focus on energy storage technologies that have the potential to go beyond present capabilities characterized by Li+ chemistry, while maintaining the required duty cycle and safety of any system operating in space. The broader scope of Category Two recognizes solutions other than traditional electro-chemical batteries and includes energy storage devices such as ultra-capacitors. This Appendix is structured to include three (3) Phases. Four selections were made for Phase I with a period of performance of 8 months. The expected duration of Phase II is up to twelve (12) months with up to two (2) awards being made. Phase III is expected to be up to fifteen (15) months with one (1) award being made.

NASA received 7 proposals (the 4 Phase I awardees and 3 new offerors) by the submission deadline of April 30, 2015. A compliance screening was immediately conducted and no exceptions were noted.

The review process for proposals was performed in accordance with the NRA and the Evaluation

Plan for this Appendix. Each proposal was evaluated by a minimum of three (3) reviewers and the evaluations were based on the following factors:

Demonstration of Completion of Phase I Requirements

Relevance to NASA’s Objectives

Technical Approach

Management Approach, Schedule and Cost

The proposal evaluation process began with a conflict of interest screening for each of the prospective reviewers. The evaluation process continued with individual proposal reviews occurring over several weeks and culminating with the individual reviews being submitted.

After completion of the individual reviews, Technical Subject Matter Expert (SME) Panel reviews were held on June 8, 2015, to establish evaluation findings for each of the seven (7) proposals. In accordance with the Evaluation Plan, reviewers provided strengths and weaknesses for each of the four (4) review criteria and assigned a quantitative score for each criterion. The lead reviewer for each proposal led the discussion during the Technical SME Panel review meeting. The findings for each proposal consisted of the scores for each criterion, an overall score, adjective rating (Excellent, Very Good, Good, Fair, and Poor), and a qualitative assessment indicating whether the proposal was recommended by the Technical SME Panel by assigning each proposal a category color coded as follows:

Highly Selectable – Blue

Selectable – Green

Marginally Selectable – Yellow

Not Selectable – Red

On June 24, 2015, the Program Officer and Technical SME Panel Chair briefed the

Recommendation Panel on the results of the Technical SME Panel evaluation process. The

Recommendation Panel considered programmatic relevance, portfolio balance, requested funding, the infusion path to NASA’s needs, and developed its recommendation for the Selection

Official (SO), as noted below.

On July 29, 2015, the Recommendation Panel Chair briefed me, as the SO, on the panel’s recommendation.

Summary of Results

In accordance with the Evaluation Plan, quantitative scores were used to assign the proposals adjectival ratings - Excellent (E), Very Good (VG), Good (G), Fair (F), or Poor (P). The

Technical SME Panel evaluation results are provided below:

Excellent Very Good Good Fair/Poor Total Proposals

1 0 4 2 7

Of the seven (7) proposals under consideration, the Recommendation Panel recommended a total of two (2) proposals for award. One (1) proposal was recommended from Category One and was rated as Excellent. One (1) proposal was recommended from Category Two and was rated as

Good.

For the reasons noted below, two (2) proposals are selected for funding:

Selected Proposals

1.) Amprius, Inc., Silicon Anode Based Cells for High Specific Energy Li + Systems, Principal Investigator: Dr. Ionel Stefan, Proposed Value: $1,000,000

Major factors/strengths supporting the selection:

Demonstration of Completion of Phase 1 Requirements

The proposal thoroughly demonstrated achievement of all project goals during Phase I. The average performance was slightly higher than originally projected (2.77 Ah, 337 W-hr/kg, and

824 W-hr/L at C/10 discharge rate). Independent tests demonstrated sustained performance over the temperature range of 0oC to 30oC and cells have been shown to maintain better than 90% capacity retention after 200 cycles. Amprius fabricated ten cells that passed all required safety tests. The proposal demonstrated a preliminary battery concept based on an optimized cell design. The preliminary design details indicate that the as-developed battery will meet voltage, mass, and volume requirements.

Relevance to NASA’s Objectives

The proposed technology currently exceeds NASA’s goals for specific energy, cycle life, rate capability, and temperature performance. This technology has broad infusion potential across many different NASA applications (e.g. EVA, Robotic Rovers). In addition, the technology could potentially be extended to other applications that require higher cycle life or rate capability than the required 200 cycles at C/10.

The proposed technical approach addresses the need to optimize and redesign the current cells to achieve the capacity required to meet battery-level goals thus demonstrating a clear understanding of the general problem. The proposal clearly explains the technical basis/justification for the use of silicon nano-wires as the cell anode. The proposal also addresses the development risks and includes appropriate mitigation strategies.

The collaboration described in the proposal is a major strength as it adds significant value, experience, and expertise to the development effort due to the partner’s long-standing experience in manufacturing custom batteries.

This proposal is the highest rated and ranked proposal. The Technical SME Panel rated the proposal Excellent and it was found highly selectable by both the Technical SME and

Recommendation panels. It has a reasonable potential for significant advancement in this technology field.

2.) University of Maryland, Garnet Electrolyte Based Safe, Lithium-Sulfur Energy

Storage Proposal 00027437, Principal Investigator: Dr. Eric Wachsman, Proposed

Value: $947,606

Major factors/strengths supporting the selection:

Demonstration of Completion of Phase 1 Requirements

The proposal describes the first known fabrication of an all solid-state electrolyte (SSE) Li-S cell. The targeted energy density of the cells, 541 Wh/kg, is 35% greater than project goals.

During Phase I, the offeror overcame a significant hurdle in order to implementation SSE Li-S system by developing a technique to drastically reduce the interface contact resistance between

Garnet solid state electrolyte and Li metal.

Relevance to NASA’s Objectives

The infusion potential for an all-solid-state battery is high. The combination of energy density and inherent safety give solid-state batteries the potential to provide a transformative solution to crucial energy storage needs for multiple NASA’s mission applications.

The technology development plan proposed a supportable and convincing strategy to use a solid-state electrolyte (SSE) with a scalable tri-layer garnet fabrication process that integrates a Li metal anode into a battery. The novel approach provides a solution to the polysulfide shuttle and

Li dendrite growth issues that typically plague Li-S battery systems. Further the solid-state electrolyte provides intrinsic safety features not available in other available technical solutions to the problem. The proposal articulated a logical development plan for the Phase II effort. In

Phase II the proposed effort will focus on scale-up and fabrication of 10 cm x 10 cm cells with a projected specific energy of 541 Wh/kg. The stacked battery pack is unique to the ceramic SSE technical concept but will provide very good performance features in terms of mass and volume.

The offeror proposed to mature an innovative cell and cell stack design that leverages proven techniques and configurations used for solid oxide fuel cells.

The proposed team members are true world leaders in the area of solid oxide fuel cells and ceramics processing. Given the focus on a Solid State Ceramic system, this expertise will offer significant benefit to the project and increase the potential for success. The proposed team has the complementary expertise to conduct the research activities in battery chemistry.

This proposal is one of the highest rated and ranked proposals. The Technical SME Panel rated the proposal Good and it was found selectable by both the Technical SME and Recommendation panels. It has a reasonable potential for significant advancement in this technology field.

Selection Rationale

Based on the thorough evaluation of proposals by the Technical SME Panel in accordance with the evaluation criteria defined in the Request Letter for Appendix NNH14ZOA001N-14GCD-C1-

Phase II, as well as programmatic considerations, the two (2) proposals noted above are selected for funding. Of the two (2) selected proposals, one (1) was rated Excellent and one (1) was rated as Good by the Technical SME Panel. The remaining proposals submitted to this announcement are not selected.

The following proposals were rated as Good, but are not selected for the following technical and programmatic reasons:

1.) Georgia Institute of Technology, Ultra-Stable and Safe Sulfur-Lithium Cells for Space, Principal Investigator: Prof. Gleb Yushin

The specific energy projected in the proposal exceeds the project goal by 10% and the cycle life projection exceeds the goal by 300%. However, the proposal did not provide a clear explanation of what size cell was used to demonstrate the Phase I equivalent results. Lacking these specifics, it is difficult to determine the suitability and applicability of the provided data. Therefore, this proposal was assessed to represent a higher risk to NASA. In addition to the concern about the present state of the offeror’s technology, the proposal had several confusing if not conflicting passages within the technical plan that left the review team uncertain as to the immediate course of the project if awarded. Finally, the energy calculations in the proposal show cell mass, which adds up to 118%, not 100% as stated, this may have a negative impact on the proposed specific energy of 440 Wh/kg. All of these issues combined to create a degree of uncertainty around the proposal and for this reason the proposal was not selected.

2.) Trustees of Indiana University, Advanced High Energy Rechargeable Lithium-Sulfur

Batteries Phase II Principal Investigator: Dr. Yongzhu Fu

During the Phase I development activity, the offeror successfully developed and demonstrated a full battery cell system with a high capacity sulfur cathode and an areal capacity greater than 8 mAh/cm2 and a specific capacity greater than 1,000 mAh/g. This equates to a system level specific energy less than the NASA project goals as set forth in the solicitation. The Phase II proposal sets expectations for performance at 350Wh/kg, which is approximately 13% below the

Appendix goal. The offeror did not include an adequate discussion of the plans to improve the specific energy to a level commensurate with that required by this Appendix. Further, the proposal did not include a sufficient discussion of the lithium anode analysis or the anode’s cyclability. The lack of this data represents a risk for cell chemistry going into Phase II.

Therefore, for technical reasons, this proposal is not selected.

3.) Jet Propulsion Laboratory, High Energy Density, Long-Life Li-S Batteries for

Aerospace Applications, Principal Investigator: R. Bugga

The proposal acknowledged that some of the Phase I technologies did not perform as expected and alternative paths were proposed for Phase II. Due to the alternative technology paths being pursued in Phase II, a significant amount of basic research work is yet to be completed and is being proposed for Phase II, including major changes to both electrodes. This proposed approach does not clearly demonstrate how all of the objectives of Phase II can be achieved within the allocated time. In addition, the proposal did not clearly demonstrate how the hybridization of the partner and JPL concepts into a single product in one year, could meet the targeted Phase II goals. Therefore, due to both technical and programmatic reasons, this proposal is not selected.

I strongly believe that the selected proposals represent the best value to the Government and have strong programmatic relevance for the Space Technology Mission Directorate. Each of the proposals selected for award exhibits a reasonable and realistic technical scope and development cost. The awards, of the selected proposals, are subject to successful negotiations.

Approved by:

James Reuther, Date

Space Technology Mission Directorate

Deputy Associate Administrator (Programs)/Selection Official Game

8/11/2015