Request for Proposal RFX-2025-10021.pdf

National Renewable Energy Laboratory Managed and Operated by the Alliance for Sustainable Energy, LLC

Request for Proposals (RFP) RFX-2025-10021

“Fundamental Aerodynamics for Large Wind Turbine Performance and Reliability”

REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL

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:

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)

Issue Date: 01/16/2025 Due Date: 03/17/2025 Time Due: 5:00 p.m. Mountain Time

Technical questions must be received in writing no later than 02/07/2025

Written questions concerning this solicitation document and its requirements will be answered in writing. In response to technical questions, NREL will issue an amendment to this solicitation document that will formally provide all the questions and answers. The amendment will be posted to beta.sam.gov.

1. Solicitation type Best Value Selection Firm Fixed Price with Price Participation

Submit offers to and request information from the NREL Contact below

2. NREL RFP Contact: Kyndall Jackson, Subcontract Administrator

National Renewable Energy Laboratory 15013 Denver West Parkway, MS: RSF030 Golden, CO 80401 Email: Kyndall.Jackson@nrel.gov

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

http://www.nrel.gov/workingwithus/forms.html https://www.nrel.gov/workingwithus/standard-terms.html mailto:Kyndall.Jackson@nrel.gov

3. Project description

Background and Objective: Modern wind turbines are the largest rotating machines ever built by humankind,1 and continued innovation to lower the energy cost and enhance plant power production requires validated modeling and simulation capabilities that mitigate the financial risk of technology innovation and deployment barriers.

Wind turbine scale and hence blade size have grown significantly over the last decade.

Large turbines (>10 MW in power, >100 m in blade length) have been deployed offshore, and the size of land-based turbines is also expected to increase. Efforts to design and model larger turbines to the performance and reliability targets desired by industry are exposing the limits of the aerodynamic sciences knowledge base. Two examples are (1) the lack of aerodynamic data for contemporary airfoils in the Reynolds number range at which large turbines operate and (2) the lack of aerodynamic data for situations that drive blade and turbine loads—and therefore reliability and resilience—in nonoperational conditions; loads in nonoperational conditions are starting to drive blade structural design and turbine system requirements (e.g., component strengths, battery backups) and are also important in transportation safety scenarios.

One of the U.S. Department of Energy’s Wind Energy Technologies Office’s (WETO’s) strategic priorities is to overcome the cost and risk barriers to the commercial liftoff of such large turbines. The National Renewable Energy Laboratory’s (NREL) portfolio of research and development (R&D) efforts in the past has included projects to characterize and model the above-mentioned phenomena so the industry can design effectively. The R&D community in general has hit the knowledge/validation data barrier that the lack of above-mentioned data represents. Consequently, WETO has mobilized funding from the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law (BIL) and Base Appropriations to support a fundamental R&D effort to overcome these barriers. NREL will lead/manage “Aerodynamics of Large Turbines” (ALTius) resulting from this RFP with the following goals:

• Collect and disseminate benchmark airfoil aerodynamic data to validate and improve the tools/models that assure the performance of next-generation wind turbine blades.

• Provide data to validate modeling and simulation tools to predict the behavior of nonoperational wind turbine rotors, e.g., when they are stopped for installation, maintenance, or idling (during the passage of extreme weather).

• Inform the wind industry with physical insights that advance modeling capabilities to minimize the risks and costs of next-generation wind turbines.

The RFP is organized by objectives into two (2) different topic areas of interest:

Topic Area 1: High Reynolds Number Airfoil Aerodynamics Validation Datasets Offerors shall create and execute an experimental test program that delivers foundational, validation-quality aerodynamic measurements across a Reynolds number range of 3–20 million for a set of modern wind turbine natural laminar flow airfoils, one of which will be predetermined.

The test program will have four (4) parts:

1. Airfoil design/selection

2. Primary high Reynolds number testing (to reach 20 million) with a minimum test matrix to be conducted at the National Full-Scale Aerodynamics Complex (NFAC) 40-foot by 80-foot wind tunnel facility, owned by the federal government and operated by the U.S.

Department of Defense.

3. Secondary testing at facility of subcontractor’s choice with one mandatory component.

1 Veers, P., K. Dykes, E. Lantz, S. Barth, C.L. Bottasso, O. Carlson, A. Clifton, et al. 2019. “Grand Challenges in the Science of Wind Energy.” Science 366(6464): eaau2027. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aau2027.

https://www.arnold.af.mil/About-Us/Fact-Sheets/Display/Article/409302/national-full-scale-aerodynamics-complex/ https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aau2027

4. Optional additional high Reynolds number testing at NFAC, including with proprietary test articles and options.

Topic Area 2: Aerodynamic Characterization of Nonoperational Loads Phenomena Offerors shall design and execute experiments to characterize the 3D unsteady aerodynamics of a wind turbine blade in a state representative of conditions that drive wind turbine nonoperational loads, viz., standstill/stall- or vortex-induced vibrations.

Proposal submissions should address individual topic areas. Offerors may submit one

(1) proposal for each topic area as the lead/prime, however, offerors may be a lower tier on multiple proposals. Do not submit proposals that combine topic areas.

Eligibility information:

To be considered for substantive evaluation, an offeror’s submission must meet the criteria set forth below. If the proposal does not meet these eligibility requirements, it will be considered ineligible and removed from further evaluation.

Eligible Offerors

The proposed prime recipient and subrecipient(s) must be domestic entities. The following types of domestic entities are eligible to participate as a prime recipient or subrecipient of this RFP:

1. Institutions of higher education;

2. For-profit entities;

3. Nonprofit entities; and

4. State and local governmental entities and Indian Tribes.

To qualify as a domestic entity, the entity must be organized, chartered, or incorporated (or otherwise formed) under the laws of a particular state or territory of the United States; and have a physical place of business in the United States.

DOE/NNSA, Non-DOE/NNSA FFRDCs are not eligible to apply for funding either as a prime recipient, or as a subrecipient; the Department of Defense is not eligible to apply as a prime recipient or a subrecipient due to the involvement of their test facilities.

Entities banned from doing business with the U.S. government, such as entities debarred, suspended, or otherwise excluded from or ineligible for participating in federal programs, are not eligible.

Nonprofit organizations described in Section 501(c)(4) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 that engaged in lobbying activities after December 31, 1995, are not eligible to apply for funding.

Performance of Work in the United States

1. Requirement All work performed under awards issued under this RFP must be performed in the United States. The prime recipient must flow down this requirement to its subrecipients.

2. Failure to Comply If the prime recipient fails to comply with the Performance of Work in the United States requirement, DOE may deny reimbursement for the work conducted outside the United States and such costs may not be recognized as allowable recipient cost share. The prime recipient is responsible should any work under this award be performed outside the United

States, absent a waiver, regardless of whether the work is performed by the prime recipient, subrecipients, contractors or other project partners

Proposals Specifically Not of Interest The RFP primary intent is to collect and disseminate experimental wind tunnel aerodynamic data for the purpose of validating and developing/improving relevant physics modeling in design/analyses methods and tools. The types of proposals that will be deemed nonresponsive and not reviewed or considered include and are not necessarily limited to:

• Proposals that fall outside the technical parameters and expectations specified in Topic

Areas 1 and 2 of the RFP.

• Iterative proposed technologies that are not based on sound scientific principles (e.g., violates the laws of thermodynamics).

• Proposals proposing to develop new wind turbine concepts or architectures, including new or highly innovative airfoil and blade designs that are not representative of contemporary airfoil and blade design technologies used by industry.

• In Topic Area 2, development of vibration detection or mitigation technologies (active or passive).

• Development of new computational fluid dynamics (CFD) code platforms and/or airfoil or blade design (or optimization) tools/codes intended to advance the current state of the art.

Modifications to existing modeling and analysis tools necessary to support test planning, design, execution and verification—especially for constituent physics models (like turbulence or transition, to improve Reynolds number scaling accuracy)—are permitted.

• Proposals (or proposed tasks/subtasks) on the following topics that do not sufficiently justify their maturity for, and how they are essential to, achieving the RFP’s data collection objectives:

o Advanced materials development or usage of materials at low technology/manufacturing readiness levels in the development of test articles that do not have a proposal-related use history and may be considered a technical risk.

o Development of new manufacturing techniques for use in test article fabrication. Use of such techniques is welcome.

o Development of innovative instrumentation to characterize aerodynamic performance, including velocity, pressure, structural loading, and flow visualization methods intended to advance the current state of the art. Use of innovative instrumentation is welcome.

o Development of advanced data collection systems offering innovative capabilities used in support of proposed instrumentation and flow measurement systems. Use of advanced data collection systems is welcome.

o Development of innovative data methods used for data synthesis, analysis, and archiving. Use of innovative data methods is welcome.

4. Proposed subcontract award and period of performance

The Alliance for Sustainable Energy, LLC has entered into Contract No. DE-AC36- 08GO28308 with the Department of Energy (DOE), an agency of the U.S. Government, for the management and operation of the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (hereinafter called “NREL”). All references to “NREL” in this solicitation shall mean the Alliance for Sustainable Energy, LLC.

The anticipated period of performance is execution through thirty-six (36) months.

The estimated budget for each topic area per award from NREL is as follows:

Topic Area 1 Maximum $4,750,000 Topic Area 2 Maximum $1,500,000

Note that only for Topic Area 1, Part 2 (Minimum test matrix at NFAC), WETO will cover operational costs at NFAC directly via an interagency agreement (IAA). Operational costs for NFAC and any other facility for all other tasks will need to be planned as part of the proposed work.

A minimum price participation of 10% is required for each topic area. Price participation is defined as a percentage of the total allowable and allocable costs under this subcontract, which may be met by contributions by the offeror and/or by contributions from the offeror’s lower-tier offeror(s) or supplier(s) at no cost to NREL. All costs must be allowable and allocable under the terms of the Federal Acquisition Regulations and DOE Acquisitions Regulations. The price participation must come from non-federal sources unless otherwise allowed by law.

Offerors are encouraged to include any company-owned materials, supplies, or equipment in their price participation.

Price participation is not required for institutions of higher education and nonprofit organizations. This waiver is granted per a determination made pursuant to 2 CFR 910.310(b)(2) that it is necessary and appropriate to eliminate the cost sharing requirement for institutions of higher education and nonprofit organizations for this research and development activity.

5. Competitive negotiated subcontract using Best Value Selection

This solicitation shall be conducted using Best Value Selection that results in an award that is most advantageous to NREL and DOE based on the best value combination of (a) evaluated qualitative merit, (b) evaluated price (cost) of the offers submitted, and (c) additional factors for evaluation provided in Section 9 of this document.

Best Value Selection is based on the premise that, if all offers are of approximately equal qualitative merit, an award will be made to the offeror with the lowest evaluated price (cost). However, NREL will consider awarding to an offeror with a higher evaluated price (cost) if the offer demonstrates the difference in price (cost) is commensurate with higher qualitative merit. Conversely, NREL will consider awarding to an offeror with a lower evaluated qualitative merit if the price (cost) differential between it and other offers warrant doing so.

6. Mandatory Qualifications

To be considered a “responsive offeror,” the following minimum criteria must be met.

These criteria are not evaluated but are instead “pass/fail” criteria. NREL reserves the right to ask clarifying questions of the offerors as necessary to determine responsiveness to this RFP. Offerors’ proposals that do not meet the mandatory qualifications will not be evaluated or considered further for award under this solicitation.

# Qualification Submission Requirement

4.1 Demonstrated ability of team to develop, fabricate, conduct quality assurance, and instrument large-scale test articles (wind tunnel test, field testing)

Previous project summaries

4.2 Ability to work with external testing facilities

to support test article integration and compliance with facility safety and operational protocols

Previous project summaries

4.3 If an airfoil design effort is proposed, then a

demonstrated ability of team to design and validate natural laminar flow airfoils that are being used in modern utility-scale wind turbines (2 MW+)

Previous project/personnel summaries

4.4 If preexisting airfoils are proposed for testing, demonstrate their performance against target metrics as specified in the SOW

Airfoil evaluation vs. provided metrics, or use in product described in technical volume certified by OEM (partner)

4.5 Limit use of Topic Area 1 award funds for

facility refurbishments and upgrades to secondary testing objective only

Program budget justification that shows upgrade/refurbishments spends limited to secondary testing task/goal

7. Qualitative merit criteria for Best Value Selection

The Statement of Work (Attachment 1 or 2) for each topic area in this Request for Proposal (RFP) serves as NREL’s baseline requirement that must be met by each offeror.

For offerors that meet the mandatory qualifications stated above, NREL will evaluate submitted proposals using the qualitative merit criteria stated below to determine which offer(s) represent the best value to NREL. The qualitative merit criteria establish what NREL considers the technical factors in an offer. These qualitative merit criteria are performance-based and permit selection of a higher priced offer that provides higher qualitative merit.

The following qualitative merit criteria for each topic area will be used to determine the technical value of the offer in meeting the objectives of the solicitation. Sub-criteria are not individually weighted but are factors in the overall weighting.

Criterion 1: Technical Merit, Innovation, and Impact (50%) This criterion considers the following factors:

Technical Merit and Innovation

• Extent to which the proposed project demonstrates its understanding of the primary phenomena underlying the modeling challenges in the two topic areas, and the consequential experimental data requirements needed to develop/validate relevant simulation models, e.g., for Topic Area 1, those necessary to predict (high) Reynolds number scaling.

• Technical strength and innovation in the formulation of the experimental tests, and associated data analyses/modeling activities with respect to effectiveness in use as a) validation benchmarks and b) basis for modeling advancements.

• Adequacy and ability of the proposed testing facilities to achieve the ultimate objective of collecting high-fidelity aerodynamic performance data.

• Extent to which the proposals align with the science objective and phenomena prioritization (via relevance and comprehensiveness of data and its delivery) expressed in the respective Topic Areas (vs. For example: facility investments)

• Degree to which the proposal incorporates (with supporting arguments) advancements in state of the art in test article fabrication, instrumentation, data quality assurance, and data analyses in creating high-quality aerodynamic datasets, and their use for modeling advancements.

• Extent to which the project’s choices of airfoils/blades in its test articles represent contemporary state of the art in wind turbine aerodynamics.

• The extent to which any computational modeling in the technical approach includes a validation plan or evidence of validation, including the source of validation data, and justification for the relevance and quality of that data.

Impact Potential

• Extent to which the project demonstrates that its delivered data and project outcomes will impact design/operation of modern large turbines.

• Potential impact of the project on advancing the state of the art in experimental and/or modeling techniques.

• Extent to which the project facilitates stakeholder relationships and hence can drive future collaboration in the specific topics in the Wind R&D community.

Criterion 2: Project Approach (25%)

Project Approach, Workplan

• Degree to which the approach and critical project path have been clearly described and thoughtfully considered.

• Discussion and demonstrated understanding of the key technical risk areas involved in the proposed work and the quality of the mitigation strategies to address them.

• Degree to which key test article fabrication and instrumentation approaches are sufficient and include quality assurance to ensure realization of intent.

• Degree to which task descriptions are clear, detailed, timely, and reasonable, resulting in a high likelihood that the proposed workplan will succeed in meeting the project goals.

Project Management

• Adequacy of proposed project management systems, including the ability to track scope, cost, and schedule progress and changes.

• Adequate safety plan and experience in managing complex tests in a safe manner.

• Reasonableness of budget and spend plan as detailed in the budget justification workbook for proposed project and objectives.

• The offeror has identified risks and challenges of the project, regulatory and financial aspects of the proposal including possible mitigation strategies; adequate contingency plan/funding based on quality of estimates (cost, risk).

• Adequacy, reasonableness, and soundness of the project schedule, as well as periodic Go/No-Go decisions prior to further funds disbursement, interim milestones, and metrics to track process.

Data, Metrics, and Deliverables

• Relative to a clearly defined project baseline, the strength of the quantifiable metrics, milestones, and midpoint deliverables defined in the proposal, such that meaningful interim progress will be made and communicated.

• Coordination of all data deliveries (raw, processed, structure, access), test configurations, calibration reports, deliverables, and publications to the DOE/WETO Wind Data Hub to facilitate complete access and reproducibility.

• Comprehensiveness of project notification and knowledge dissemination plan.

Criterion 3: Team Capabilities, Experience and Resources (25%)

• The offeror and their team have the qualifications, experience, capabilities, and other resources necessary to complete the proposed project, assisted by sufficiency of technical detail in the proposal to assess offeror’s past work/experiences related to the mandatory qualifications 4.1 to 4.3: test article development, testing at external facilities, airfoil design.

• Capability and prior experience of the project manager and the team lead(s) to safely manage a multi-party program with a high probability of success; this will include qualifications, relevant expertise, and time commitment of the individuals on the team.

• Extent of industry buy-in and support of the proposed project: ranging from direct participation (levels) to indirect means (results adoption and use to accelerate impact, quality and approach support etc., which may be conveyed in part by letters of support).

• Diversity of expertise in team to cover all aspects of proposed work: aero design, testing, modeling.

• Level of participation by project participants as evidenced by letter(s) of commitment and how well they are integrated into the workplan.

8. Price (cost) evaluation for Best Value Selection

After evaluation of the qualitative merit criteria, the following price (cost) evaluation will be used to determine the best value of the offer in meeting the objectives of the solicitation.

The combined qualitative merit value will be considered substantially more important to the price (cost).

9. Evaluation process

NREL will evaluate offers in two general steps:

Step One—Initial Evaluation An initial evaluation will be performed to determine if all required information has been provided for an acceptable offer. Offerors may be contacted only for clarification purposes during the initial evaluation. Offerors shall be notified if their offer is determined unacceptable and the reasons for rejection will be provided. Unacceptable offers will be excluded from further consideration.

Step Two—Discussion, Selection, Negotiation, and Award All acceptable offers will be evaluated against the Statement of Work (Attachment 1 or 2) and the qualitative merit criteria listed above. Based on this evaluation, NREL has the option, depending on the specific circumstances of the offers received, to use one of the following methods of selection:

a. Make individual selection(s), conduct negotiations, and make an award(s);

b. Conduct parallel negotiations with all offerors and make award(s).

c. Conduct discussions with all offerors, select successful finalists, conduct parallel negotiations with successful finalists, and then make award(s);

d. Conduct discussions with all offerors, conduct parallel negotiations with the finalists, select successful finalist(s), and then make award(s);

e. Select successful finalists, conduct successive negotiations, and make successive selections and awards.

f. Make no award(s).

10. Additional factors for evaluation

The Source Evaluation Team will consider program factors in making a final negotiation rank order within the competitive range. The program factors will not be weighted.

Program factors include:

• The degree to which the proposed project, including proposed cost share/price-participation, optimizes the use of available DOE funding to achieve the RFP objectives.

11. Proposal preparation information

Proposal submissions should address individual topic areas. Offerors may submit multiple proposals for multiple topic areas. Do not submit hybrid proposals that combine topic areas.

a. The proposal must include a title page, including the RFP title and number, topic area being proposed on, name of your organization and principal investigator (with postal address, telephone number and email address). The title should be succinct and capture the essence of your offer. The technical proposal with its title page, along with all components of the proposal and other required documents as described sections b through m below shall each be provided as separate PDF files (provided in a compressed or “zipped” folder, preferred).

b. Formatting instructions

- A page is defined as one side of an 8 ½” x 11” sheet of paper.

- Use a 12-point font.

- Maintain at least 1-inch margins on all sides.

- Technical proposal and cost proposal must be in separate sections.

- Include the following notice on your title page:

“Notice for Handling Proposals:

This proposal shall be used and disclosed for Alliance/NREL and Government evaluation purposes only. Any authorized restrictive notices which the Offeror places on this proposal shall also be strictly complied with. Disclosure of this proposal outside the Government, Alliance/NREL, Alliance/NREL consultants, or other national laboratories personnel for evaluation purposes shall be made only to the extend authorized by, and in accordance with, the procedures in DEAR 915.207-70 and, as applicable stated in the procurement solicitation document for source evaluation and selection process.

Upon completion of the evaluation, the evaluator shall certify in writing to the Source Evaluation Team Chairperson that all copies of this proposal have been destroyed and/or deleted from any electronic device, medium or storage location with the exception of those retained in the procurement file or in the case of successful offeror(s) in the project management file.”

c. An electronic PDF file must be submitted by 5:00 p.m. MDT on 03/03/25 to Kyndall.Jackson@nrel.gov. The submission must include RFX-2024-10021, the project title “Fundamental Aerodynamics for Offshore Wind Performance and Reliability” and the specific topic area in the subject line (For example: “RFX-2024- 10021 - Fundamental Aerodynamics for Offshore Wind Performance and Reliability – Topic Area 1”. If submitting for multiple topic areas, please submit one email submission for each topic area.

d. A technical proposal shall be submitted directed toward meeting the requirements of NREL’s Statement of Work (Attachment 1 or 2) and qualitative merit criteria (see item 6 above).

The technical proposal shall be organized in the following sections:

Section No.

Description File format

Page limit

File name

1. Technical Volume (Not including cover page)

PDF 20 Organization Name_Technical Volume

2. Resumes

PDF 3 pages each

Organization Name_Resumes

3. Letters of Commitment

PDF 1 page each

Organization Name_Letters_of_commitment

4. Summary of Relevant Tests and Experiences

PDF 5 pages max

Organization Name_Experiences

5. Cost share

PDF 1 Organization Name_Cost Share

6. Transparency of Foreign Connections

PDF 1 Organization Name_TFC

Each sections page limit shall include all text, graphics, charts, attachments, appendices, addendums, indices, exhibits, If the page limit is exceeded, NREL at its sole discretion, reserves the right to remove pages from the sections of any nonconforming submittals to bring each nonconforming submittal within the page count. The Technical Volume must conform to the following content and form requirements and address the technical review criteria as discussed in Section 7 of the RFP.

Technical Volume Content Requirements

SECTION/PAGE

LIMIT

DESCRIPTION

Cover Page The cover page should include the project title, the specific Topic Area being addressed (if applicable), both the technical and business points of contact, names of all team member organizations, names of project managers, Senior/Key Personnel and their organizations, the project location(s), and any statements regarding confidentiality.

mailto:Kyndall.Jackson@nrel.gov

Technical Overview and Description (Approximately 50% of the Technical Volume)

This section should contain the following information:

• Describe how the design/selection of the test subjects (across the full scope of proposal) fits with the RFP objectives.

• In the testing plan, explicitly identify, and demonstrate understanding of, the experimental scope needed to validate and develop models necessary to accurately model the phenomena being targeted.

• Demonstrate usage of and experience with advanced instrumentation and data analysis techniques necessary to collect/interpret the high-fidelity aerodynamic data.

• Thoroughly describe the test article development approach (design, fabrication) and integration of instrumentation and data collection systems.

• Describe the modeling techniques and results to be used to define test configurations, plans, and instrumentation;

define expected testing limits and sensitivity assessments to facility characteristics that may need correction (e.g., blockage, directional anomalies, turbulence levels, etc.) or augmented testing.

• Describe how the secondary test design/plan (if any proposed) will complement primary testing and contribute to the primary objectives of the RFP.

• Describe the expected accuracy/features of the data systems and planned measurements with respect to requirements for validation/development of new or improved modeling approaches.

• Describe expected concept of integration and operations for integration with test facilities/teams.

• Describe additional aligned outcomes if any that may be pursued during the project in addition to the principal objectives of the RFP, e.g., modeling improvements using the experimental data.

• Feasibility and risk: Demonstrate the technical feasibility of the proposed technology and capability of achieving the anticipated performance targets; potential technical risks that could prevent achieving the expected experimental outcomes and mitigation steps that address these risks should be described.

• Innovation: Describe the specific innovations proposed, any advantages over current and past similar research, and the overall impact on advancing the state-of-the-art/technical baseline if the project is successful.

• Describe how this funding and work synergizes with prior/current/anticipated funding from other public and private sources to solve the key challenges highlighted in this RFP.

Workplan (Approximately 30% of the Technical Volume)

The Workplan should contain the following information:

• Technical Scope Summary: description of the overall work scope and approach to achieve the objective(s), to be divided into discrete, major program elements, with chronology of activities, containing Go/No-Go decision points as applicable.

• The specific expected end result of each program element, including milestones and deliverables.

• WBS and Task Description Summary:

o Describe the outcomes, and how the offeror will achieve the milestones, accomplish the final project goal(s), and produce all deliverables.

o To be structured with a hierarchy of performance period (approximately annual), tasks, and subtasks.

o The descriptions shall be a full explanation and disclosure of the project being proposed (i.e., a statement such as “we will then complete a proprietary process” is unacceptable).

o It is the offeror’s responsibility to prepare an adequately detailed task plan to describe the proposed project and the plan for addressing the objectives of the RFP.

• Milestone and Go/No-Go Decision Point Summary:

o A milestone may be either a progress measure

(which can be activity based) or a Specific, Measurable, Attainable, Realistic, and Timely (SMART) technical milestone that demonstrates a technical achievement rather than simply completing a task.

o The minimum requirement is that each project must have at least one milestone per half-year for the duration of the project with at least one SMART technical milestone per year with verification measure identified.

o The offeror should identify which milestone becomes a project-wide Go/No-Go decision point in the Workplan, and the specific technical criteria used to evaluate the project. Typically, each project will have at least one project-wide Go/No-Go decision point for each budget period (12–18 months).

• Project Schedule (Gantt Chart or similar).

• Project Management: The offeror should discuss the team’s proposed management plan, including the following:

o The overall approach to and organization for managing the work, process for making decisions on technical direction.

o The roles of each project team member; any critical hand-offs/interdependencies among project team members.

o The technical and management aspects of the management plan, including systems and practices, such as financial and project management practices.

o The approach to project risk management, including a plan for securing a qualified workforce and mitigating risks to project performance.

o A description of how project changes will be coordinated with NREL and implemented.

o If applicable, the approach to quality assurance/control.

o How communications will be maintained among project team members.

Technical Qualifications and Resources (Approximately 20% of the Technical Volume)

This section should contain the following information:

• The offeror should discuss the background of their organization(s), relevant to the technical topic, using project/experience summaries in appendices to elaborate if necessary:

o Qualifications, experience, capabilities, and other pertinent information to successfully completing the proposed project.

o Previous experience in developing aerodynamic test articles to create validation quality performance datasets.

o Previous experience conducting wind tunnel experiments in government/external wind tunnel or other functionally similar testing facilities.

o Prior experience demonstrating the PI and project team have the skill and expertise to plan, manage risk and complexity, execute safely and completely.

o Prior experience working together as teaming partners on prior projects or programs.

• A description of the project team’s proposed equipment and facilities that will facilitate the successful completion of the proposed project.

• Relevant, previous work efforts, demonstrated innovations, and how these enable the offeror to achieve the project objectives.

• The time commitment of the key team members to support the project.

• For multi-organization projects, describe succinctly:

o The roles and the work to be performed by the project manager and senior/key personnel at the prime and sub levels.

o Business agreements between the offeror and subrecipients o Data dissemination and publication arrangements.

o Intellectual property issues and constraints.

Resumes

A resume provides information reviewers can use to evaluate an individual’s skills, experience, and potential for leadership within the scientific community. Offerors must submit a resume (limited to three pages) for each Principal Investigator or Lead Project Manager and Senior/Key Personnel that includes the following:

1. Contact information;

2. Education and training: Provide name of institution, major/area, degree, and year for undergraduate, graduate, and postdoctoral training;

3. Research and professional experience: Beginning with the current position, list professional/academic positions in chronological order with a brief description. List all current academic, professional, or institutional appointments, foreign or domestic, at the offeror institution or elsewhere,

4. Awards and honors;

5. A list of up to 10 publications most closely related to the proposed project.

6. Synergistic activities: List up to five professional and scholarly activities related to the proposed effort; and

7. There should be no lapses in time over the past 10 years or since age 18, whichever period is shorter.

8. As an alternative to a resume, it is acceptable to use the biographical sketch format approved by the National Science Foundation (NSF). The biographical sketch format may be generated by the Science Experts Network Curriculum Vita (SciENcv), a cooperative venture maintained at https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sciencv/, also available at https://nsf.gov/bfa/dias/policy/nsfapprovedformats/biosketch.pdf. The use of a format required by another agency is intended to reduce the administrative burden to researchers by promoting the use of common formats. Save Resumes in a single PDF file using the following convention for the title: “Organization Name_Resumes”

Letters of Commitment

Submit letters of commitment from all subrecipient and third-party cost share providers.

If applicable, the letter must state that the third party is committed to providing a specific minimum dollar amount or value of in-kind contributions allocated to cost sharing. The following information for each third party contributing to cost sharing should be identified:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sciencv/ https://nsf.gov/bfa/dias/policy/nsfapprovedformats/biosketch.pdf

(1) the name of the organization; (2) the proposed dollar amount to be provided; and (3) the proposed cost sharing type (cash or in-kind contributions).

Letters of support or endorsement for the project from entities that do not have a substantive role in the project will not be accepted.

Save Letters of Commitment in a single PDF file using the following convention for the title: “Organization Name_LOC”

e. A completed “Price/Cost Proposal” form shall be submitted with the offer (see NREL website above). An individual offeror’s price (cost) proposal standard format can be used if the data included are substantially the same as the NREL form. The offeror’s price (cost) and delivery terms must be valid for 90 days from the date of the offer. The price (cost) proposal should include support documentation for all categories of the proposed price (cost). The price (cost) proposal should separate price (cost) for lower-tier subcontractor(s) and include support documentation for all categories of the proposed lower-tier subcontractor(s) price (cost).

f. Proposals should include a completed Deliverable Summary Table (Attachment 6).

g. Proposals should include a completed “Representations and Certifications for

Subcontracts/Purchase Orders” form (see NREL website above).

h. Proposals should include EITHER the “Organizational Conflicts of Interest

Representation Statement” OR the “Organizational Conflicts of Interest Disclosure Statement”, as applicable per the “Instructions for Completion of Organizational Conflicts of Interest Statement – Disclosure or Representation Statement”. The forms and instructions are located at the following link:

i. A cover letter including a summary statement indicating acceptance of the proposed Statement of Work (Attachment 1 or 2) or any change with the reason(s) shall be included with the proposal. The cover letter should also include whether the offeror is accepting or proposes a change/exception (with reason) to the subcontract schedule, the standard terms and conditions and/or the intellectual property terms and conditions in the appendices (see section 12). The offeror will explain any proposed change/exception with respect to the 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, a large number of 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.

j. This solicitation does not commit NREL to pay costs incurred in the preparation and submission of a proposal in response to this RFP.

k. This solicitation requires the submittal of electronic proposals.

12. Solicitation Provisions—full text provided

a. Late submissions, modifications, and withdrawals of offers Offers, or modifications to them, received from qualified organizations after the latest date specified for receipt may be considered if received prior to award, and NREL determines that there is a potential price (cost), technical, or other advantage, as compared to the other offers received. However, depending on the circumstances surrounding the late submission or modification, NREL may consider a late offer to be an indication of the offeror’s performance capabilities, resulting in downgrading of the offer in the technical evaluation process. Offers may be withdrawn by written notice received at any time before award. Offers may be withdrawn in person by an offeror or an authorized representative if the representative’s identity is made known and the representative signs a receipt for the offer before award.

b. Restrictions on disclosure and use of data

Offerors who include in their proposals data that they do not want disclosed to the public for any purpose or used by the government or NREL, except for evaluation purposes shall—

1. Mark the title page with the following legend:

“This offer includes data that shall not be disclosed outside the government or NREL and shall not be used or disclosed—in whole or in part—for any purpose other than to evaluate this offer. If, however, a subcontract is awarded to this offeror as a result of—or in connection with—the submission of this data, the government or NREL shall have the right to duplicate, use, or disclose the data to the extent provided in the resulting subcontract. This restriction does not limit the government or NREL’s right to use information contained in this data if obtained from another source without restriction. The data subject to this restriction are contained on pages [insert page and line numbers or other identification of pages] of this offer”; and

2. Highlight (in yellow) the proprietary data on each page it wishes to restrict and add the following footer:

“Use or disclosure of data contained on this page is subject to the restriction on the title page of this offer.”

c. Notice of right to receive patent waiver (derived from DEAR 952.227-84) and technical data requirements.

Offerors (and their prospective lower-tier subcontractors) in accordance with applicable statutes and Department of Energy Acquisition Regulations, (derived from DEAR 952.227-84) have the right to request a waiver of all or any part of the rights of the United States in inventions conceived or first actually reduced to practice in performance of the subcontract that may be awarded as a result of this solicitation, in advance of or within thirty (30) days after the effective date of subcontracting. Even where such advance waiver is not requested or the request is denied, the subcontractor will have a continuing right during the subcontract to request a waiver of the rights of the United States in identified, individual inventions.

Domestic small business firms, educational institutions, and domestic nonprofit organizations normally will receive the clause: Patent Rights - Retention by the Subcontractor, which permits the offeror to retain title to subject inventions, except in subcontracts involving exceptional circumstances or intelligence activities. Therefore, domestic small business firms, educational institutions, and domestic nonprofit organizations normally need not request a waiver.

If an offeror’s proposal includes a lower-tier subcontract to another organization, that lower-tier organization's business type will determine the applicable intellectual property provisions that will apply to the lower-tier subcontract. Note that a lower-tier subcontractor may apply for a patent waiver under the same conditions as the offeror.

Under a research, development, and demonstration project, the Department of Energy and NREL are unable to ascertain, prior to receipt of offers or performance of the project, their actual needs for technical data. It is believed that the requirements contained herein are the basic needs of the Department of Energy and NREL.

However, if the offeror indicates in its proposal that proprietary data will be used or withheld under its proposed effort, the Department of Energy and NREL reserve the right to negotiate appropriate rights to the proprietary data. The appropriate rights may include "Limited Rights in Proprietary Data" and/or "Subcontractor Licensing."

d. Disclaimer

NEITHER THE UNITED STATES; NOR THE DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY; NOR

ALLIANCE FOR SUSTAINABLE ENERGY, LLC; NOR ANY OF THEIR

CONTRACTORS, SUBCONTRACTORS, OR THEIR EMPLOYEES MAKE ANY

WARRANTY, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, OR ASSUME ANY LEGAL LIABILITY OR

RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE ACCURACY, COMPLETENESS, OR USEFULNESS

FOR ANY PURPOSE OF ANY OF THE TECHNICAL INFORMATION OR DATA

ATTACHED OR OTHERWISE PROVIDED HEREIN AS REFERENCE MATERIAL.

e. Solicitation disputes

The General Accountability Office and the Department of Energy do not accept or rule on disputes for solicitations for Requests for Proposals issued by Management and Operating Contractors for the Department of Energy (operators of Department of Energy National Laboratories). Should an offeror have any concerns regarding the NREL solicitation process or selection determination, the offeror may contact Mark Barela, Advocate for Commercial Practices, at (303) 384-7559. NREL will address each concern received from an offeror on an individual basis.

f. Prohibition on use of certain telecommunications and video surveillance services or equipment per the John S. McCain National Defense Authorization Act Section 889(a)(1)(B)

In accordance with the John S. McCain National Defense Authorization Act Section

889(a)(1)(B), NREL is prohibited from contracting with any offeror that uses, and/or whose lower-tier subcontractor(s) use, covered telecommunication equipment or services as a substantial or essential component of any system, or as a critical technology of any system, on or after 08/13/2020, unless an exception applies or a waiver is granted. This includes such equipment or services from five Chinese companies: Huawei, ZTE Corporation, Hytera Communications, Hangzhou Hikvision, and Dahua Technology.

g. Compliance with Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act (found at 29 U.S.C. 794d)

The requirements of Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act apply to NREL’s procurement of all electronic and information technology (EIT) and any development, maintenance, or use of EIT.

13. Small Business (Lower-Tier) Subcontracting Plan (derived from FAR 52.219-9)

The following requirement does not apply to small business offerors. This requirement only applies if offeror is notified of intent to negotiate a subcontract in response to this solicitation after the source selection process described above is complete.

Successful offerors shall be required to submit a lower-tier subcontracting plan upon notification of intent to negotiate a subcontract in response to this solicitation. The lower-tier subcontracting plan shall separately address lower-tier subcontracting with small business, small disadvantaged business, and women-owned small business concerns. If the offeror is submitting an individual subcontracting plan, the plan must separately address lower-tier subcontracting with small business, small disadvantaged business, and women-owned small business concerns, with a separate part for the basic subcontract and separate parts for each option (if any).

The plan shall be included in and made a part of the resultant subcontract. The lower-tier subcontracting plan shall be negotiated within the time specified by the NREL subcontract administrator. Failure to submit and negotiate a lower-tier subcontracting plan shall make the offeror ineligible for award of a subcontract.

Lower-tier subcontracting plan requirements can be found at the following link:

http://www.nrel.gov/workingwithus/standard-terms.html (see Appendix F)

14. Solicitation provisions—incorporated by reference—general access

This solicitation incorporates one or more solicitation provisions by reference with the same force and effect as if they were given in full text. The following documents can be downloaded from the NREL general access websites:

If requested, the NREL RFP Contact (see item 2) will make full text available upon request.

▪ NREL Standard Terms and Conditions:

- Appendix B-2 dated 01/23/23

▪ NREL Intellectual Property Provisions:

- Appendix C-1 dated 08/01/22; or

- Appendix C-2 dated 08/01/22; as applicable

▪ NREL Standard Terms and Conditions for Subcontracts in Excess of $700,000

- Appendix D dated 03/01/20

▪ NREL Small Business Lower-Tier Subcontracting Plan

- Appendix F dated 06/01/21

▪ NREL Representations and Certifications for Subcontracts/Purchase Orders

▪ NREL Price/Cost Proposal Form and Instructions

▪ NREL Conflicts of Interest Forms http://www.nrel.gov/workingwithus/standard-terms.html

15. Summary of Attachments

Attachment 1 – Statement of Work (Topic Area 1), dated 01/07/25 Attachment 1.A - NFAC Test Planning Additional Information Attachment 1.B – NFAC Testing Cost Estimates Attachment 1.C – NFAC Test Planning Guide Attachment 1.D – Open-Source Airfoil Candidates Attachment 2 – Statement of Work (Topic Area 2), dated 01/07/25 Attachment 3 – Sample Subcontract Schedule Attachment 4 – Sample Deliverable Schedule

16. NAICS Code and Small Business Size Standard

a. The North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) for this solicitation is 541990.

b. The small business size standard for 541990 – All other Professional, Scientific and

Technical Services is $15,000,000.00 in annual receipts. (Annual receipts of a concern means the annual average gross revenue for the last three fiscal years.)

17. Notice Regarding NREL Payments to Subcontractors

It is NREL’s standard practice to make all payments to domestic subcontractors via electronic (ACH) payments or…