Amendment No. 1 to SUB-2020-10121 - 2020 Distributed Wind Turbine Competitiveness Improvement Project.pdf

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

Request for Proposals Number SUB-2020-10121

AMENDMENT NO. 1

"2020 Distributed Wind Turbine Competitiveness Improvement Project”

Amendment Issue Date: 03/13/20 Due Date for Proposals: 04/21/20 **Revised** Time Due: 2:00pm Mountain Time

1. Solicitation Type Best Value Selection Fixed Price with Price Participation

Submit offers to the NREL RFP Contact below

2. NREL RFP Contact Kyndall Jackson, Subcontract Administrator National Renewable Energy Laboratory 15013 Denver West Parkway, MS RSF 030 Golden, CO 80401 Phone: (303) 275-4253 Email: Kyndall.Jackson@nrel.gov

Amendment No. 1 is hereby issued in response to questions received regarding the subject Request for Proposal (RFP) No. SUB-2020-10121. Please note that some questions may have been edited to address duplicate questions or to protect business-sensitive information provided in the original questions. The essences of the original questions are not affected. Questions are in no particular order.

1. Would NREL consider extending the submission deadline due to closures, delays, and health challenges this month related to COVID-19?

NREL Response: Due to the concerns and circumstances surrounding COVID-19, NREL is extending the due date by three (3) weeks. Proposals are now due on Tuesday, April 21st at 2:00 pm Mountain Time.

2. Can an Offeror submit a proposal under Component Innovation for design & manufacturing of a new component or set of components or subsystem and submit a second Proposal for the Testing of that Hardware under Prototype Testing?

NREL Response: That would not be recommended. A project must start shortly after the subcontract is awarded and is expected to be implemented over a defined time period. Under the proposed concept, prototype testing of the new component could not start until the development identified under the Component Innovation was completed. Historically CIP funding cycles have been provided annually to address the understood need for support during the different stages of a product development process.

mailto:Kyndall.Jackson@nrel.gov

3. If an Offeror is in the middle of a fund-raising effort and proposes a very attractive price participation contribution (>>20% Minimum) assuming they will raise a given amount of funds and then fall short on the expectations to the point where they simply cannot contribute as much as expected when the proposal was prepared, is there an option of walking away or renegotiating?

NREL Response: NREL expects that an Offeror will meet or exceed the details provided in their proposal and we evaluate the proposals with this thought in mind. If an Offeror is unable to meet the proposed price participation this would affect the scoring of that proposal after the fact and may remove that proposal from those that were selected for award. The Offeror does have the right/ability to withdraw the proposal at any moment up to the signing of the agreement. In NREL’s view, an Offeror would be better served to propose a project that can be funded and leads to a clearly defined result, using any additional funds that may be available to expand or improve the product outside of the procurement effort.

4. Can an Offeror apply with two proposals and, if not, whether two proposals from two affiliated companies would be accepted? (dealing with same technology but focusing on two different topics)

NREL Response: Yes, offerors can submit proposals for multiple topic areas but linkages between these topics should be clearly defined and the success of the projects should not be co-dependent.

5. Can an Offeror apply as an individual with an intention to form a US company to assemble, sell and service 500 kW turbines?

NREL Response: An individual can apply as a sole proprietor company though they would still be required to demonstrate the resources, facilities and capabilities of a team to undertake the work identified in the proposal.

6. An Offeror has long been pursuing a pre-prototype turbine path and has developed now a prototype (first gen) turbine. What portion of the offer is best suited for the Offeror to pursue under this opportunity? The Offeror understands that in some regards they are past certain parts, however, believe that more focus on component development may be an area that needs more pursuit, however the prototype needs much more testing. The Offeror believes the component development path would then become evident through that process.

NREL Response: It is not possible for NREL to make recommendations relating to potential proposals. Please review the different RFP tasks carefully and determine which topical area fits best with the level of product development an Offeror is in. It is not advised to submit multiple proposals for different topical areas for essentially the same work if an Offeror is unsure of which topical area would be the most appropriate.

7. Is it possible for an Offeror to submit two separate applications relating to two different topics of research (e.g, prototype testing, and system optimization), but each relating to the same subject matter (eg. development scope of the same technology/product)?

NREL Response: Yes, Offerors can submit proposals for multiple topic areas but linkages between these topics should be clearly defined and the success of the projects should not be co-dependent. Proposals that are ambiguous, seem to articulate similar or even conflicting work, such as proposing prototype testing and system optimization on the same set of components, should be avoided.

8. Is it possible for two associated organizations (e.g. strategic R&D and Manufacturing partners) to submit separate applications relating to two different topics of research (e.g, prototype testing, and system optimization), but relating to the same subject matter (e.g, development scope of the same technology/product)?

NREL Response: Yes, multiple Offerors can submit proposals for different topic areas for the same product but linkages, if any, between these topics should be clearly defined and the success of one project should not be dependent on the other. Care should also be taken to eliminate any potential development or timeline conflicts, such work to improve a component which may require new product certification while undertaking cocurate manufacturing improvement efforts on the same components. See question 3 and 6.

9. Section 6.5.3 of the Request for Proposal document on page 8 reads:

d. Evidence that the turbine testing can be completed at the testing facility within eighteen (21) months. This evidence shall include site wind speed histogram and an evaluation of the need for site calibration if the site is not certified for testing. Should it be 18 or 21 months?

NREL Response: It is intended to be twenty-one (21) months consistent with the SOW.

10. Does the “technical assistance” offered in the next round of CIP only apply to specialized skillsets or test capability that could only reasonably be found at NREL. Specifically interested in dyno testing on 225kW unit. Would that fall under technical assistance?

NREL Response: Generally technical assistance provided by NREL will only be for services that cannot be found elsewhere within the industry. Read the information on technical assistance carefully. While dyno testing could be considered as a technical assistance item there is no guarantee that requested technical assistance will be available. It depends on equipment, personnel and funding availability. If an NREL provided service is determined to be critical to the success of the project, clearly specify what is needed as an appendix to the application.

11. If an Offeror is able to test on the dyno, through one funding source or another, can/will the

225kW be connected to the CGI? If not CGI can they grid connect the system while on the 225kW to fully test their drive train and power electronics?

NREL Response: NREL expects to have the capability to setup the small dyno with the ability to have the test article connected to the NREL Controllable Grid Interface (CGI).

That said, read the information on technical assistance carefully. While dyno testing could be considered as a technical assistance item there is no guarantee that requested technical assistance will be available. It depends on equipment, personnel and funding availability. If an NREL provided service is determined to be critical to the success of the project, clearly specify what is needed as an appendix to the application.

12. Please clarify whether the topics "Pre-Prototype Development" & "Prototype Testing" are open to component development and testing as opposed to full turbine systems. Or whether such development and testing is limited to the "Component Innovation" topic. Specifically, if an Offeror plans to develop an electronic component for small wind turbines (the converter system that connects the wind turbine alternator to grid power), can it be submitted under the "Pre- Prototype Development" topic?

NREL Response: Pre-prototype. The Request for Proposal and Statement of Work specifically indicate that a component can be the focus of a pre-prototype development proposal. However, an Offeree must identify an associated turbine which the component is intended for and it is highly desirable that the turbine OEM is an active participant in the proposal. In essence the participation of a turbine OEM indicates that there is a defined market for the component. If there are other potential turbine vendors or applications for which the component may be applicable, this should also be articulated. The inclusion of bench or sub-scale component testing is allowed within the pre-prototype development proposal. Prototype testing is intended for the whole system but should be targeted at better understanding or addressing concerns around specific components or subsystems. A component manufacturer could lead a prototype testing effort but integration into a full turbine system is expected and the turbine OEM would be expected to participate on the proposal.

13. Pre-Prototype Development question.

Minimum price participation is 20%. Part of an Offeror’s proposal may be the construction and testing of a pre-prototype unique patent pending wind turbine. The Offeror has a wind site with pole barn workshop available for third party rental. If an Offeror can have the third-party owner waive their rental fee, can that waived fee be considered a contribution from the Offeror's supplier at no cost to NREL and a part of the 20% minimum price participation?

NREL Response: Yes, company provided space can be used as in-kind contributions to the price participation but needs to be appropriately documented. For instance, documentation showing that the space was normally rented for the amount claimed would be needed.

14. For the pre-prototype and prototype testing categories, are materials allowable expenses? This would be either for building early system versions to help refine the design in the pre-prototype category, or for building the actual prototype to be tested in the prototype testing category.

NREL Response: Yes, with proper documentation. All costs must be reasonable, allowable and allocable under the terms of the Federal Acquisition Regulations and DOE Acquisitions Regulations.

15. Is it possible to apply for Topic Areas 4 and 5 in regard to the same application, meeting the goals of the Topic Area 4 from the 1st to 6th month and then Topic Area 5 from months 6 to 12, subject to positive results on Topic Area 4? Is there any concern regarding the time element with an offeror seeking to achieve results in less than a year?

NREL Response: No. Proposals that cover multiple topical areas do not conform with the stated terms of the request for proposal and will not be considered. Additionally, Topic Area 5 (Certification Testing) are for products that are ready for certification or listing and a concurrent or overlapping proposal for Topic Area 4 (System Optimization) would indicate that the system was not ready for certification testing. An Offeror may submit proposals with development timelines shorter than the request for proposal however our experience is that these contracts usually take longer than expected. Historically CIP funding cycles have been provided annually to address the understood need for support during the different stages of a product development process.

16. Does the 20-page limit for the technical proposal include the following?

*letter(s) of commitment: No

*Turbine specifications: Should be referenced in the document but may be included as an appendix *Deliverables summary table: No *Figure of Merit: Should be referenced in the document but may be included as an appendix *Eligibility Verification: Should be included as an appendix *Representations and Certifications for Subcontracts/Purchase Orders: Should be included as an appendix *Organizational Conflicts of Interest Representation Statement: Should be included as an appendix

17. Could you provide direct links to the correct Appendices, including the applicable NREL Standard

Terms and Conditions: Appendix B-2 dated 12/15/16; NREL Intellectual Property Provisions:

Appendix C-2 dated 03/26/12 – these are now dated 3/1/20; please confirm which versions apply to this RFP?

NREL Response: NREL’s Terms and Conditions were updated effective 03/01/20, please reference these in your proposal. Disregard the previous versions dated 12/15/16 and 03/8/26/12. Please continue to use this link to reference the T&Cs:

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

18. Could you clarify what rules on “Cost Participation” apply – in the RFP, p.2, Section 4 ends with this statement: “Offerors are encouraged to include any materials, supplies, or equipment in their price participation.” Are there any hard rules regarding which cost items must be applied to each party in the contract, and if there are any limits on how much NREL funding can be spent on equipment, materials, or supplies?

NREL Response: All costs must be reasonable, allowable and allocable under the terms of the Federal Acquisition Regulations and DOE Acquisitions Regulations. All costs associated with the proposal must be associated with the proposed work. The percentages outlined in the RFP apply to the overall cost, not to any specific party (offeror or lower tier sub). There are no specific limits as to how much can be spent on certain elements of the cost proposal.

19. Does NREL prefer a majority of CIP funding to be spent by applicants in-house, i.e. are proposals to direct most of the CIP funding to vendors and suppliers less preferable?

NREL Response: There is no preference in the merit criteria on how funding is allocated.

20. In the RFP (under section 6.5.1-Certification testing) it asks for AEP at 5.5 m/s. This is not consistent with other references to 6 m/s for the LCOE calculations.

NREL Response: Use 6 m/s at 30 m hub height for all AEP and LCOE calculations. If an

Offeror has a higher or lower hub height use the provided 0.25 shear exponent adjustment.

As a reminder, each proposal must be submitted as an electronic PDF file by 2:00 p.m. Mountain Time on 04/21/20. Please send submissions to Kyndall.Jackson@nrel.gov.

Please include confirmation of receipt and acceptance of this Amendment in your cover letter.

Thank you for your interest in this project. We look forward to receiving your proposal!

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

Submit offers to the NREL RFP Contact below