Pre-application Questions and Answers for Solicitation GFO-17-308:

Bringing Rapid Innovation Development to Green Energy (BRIDGE)

Written for:

Solicitation GFO-17-308 Applicants

Written By:

Energy Development and Market Facilitation Office

California Energy Commission

Date: February2018

Table of Contents

Administrative

General

Applicant Eligibility

Previous Funding Agencies/Programs

Time-Frame of Previous Projects

General Project Requirements

Technology Requirements

Match Funding

Group 1

Group 2

Administrative

  1. QUESTION: Does the submitting applicant need to be registered as aCalifornia business before submission or can the lead applicant file for California business registration following the notification/selection of awards?

RESPONSE: The submitting applicant does not need to be registered as a California business before submission of the application. However, they must be registered and in good standing prior to the execution of the agreement. See Section II.A.3 on page 21 of the solicitation manual. The Energy Commission’s Contracts Office will verify this before the final signature is obtained.

  1. QUESTION: We have received previous grants from ARPA-E and from DOE-EERE. Should we add an attachment 13 for each of the grants? Is there a benefit in submitting both grants to demonstrate the targets we met for both projects? In the ARPA-E open grant, we were the private company subcontractor. In the DOE-EERE SBIR we were the lead. I was Co-PI and PI for both grants respectively.

RESPONSE: The Attachment 13 form should be completed for the most recent and relevant grant previously awarded for the proposed technology as long as it meets the eligibility requirements (i.e., within the last 3 years and awarded by an eligible funding agency).

  1. QUESTION: Regarding attachment 13, will it be submitted to you directly or should we submit it via our proposal package?

RESPONSE: The process for submitting Attachment 13 has changed. After completing Section I, the applicant must submit Attachment 13 to the appropriate funding agency’s program director, agreement manager, or authorized representative, to complete Section II. Once completed and signed, the responding agency should submit it to efore the application deadline.

  1. QUESTION: Currently, our company has several joint development agreements with our strategic partners/customers in the architectural glass market. A large portion of these companies are equity investors as well as JDA partners. I would like to highlight all of our partnerships to demonstrate the ecosystem we have established but would not like this information to be released publicly. What is the confidentiality of the application? Can we ensure that our partner names are not released publicly? I will only get letters of support from our customer/partners if they keep their name outside the public eye?

RESPONSE: The Energy Commission will not accept or retain applications that identify any portion as confidential.An application containing confidential information or identifying any portion of the application as confidential is grounds to reject an application pursuant to Section IV.C on page 24 of solicitation manual. See also Section IV.D.3 on page 34 of the solicitation manual. While the Energy Commission doesn’t typically publicly post applications, all information is typically shared upon request.

  1. QUESTION: How are the funds going to be distributed? Will they be distributed on a monthly basis?

RESPONSE:The Energy Commission will reimburse the recipient based on invoices submitted on either a monthly or quarterly basis.

  1. QUESTION: Will distribution of the grant funds to a Prime be provided upon approval of periodic Invoices by the CEC officer that includes sub consultant team members' invoices for work during that submitted pay period? OR must the Prime first pay their sub consultant team members andthen request reimbursement from CEC through their periodic (monthly) invoices to the CEC that will be subject to CEC officer approvals?

RESPONSE:The Energy Commission will reimburse prime applicants for incurred costs (e.g., costs they are obligated to pay or have paid for work performed). The prime will then be required to pay their subcontractors within 14 days of receiving payment from the Energy Commission if they have not done so already.

  1. QUESTION: Will there be intermediate project reviews and will funding depend on the status of the project?

RESPONSE:Yes, the recipient will be required to provide regular project updates to accompany invoices, and will likely participate in regular status calls. Additionally, there will be at least one Critical Project Review meeting to determine whether the project should continue. While the Energy Commission prefers to work with the recipient to resolve any issues that arise, it is possible that a project can be stopped or cancelled.See also Attachment 6 Scope of Work Template and the terms and conditions referenced in Section I.C. on page 7 of the solicitation manual.

  1. QUESTION:Will you post the pre-proposalattendees list ASAP on the website, along with any Q&A when responded to?

RESPONSE:Yes, the participant list for the Pre-Application workshop was posted to the website, along with all other materials concerning this funding opportunity. This can be found at: http://www.energy.ca.gov/contracts/epic.html#GFO-17-308.

  1. QUESTION: I understand that 80% is the minimum spent within California. Does the evaluation give a bonus for more? Does 90% score higher than 80%?

RESPONSE:Yes. Please refer to the scoring criteria #6 on page 42 of the solicitation manual.

  1. QUESTION:What if the CEC Project Manager of original award is no longer at the CEC?

RESPONSE:Energy Commission staff can identify someone else that was aware of the previously funded project to help complete the responses for the Attachment 13 form.

  1. QUESTION:Can you explain the fringe benefits requirements please?

RESPONSE:Applicants and each major subcontractor are required to provide the maximumpercentage that will be charged during the term of the agreement for Fringe Benefits on the budget forms. A “base description,” or a formula that explains what is included for calculating Fringe Benefits, is also required on the budget forms for the applicant and each major subcontractor. Refer to the instructions on the budget template for this worksheet. NOTE: The Energy Commission does not dictate what is included in Fringe Benefits, each company is unique. However, they must adhere to General Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP) or Federal Acquisition Regulations (FAR).

  1. QUESTION:To what degree is the marketing plan and team ranked vs. the technical aspects?

RESPONSE: The marketing plan, team, and technical, aspects are evaluated under different sections of the Scoring Criteria. Both the marketing plan and technical aspectsareevaluated under the Technical Merit and Need section of the scoring criteria, which is worth the most amount of points overall. The teamis evaluated under the Team Qualifications, Capabilities, and Resources section. Proposals will be evaluated as described on page 39 of the solicitation manual so applicants should ensure they provide clear and complete responses to each item.

General

  1. QUESTION: In regards to the EPIC Program’s requirement to provide electric IOU ratepayer benefits in the form of greater reliability, lower costs, or increased safety. It appears that there are a variety of ways to provide these benefits – what sort of mechanisms for delivering them have been recognized as eligible in the past?

RESPONSE: Some of the metrics that may be relevant for demonstrating benefits for this solicitation include potential energy and cost savings (e.g., peak load reduction, avoided customer energy use, percentage of demand response enabled by automated demand response technology, reduction in cost of technology, and customer bill savings); economic benefits (e.g., maintain/reduce operations and maintenance costs); environmental benefits (e.g., GHG emissions/criteria air pollution emissions reductions, water savings, waste reductions); safety, power quality, and reliability for equipment and the electricity system (e.g., outage number, frequency and duration reductions, public safety improvement and hazard exposure reduction). Applicants may use any reasonable and justifiable approach to show their technology will provide the stated benefits. Attachment 12 provides references to calculate energy end-use, electricity demand, and GHG emissions.

  1. QUESTION: Are projects also scored based on time elapsed since the end date of previous project?

RESPONSE:Projects are not scored based on how long it has been since they were previously awarded funds. Rather, their applications will be evaluated based on the relevance of the technology, the major milestones and results achieved, and the marketing plans and feasibility for commercializing the proposed technology in California, as well as other scoring criteria described in the solicitation manual.

  1. QUESTION: Is there any preference for activities that have been funded in the very recent past? Is a project that ended 6 months ago preferable to a project that ended several years ago?

RESPONSE: Please see the response to Question #14 above.

  1. QUESTION: Is this an annual funding opportunity?

RESPONSE:This is not an annual funding opportunity. The Energy Commission might release a similar solicitation in the future which would allow applications to be submitted on a more continuous flow.

  1. QUESTION: For the installations, it is our objective to start off installing our window into LBL's Flexlab (https://flexlab.lbl.gov/). This will allow us to gather energy performance in a controlled environment. This installation will occur in California. Aside from this installation, we will be testing other climate environments with customer test houses outside of California. Can we use data from these installations as part of our assessment for the final phase in the proposed project (installation in a customer test facility within California)?

RESPONSE:EPIC Technology Demonstration and Deployment funds can only be provided for installations and analyses conducted in California, specifically in locations within the IOU electric service territories (i.e., PG&E, SCE, and SDG&E).

Applicant Eligibility

  1. QUESTION: I recently established a company, RENERAGE, with an intention to commercialize the technology that I developed under a previous EPIC grant for an energy storage system using second life EV batteries. Am I eligible to apply for this opportunity although I am the founder of the company as well as the PI of the laboratory which would be the subcontractor of the project?

RESPONSE: Yes, the applicant would be eligible to apply for BRIDGE funding.However, Energy storage is not an eligible technology under this first BRIDGE solicitation. Please refer to strategic objectives identified on page 9 of the solicitation manual, and described in further detail in the 2015-2017 EPIC Triennial Investment Plan, regarding eligible technologies.

  1. Question: If a national lab received the original award but had an agreement with a private partner to commercialize the technology, is this allowed?

RESPONSE: Yes, this is allowed as long as the private partner is the prime applicant and can prove they currently own the intellectual property or have a legal right to further develop the technology (e.g., through a contractual or license agreement with the lab), and can demonstrate a path forward for commercializing the technology in California. See Sections I.A. on page 4 and II.A.1 on page 20 of the solicitation manual.

  1. QUESTION: We have a technology developed and owned by a university, which has received DOE funding for advancing the technology and develop a commercialization plan. A prime from California will lead the proposal for demonstration project with an intention to commercialize the technology in California. Will this be a qualified proposal?

RESPONSE: Yes, as long as the prime applicant 1) is a private entity, 2) can provide proof that they currently own the intellectual property or have a legal right to further develop the technology (e.g., through a contractual/license agreement with the university), and 3) can demonstrate a path forward for commercializing the technology in California. See Sections I.A. on page 4 and II.A.1 on page 20 of the solicitation manual.

  1. QUESTION: If we have an exclusive option on patents developed at an academic institution with EERE funding is that technology qualified for this grant? We are a startup that has optioned and is commercializing the technology.

RESPONSE: Yes, the technology would qualify for this funding opportunity if it received an award from EERE and meets the other eligibility requirements for this funding opportunity.

  1. QUESTION: If a startup has licensed I.P. from a university that was developed by DOE funding but not EERE funding - it was DOE-EE Smart Grid Demonstration Grant Program (a different DOE division) then does this technology qualify?

RESPONSE: This particular solicitation is focused on energy efficiency technologies only, so a Smart Grid project would not be eligible. However, future BRIDGE funding opportunities may consider other technologies.

  1. QUESTION: The solicitation is for previous awardees. If I was a project manager on a previous award, do I have to apply in the name of the actual past awardee entity?

RESPONSE: No, applicants do not have to apply in the name of the past awardee entity.As long as the prime applicant can demonstrate in their application that they currently own the intellectual property or have a legal right to further develop the technology (e.g., through a contractual/license agreement with the previous awardee),and can demonstrate a path forward for commercializing the technology in California. See Sections I.A. on page 4 and II.A.1 on page 20 of the solicitation manual.

  1. QUESTION: The company that was previously awarded funding has been acquired and no longer exists but the major cooperating university and the PI from that company have decided to continue the work and develop the technology proposed at the time,are they still eligible to participate?

RESPONSE:Please see the response to Question #23.

  1. QUESTION: Can we continue work on a project done by a different team?

RESPONSE:Please see the response to Question #23 above.

  1. QUESTION:If we have a company that received several funding awards from various U.S. agencies, and they are the majority owner of another company that was developed to now sell the products that were being developed previously, is it okay if the new company is the prime under BRIDGE and responsible for obtaining match contributions?

RESPONSE: Yes, as long as the new company can demonstrate in their application that they currently own the intellectual property or have a legal right to further develop the technology (e.g., through a contractual/license agreement with the previous awardee), and can demonstrate a path forward for commercializing the technology in California. See Sections I.A. on page 4 and II.A.1 on page 20 of the solicitation manual.

  1. QUESTION: We have earned Merit Status from DOE EERE for our project, which is the necessary condition for funding. However, due to lack of funds for renewable energy DOE did not provide the funds. Are we eligible?

RESPONSE:No, applicants must be able to show in their proposal the extent to which they met the technical goals and targets of their previous award. In addition, renewable energy technologies are not eligible for this first release of BRIDGE but could be considered in the future.

  1. QUESTION: Can a subcontractor's technology meet the eligibility requirement for having previous DOE or CEC funding?

RESPONSE: No, only a prime recipient’s technology is eligible under this solicitation.

  1. QUESTION: If an entity worked as a subcontractor to another CEC contract award, or received an award from a utility under Emerging Technologies Coordinating Council (ETCC), is that entity qualified to submit a proposal under this solicitation?

RESPONSE: No, the entity would not be eligible.

  1. QUESTION: You mentioned during the webinar that we can continue research on a technology previously conducted by a different team as long as the PI is the same. I was wondering if the PI on the previous project was a university professor, is it okay to have a different PI for this grant application?

RESPONSE: Yes, as long as the prime applicant is a private entity and can provide proof they currently own the intellectual property or have a legal right to further develop the technology (e.g., through a contractual/license agreement with the previous awardee), and can demonstrate a path forward for commercializing the technology in California. See Sections I.A. on page 4 and II.A.1 on page 20 of the solicitation manual.

  1. QUESTION: Does the eligible applicant (Prime) have to be the technology manufacturer, or can the Prime be any other eligible (former CEC or US DOE funding award winner) applicant, whether or not their awarded funding was tied to a specific technology?

RESPONSE: The applicant must be a private entity that received a previous award from an eligible funding agency or possesses the necessary licensing to perform the follow-on work of the technology. Additionally, the applicant and proposed project must meet all other requirements as stated in the solicitation manual, including those on pages 4, and 21-22.

  1. QUESTION: Are non-California- based (or non-U.S. companies) eligible to apply as a Prime applicant?

RESPONSE: Out of state companies or entities are eligible to apply as a prime applicant. However, they will be required to spend at least 80% of the EPIC funds in California in order to be considered for an award under this solicitation.

  1. QUESTION: Are non-California -based (or non-U.S. companies) allowed to participate as a subconsultant to an eligible Prime? (I.E. a technology that is not yet commercialized in the U.S.?)

RESPONSE: Out of state companies or entities are allowed to participate as a subcontractor. However, the prime willbe required to spend at least 80% of the EPIC funds in California in order to be considered for an award under this solicitation.

  1. QUESTION: Can recognized winners of U.S. DOE initiatives , such as the Better Buildings challenge Initiatives (i.e. wireless metering) of the U.S. DOE Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE) program, participate as eligible applicants and/ or eligible technologies, even though they may or may not have technically been awarded any grant($) funding?

RESPONSE: No. Only applicants that received a prior grant funding award to develop a technology from an eligible funding agency are eligible to apply under this solicitation.