· web viewpage 24 of solicitation manual. see also section iv.d.3 on page 34 of the solicitation...

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: February 2018

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Administrative.............................................................................................................................................3

General........................................................................................................................................................5

Applicant Eligibility......................................................................................................................................7

Previous Funding Agencies/Programs.......................................................................................................11

Time-Frame of Previous Projects...............................................................................................................12

General Project Requirements..................................................................................................................15

Technology Requirements.........................................................................................................................17

Match Funding...........................................................................................................................................19

Group 1......................................................................................................................................................21

Group 2......................................................................................................................................................21

of 21

Administrative 1. QUESTION: Does the submitting applicant need to be registered as a California 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.

2. 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).

3. 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 [email protected] before the application deadline.

4. 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?

of 21

mailto:[email protected]

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.

5. 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.

6. 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 and then 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.

7. 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.

8. QUESTION: Will you post the pre-proposal attendees 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.

of 21

http://www.energy.ca.gov/contracts/epic.html#GFO-17-308

9. 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.

10. 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.

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

RESPONSE: Applicants and each major subcontractor are required to provide the maximum percentage 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).

12. 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 aspects are evaluated under the Technical Merit and Need section of the scoring criteria, which is worth the most amount of points overall. The team is 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 13. 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?

of 21

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.

14. 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.

15. 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.

16. 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.

17. 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)?

of 21

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 Eligibility18. 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.

19. 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.

20. 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.

of 21

21. 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.

22. 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.

23. 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.

24. 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.

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


26. 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?

of 21

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.

27. 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.

28. 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.

29. 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.

30. 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.

31. 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?

of 21

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.

32. 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.

33. 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 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.

34. 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.

35. QUESTION: Regarding the following statement:“Applicants whose technology received funding for their previous research while being developed at an academic institution, national laboratory, or non-profit research organization are eligible as long as the intellectual property currently resides with the applicant".

How should we show the Intellectual Property is owned by the applicant's organization if no patent has been filed yet?

RESPONSE: If a patent is not available, the applicant must provide proof that they are legally able to further develop the technology from the previous agreement. For

of 21

example, the applicant can provide a contractual or license agreement between the applicant and the previous awardee to further develop the technology.

36. QUESTION: With a private company as the prime applicant, do we still need an agreement letter from the acquired company or can we participate independently?

RESPONSE: The prime applicant would need to provide proof that they own or have a license to the intellectual property developed under the previous agreement if they were not the recipient of the previous award.

37. QUESTION: If entities partner on this proposal in a contractor/subcontractor role, must both partners meet the project requirements, or is it possible for a subcontractor that has never received government funding partner with an applicant that meets the project requirements?

RESPONSE: These requirements are for the prime applicant only. It is allowable for a subcontractor to be proposed as part of the project team without having been awarded a previous award, as long as the prime applicant meets the eligibility requirements.

Previous Funding Agencies/Programs38. QUESTION: This concerns the requirement to have previously received DOE funding.

Our company has received grants from NASA, US Army Corps of Engineers, DARPA and Center for commercialization of Advanced Tech (CCAT). Can this be considered in lieu of previous DOE grant?

RESPONSE: The solicitation manual was amended to expand the number of federal agencies that are deemed as eligible for providing a previous award to develop the proposed technology. This includes NASA, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, and DARPA. Please see page 4 of the solicitation manual for a complete list of eligible funding agencies that will be accepted under this solicitation.

39. QUESTION: If an entity received previous ‘federal’ awards, but not from ARPA-E and EERE (and no award from the CEC) is that entity qualified to submit a proposal under this solicitation?


40. QUESTION: If we did not receive a funding award from one of the 4 listed programs or DOE offices (PIER Electric, EPIC, ARPA-E, or EERE), but did receive awards from NASA, CCAT, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, and DARPA, can that be counted as eligible for a previous funding award?

of 21


41. QUESTION: Does the DOE funding have to be from the ARPA and/or EERE, or could funding from DARPA or NASA or Defense Department be eligible for an energy related project?

RESPONSE: Projects that previously received funding from DARPA or NASA are now eligible, per the solicitation manual amendments. Please see the response to Question #38 above.

42. QUESTION: Our company and technology has not received funding from these sources but we have received SBIR funding from the US NIH, and I was wondering if this would satisfy the previous funding criteria.

RESPONSE: Per the solicitation amendment, projects that received SBIR funding from the U.S. National Institute of Health can be eligible. However, the applicant must satisfy all other applicant/project requirements.

43. QUESTION: If we received a CalSEED award (CalSEED is funded by EPIC) to develop technology are we qualified to apply for this grant?

RESPONSE: No, currently CalSEED awards cannot be used to meet the eligibility requirements of this funding opportunity. Staff might consider allowing CalSEED awards to be used to meet eligibility requirements in future releases of BRIDGE.

44. QUESTION: If a startup company is a recipient of a CALSEED award which is funded by EPIC, is this startup eligible to apply?


45. QUESTION: If the previous project funding was received from DOE RPSEA program, are we still eligible to apply?

RESPONSE: No, the U.S. DOE Research Partnership to Secure Energy for America (RPSEA) program is not an eligible funding program for proposed projects under this solicitation because that program is focused on natural gas and petroleum resources.

Time-Frame of Previous Projects46. Question: Does the prior DOE funding [award] have to be current at the time or can it

be technology that DOE stopped funding 2-3 years ago but we still have the technology and partners interested?

of 21

RESPONSE: The prior DOE funding award does not have to be a current project. The solicitation manual was amended to allow previously funded projects that ended as much as 3 years prior to the application date. Additionally, the Energy Commission is looking for technologies that were successful in meeting the technical milestones and performance targets.

47. QUESTION: Is there a timeframe when the previous DOE grant ended to be eligible for this grant? Our previous grant ended Sept 2016.


48. QUESTION: If we have a technology that was developed under the DOE SunShot program between 2008-2012 does this mean we are not eligible to apply for the BRIDGE solicitation? What I understood from the solicitation is that the technology has to recently been funded within the last 12 months?

RESPONSE: The solicitation manual was amended to allow projects that ended within 3 years before the date of the application, which would put this project out of the eligible date-range. Additionally, this solicitation is only focused on energy efficiency technologies.

49. QUESTION: Can our “prior” ARPA-E funding be through a current project (funding ongoing), or is it required that the project / award be completed already?

RESPONSE: The solicitation manual was amended to state that the previous project no longer needs to be completed prior to applying for this solicitation. However, it must be far enough along that all of the technical deliverables have been submitted and the applicant can demonstrate that the performance targets and technical goals have been met. Responses to Section II of Attachment 13 will help demonstrate this. See page 21 of the solicitation manual.

50. QUESTION: If we have an active DOE grant, are we eligible for this grant, or must the DOE grant be completed to be eligible?

RESPONSE: See response to Question #49 above.

51. QUESTION: Can a grant that is active now and will not end by the time of this award be allowed to participate?


of 21

52. QUESTION: How strict is the end-date requirement for previously funded grants? Is it possible to apply if the potential start date for this agreement (rather than the application form date) falls within the 12-month time window?


53. QUESTION: My CEC funded project has an end date of March 31, 2019. The final project report will be completed by Oct 2018. Can we apply for this GFO?

RESPONSE: Yes, as long as all of the technical deliverables have been submitted and you can demonstrate that performance targets and technical goals have been met.

54. QUESTION: How much funding from the previously awarded grant must be spent to be eligible?

RESPONSE: There isn’t a threshold for how much funding must be spent in the previous award in order to be eligible for this solicitation. Rather, the Scoring Committee will be focused on whether the technical deliverables have been submitted, and performance/technical goals are met that provide verifiable, positive results.

55. QUESTION: Regarding the following statement:“Projects whose initial Energy Commission or U.S. DOE research agreement term has not yet expired are eligible as long as all deliverables, including the final project report from the initial agreement, have been submitted and are deemed satisfactory".

What date must the deliverables be submitted by? Does it mean that all deliverables are supposed to be submitted before submitting GFO-17-308? Or does it mean that all deliverables should be submitted before the beginning day for GFO-17-308?

RESPONSE: The solicitation manual was amended to state that the previous project no longer needs to be completed prior to applying for this solicitation. However, it must be far enough along that all of the technical deliverables have been submitted by the application date for the proposed new project. Additionally, the applicant should be able to demonstrate that the performance targets and technical goals have been met.

56. QUESTION: According to the Project Requirements: “Previous eligible Energy Commission or U.S. DOE project’s end-date [must be] within 12 months of the date on the Application Form and all deliverables from the prior funding agreement must be successfully completed and submitted;” and, “Projects whose initial Energy Commission or U.S. DOE research agreement term has not yet expired are eligible as long as all deliverables, including the final project report from the initial agreement, have been submitted and are deemed satisfactory.”

of 21

a) If a current California Energy Commission EPIC grant awardee has a contract that is set to expire more than 12 months of the date on the Application Form but the awardee plans to finalize all deliverables by February 2018, can the company apply to the 2nd application deadline for this opportunity (Feb. 12, 2018)?

b) In addition, do applicants need to meet both of the above requirements, or do they only need to meet one, i.e., as long as the final deliverables are submitted, the end-date is negotiable?

RESPONSE: The solicitation manual and schedule was amended to 1) reflect only one application due date, and 2) allow current projects to be eligible as long as all of the technical deliverables have been submitted by the application date. Furthermore, the applicant must be able to demonstrate that the technical and performance goals have been met.

57. QUESTION: We have developed a microgrid controller technology for a current EPIC project. The project is ending on March 30, 2019. We are in the final data collection period of this project. The final project report will be completed by September/October 2018. Based on the eligibility requirements of this solicitation, are we eligible to apply for additional funding to complete R&D for commercialization of this technology?

RESPONSE: No, this solicitation is focused on energy efficiency technologies only. However, other technologies may be considered under future BRIDGE funding opportunities.

General Project Requirements58. QUESTION: We are currently at a TRL of 6 and will be at TRL level of 7 by May 2018.

Should we apply for TRL 7 funding? That is preferred.

RESPONSE: There are two funding groups under this solicitation: one to conduct applied research of eligible technologies that have a Technology Readiness Level (TRL) of 6 or below, and the other will fund demonstration for technologies at a TRL of 7 or 8. Applicants should apply to the group they feel is most relevant, given the status of their proposed technology and the type of work they are proposing to perform.

59. QUESTION: We will be TRL 7+ as of the coming spring 2018 (we have several pilot projects under agreements with utilities, through which we will demonstrate the technology in real setting). Are we qualified to apply given that we are not TRL 7+ today?


of 21

60. QUESTION: Can funding be available for a project outside California? What if the project started in another state, but will continue in California?

RESPONSE: It is acceptable for previously funded projects to originate out of state. As long as the proposed project under this solicitation is located in California (e.g., can demonstrate spending more than 80 percent of EPIC funds in California and any demonstration sites are located within California), it is eligible.

61. QUESTION: When you describe a field installation, will LBL Flex Lab be considered?

RESPONSE: National laboratories may be hosts to field installations, as long as they are demonstrating the technology in a real-world environment (or conditions approximating a real-world environment).

62. QUESTION: Do field installations have to be in California?

RESPONSE: Yes, for Group 2 all installations or demonstrations must be located in California, as well as located in one of the three IOU electric service territories (PG&E, SCE, and SDG&E).

63. QUESTION: Can we use technology from a previously funded project to be funded for a different application?

RESPONSE: Yes, this is allowed. The applicant should provide an explanation for why they are looking to use the technology in a different application and describe what additional technology development and testing is needed for the new application.

64. QUESTION: Are any past grant awardees of the CEC or US DOE programs eligible applicants, even if the grant funding was for a study or research (R&D) or roadmaps, etc., as opposed to technology or deployment or demonstration implementation?

RESPONSE: No. This solicitation is only focused on funding past awardees (or other eligible applicants) to further develop energy efficiency technologies that were originally awarded funding. Roadmaps are not eligible for further development. Please see page 4 of the solicitation manual for applicant eligibility requirements.

65. QUESTION: How does the Energy Commission define “clear intentions and path forward for commercializing the technology in California”? Specifically, what is considered a pre-commercialized product? Is a product in the technology demonstration and deployment stage a pre-commercialized product?

of 21

RESPONSE: The Energy Commission will evaluate in its scoring whether the applicant has “clear intention and path forward for commercializing the technology in California” based on the applicant’s responses to the questions listed under Project Focus on page 23 of the application manual. For the second question, for purposes of this funding opportunity, pre-commercial technologies are those that are at a Technology Readiness Level (TRL) of 7 or 8 at the time the project begins.1

Technology Requirements66. QUESTION: Do all projects have to be purely energy efficiency projects? That is, are

projects that create new renewable fuels and/or electricity eligible?

RESPONSE: This particular BRIDGE solicitation is focused on energy efficiency and demand response only. While renewable technologies and fuels are not eligible under this solicitation, they may be considered under future BRIDGE funding opportunities.

Examples of eligible energy efficiency technologies include: solid-state lighting technologies; electric heat pumps; aftermarket treatments that improve energy efficiency of existing HVAC and building envelope systems; cooling technologies using alternative refrigerants (e.g., high efficiency, low global warming and low ozone depletion), including CO2, ammonia, and propane; absorption cooling; onsite energy management systems; and energy and water saving agricultural irrigation systems.

For more information, please refer to page 9 of the solicitation manual and the 2015-2017 EPIC Triennial Investment Plan, to determine which technologies are eligible under the listed strategic objectives identified under this solicitation.

67. QUESTION: If a fuel satisfies many of the CEC’s objectives in this solicitation, and it will be created using the facility’s electric production from upgraded biogas, but the fuel itself is biogas and not electricity, will that be eligible?

RESPONSE: No, this solicitation is focused on technologies that improve the efficiency of end-use electricity consumption. However, future BRIDGE solicitations may consider biogas. Please see the response to Question #66 above to determine which technologies are eligible under the listed strategic objectives identified under this solicitation.

68. QUESTION: Is wave ocean energy included in S1 Water Sector? We have earned MERIT status for our project from DOE EERE.

1 TRLs are defined by the U.S. DOE. See the Department of Energy’s Technology Readiness Assessment Report, p. 6, http://energy.gov/sites/prod/files/em/Volume_I/O_SRP.pdf.

of 21

http://energy.gov/sites/prod/files/em/Volume_I/O_SRP.pdf

RESPONSE: No, wave energy is not an eligible technology under this solicitation. Please see the response to Question #66 above for eligible technologies.

69. QUESTION: My company makes a Li-ion battery material that is increasing the energy density of battery material. Therefore, the improvements we are making in our battery material will indirectly lead to the need for less electricity to charge our batteries to the same power output of current batteries. Would this qualify us for this project?

RESPONSE: No. Please see the response to Question #66 above regarding which technologies are eligible under this solicitation.

70. QUESTION: Can you clarify what technologies are considered energy efficiency? For example, can a solar thermal system used to produce steam to reduce fossil fuel consumption and emissions at a major industrial site be considered as energy efficiency?

RESPONSE: Examples include solid-state lighting technologies, building envelope systems (e.g., insulation, windows), components improving efficiency of plug-load devices, and control technologies. While the application of solar thermal described can be used as an energy efficiency measure, it is funded out of the Natural Gas program and is not eligible for EPIC funding.

71. QUESTION: Demand response is mentioned in the solicitation as one of the "drivers". Are DR and EE both eligible in this GFO?

RESPONSE: Yes, demand response and energy efficiency technologies are eligible under this solicitation.

72. Question: Are geothermal heat pumps (also known as ground source heat pumps or ground heat exchanges) eligible technologies under consideration for this solicitation?

RESPONSE: Yes, heat pumps are eligible for BRIDGE funding under this solicitation.

73. QUESTION: Can the technology be a water metering or conservation technology (as opposed to strictly energy?) or can it combine both energy and water efficiency technologies?

RESPONSE: The technology must show a direct onsite energy efficiency benefit beyond water-use reduction and be aligned with one of the eligible funding initiatives listed under strategic objectives S1 or S12 in the 2015-2017 EPIC Triennial Investment Plan.

of 21

74. QUESTION: In order to be eligible for EPIC, a project must demonstrate ratepayer benefits. Does that mean the project must primarily generate or save electricity, or could production of other fuels qualify if those also create ratepayer benefits?

RESPONSE: To be eligible for EPIC funding, the technology must primarily generate, distribute, or save electricity.

75. QUESTION: Does energy efficiency include integrated renewable solar and storage technologies?

RESPONSE: No, integrated solar and storage technologies are not eligible technologies for further development under this solicitation. However, future BRIDGE funding opportunities may consider these technologies.

76. QUESTION: Would behind-the-meter integrated solar plus storage product technologies qualify as a potential application to this GFO?

RESPONSE: No. Please see the response to Question #75 above.

Match Funding77. QUESTION: Regarding match funding, can this be venture capital that the company

receives for the research?

RESPONSE: Yes. As long as the applicant can provide proof that the funding is available from a private entity and specifically earmarked for the proposed project, it is eligible. See section I.F.3 of the solicitation manual.

78. QUESTION: What form or letter is accepted for the match funds? Especially if it is from an IOU or a large known corporation?

RESPONSE: The Energy Commission does not have a form for commitment letters. However, Attachment 11 provides guidance for what must be contained in the commitment letter, as well as provides the cover form to the letter. Note, all commitment letters must add up to the amount of match being claimed on the application form.

79. QUESTION: Regarding the requirement for cash-in-hand, how should we show the cash-in-hand? Do we have to show a bank statement?

RESPONSE: For the application submittal, it is only necessary to provide commitment letters from match contributors. If the application is awarded funding, proof of the funds being in the recipient’s possession will be required shortly after the agreement

of 21

execution (likely at the kick-off meeting). Although bank statements can show funds available, it may not be enough to prove the funding is earmarked for the project. Therefore, the agreement manager may ask for a sworn statement signed by an authorized representative, or something similar.

80. QUESTION: Can DOE funds be used as matching funds?

RESPONSE: No. Match funds must be from private entities only.

81. QUESTION: Can local bond funds of a school or community college serve as match funds for a Deployment Group Project?

RESPONSE: Yes, as long as the prime applicant can demonstrate that the funds will be used for the technology’s installation, initial operation, and testing. In addition, the applicant must satisfy other eligibility criteria. Note: Technologies that are already beyond a Technology Readiness Level of 8 are not eligible for this funding opportunity.

82. QUESTION: Can you give further details on the definition of the match funding requirements, and allowable calculations of advanced practice costs?

RESPONSE: The solicitation manual was amended to clarify that only “cash in hand” funds will be eligible under this solicitation, whether it is to meet the minimum requirement or provided in excess of the minimum. Furthermore, the funds must be from a private entity. See also section I.F.3 of the solicitation manual.

83. QUESTION: Please provide more info on "cash in hand" match funding. How could a small company have hundreds of thousands in bank by Dec. 18?

RESPONSE: For the application period, it is only necessary that applicants show commitments from private investors towards the minimum match requirement, relevant to their funding group (e.g., 10% for Group 1 and 20% for Group 2). If the proposal is funded, the recipient will be required to prove that the cash is in their possession at the time of the kick-off meeting.

84. QUESTION: Could you give more detail about the cash-in-hand cost share? Specifically, can active federal grant funding be used? Can cash-in-hand be in the form of remaining funds (e.g. on an ARPA-E award) or does the cash have to be in the bank?

RESPONSE: No, funds must be provided by a private entity and cannot be provided from excess funding from a previous project.

of 21

85. QUESTION: Does that mean that the match funds don’t really have to be cash-in-hand? If a large corporation provides the match via a signed letter on their letterhead, is that sufficient?

RESPONSE: Yes, the commitment letter is sufficient for the application. If the proposal is funded, the recipient will be required to prove that the cash is in their possession at the time of the kick-off meeting.

86. QUESTION: What is the date we need to have the match funding in hand?

RESPONSE: The recipient will be required to show documentation that the match funding is in their possession at the project kick-off meeting.

Group 187. QUESTION: Do Group 1 applications have to include pilot scale hardware testing in

order to demonstrate feasibility?

RESPONSE: No. Group 1 is targeting pre-commercial technologies that require additional laboratory assessment for development and are at a Technology Readiness Level of 6 or below.

88. For Group 1, can design, engineering, and development activities be eligible as applied R&D stage in order to demonstrate feasibility of the technology?

RESPONSE: Yes, these activities can be a part of the project.

Group 289. QUESTION: Would laboratory assessment of a technology qualify for group 2 or field

demonstration is a requirement?

RESPONSE: No, a laboratory assessment would likely best fit under Group 1. Group 2 will fund field demonstrations of the proposed technology.

of 21

· web viewpage 24 of solicitation manual. see also section iv.d.3 on page 34 of the solicitation...

Documents