national renewable energy laboratory dual-staged microgrid … · 2019-05-29 · national renewable...

National Renewable Energy Laboratory Dual-Staged Microgrid Controller Procurement Details

I. Overview

The National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) 1 is conducting a dual-stage (Letter of Interest and Request for Proposals) competitive procurement for microgrid control technology where up to five respondents will compete on state-of-the-art testbeds at the Energy Systems Integration Facility (ESIF) between June and December 2017.

The top performer will have the opportunity for its microgrid controller to be purchased and made part of a permanent microgrid research test bed available to NREL researchers and other Users of the ESIF. NREL intends to purchase the winning microgrid controller from top performer, subject to successful negotiations on a fair and reasonable purchase price. NREL will also provide at its own expense the necessary engineering and communications expertise required to successfully procure and install the winning microgrid controller at the ESIF. Important Dates* Item April 13, 2017 Notice of Intent issued May 1, 2017 Letter of Interest (LOI) issued May 5, 2017, 11:30-12:30 Eastern Informational webinar May 15, 2017, 5 PM Eastern Register at https://tools.eventpower.com/reg/index/x9xDeSUJxV May 26, 2017, 5 PM Eastern Last day to submit questions June 2, 2017 , 5 PM Eastern LOI responses due June 5-9, 2017 Clarifying calls with qualified responders June 12-15, 2017 Notification to selected responders June 19, 2017 Stage 1 begins (start dates staggered 6/19-7/17) October 13 - 20, 2017 Down-selection to top 2 performers October 23, 2017 Stage 2 begins (RFP issued 10/23 and 10/30) December 8 and 15, 2017 RFP responses/ cost proposals due December 18-22 2017 Final selection and notification January 2018 Procurement / contracting may begin *Dates are subject to change if unanticipated events occur. 1 The National Renewable Energy Laboratory is managed and operated by the Alliance for Sustainable Energy, LLC under DOE Contract DE-AC36-08GO28308.

https://tools.eventpower.com/reg/index/x9xDeSUJxV

Interested parties must submit a Letter of Interest (LOI) to be considered for this competitive procurement. Details on how to apply are available at https://www.nrel.gov/esif/user-call.html.

II. Dual-Stage Procurement Structure & Schedule

Stage 1 includes selection of approximately five respondents who will be given the opportunity demonstrate and improve their technology in a controller-hardware-in-the-loop (CHIL) testbed. This will encompass a 14-week, staggered schedule approach with the following components to take place once the selected respondents are identified:

• Notification and receipt of instructional packet with testbed details • 8-week programming and preparation, including shipping controller to NREL and

responding to cybersecurity posture review questionnaire • 1-week CHIL integration (participants are encouraged to work onsite at NREL) and

receipt of cybersecurity vulnerability mitigation report from NREL • 4-week research and development (R&D) period at home institution and written

response to cybersecurity review • 1-week CHIL access (NREL performs final evaluations on the last day of access)

Down-selection will be based on CHIL performance (70%) and cybersecurity evaluation (30%). The top performers (anticipate selecting two) in Stage 1 will receive the official request for proposal (RFP) which will mark the start of Stage 2 – Power-Hardware-in-the-Loop (PHIL) and Cybersecurity Testing. Stage 2 will begin on October 23 for Offeror 1, and on November 6 for Offeror 2. The selected performers gain access to a PHIL testbed located at the ESIF and a comprehensive evaluation in NREL’s cyber-physical testbed. Stage 2 is seven weeks in duration, on a staggered schedule that includes:

• RFP issued to participant. • 1-week PHIL access (participants work onsite at NREL). • 4-week R&D period / break at home institution. • 2-weeks comprehensive cybersecurity testing in takes place concurrently with

4-week R&D/ break period. Offerors are not expected to be at NREL during this period.

• 1-week PHIL access with NREL completing final evaluations on Friday of that week.

• Cost proposals will be due one week after the PHIL evaluation takes place. The final evaluation will include results from evaluations in PHIL and cyber-physical testbeds where power systems functionalities are weighted at 70% , cybersecurity posture at 20%, and cost at 10%. Stage 1 CHIL evaluations will not be included in the final score. Procurement is contingent upon successful negotiation of terms and purchase price. Note that selected respondents are expected to travel to NREL at least once and those who become the final 2 offerors will travel to NREL at least three times over the 20-week period.

https://www.nrel.gov/esif/user-call.html

Stage 1 Schedule: Dates are subject to change if unanticipated events occur.

Selected Respondent 2

Controller Hardware in the Loop (CHIL) + Cybersecurity Review

June 26 Receive

Instructional Packet

8 Weeks One Week @ NREL Four weeks One Week @ NREL NREL Evaluation

Prep Period CHIL Integration R&D Period CHIL Evaluation

70% CHIL

26-Jun 18-Aug 22-Aug 25-Aug 28-Aug 22-Sep 25-Sep 28-Sep 29-Sep 30% CYBER

Cybersecurity Review and Evaluation = 30% Score Stage 1 Score



July 3 Receive




70% CHIL

3-Jul 25-Aug 29-Aug 1-Sep 4-Sep 29-Sep 2-Oct 5-Oct 6-Oct 30% CYBER




July 10 Receive




70% CHIL

10-Jul 1-Sep 5-Sep 8-Sep 11-Sep 6-Oct 9-Oct 12-Oct 13-Oct 30% CYBER




July 17

Receive Instructional

Packet



70% CHIL

17-Jul 8-Sep 12-Sep 15-Sep 18-Sep 13-Oct 16-Oct 19-Oct 20-Oct 30% CYBER


Stage 2 Schedule: Dates are subject to change if unanticipated events occur.

III. Benefits of Participation All five Stage 1 selected respondents will receive access to state-of-the-art testbeds and a technical evaluation and cybersecurity evaluation from NREL. Each selected respondent will receive a report with technical results and custom cybersecurity vulnerability mitigation strategies to help companies optimize the performance of their controller technology and ultimately, reduce deployment risk. All five Stage 1 selected respondents will gain exposure to incubator and investment firms in New York, Colorado, and Massachusetts and be eligible for a discounted application fee to the Industry Growth Forum in April 2018. The top two performers will also receive (if desired):

• Public recognition in articles, news releases, conferences, and online • A co-branded event to demonstrate the technology at the ESIF in 2018 • Booth space at the Industry Growth Forum (2018).

The top performer will gain primary consideration for purchase of its technology by NREL, where it will be on display to visitors who visit the ESIF and for use by researchers.

IV. Testbed Descriptions All selected respondents will receive a detailed instruction packet eight weeks prior to their CHIL testbed access. The instructional packet will include the following:

• Further details on the CHIL and PHIL testbed schematics • Description of the controllable assets • Detailed description of the communications protocols • High-level overview of the test sequence including initial conditions, rough weather

forecast and timing for when the sun rises and sets, order and duration of grid disturbances, operational scenarios.

Offeror 1 Power Hardware in the Loop (PHIL) + Cyber-Physical Testbeds

23-Oct One Week @ NREL Four weeks One Week @ NREL Cost Proposals Due Offeror 1 PHIL Integration Offeror R&D Period PHIL Evaluation

8-Dec Receives RFP 23-Oct 27-Oct 30-Oct 27-Nov 27-Nov 1-Dec

Cyber-Physical testbed evaluation takes place during the 4-week Offeror R&D / break period.

Offeror 2 Power Hardware in the Loop (PHIL) + Cyber-Physical Testbeds

30-Oct One Week @ NREL Four weeks One Week @ NREL Cost Proposals Due Offeror 2 PHIL Integration Offeror R&D Period PHIL Evaluation

15-Dec Receives RFP 30-Oct 3-Nov 6-Nov 1-Dec 4-Dec 8-Dec

Cyber-Physical testbed evaluation takes place during the 4-week Offeror R&D/ break period.

http://www.nrelforum.com/



• Price inputs for Key Performance Parameters (KPP) with example microgrid operator bill showing the baseline (no controller) evaluation

• List of cybersecurity questions and template for submitting responses. Testbed Configuration Power hardware includes a programmable AC grid simulator, diesel genset with advanced controller, an electric vehicle with smart meter, commercial solar inverter with PV array simulator, grid forming battery storage inverter with battery simulator, and controllable load. The remainder of the power distribution grid including additional substations, feeders/relays, distributed energy resource (DER) assets, loads, and microgrid switch(es) exist within a real time computer simulation. The CHIL platform will include the entire power system testbed in real time simulation, which enables 24/7 operation and remote control from any location through Virtual Private Network (VPN) access, if desired. Testbed Equipment

• Microgrid controller – provided by participant

• Real time power simulation – (RTS) Opal RT and Mathworks - Matlab & Simulink

• Operator interface (HMI ) and data manager- SEL RTAC

• Ametek 270kW bidirectional programmable AC source/sink

• Research electrical distribution bus (REDB)

• ABB 100kW solar inverter w/ MagnaPower programmable DC source (solar array emulator)

• Loadtec 250kW RLC load bank • Caterpillar 250kW battery inverter

w/ AV900 bidirectional programmable DC source/sink (battery emulator)

• Onan Cummins 80kW diesel genset w/ Woodward paralleling controller

• Nissan Leaf w/ electric vehicle service equipment (EVSE) and Sparkmeter

6

Testbed Schematic

PHIL Node Description The PHIL experiment will demonstrate microgrid controller operation and its ability to integrate with real power devices. The PHIL node will extend the Banshee model at the third feeder by adding additional assets that can be controlled by the microgrid controller without modifying Banshee architecture. The circuit will consist of two busses, circuit breaker relay, and various controllable smart DER assets. The PV inverter (100kW) is coupled with a programmable voltage source allowing for various irradiance profiles. The grid forming BESS inverter (250kW) and Generator (80kW Onan) are able to form the grid during island operation, but they follow the grid during grid connected operation. Thus, it is important to test real asset integration with microgrid controller in both states as well as during transition periods. Additionally, the generator will be connected to critical load (programmable load bank) so that in case of major microgrid blackout the critical load can still be served. An electric vehicle (EV) will be connected to the circuit to represent a load that can be interrupted by microgrid controller during periods of insufficient generation. To enable the PHIL experiment, an Ametek 270kW bidirectional programmable AC grid simulator (GS) is used. The GS will follow the voltage calculated within the RTS model, which enables real time interaction with the entire Banshee power system. All PHIL devices will have additional limits of current and voltage to allow safe test execution in the ESIF lab environment. Power Distribution System Model NREL will leverage the MIT Lincoln Laboratories (MIT LL) power system model, Banshee, which is already complete with built-in controller interfaces. This enables NREL to adopt

7

the existing testbed and expend resources to further improve it. Improvements will be posted to open source repository and MIT LL upon completion. “Banshee” System Diagram

“Banshee” System Description The system modelled for this microgrid controller evaluation consists of three substations supplying a power network based on a real world location and presents challenges that will be found in a community microgrid. The overall electrical demand of the feeders ranges from 5 MW to 14 MW for minimum and maximum load, respectively. The system is rated for a medium voltage of 13.8 kV and low voltages of 4.16 kV, 480 V, and 208 V. There are 18 loads continuously supplied by the feeders (6 critical, 6 priority, and 6 interruptible). Critical loads are categorized by the high requirements of continuous electrical service, power quality, and reliability (i.e. sensitive equipment labs, etc.). Priority loads are buildings that, ideally, are always served, but in case of contingencies, or islanding with lack of generation, may be disconnected. Interruptible loads are buildings not necessarily required to be served during contingencies or islanded conditions. Furthermore, there are two large induction motors of 200 horsepower, one of the largest sizes recommended by the 2011 National Electric Code (NEC) for full voltage start-up. Each of the system loads is modelled as a time-varying dynamic load based on electrical demand profiles extracted from smart metering equipment. The generation assets consists of a 4000 kVA diesel generator and a 3500 kVA natural gas-fired combined heat and power (CHP) system. Both units operate at a 13.8 kV nominal voltage and are simulated in a real time simulator (RTS). During simulations, both generators are entirely controlled by the microgrid controllers without operator intervention unless the alarms deem necessary. The system also includes a 5000 kW PV system and a 2000 kVA battery energy storage system (BESS). The PV system will be supplied with a varying irradiance profile matching a defined test sequence. The BESS is fully controlled by the microgrid controller enabling the evaluation of power factor correction, peak shaving/smoothing, and possibly power export. The total system demand, and the available generation and storage will be sized to evaluate the microgrid

CB310

PHILNODE

8

controller’s ability to perform smart load shedding prior and during islanded conditions. Internal system fault protection is provided by multiple relays that can be remotely monitored and actuated by the microgrid controller. The relay protection functions are the following: synchronizing or synchronism-check (ANSI Std. Dev. No. 25), phase instantaneous overcurrent (ANSI Std. Dev. No. 50P), AC inverse time overcurrent (ANSI Std. Dev. No. 51P), under voltage relay (ANSI Std. Dev. No. 27), and overvoltage relay (ANSI Std. Dev. No. 59). ). Some relays will be able to transmit their status using IEC61850 GOOSE messages and some will be capable of fast load shedding using also IEC61850 GOOSE thus allowing for operation within sub 10 ms delay cycle required e.g. during unintentional islanding. PHIL Node Description The PHIL experiment will demonstrate microgrid controller operation and its ability to integrate with real power devices. The PHIL node will extend the Banshee model at the third feeder by adding additional assets that can be controlled by the microgrid controller without modifying Banshee architecture. The circuit will consist of two busses, circuit breaker relay, and various controllable smart DER assets. The PV inverter (100kW) is coupled with a programmable voltage source allowing for various irradiance profiles. The grid forming BESS inverter (250kW) and Generator (80kW Onan) are able to form the grid during island operation, but they follow the grid during grid connected operation. Thus, it is important to test real asset integration with microgrid controller in both states as well as during transition periods. Additionally, the generator will be connected to critical load (programmable load bank) so that in case of major microgrid blackout the critical load can still be served. An electric vehicle (EV) will be connected to the circuit to represent a load that can be interrupted by microgrid controller during periods of insufficient generation. To enable the PHIL experiment, an Ametek 270kW bidirectional programmable AC grid simulator (GS) is used. The GS will follow the voltage calculated within the RTS model, which enables real time interaction with the entire Banshee power system. All PHIL devices will have additional limits of current and voltage to allow safe test execution in the ESIF lab environment. Cyber -Physical Testbed NREL will implement a bump-in-the-wire security approach to test the cybersecurity posture of microgrid controller technologies. The bump-in-the-wire approach includes cybersecurity technologies that protect the mixture of legacy and modern technologies. This approach diminishes reliance on vendors to implement proprietary security controls and places greater emphasis on securing the entire network against threats. NREL will utilize a secure distribution grid management testbed with power systems SCADA, grid simulation, and distributed energy resources on a routed and firewalled network (one control center + two substations) with five purpose-built cybersecurity technologies (three intrusion detection tools and two in-line blocking tools). Two sets of pen tests over a 12-month period have demonstrated that the cybersecurity architecture employed in this approach can protect critical infrastructure from insider and external

9

cyber threats. Pen testing will be performed by NREL staff, but may also include members of the Armed Forces, and/or a third party such as Kryus Tech.

V. Evaluation Process and Scoring Rubric This dual-stage competitive procurement takes into consideration power systems performance in CHIL and PHIL testbeds against a common set of key performance parameters, cybersecurity posture, and price (cost) of the product offering. Up to five controllers will be considered in Stage 1. Two controllers will be considered in Stage 2 and the top performing controller in Stage 2 will be considered for purchase. Table 1 shows the relative weighting for different evaluation areas. Table 1- Evaluation Overview Stage Evaluation Area Weighting

1 Power Systems - CHIL evaluation 70% Cybersecurity–Responses, interview/implementation plan 30% Total 100% Down select from 5 to 2 controllers

2 Power Systems - PHIL evaluation 70% Cybersecurity - Cyber-Physical testbed evaluation 20% Price (cost) received in RFP response 10% Total 100%

Power Systems Performance Evaluation Process Stage 1 will conclude with NREL conducting an evaluation against the scoring rubric described below on the CHIL testbed. Stage 2 will conclude with the same evaluation rubric on the PHIL testbed. Leveraging MIT LL’s work on the Banshee Model, controllers will be evaluated on their ability to provide uninterruptable power to critical facilities and stabilize the grid under events such as a grid outage, highly variable generation or an internal fault. Interested parties may access the open source model at https://github.com/PowerSystemsHIL. Each controller will be tested using the same test setup and the same test sequence that will challenge its algorithms. Data collected during tests will be post processed and key performance parameters (KPP) will be evaluated. Using KPPs, each aspect of microgrid controller operation can be compared individually. However, to achieve an overall comparison of controller performance, each KPP is converted into single unit – U.S. dollars. The conversions used to obtain dollar values are hypothetical and are in place to incorporate relevant weighting of various KPPs. The baseline evaluation – CHIL without controller – will also be available. The weighting of each KPP is based upon two publicly available focus groups held in November 2016. The final result will be a sum of all revenues and expenditures that the hypothetical microgrid operator would encounter. These only include operational costs and revenue

https://github.com/PowerSystemsHIL

10

and do not include capital investment costs that would have been incurred to install the microgrid. Price parameters will be provided to selected vendors approximately two weeks prior to CHIL access.

Table 1 Scoring Rubric: KPP Summary (as a bill for microgrid operator)

KPP description Measured Units Unit Price KPP8 Sum KPP1 – Resiliency and reliability The ability to supply power to customers will be measured by calculating the energy delivered to each category of load. The prices of energy will differ considerably. Additionally, a penalty will be added for any outage on critical loads.

KPP1 $

Energy delivered to Critical loads (EC)

EC [kWh] P11 [$/kWh] EC *P11 [$]

Energy delivered to Priority loads (EP)

EP [kWh] P12 [$/kWh]] EP*P12 [$]

Energy delivered to Interruptible loads (EI)

EI [kWh] P13 [$/kWh] EI*P13 [$]

Energy delivered as Heat (EH) EH [kWh] P14 [$/kWh]] EH*P14 [$] Energy Critical loads Outage (ECO) ECO [kWh] P15 [$/kWh] -ECO*P15 [$] KPP2 - Operation and maintenance Costs of operating and maintaining the microgrid DERs and devices will depend on how these assets are managed. The cost places a value on degradation from use of devices (causing them to fail quicker, e.g. circuit breakers use).

KPP2 $

Used Fuel - Diesel (FD) FD [l] P21 [$/l] -FD*P21 [$] Used Fuel- Natural Gas (FNG) FNG [m3] P22 [$/m3] -FNG*P22[$] Number of Diesel starts (ND) ND P23 [$] -ND*P23 [$] Number Combined Heat & Power re-starts (NCHP)

NCHP P24 [$] -NCHP*P24 [$]

Number of Battery cycles (NB) NB P25 [$] -NB*P25 [$] Number of Circuit Breaker cycles (NCB)

NCB P26 [$] -NCB*P26 [$]

Fixed costs 1 P27 [$] - P27 [$] KPP3 - Interconnection contract The microgrid is connected to bulk grid based on a contract defining limits of power that can be imported or exported. The price of energy during the test sequence will vary between p31∈(P31 P32) to allow controller to benefit from its variability (e.g. dispatching energy from battery). The price of sold energy and energy over limit will be always proportional to variable p31. Coefficients will penalize use of energy over limit, (e.g. kBO =3, kEO =0.5).

KPP3 $

Exported Energy (EE) EE [kWh] PE $/kWh (p31) EE*p31 [$] Exported Energy Over limit (E E0) EE0 [kWh] PEO [$/kWh]

(p32=p31*kEO) EEO*p32 [$]

Energy imported (bought from grid. EB)

EB [kWh] PB [$/kWh] (p33=p31*kB)

-EB*p33 [$]

Energy imported over limit (bought from grid, EBO)

EBO [kWh] PBO [$/kWh] (p34=p31*kBO)

-EBO*p34 [$]

KPP4 – Distribution Service Operator (DSO) commands The microgrid controller can allow additional revenue by providing services to DSO on request. Some request are necessary, thus violating them causes a penalty.

KPP4 $

11

KPP description Measured Units Unit Price KPP8 Sum Meeting dispatch command premium (DP)

TDP min P41 [$/min] TDP * P41 [$]

Meeting demand command premium (DM)

TDM min P42 [$/min] TDM * P42 [$]

Following Volt/Var support premium (VV)

TVV min P43 [$/min] TVV * P43 [$]

Following Demand response curve (Freq/kW, FkW)

TFkW min P44 [$/min] TFKW * P44 [$]

Violating disconnect request (DR) TDR min P43 [$/min] -TDR * P45 [$]

Violating power factor request (PF) TPF min P44 [$/min] -TPF * P46 [$]

KPP5 - Power quality Voltage on each bus will be monitored for violation of IEEE 1547a-2014 – every violation exceeding clearing time defined in Table 1 of the standard will be counted. Frequency on grid forming device will be monitored for violation of IEEE 1547a-2014. Every violation exceeding clearing time defined in Table 2 of the standard will be counted.

KPP5 $

Number of voltage violations (NV) NV [1] P51 [$] -NV*P51 [$]

Number of frequency violations (NF)

NF [1] P52 [$] -NF*P51 [$]

KPP6 - Microgrid survivability To assure a certain level of microgrid survivability it is important to keep the level of battery charge at least at certain level during grid connected operation. Keeping battery State of Charge (SoC) below this level during grid connected conditions will cause penalty.

KPP6 $

Time below requested SoC (TBRS ) TBRS min P61[$/min] -TBRS* P61[$/min]

KPP7 – Fuel-Free Asset Utilization This KPP is measured using the amount of energy generated from PV to supply 1MWh of loads in the microgrid and PV energy generation. This value does not directly impact the score, but is indirectly included in the price of fuels used in KPP 2.

KPP7 $

Rate of PV energy production (RPV) RPV [%] 0$ KPP8 - Economical operation Sum of all KPP’s above will show the monetary result of all above performance metrics. A high result means that the microgrid operator achieves higher benefits of having the microgrid controller in comparison to not having it. Selection of prices parameters (Pxx) will define the aspects of microgrid control that impacts the result the most. By analyzing these prices participants should prepare their strategies to achieve highest value of KPP8.

SUM(KPPn, n=(1..7)) $

Cybersecurity Evaluation Process Stage 1 will include a cybersecurity review in the form of a written questionnaire issued to each of the five selected respondents and corresponding interview. Stage 2 will include comprehensive testing in NREL’s Cyber-Physical testbed for the final evaluation. Stage 1: Cybersecurity Control Review Selected respondents will provide answers to a series of questions that will reveal detailed information about the cybersecurity posture of their controller. NREL staff will create a custom plan for testing the cybersecurity posture of each controller based on the answers

12

to the questions. Specifically, selected respondents will be evaluated on the following functionalities:

1. Capable of supporting strong username and password (12+ characters including numerals, letters and symbols)

2. Ability to integrate with a Single Sign On methodology such as LDAP, Kerberos, NIS, etc.,

3. Ability to receive and transmit encrypted traffic 4. AES 128 or better encryption 5. Ability to implement PKI 6. Ability to use digital certificates for authentication 7. Two factor authentication (using out of band means for secondary authentication) 8. Authorization for access to data and controls by user profile 9. Syslog alarming and integration capability 10. Tamper resistance (e.g. last gasp alarm, self-ejection from system if compromised,

immunity from registries to be overwritten) 11. Secure firmware upgrade methodology 12. Remote access for security management using SSH.

Each of the five selected respondents will review the custom cybersecurity posture report from NREL staff and respond in writing about how they plan to implement improvements to their cybersecurity posture. NREL staff will evaluate the strength of the current posture and depth and feasibility of an implementation plan to make enhancements over the course of this opportunity to arrive at the Stage 1 cybersecurity score. Cybersecurity will account for 30% of the final Stage 1 score. Stage 2: Cyber-Physical Testbed Evaluation The final two offerors will have their controller evaluated in NREL’s Cyber-Physical testbed (offerors do not need to be at NREL during this 2-week period). NREL staff will develop a custom written report for each offeror that includes a detailed account of test results of the binary scans, data fuzz testing and pen testing conducted on each controller. NREL will evaluate the final cybersecurity posture and provide each offeror a mitigation strategies based upon this evaluation. The cybersecurity portion of Stage 2 accounts for 30% of the overall Stage 2 score.

VI. Cybersecurity Scoring Rubric All selected responders will have completed a clarifying call in which the following aspects of the technology and respondent’s team will have been evaluated. The score from the clarifying call (based upon the criteria in Table 2), will be added to the evaluation criteria in Table 3 to arrive at the total cybersecurity score for Stage 1 (which comprises 30% of the overall Stage 1 score). The score from Table 2 and Table 3 have equal weighting in the Stage 1 cybersecurity score.

13

Table 2: Clarifying Call Cybersecurity Evaluation Criteria

Criteria Weighting Domain expertise in microgrid technologies 25% Fluency with cybersecurity controls for microgrids 30% Level of professionalism 15% Customer support protocols 15% Existing partnerships 15% Total 100%

Table 3: Cybersecurity Posture Evaluation Criteria

Criteria Weighting Strength of the controller’s cybersecurity posture when entering Stage 1

40%

Strength of the implementation plan to improve controllers posture (based on Stage 1 evaluation)

30%

Confidence in the respondent’s team to make the proposed improvements in the timeframe of this opportunity (until Stage 2 cybersecurity testing begins)

30%

Total 100% In Stage 2, offerors will undergo a two-week cybersecurity evaluation in the Cyber-Physical testbed at NREL. This evaluation will constitute the entirety of the final cybersecurity score. The cybersecurity score will account for 20% of the overall Stage 2 score.

VII. Final Selection for Procurement Final selection for procurement is based solely upon Stage 2 performance in the PHIL and Cyber-Physical testbeds and price of the product offering. Stage 1 scores will not be included in final selection criteria.

Table 4: Final Selection Criteria

Criteria Weighting Power Systems Performance on PHIL- based upon KPPs in Table 1.

70%

Cybersecurity Performance on Cyber-Physical testbed

20%

Price (cost) submitted in the RFP cost proposal 10% Total 100%

VIII. Participant Expectations and Support Support from ESIF Operations Team Participants will be supported by ESIF Engineering and Operations staff to ensure proper setup and decommissioning of vendor controllers in the testbeds. Training and oversight

14

associated with safe operations and NREL procedures will be provided, but NREL staff will engage in any development assistance at any time, including during the period in which contending vendors have access to NREL testbeds. NREL will make every attempt to provide 100% access to the CHIL and PHIL testbeds during each vendor’s access period (except for the last day of access to each testbed, when NREL staff performs evaluations). However, unforeseen events may require maintenance or replacement of equipment in the PHIL testbed, which may limit teams’ access. If such an incident occurs, teams may need to alter their travel schedule. Semi-finalist teams should anticipate access to PHIL ~75% - 80% of their allotted time period. Participant-Expended Resources Upon applying for this opportunity, applicants must certify that their team has sufficient resources necessary to participate in the following activities, noting that participants are responsible for covering the costs associated with participation (including, but not limited to travel, lodging, salary, shipping expenses):

• Shipping the controller to NREL in time to be connected to the CHIL testbed • Providing a technician to support the initial connection of the controller to the CHIL

testbed (willing to travel to NREL if necessary for troubleshooting) • Supporting your team (or portion of the team) to work onsite at NREL for the two

weeks of PHIL access. • Responding to questions and discussions regarding development of the custom

cybersecurity test plan during Stage 1 preparation period. • Timely (within 2 weeks) review of any information NREL intends to publish. • Shipping or otherwise retrieving the controller after the pilot program concludes.

IX. Terms and Conditions

All participants in this procurement opportunity will become ESIF Users, who must agree to the terms and conditions of the Non-Proprietary User Agreement without modification. Details of the agreement are located at https://www.nrel.gov/esif/user-call.html Non-Proprietary User Agreement (excerpt)

• User may elect to retain title to any subject inventions created solely by User’s employees. The government retains the right to use these inventions for US government purposes.

• User’s pre-existing proprietary data may be designated as such and ownership of such data will remain with User. NREL will protect this information from disclosure.

• The government (i.e., NREL) and the User share broad rights to use any data generated by either NREL or the User under the agreement.

• NREL or User may publish the data, but will allow the other party to review prior to publication.

Selected responders are not obligated to disclose how they made improvements to their technologies over the course of the procurement evaluation, no matter where the

https://www.nrel.gov/esif/user-call.html

15

improvements took place (onsite at NREL or offsite). Participants have the right to elect ownership of any inventions they create during this process.

Individuals who will work onsite at NREL are required to complete all training associated with onboarding and the safe operation of ESIF equipment. Onboarding and training requirements are estimated to take approximately four (4) hours per person. Each individual must complete all required paperwork to be admitted on to NREL’s campus. Foreign Nationals must submit additional information at least three weeks prior to arriving onsite at NREL. NREL will solicit the information when needed. Admittance on NREL’s campus is at the discretion of the U.S. DOE.

X. Attribution and Treatment of Data

The identity of the selected respondents and offerors will not be publicly announced or made known to each other at any time before, during or after the competitive procurement. NREL will publicize the winner of the procurement contract once all agreements have been executed. The offeror ultimately selected for procurement will have the right to review all information prior to publication. This procurement will result in controller-specific power systems performance and cybersecurity evaluations that will be written up and given to each selected respondent, but not shared otherwise. NREL intends to publish a report that contains insights learned from this procurement for the benefit of the broader community. Results from CHIL, PHIL, and cybersecurity evaluations, will be aggregated and anonymized in a published technical article. Participants will have a chance to review the materials before publication. If results cannot be sufficiently annonymized, NREL will omit specific results and only include insights gained. Evaluation results will be shared with the U.S. DOE in an annonymized, but disaggregated manner. Insights gained from evaluating multiple microgrid controllers on identical testbeds under identical test sequences will be shared with IEEE standards working groups, but will not be attributed to any entity.

XI. Funding No funding is available for covering the cost of participation. Successful respondents are required to cover all of their team’s costs associated with participation. All of NREL’s costs associated with this procurement are supported by the U.S. Department of Energy.

Point of Contact: Sarah Truitt

(303) 275-4684 [email protected]

mailto:[email protected]

national renewable energy laboratory dual-staged microgrid … · 2019-05-29 · national renewable...

Documents