request for proposals (rfp)...2016/07/04 · 07 april 2016 closing date for (i) notification of...

Request for Proposals (RfP)

© 2016 Energy Technologies Institute LLP. The information in this document is the property of Energy Technologies Institute LLP and may not be copied or communicated to a third party or used for any purpose other than that for which it is supplied without the express written consent of Energy Technologies Institute LLP.

www.eti.co.uk Delivering the UK’s Future Energy Technologies 1

Heavy Duty Vehicle Efficiency Programme: HDV Marine Waste Heat Recovery Project

F.A.O. Paul Trinick, the ETI Project Manager Email: [email protected] Tel: +44 (0) 1509 202062 or Switchboard +44 (0) 1509 202020

mailto:[email protected]

Request for Proposals (RfP) Energy Technologies Institute



SUMMARY OF REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL INFORMATION

Summary of Key Information

Title of Project HDV Marine Waste Heat Recovery Project

Request issue date 07 April 2016

Closing date for submission of Proposals

30 June 2016

Closing Date for notification of intention to submit a Proposal and return of signed Non-Disclosure Agreement

28 April 2016

Contact for enquiries Paul Trinick

Email [email protected]

Telephone 01509 202020

Address for notification and submission of Proposals

ENERGY TECHNOLOGIES INSTITUTE Holywell Building Holywell Way Loughborough LE11 3UZ

Additional documents Location

1. Project Commercial and Legal Requirements http://www.eti.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/Commercial-and-Legal-Requirements-Marine-WHR-Final.pdf

2. Annex A1 – Due Diligence Information Requirements

http://www.eti.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/Annex-A1-Due-Diligence-Information-Requirements-Marine-WHR-Final.pdf

3. Annex A2 – General Due Diligence Requirements

http://www.eti.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/Annex-A2-General-Due-Diligence-Requirements.pdf

4. Annex A3 – Statement of Compliance http://www.eti.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/Annex-A3-Statement-of-Compliance.pdf

5. ETI Non-Disclosure Agreement http://www.eti.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/Marine-WHR-RfP-NDA-FINAL.pdf

A glossary of terms used in this RfP is provided at Appendix A.

mailto:[email protected]

http://www.eti.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/Commercial-and-Legal-Requirements-Marine-WHR-Final.pdf









http://www.eti.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/Annex-A3-Statement-of-Compliance.pdf



http://www.eti.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/Marine-WHR-RfP-NDA-FINAL.pdf






SUMMARY OF KEY PROJECT INFORMATION

Project Summary:

Heavy duty vehicles (HDV) such as shipping, heavy goods vehicles (HGV), construction equipment, agricultural equipment etc. currently contribute 8% to UK CO2 emissions. Apart from bio-fuels, the low carbon options for replacing fossil fuels as the energy source for HDV applications are limited. Fuel efficiency will therefore be increasingly important to the future affordability, security and sustainability of HDV operation in the UK.

Given the economic, security and climate change benefits of restraining or even reducing fuel consumption there is significant opportunity for early benefits from the introduction of improved vessels, especially as European legislation is likely to move from a focus on emissions to fuel efficiency over the period required to develop significant technology improvements.

The ETI anticipates that there is a significant opportunity to accelerate vessel technology development through investment in Platform Technologies which will enable and support vessel system development.

To address the concerns and accelerate the opportunities, the ETI has setup a Heavy Duty Vehicle Efficiency Programme, with the specific aim of identifying and demonstrating a package of efficiency improvement technologies relevant to multiple domains within this sector.

The ETI believes that it is realistic to target an overall weighted average efficiency improvement across the in scope applications in excess of 30%. The expectation is that vessels embodying technologies from this Programme will be on sale by 2022 and that the full efficiency benefit will be delivered into the market from 2030 onwards. It is intended that these vessels will be competitively superior products and will be purchased preferentially due to their superior economics and mission performance in use.

The main objective of this Project is a commercially-viable Waste Heat Recovery (WHR) system which will be retrofitable to a wide range of vessels.

As a minimum, the successful Respondent will need to demonstrate a design which will be manufactured, instrumented and tested in a controlled environment, before being retrofitted and demonstrated on a test vessel.

Project Investment:

The ETI is an investor in technology, not a grant giving body; a return on investment is expected. Value Returns are often in the form of royalty payments, however other forms of Value Return may also be appropriate.

The ETI is flexible as to how its Project investments are made. There are a number of potential options depending on the Project and the circumstances. Typically, the ETI Investment is provided substantially by a direct contribution towards Project costs, based on the quality of a number of deliverables provided to the ETI (and this is the ETI’s anticipation for this Project – see Section 3.10 (Payment)). Or, by way of example, where the Project is a substantial part of the business of the lead company involved in the Project, the ETI may consider providing the ETI Investment (or part of it) by acquiring an equity stake in that company. Whatever option, or combination of options are agreed, the ETI would prefer bids in which Participants also make a financial contribution.

The form of the ETI Investment in the Project will be agreed during the Project Shaping and Contract Negotiation Stage of the Project Commissioning Process.




Key Dates:

Request for Proposal and Selection dates

Issue of RfP 07 April 2016

Closing date for (i) notification of intention to submit a Proposal and (ii) return of signed Non-Disclosure Agreement.

28 April 2016

One-to-one briefings (if requested) at the ETI, Loughborough

16th-19th May 2016

Closing date for submission of Proposals

30 June 2016

Preferred Respondent notified End July 2016

Project timescales and anticipated dates

Project Contract execution target date January 2017

Project start February 2017

Project finish February 2019

Respondents shall be wholly responsible for the costs they incur in the preparation and submission of their Proposals in response to the RfP. The ETI shall not be responsible for, and shall not pay, any costs and expenses which may be incurred by Respondents in connection with participation in the Project Commissioning Process, including but not limited to any costs or expenses incurred up to and including execution of the Agreement.




TABLE OF CONTENTS

SUMMARY OF REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL INFORMATION ......................................................................... 2 SUMMARY OF KEY PROJECT INFORMATION ............................................................................................... 3 TABLE OF CONTENTS ...................................................................................................................................... 5 1 ETI INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................... 6

1.1 Programme Introduction ...................................................................................................................... 6 1.2 Product Development .......................................................................................................................... 7 1.3 Project Timeline ................................................................................................................................... 8

2 WELCOME TO THE RESPONDENTS ..................................................................................................... 12 3. THE REQUIREMENT ................................................................................................................................ 13

3.1 Project Introduction ............................................................................................................................ 13 3.2 Project Objectives .............................................................................................................................. 13 3.3 Project Scope .................................................................................................................................... 13 3.4 Technical Requirements .................................................................................................................... 14 3.5 Deliverables ....................................................................................................................................... 15 3.6 Key Resources .................................................................................................................................. 19 3.7 Timescale and Detail of any Milestones ............................................................................................ 19 3.8 Key Personnel ................................................................................................................................... 19 3.9 Project Meetings and Reviews .......................................................................................................... 19 3.10 Payment ............................................................................................................................................. 21

4. PROJECT COMMERCIAL AND LEGAL REQUIREMENTS .................................................................... 22 5. PROPOSAL, FORMAT AND SUBSEQUENT EVALUATION .................................................................. 24 6. PROJECT COMMISSIONING PROCESS ................................................................................................ 26

6.1 Notification of Intention to Submit a Proposal / NDA ......................................................................... 26 6.2 Submissions in Response to the RfP ................................................................................................ 26 6.3 Questions and Clarifications .............................................................................................................. 26 6.4 Selection Process .............................................................................................................................. 27 6.5 Project Shaping and Contract Negotiation Stage .............................................................................. 27

7. IMPORTANT NOTICES ............................................................................................................................ 29 8. ANNEXES.................................................................................................................................................. 31 APPENDIX A – GLOSSARY OF TERMS ......................................................................................................... 32 APPENDIX B – NOTIFICATION OF INTENTION TO SUBMIT A PROPOSAL ............................................... 37 APPENDIX C – NON-DISCLOSURE AGREEMENT EXECUTION INSTRUCTIONS ..................................... 38 APPENDIX D – PROPOSAL CONTENT AND FORMAT ................................................................................. 40




1 ETI INTRODUCTION

The Energy Technologies Institute (ETI) is a public-private partnership between global industries – BP, Caterpillar, EDF, Rolls-Royce and Shell – and the UK Government.

We are a commercial organisation that makes targeted commercial investments in technology projects, which can involve the ETI funding entire projects or working with Participants or third parties to co-fund project activity.

Further information can be found on our website at www.eti.co.uk

1.1 Programme Introduction

1.1.1 Background to the Heavy Duty Vehicle Efficiency Programme

Heavy duty vehicles (HDV) such as shipping, heavy goods vehicles (HGV), construction equipment, agricultural equipment etc. currently contribute 8% to UK CO2 emissions. Fuel efficiency will therefore be increasingly important to the future affordability, security and sustainability of HDV operation in the UK.

The ETI believes that there is a significant opportunity to accelerate vessel technology development through investment in Platform Technologies, such as WHR, which will enable and support vessel system development.

To address the concerns and accelerate the opportunities, the ETI has setup a Heavy Duty Vehicle Efficiency Programme, with the specific aim of identifying and demonstrating a package of efficiency improvement technologies relevant to multiple domains within this sector.

1.1.2 Programme Objectives

The ETI believes that it is realistic to achieve an overall weighted average efficiency improvement, across the in targeted technologies, in excess of 30%. The expectation is that new vessels deploying technologies developed under this Programme will be on sale by 2020, and a retrofitable solution will be available before that. It is intended that these vessels will be made more competitive as a result of the work undertaken by this Programme, and will be built in preference to less fuel efficient vessels.

1.1.3 Programme Structure

The Programme has been divided into two main parts with the aim of ensuring effective definition, development and integration of a number of key sub-systems and component technologies (Platform Technologies) into a number of vehicle demonstrations covering land and marine applications, specifically:

• Systems Integration – initial requirements and final demonstration at vehicle level; and • Platform Technology developments – at component / sub-system level.

The Programme has been further divided into land and marine sub-programmes, referred to as the HDV Land Programme and HDV Marine Programme, respectively. Each of the HDV Land Programme and HDV Marine Programme have Systems Integration and Platform Technology development parts.

This Project is part of the HDV Marine Programme and is a Platform Technology development project.

http://www.eti.co.uk/




1.2 Product Development

Section 3 sets out a range of marine vessels which, although not an exhaustive list, forms the target vessels for the proposed WHR technology. In order to satisfy the requirements of each of the vessel types it is expected that a full systems engineering approach will be adopted, as described in Figure 1 below.

Figure 1: Generic Model to Define Technology and Product Development Process (V-Model)

Note that the V-Model does not represent a linear set of steps or activities and that a high level of communication is expected between the Systems Integrator (Marine) and the component / sub-system Platform Technology developers.

Design Synthesis

Component Requirements

Sub-system Requirements

System Requirements

TIME

Customer Needs Product

Vessel Level e.g. Ship wide

Major System Level i.e. Vessel & Product Specification

Sub-system Level i.e. Sub-system Specification

Component Level e.g. Condenser unit

Design Activity

Vessel Requirements

Component Verification

Sub-system Verification

System Verification

Vessel Verification

Test

Req

uire

men

ts M

ap

With

in th

e sa

me

leve

l




Figure 2: Two Phase HDV Marine Programme approach showing information transfer

1.3 Project Timeline

It is expected that the following Project timeline will be met, and that the end product will reach Technology Readiness Level 7 (TRL), as a minimum, by the end of the Project.

Note: the TRL definitions are given in Table 1.

• RfP issue date: 7th April 2016

• Notification of intention to submit a Proposal and signed NDA: 28th April 2016

• One-to-one confidential briefings (if required): 16-19th April 2016

• Closure date for submission of Proposals: 30th June 2016

• Selection Panel: end July 2016

• Project Shaping and Contract Negotiation Stage (until): January 2017

• Project Contract Effective Date: early February 2017

Note: A summary Project Plan is given in Figure 3.




TRL Definitions

Low

1 Basic principles of the technology observed and reported.

2 Technology concept and/or application formulated.

3 Analytical and laboratory studies to validate analytical predictions.

Med

ium

4 Component and/or sub-system technology valid in Lab environment.

5 Component and/or basic sub-system technology valid in relevant environment.

6 System/sub-system technology model or prototype demo in relevant environment.

Hig

h

7 System technology prototype demo in an operational environment.

8 System technology qualified through test and demonstration.

9 System technology qualified through successful mission operations.

Table 1: TRL Definitions




Work up RFP

Selection Panel

Scoping project & legal contract

Design phase

Lab. Demo

Manufacturing & test phase

Land Demo

Marine integration phase

Sea trials

Project final report

end Q1 2016

end Q3 2016

end Q3 2017

end Q3 2018

end Q3 2019




Figure 3: High level Summary Project Plan

end Q1 2017

end Q1 2018

end Q1 2019




2 WELCOME TO THE RESPONDENTS

We are seeking Respondents who will bring their experience, expertise, innovation and solutions to our Project. The procurement process is designed to offer all Respondents the opportunity to engage in the Project.

All Respondents have an equal opportunity to be successful. Your Proposal will be given active consideration, recognising the need for compliance with our deliverables, reporting accountabilities and contractual requirements.

We value your enthusiasm, commitment and proposals from which we can benefit on this strategically important project. Your investment in time and resources making the Proposal is appreciated.




3. THE REQUIREMENT

3.1 Project Introduction

A previous ETI project has identified WHR as a key technology in achieving the target vessel efficiency increase. It is the intention of the ETI to procure a Project to design, develop and deliver a WHR system, including retrofitable hardware and a scale demonstration of the hardware during this Project. Therefore, this Request for Proposals is for the design, delivery and demonstration of a WHR system technology.

A vessel’s fuel efficiency can be improved by reducing the electrical load provided by the ship’s generating sources. It can also be improved by extracting heat energy from the exhaust stream, substantially reducing the temperature of the exhaust gas by converting heat to electricity.

The aim of the proposed Project is to develop the WHR technology through TRL level 4/5 to TRL7 (as a minimum) by demonstrating the technology at full scale (see Table 1 for definitions of TRLs).

It is anticipated that the WHR system technology could deliver a fuel efficiency benefit of greater than 8% on most vessels.

3.2 Project Objectives

Some of the current challenges facing designers of WHR systems for marine applications are as follows:

• ability to develop and prove a commercially viable solution (appropriate capital cost vs operator benefit);

• ensuring robustness, durability and reliability of the system;

• ensuring the maintenance activity frequency for the system application;

• developing a system architecture that can be effectively packaged in a range of vessels.

The overall objective of this Project is to demonstrate, via a combination of simulation and operational hardware, that the challenges outlined above for the development of a cost effective platform WHR System can be addressed. It is preferable that the bidder will source an appropriate sea going vessel, integrate the technologies onto that vessel, and measure and present vessel performance improvements. This platform design must be capable of being adapted to meet the requirements (cost, volumes, operational conditions) of the representative marine vessels, as listed in Table 2.

HDV Marine Segment Representative Vessel

Chemical / Oil Tanker Length over all: 115 m, Dead Weight Tonnes: 9,900 tonnes

General cargo (dry bulk) Length over all: 200 m, Dead Weight Tonnes: 45,000 tonnes

Container feeder Length over all: 134 m, Dead Weight Tonnes: 9,000 tonnes

RoPax (Dover-Calais type) Length over all: 180+ m, Dead Weight Tonnes: ~9,000+ DWT

Offshore Support Vessel (OSV) (Anchor handler)

Length over all: 87.4 m, Dead Weight Tonnes:

Table 2: Representative UK HDV Marine Fleet Vessels

3.3 Project Scope

Optimised designs and supporting simulation analyses for the representative vessels described in Table 2 are required. The aim is to demonstrate technology flexibility and application across the in-scope HDV marine portfolio. The Project must include manufacture-ready detailed design drawings and calculations, System Integration studies and comply with legislative and Classification Society rules.




The successful Respondent(s) will be expected to manage procurement, manufacture, and demonstrate the technology at full-scale. The demonstration system will be instrumented and safely tested, as part of this Project scope and demonstrated on a sea-going vessel as described in Section 3.2.

A clear route to future commercial exploitation shall be investigated and presented. This shall include design tools or optimisation software, and supply chain establishment, protection of designs and other intellectual property to facilitate technology exploitation.

3.4 Technical Requirements

Whilst the ETI wants a Platform Technology and solution that is broadly applicable to the HDV marine portfolio, the individual designs need to be capable of achieving market success within their sector of application. To enable the technical requirements, specific to the various sectors, applications have been identified and documented in this section.

The ETI is focussed on developing technology that will be utilised in the real world and provide a meaningful reduction in CO2 emissions. As a result, the commercial viability of the WHR system will be critical to the overall success of the Project.

Another key requirement is a real world improvement in vessel efficiency, of greater than 8%, across the representative UK HDV Marine Fleet vessels, described in Table 2.

3.4.1 Product Cost

The ETI acknowledges that cost estimates are dependent on a number of factors and can be sensitive to assumptions.

The ETI has established maximum representative product “on costs” (price increase that the end user pays above the current technology; this includes fitting) for two of the representative applications. Below these maxima the ETI believes the technology will be financially appealing to vessel operators and users. This has been established based on anticipated fuel savings and industry accepted Payback Period.

Application / Vessel Max. “on cost” (£/kW) Target “Pay back” (years) Container Feeder 1,200 2 Chemical / Oil Tanker 1,200 2

Table 3: Target “on cost” and “pay-back” term

Respondents are expected to provide justified cost estimates for the two representative applications in Table 3 (or similar, representative vessel), based on the following volumes:

Application / Vessel Vessel volume (per annum)

Initial (low) Established Container Feeder 200 500 Chemical / Oil Tanker 200 500

Table 4: Vessel Volumes for cost estimation purposes

These estimates should utilise the experience and knowledge of the Respondent organisation(s) (raw materials, production, assembly and inspection cost should all be accounted for in the estimations). Respondents should comment on factory / production setup and declare the factory asset cost as separate items (e.g. jigs & fixtures, production machinery, test and inspection, plus other investment costs.)

The cost estimates and justification of these will form part of the Selection Criteria for this Project (refer to Section 5 – Proposal, Format and Subsequent Evaluation.)




3.4.2 System Requirements

WHR integration into the ship’s systems, including human factor engineering, is key to the adoption and success of the technology. In this section we set out some of the desirable system attributes.

Durability, reliability and life requirements

The WHR system must not negatively impact the durability, reliability or life of the vessels systems.

As the ETI requires a Platform Technology approach, the system must be capable of operation in the most arduous environmental conditions associated with the representative vessels, according to Classification Society rules. In addition, we expect the WHR system to have a positive influence on the vessels’ range under all operating conditions.

Where any item of the WHR system is fully integrated into the vessel, the required target life is to be equal to or greater than the ship’s service life, allowing for degradation due to age and environment. Refit applications shall have a service life equal to or greater than the refit vessel without incurring excessive costs to decommission.

Service / Overhaul requirements

The WHR system should be designed so that major servicing / overhaul of the components matches major and minor refit intervals as per Classification Society demands, or owner’s custom and practise.

Vessel Integration

As the ETI is looking to maximise the impact of this Project on real world CO2, it is a requirement of the Project, that the WHR system is retrofitable to the 5 representative vessel applications.

3.5 Deliverables

The Project should be divided into three parts, comprising specification, design and Verification. This methodology relates to the V-model approach and is shown in Figure 4, below.

Part 1 (Specification): The Work Packages will include (as a minimum):

• literature review and competitive technology landscape report;

• basis of design, system requirements and specification;

• basic simulation models that explore and report:

operation of the concept(s) and their particulars;

expected performance; and

assumptions and uncertainties;

• system level Failure Mode and Effect Analysis (FMEA) and test matrix (based on FMEA outputs); and

• documented approach and plan for potential exploitation routes.

Part 2 (Design): less well defined and it is for the Respondent to outline the shape of this part and confirm the expected breakdown of deliverables. It is expected that the Work Packages in this part will include (as a minimum):

• detailed simulation models (stating assumptions made);

• CAD models, estimated costs and layouts for the component and system design;

• detailed design, system integration plans, FMEA and drawings for the Demonstrator vessel;

• updated test matrix and design verification plan based on part level FMEAs and new knowledge;




• drawings for the planned verification system(s), including instrumentation details;

• identification of the number of test pieces required; and

• a final version of the exploitation plan in line with the Project Objectives (Section 3.2), together with any evidence of exploitation activity.

Part 3 (Verification): mostly undefined, as this part is largely based on the outputs of the previous two parts. However, at a high level there are several deliverables that are required (as a minimum):

• manufacturing, assembly and verification of the WHR system;

• instrumentation of the verification system(s) (in accordance with the Part 2 output);

• testing (as per test matrices and plans);

• test result reports, comparison with analytical expectations and variation report;

• reports / models for any verification that is solely reliant on Computer Aided Engineering (CAE i.e. finite element models, etc.);

• final verification of all systems updated with knowledge gained during physical testing; and

• full-scale demonstration on-board a sea-going vessel.

Figure 4 – Project breakdown overlaid onto the V-model

3.5.1 Part 1 (Specification): Scope of Work and Deliverables

Work Package 1.1: Literature Review and Competitive Technology Landscape

This Work Package will examine and report previous work carried out on WHR focused on heavy duty applications. The work should include an investigation into the potential challenges facing the design of WHR systems for heavy duty use and potential solutions to overcome these problems. The work will highlight any




gaps in previous work and identify development opportunities that can be investigated in Work Package 1.4 (see below) and developed in Part 2 (Design).

Key Deliverables:

A detailed technical report to cover the following areas:

• current technology status for WHR technologies;

• areas of continued research in WHR;

• potential development challenges for WHR in marine applications; and

• companies or organisations active in the WHR systems technologies.

Work Package 1.2: Simulation model development

This Work Package will focus on developing models that are capable of representing and analysing the following:

• concept(s) system performance capabilities and limits;

• performance of the system based on typical vessel operating cycles; and

• sensitivity analysis to verify model and system capability.

The models needs to cover (but not be limited to) the 5 segments of the UK HDV fleet outlined in Table 2.

Key Deliverables:

A detailed technical report of the model development work which includes:

• full explanation of all assumptions used in the model(s);

• full explanation of all the system interactions that the model does and does not include; and

• all validation data and results from the model.

Work Package 1.3: System level FMEA and Verification test matrix

A detailed system level FMEA will be undertaken and the outputs used to define the overall system level verification matrix. This verification matrix must address any specific requirements from the Systems Integrator (Marine).

Key Deliverables:

A verification test matrix report will include the following:

• details of the system level FMEA and the approach to this;

• illustrate a clear link between the specifications from Work Package 1.4 and the planned verification tasks; and

• a clear statement on which specific capabilities are going to be verified by analysis only, analysis in combination with testing and those by testing alone.

Work Package 1.4: Approved specifications for commercially viable WHR systems

Any detailed specific requirements of the Systems Integrator (Marine) (generated as a consequence of their vessel level modelling and design work) and the model developed in Work Package 1.2, will be used to




establish the requirements for system and components. FMEA data (from Work Package 1.3) should be used to aid negotiation of criteria parameters and interfaces.

Key Deliverables:

A specification document for the system and components that will include:

• a cost model for the overall system and the associated modules;

• the approach to platform design (e.g. how part or engineering re-use will be maximised);

• operating limitations;

• expected target lives (operating hours or other stated variable);

• critical interdependence / requirements from interfacing components; and

• fitting, retrofitting, and service requirements including outlined details of any specialist assembly, inspection or manufacturing apparatus that might be required as a consequence of the WHR.

Any other specific requirements as determined through agreement with the Systems Integrator (Marine).

Work Package 1.5: Exploitation planning

To enable both the ETI and the Respondents to extract maximum value from the new technology, a clear exploitation plan is required (in line with the requirements in Section 3.2; Project Objectives)

Key Deliverables:

A report that covers:

• key market expectations for any new technology;

• a Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities & Threats (SWOT) analysis for the WHR technology, including any market specific items; and

this shall include design tools or optimisation software, and supply chain establishment, protection of designs and other intellectual property to facilitate technology exploitation;

• a clear route to future commercial exploitation should be presented, identification of potential routes to market(s) and key challenges in leveraging these;

• updated expected sales figures for the markets and potential ways to increase these sales; and

• a plan covering:

Tasks required to overcome challenges in leveraging markets;

knowledge dissemination into other products; and

potential exhibitions and conferences and information required for these.

3.5.2 Part 2 (Design): Scope of Work and Deliverables

Respondents are expected to shape this part of the Project. The approach and resulting work breakdown structure (including deliverables) must be clearly documented.

Any key resources, tools (i.e. optimization software) etc. must be clearly listed.




3.5.3 Part 3 (Verification): Scope of Work and Deliverables

Respondents are expected to shape this part of the Project. The approach and resulting work breakdown structure (including deliverables) must be clearly documented.

It is critical that these verification activities mitigate key component risks, as identified by both the system and part level FMEAs.

3.6 Key Resources

Validation test rigs and interfaces (mechanical or otherwise) need to be stated together with any associated Health, Safety and/or Environmental risks and constraints must also be stated.

3.7 Timescale and Detail of any Milestones

The ETI is envisaging that the Project will be delivered a maximum of 24 months after Project Contract signature and no later than February 2019. It is anticipated that Stage Gate Reviews (SGR) will be held at strategic points during the Project. As a minimum, SGRs will be held at the end of each part. Project Milestones should be identified by the Respondent and detailed in the Proposal. The ETI’s preference would be for three/four Milestones per year, to include a number of Integration milestones and one on completion of each part of the Project. If additional payment Milestones are required to satisfy cash flow requirements, then these should be discussed during contract shaping. Budget should be apportioned for post Project presentations to the ETI Members and wider dissemination to industry.

3.8 Key Personnel

The ETI places great emphasis on two critical roles in the delivery of the Project – the Project Manager (PM) and the Chief Technologist (CT) – who together will lead the Project on behalf of the Prime Contractor.

The Project Manager is responsible for leading and managing the Project team, delivering the Project outputs of work to time, cost and Project quality, handling information flows and commercial issues.

The Chief Technologist is responsible (on behalf of the Prime Contractor) for the technical quality and content of the work and ensuring the competence of key technical staff allocated to individual work packages.

3.9 Project Meetings and Reviews

Project Manager meetings between the ETI PM and the Project PM will be held weekly by telephone and are expected to take approximately one hour.

Technical review meetings are anticipated to be held at key points in the Project, to be agreed once the Project Plan is available. Attendees will include ETI PM and Strategy Manager (or substitute); the Project PM and CT plus any other staff as necessary. The location of these meetings is expected to be at the ETI’s offices in Loughborough, however some meetings may be held at the Participant’s offices or by telephone, if the ETI considers it appropriate. If meetings take place by telephone, they are anticipated to be a maximum of 2 hours in duration; face to face meetings up to 4 hours duration. In the first technical review meeting, the Participant(s) are to brief the ETI on their scope and approach. In the last technical review meeting prior to submitting the final report, the Participant(s) should be in a position to brief the ETI on the results of the Project.

The ETI expects that there will be SGRs at strategic points during the Project, as a minimum, at the end of each part. A SGR is a ‘go / no-go’ decision point for the ETI to determine, with support from the Project Team, whether the Project is on track to deliver the intended outcomes and whether the intended scope of the Project has been satisfactorily completed to date.

A number of integration Milestones will occur. The aim is to ensure the smooth integration of sub-system technology into the overall vessel demonstrator. It should be possible (and desirable) to align the project and integration Milestones so as to adhere to the guidance of three/four Milestones in total per year.




The following table lists anticipated dates for integration:

Integration Milestones Objective Anticipated Date

IMS 1 Level setting & requirements capture complete During Q2, 2017

IMS 2 System design & vessel integration review. During Q4, 2017

IMS 3 Deliver final system for vessel demonstration.

To be agreed during Project Shaping and Contract Negotiation Stage activities, and to align with marine Systems Integration requirements

IMS 4 Full-scale vessel demonstration To be agreed during Project Shaping and Contract Negotiation Stage, however expected to commence early Q4, 2018

Table 5 – Integration Milestone events and anticipated dates

It is anticipated that these events will cover the following topics:

IMS 1 – Level setting & requirements capture:

• In line and as part of Work Package 1.4 (Section 3.5).

IMS 2 – System design and vessel integration review:

• interface points (mechanical) and package requirements;

• simulation models; and

• operator interface and controls strategy (fundamental).

IMS 3 – Deliver final system for vessel demonstration:

• system for vessel demonstration that has been subjected to appropriate testing demonstrating performance capabilities and safety requirements (durability, fail-safe mode, etc.);

• fully developed controls system;

• WHR system installation and maintenance documentation; and

• Classification Society approval as required (e.g. type approval, which would include design and manufacture review.).

IMS 4 – Full-scale sea-going vessel demonstration:

• to consist of appropriate system testing, demonstrate performance capabilities and safety requirements (durability, fail-safe mode, etc.)

Engineering support (potentially at the vessel integration demonstrator’s site) will be required from IMS 3 onwards.

Engineering support will also be required for vessel testing through 2018, with an in-service inspection and partial strip towards the end of 2018.




3.10 Payment

Payment will be made by the ETI following (and subject to) successful completion of agreed Milestones (to be proposed by the Respondent and as agreed during the Project Shaping and Contract Negotiation Stage). These Milestones must be based on tangible deliverables that can justify the value of the payment.

Please refer to Section 7 (Project Payment Structure) of the Project Commercial and Legal Requirements document, for further information.




4. PROJECT COMMERCIAL AND LEGAL REQUIREMENTS

Please refer to the separate Project Commercial and Legal Requirements document, noting that the following specific requirements apply to this Project:

• Value Return – Please refer to the typical Value Return requirements for a Technology Development or System Demonstration Project (as set out on page 2 of the Project Commercial and Legal Requirements document). See also Intellectual Property, below.

The ETI anticipates that the main Value Return of the Project will be provided by way of payment of royalties to the ETI. Nevertheless, Respondents should consider all types of “value” and propose a fair Value Return. The table below (Table 6) contains a non-exhaustive list of types of value which may be considered by Respondents for the purpose of forming a Value Return proposal. Please note that the table is intended to demonstrate the types of value that may arise and is not intended to demonstrate any order of preference.

Respondents should bear in mind that, although detailed negotiation of the Value Return is expected during the Project Shaping and Contract Negotiation Stage, the ETI can only select preferred Respondents on the basis of information provided in their Proposal / Submission.

• Intellectual Property – Please refer to Section 2 (Intellectual Property) of the Project Commercial and Legal Requirements document, including (in particular) the section on Technology Development Projects and System Demonstration Projects. For this Project, the ETI anticipates that Arising IP will be owned by the Participant(s), in accordance with the principle(s) set out in the Project Commercial and Legal Requirements document (in return for an appropriate Value Return).

The ETI anticipates that:

Respondent(s) selected to proceed to the Project Shaping and Contract Negotiation Stage will be required to conduct a Patent Study (prior to execution of the Project Contract) at their own expense; and

• additionally, one or more Patent Studies will be required during the course of the Project (the costs associated with which will be discussed during the Project Shaping and Contract Negotiation Stage); the ETI anticipates that it will meet the costs of each such Patent Study as part of the ETI Investment.

• Participant Contracting Structure – Prime Contractor strongly preferred.

• Form of ETI Investment – Fixed Price strongly preferred.

• It is expected that the Project will include a demonstration activity and references in Section 8 of the Project Commercial and Legal Requirements document to CDM regulations may apply. The ETI anticipates that a formal Health, Safety and Environment (HSE) Competency Assessment will be required.




Potential Value Examples (non-exhaustive)

Direct financial return / financial benefits from technology commercialisation

• Royalty income to the ETI from the exploitation of Project results by Participants and (where relevant) third parties (including royalty income from: the sale of components or systems containing technology developed in the Project, the supply of services etc.); Respondents should include proposals for a formula for any royalty, any limitation on the payment of royalties and how royalties would apply to commercial uses of the relevant technology (including sub-licensing).

• Alternative ways for the ETI and its Members to share in the successful financial commercialisation of the technology.

Sharing the financial risk of the Project

• Monies (Participant Funding / Third Party Funding) • Capital (e.g. Tooling for modification) • Assets (e.g. Donor machines / vehicles) • Labour • Loan of facilities Note: the ETI requires that Participants will take the risk of all overruns to Project costs.

Access to Project results/outputs and Intellectual Property

Benefits to the ETI and its Members arising from access to and/or other value derived from Project results/outputs and intellectual property rights, including: • rights to use and exploit Project results / Arising IP; • financial benefits from technology commercialisation (see

below); • deliverables/results available to the ETI and its Members

promptly during the Project; • reports of results at all stages of the Project (including to

facilitate access to and understanding of validation and demonstration work throughout the Project);

• use of Project results in other ETI projects (including for integration with technologies developed in other projects in the Programme); and

• opportunities for the ETI and its Members to witness testing during the Project.

Preferential access for the ETI and its Members to technologies, equipment and/or services

• Preferential/improved access to specific innovations/devices. • Preferential access to manufacturing slots. • Guaranteed delivery times. • Preferential unit prices / discounted product costs. • Preferential operational support packages.

Miscellaneous • equity investment (in appropriate circumstances). • benefits to the UK economy.

Table 6: Value Return examples




5. PROPOSAL, FORMAT AND SUBSEQUENT EVALUATION

Your Proposal shall follow the format set out in Appendix D.

All Proposals will be evaluated by the ETI against the Selection Criteria , which fall into the following categories: completeness of information; Project approach; capability of organisations and individuals; technology compliance, maturity and cost; Project cost and Value Return; ability of the Proposal to achieve the Project Objectives (see Section 3.2).

Respondents should note that specific, independent and objective evidence of performance, capabilities and experience will carry greater weight than general statements about and organisational capabilities and experience:

a) Ability of the Participant(s) to deliver the Project, based on evidence provided in the Proposal and presented at the Selection Panel(s). It should be noted that the performance of the Respondents and quality of information provided to the ETI during the Project Commissioning Process will be considered by the ETI as an indicator of likely performance during the Project:

Technical:

o experience and availability of the proposed Chief Technologist; and

o level of experience and completeness of the technical skills of the Prime Contractor (and Subcontractors) to deliver the Project, including:

ability to simulate technology benefits on UK HDV Marine Fleet representative vessels; and

ability to perform real world analysis of demonstrator vessel.

Delivery:

o experience and availability of the proposed Project Manager;

o record and ability in quality, timely and on-budget delivery of projects (of the type requested in this RfP) to the full satisfaction of the main stakeholders;

o project management systems and expertise appropriate for this sort of project;

o effectiveness of the contracting, organisational, governance and control structures and processes proposed for the participating entities / organisations, including interfacing with ETI as it requires, etc.;

o project approach and credible plan to deliver on quality, budget and time, including Gantt chart, and Milestones. Timing of suitable SGR points will be decided upon once the Project schedule is available;

o risk management. Respondents will need to demonstrate clear evidence of a rigorous, risk-based approach to management of the Project. A register identifying the key risks and how they will be managed is required; and

o ability to demonstrate on an appropriate vessel and provide a route to exploitation; and

o appropriate health, safety and environmental management systems and experience.

b) Compliance with the Requirements:

o compliance with the requirements set out in Section 3 of this RfP; and the Project Commercial and Legal Requirements document (section 4)




c) Value for money with respect to Project funding:

o competitiveness of costs;

o contributions from Participants and third parties (including funding, in-kind support and making their own IP available to the Project, e.g. data, models, previous analysis);

o the extent to which there may be Background IP and/or Third Party IP which would prevent the Project proceeding or the Project results / Arising IP being exploited;

o Value Return (to ETI / Members), value to Participant(s), ability and freedom to exploit the technology in all applicable markets; and

o willingness and capacity to accept the financial risk profile for the Project.

d) Risks associated with reaching acceptable agreement with the ETI within the timescales set out in this RfP:

o Respondents’ willingness to materially comply with the terms and conditions of the proposed Project Contract; and

o availability and commitment of the necessary technical, legal and financial resources to meet the requirements of ETI’s Project Commissioning Process.

e) Specific Project Selection Criteria:

Product related:

o Health, Safety and Environment: the system must operate in a safe and controlled manner at all times, including loss of electrical power, etc. in compliance with IMO and Classification Society rules;

o total (ceiling) CAPEX cost: £1,200/kW (this is for all vessel types and includes installation);

o production volumes expected to be in the range 200-500 units p.a. (guidance only);

o input temperature: 100-300oC;

o output electrical power: 100-300kWe; and

o the system must be retrofitable.

o Proposal should include a credible route to full-scale demonstration.

General:

o a Non-Disclosure Agreement must be in place.




6. PROJECT COMMISSIONING PROCESS

The ETI is using a two-stage process to commission the Project:

Stage 1 – RfP Issue, receipt of Proposals/Submissions and selection of preferred Respondent(s); and

Stage 2 – Project Shaping and Contract Negotiation Stage.

Stage 1 includes:

6.1 Notification of Intention to Submit a Proposal / NDA

Prior to making a Submission in response to this RfP, Respondents are required to provide to the ETI:

a) a formal notification of their intention to submit a Proposal, in the form set out at Appendix B, and

b) a Non-Disclosure Agreement in the form provided on the website alongside this RfP, signed by all Respondents involved in the Proposal and returned to the ETI in accordance with the instructions at Appendix C.

Both documents must be received by the ETI no later than the closing date specified in the Key Dates table on page four of this RfP

6.2 Submissions in Response to the RfP

Respondents are required to make a Submission comprising the following components.

a) Detailed Proposal, arranged according to the structure set out in Appendix D. The content must clearly demonstrate how the proposed Prime Contractor or Consortium, as appropriate, will meet the requirements and criteria set out in Sections 3 to 5 of this RfP. The Proposal must be written in a succinct manner and must not include imprecise statements, generalities or repetition. The Proposal must be easily readable with appropriate font sizes (10pt or larger), margin widths, and shall not exceed a maximum of 30 pages, plus supporting information.

b) Any supporting information as specifically set out in Appendix D.

c) Initial due-diligence information, as set out in Section 1 of the Due Diligence Information Requirements (Annex A1, including in relation to State aid, insurance, intellectual property, health, safety and the environment, and the General Due Diligence Requirements, Annex A2).

d) Statement of Compliance, with supporting information, confirming compliance with or identifying exceptions to the requirements of this RfP and/or the draft Project Contract, as set out in Annex A3. This must be signed by each Respondent; if a Consortium structure is proposed, every member organisation of the Consortium must provide a separate Statement of Compliance.

Additional information (such as organisational brochures, etc.) may be provided to accompany the Submission, but such additional information will not be taken into account when reviewing Proposals.

The Submission shall be provided in electronic format, in both PDF and Microsoft Word formats, with each component as a separate file.

6.3 Questions and Clarifications

Potential Respondents may request a one-to-one briefing with the ETI. The purpose of this would be to further describe the Project requirements and to provide an opportunity to ask questions prior to further development of Respondents’ Submissions in response to this RfP.

Respondents should indicate their desire to attend a one-to-one meeting by contacting the ETI using the same contact details at the front of this RfP, no later than the deadline for submission of the signed Non-Disclosure Agreement. The ETI shall notify Respondents of their allocated meeting dates and times when the number of attendees is known. Such meetings will be a maximum of two hours duration and will take place at the ETI’s offices in Loughborough or by teleconference. The ETI will not meet with Respondents unless they have submitted signed NDAs according to the instructions in Appendix C.




The ETI welcomes written questions from Respondents for ETI consideration and written responses. The questions are to be submitted no later than one month before the closing date for submission of Proposals (date given at the front of this RfP). The ETI will endeavour to provide written answers in a reasonable period, prior to submission of the proposal.

Any advice or clarifications of ETI requirements requested by and provided to any Respondent may (at the ETI’s discretion) be made available to all Respondents to ensure parity of information. Respondents should therefore consider presenting requests for advice and clarifications in a way that the ETI can respond to all Respondents without revealing confidential information.

6.4 Selection Process

Following the closing date for Submissions, the ETI will convene an appropriate Selection Panel to consider Proposals that satisfy our criteria.

Respondents may be requested to make a presentation to the Selection Panel to support information provided in their Submission. Respondents should ensure that all information and evidence that the Submission meets the Selection Criteria is included in their Proposal.

The ETI may also request further clarifications before or after the meeting of the Selection Panel and as part of the Project Shaping and Contract Negotiation Stage.

In the event that the ETI receives a large number of Submissions, the ETI may make an assessment to select a manageable shortlist of Respondents/Submissions for consideration by the Selection Panel; the maximum number is likely to be approximately five.

The Selection Panel will make a recommendation to the ETI as to the preferred Respondent(s) to move forward into the Project Shaping and Contract Negotiation Stage (however, Respondents should note that the final decision to proceed with any Respondent(s) rests with the ETI).

Stage 2:

6.5 Project Shaping and Contract Negotiation Stage

Following selection, the ETI will invite any preferred Respondent(s) to enter into negotiations with the ETI to shape the Project and finalise the terms of the Project Contract.

The ETI may decide to negotiate with more than one Respondent or group of Respondents (as appropriate) to ensure that all key issues are resolved fully and promptly, before making a final selection decision.

The Project Shaping and Contract Negotiation Stage will include the following activities (as required and dependent on the level of detail provided in the Respondent’s Proposal):

a) negotiation and agreement of the detailed Value Return;

b) detailing of the proposed technical programme, including definition of deliverables, acceptance criteria and date for the delivery of hardware for the demonstration(s) during the Project.

c) detailing and agreement of Stage Gate Reviews, where Project performance and the business case are critically reviewed and decisions taken on whether to proceed with the Project;

d) negotiation and agreement of the Project Contract;

e) detailing and due diligence relating to the breakdown of costs of the Project;

f) further intellectual property due diligence, which the ETI anticipates will include a Patent Study (see Annex A1 Section 2);

g) further due diligence activities as required (see Annex A1 Section 2);




h) agreement (and approval as required by the ETI) to terms of other key contractual arrangements (e.g. Subcontracts, Consortium Agreement, as appropriate);

i) gaining all necessary Respondent and ETI approvals to undertake the Project; and

j) any further information or assessment that may be necessary to meet State aid requirements.

Respondents are required to commit to provide legal, technical, commercial and managerial resources as required to achieve the target Project Contract execution date. The ETI reserves the right to re-open/conduct discussions with other parties and/or cancel the commissioning of the Project should it consider at any time that this date may not be achieved.




7. IMPORTANT NOTICES

a) The ETI at its discretion may request clarification of a Proposal, and may reject any Proposal which is unclear.

b) Neither the issue of any documentation in the Project Commissioning Process nor any of the information presented in it should be regarded as a commitment or representation on the part of the ETI or any other person to enter into a contractual arrangement. The issue of the RfP is not an agreement or offer to purchase goods or services, and the ETI is not bound to enter into any contract with the (or any) Respondent. By responding to this Request for Proposals, the Respondent does not commit itself to entering into a contract with the ETI.

c) All decisions made by the ETI relating to the acceptance, review and selection or otherwise of Proposals are final.

d) All documents, including Proposals, submitted to the ETI become the property of the ETI. They will be received and held in confidence by the ETI, subject to the terms of the Non-Disclosure Agreement. No part of a Proposal, or other documents provided by Respondents, shall be returned.

e) The ETI reserves the right at any time to (i) withdraw the RfP; (ii) change the basis, timetable and/or requirements of, and/or the procedures for, the Project Commissioning Process, including the timetable or closing date for receipt by the ETI of Proposals/Submissions, (iii) make modifications to, or alter any of the information within, the RfP (iv) reject any or all of the Proposals received, (v) not invite any Respondent(s) to proceed further, and/or (vi) terminate the Project Commissioning Process.

f) Neither the ETI nor any of its agents or advisers accepts any liability or responsibility for the accuracy, adequacy or completeness of any of the information provided or any opinions contained in this RfP or of any other information made available during the Project Commissioning Process. No representation or warranty, express or implied, is or will be given by the ETI or any of its agents or advisers with respect to such information provided or opinion given therein. Any liability is thereby expressly disclaimed to the fullest extent permitted by applicable law.

g) Respondents must assess the information and terms contained in this RfP independently, having taken professional advice if necessary. Each Respondent will be deemed to have examined all the documents provided with this Request for Proposals and by its own independent observations and enquiries will be held to have fully informed itself as to the nature and extent of the requirements of the RfP. Each Respondent must rely on its own enquiries and on the terms and conditions contained in any agreement, when and if finally executed, subject to such limitations and restrictions as may be specified therein.

h) Respondents shall be wholly responsible for the costs they incur in the preparation and submission of their responses to the RfP. The ETI shall not be responsible for, and shall not pay, any costs and expenses which may be incurred by the Respondent (or by any third party, including proposed Subcontractors) in connection with its participation in the Project Commissioning Process, including any costs or expenses incurred up to and including the execution of the Project Contract.

i) The ETI may, at its discretion, shortlist Respondents for the next stage of the Project Commissioning Process (Project Shaping and Contract Negotiation Stage). The ETI does not undertake to accept the lowest bid or to accept part or all of any Proposal and the acknowledgement of receipt of any Proposal/Submission (and/or any invitation to any Respondent(s) to proceed to the next stage) shall not constitute any actual or implied agreement between the ETI and the Respondent(s).

j) The copyright in the documentation and any other materials supplied by the ETI and/or its advisers in this Project Commissioning Process, in whatever format, belongs to the ETI or its appointed advisers. Such documentation and materials may not, either in whole or in part, be copied, reproduced, distributed or otherwise made available to any other third party or used without the prior written consent of the ETI, except in relation to the preparation of the Proposal/Submission in the course of




the Project Commissioning Process. All documentation supplied by the ETI in relation to this Project Commissioning Process must be returned on demand, without any copies being retained by the Respondent(s).

k) In this RfP, any phrase introduced by the term “include”, “including”, “in particular”, “for example”, “such as” or similar expression shall be construed as illustrative and shall not limit the sense of the words preceding that term.

l) This RfP, and any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with it (including any dispute or claim relating to non-contractual obligations), shall be governed by and construed in all respects in accordance with the laws of England and Wales and the parties agree that the Courts of England and Wales shall have exclusive jurisdiction to settle any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with this RfP (including any non-contractual disputes or claims).

m) The submission of a Proposal will confirm acceptance of the foregoing provisions by the Respondent(s) without qualification. Any attempt to qualify any of the foregoing provisions in this Section 7 (Important Notices), either expressly or impliedly, may result in a Respondent (or Respondents) being disqualified.




8. ANNEXES

Additional Documents

1. Project Commercial and Legal Requirements

2. Annex A1 – Due Diligence Information Requirements

3. Annex A2 – General Due Diligence Requirements

4. Annex A3 – Statement of Compliance

5. ETI Non-Disclosure Agreement




APPENDIX A – GLOSSARY OF TERMS

Term Definition

Arising IP Any intellectual property which is created by or for any Participant during the Project or for the purposes of the Project.

Background IP Any intellectual property which existed prior to any Participant’s commencement of the Project and which was created by or for the Participant.

Capped Cost An ETI Investment structure under which payment will only be made in respect of eligible costs1 actually incurred by a Participant in the performance of the Project, up to a contractually agreed cap for each accepted Milestone.

Chief Technologist The individual as described in Section 3.8.

Classification Society A non-governmental organisation that establishes and maintains technical standards for the construction and operation of ships and offshore structures. The society will also validate that construction is according to these standards and carry out regular surveys in service to ensure compliance with the standards.

Company Registration Number Company number as registered at Companies House. Universities should enter their Royal Charter (RC) number in place of the Company Registration Number.

Computer Aided Engineering (CAE)

CAE is the broad usage of computer software to aid in engineering analysis tasks. It includes Finite Element Analysis (FEA), Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD), Multibody dynamics (MBD), and optimization.

Consortium The group of organisations which contract with the ETI to perform the Project. This will not include the ETI itself or any Subcontractors.

Consortium Agreement The agreement to be entered into between the organisations together forming a Consortium, which governs the execution of the Project within the Consortium.

Consortium Member An organisation which forms part of the Consortium.

Dead Weight Tonnes (DWT) Deadweight tonnage (DWT) or tons deadweight (TDW) is a measure of how much mass a ship can safely carry; it does not include the weight of the ship. DWT is the sum of the weights of cargo, fuel, fresh water, ballast water, provisions, passengers, and crew.

Due Diligence Information Requirements

Due Diligence Information Requirements are provided in Annex A1.

ETI The Energy Technologies Institute LLP, a limited liability partnership (Company no. OC333553) whose registered office is at Holywell Building, Holywell Way, Loughborough, Leicestershire LE11 3UZ.

ETI Investment The amount to be made available by the ETI for the Project.

Fixed Price An ETI Investment structure under which agreed fixed payments will be made against each accepted Milestone.

1 Further information is available on request from the ETI on costs that are eligible for ETI investment.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_software

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Engineering

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Finite_Element_Analysis

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computational_Fluid_Dynamics

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multibody_dynamics

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Optimization

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cargo

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fresh_water

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sailing_ballast#Water_ballast

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crew




Failure Mode & Effect Analysis (FMEA)

An FMEA is often the first step of a system reliability study. It involves reviewing as many components, assemblies, and subsystems as possible to identify failure modes, their causes and effects.

General Due Diligence Requirements

General Due Diligence Requirements are provided in Annex A2.

HDV Land Programme The sub-set of the ETI Heavy Duty Vehicle Efficiency Programme that incorporates a three phase approach to improving land based vehicle efficiency.

HDV Marine Programme The sub-set of the ETI Heavy Duty Vehicle Efficiency Programme that includes the Project.

Health, Safety and Environment (HSE)

HSE exists to protect employees, the public, the environment and to comply with applicable laws and protect the Company’s reputation.

Heavy Duty Vehicle (HDV) Heavy duty vehicles (HDV), such as shipping.

Heavy Goods Vehicle (HGV) Heavy goods vehicles (HGV), such as construction equipment, agricultural equipment etc.

Her Majesty’s Government Her Majesty’s Government, including but not limited to all of its departments and executive agencies and the devolved administrations of Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland.

IP Intellectual property.

Lead Coordinator The organisation which is a Consortium Member, and which manages and coordinates the activities of all the Consortium Members, and which acts as the primary interface between the Consortium and the ETI.

Member The ETI’s industry members (as identified on the ETI’s website) and Her Majesty’s Government (including but not limited to those public sector members identified on the ETI’s website (above) from time to time).

Milestone A contract milestone with defined constituent deliverables, associated deliverable acceptance criteria, deliverable value and milestone value (all to be detailed in the Respondent’s Proposal and negotiated/agreed in the Project Contract which should be completed in order to reach the said milestone, and following successful completion of which, subject to acceptance by the ETI that the milestone has in fact been reached, payment may be claimed from the ETI.

NI National Insurance

Non-Disclosure Agreement A non-disclosure agreement in the form provided at Appendix C.

Own Funds (Participant Funding)

Funding sourced by the Respondent’s own resources and not dependent in any way on third party lending to either the Respondent or member of the Respondent’s group.

Participant Either the Prime Contractor or a Consortium Member.

Participant Funding (Own Funds)

Funding provided by a Participant from its own resources and not dependent in any way on Third Party Funding.

Patent Study A patent clearance / freedom to operate search and analysis and/or a patent landscape search and analysis, to be conducted by




Respondents or Participants (as appropriate) at the request of and to the requirements of the ETI.

Payback Period The time in which the initial cash outflow of an investment is expected to be recovered from the cash inflows, generated by the investment.

Platform Technology A technology (and its associated interfaces) that can be efficiently implemented into a wide range of products (in this case a vessel). These vessels will vary in scale and use and therefore, Platform Technologies must scale efficiently and be robust to a wide range of noise factors.

Prime Contractor A sole organisation which contracts with the ETI to perform the Project, on its own or (subject to ETI approval) together with Subcontractors.

Private Funding Third Party Funding other than Public Funding.

Programme The ETI Heavy Duty Vehicle Efficiency Programme that includes the Project.

Project The ETI project for which the purpose, scope of work and other details are described in this Request for Proposals.

Project Commercial and Legal Requirements

The separate document published as part of the RfP setting out the ETI’s commercial and legal requirements for ETI projects.

Project Commissioning Process The ETI’s process for procuring the Project, including those parts of the process described at Section 6.

Project Contract The contract to be entered into between the ETI and the Participants (whether the Consortium Members or a Prime Contractor).

Project Manager The individual as described in Section 3.8.

Project Objectives The objectives of the Project as described in Section 3.2. and 3.3

Project Organisation The entity or group of entities / organisations, and the contracting and management structure which they adopt, which together will carry out the Project if commissioned by the ETI and includes any Consortium Members or Prime Contractor and any Subcontractors.

Project Plan The project plan given at Figure 3.

Project Shaping and Contract Negotiation Stage

The Project/contract negotiation stage of the Project Commissioning Process, as described at Section 6.

Proposal A proposal for the Project submitted to the ETI, in response to this Request for Proposals.

Public Funding Any Third Party Funding provided by a public authority or agency.

RfP This Request for Proposals (including its Appendices and the Annexes / additional documents (see Section 8)).

Respondent(s) The organisation (in the case of a Prime Contractor) or organisations (in the case of a Consortium structure) submitting a Proposal to the ETI.

Review Point A Project review involving Project Participants and ETI representatives at which the overall progress in Project or a specific Work Package will be critically reviewed and following which a formal decision will made on the future Project programme.




Selection Criteria The criteria by which Proposals/Submissions are evaluated; the Selection Criteria for the Project are described at Sections 3, 4 and 5.

Selection Panel A group of technical specialists who will assess the offer and presentation against the Selection Criteria, Project Objectives, etc.

Sensitivity analysis The study of how uncertainty in the output of a mathematical model or system (numerical or otherwise) can be apportioned to different sources of uncertainty in its inputs.

Stage Gate Review / SGR A major Review Point involving Participants and ETI representatives at which the overall performance and business case for the Project will be critically reviewed and following which a formal decision will be made whether to continue with the Project, based on whether agreed Stage Gate Review criteria have been met.

Statement of Compliance The statement of compliance required by the ETI, as described at Annex A3.

Subcontract A contractual arrangement between a Participant and another organisation to which work for the Project has been subcontracted.

Subcontractor An organisation which has a Subcontract.

Submission A Proposal, supporting information and other components (as required by Section 6.2) submitted by the Respondent(s) in response to this Request for Proposals.

SWOT Analysis SWOT analysis is a four letter acronym for strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats—and is a structured planning method that evaluates those four elements of a Project or business venture.

Systems Integrator / Systems Integration

A systems integrator is a person or company that specialises in bringing together component subsystems into a whole and ensuring that those subsystems function together, a practice known as systems integration.

Systems Integrator (Marine) A Systems Integrator for the ETI project(s) under the HDV Marine Programme.

Task A significant activity or group of activities (within a Work Package) which results in completion of a deliverable or a significant part of one, or which represents a significant step in the process towards one.

Technical Requirements The technical requirements identified in Section 3.4.

Technology Readiness Levels (TRL)

Technology Readiness Levels are a method of estimating the maturity of a technology during its development.

Third Party Funding Funding provided to or for the purposes of the Project directly or indirectly by an organisation, person or entity other than the ETI or a Participant. For the avoidance of doubt, “third party” includes (i) any organisation, person or entity lending to a Participant, (ii) any organisation / person / entity in the same group as the Participant and (iii) any Subcontractor.

Third Party IP Intellectual Property owned by a third party.

Total Project Cost The amount proposed by Respondent(s) as the total cost of the Project (ETI Investment + Participant Funding + Third Party Funding).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uncertainty

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mathematical_model

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uncertainty

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plan

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Business

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/System_integration

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/System_integration




Type Approval Independent product verification provided as an efficient alternative for the approval of identical products. It is indefinite, but subject to timely or change controlled review.

UK HDV Marine Fleet Those ships voyaging to UK ports (including domestic, UK to UK).

Value Return The value to be delivered by the Project to the ETI, the Members and the UK economy in return for the ETI’s investment in the Project.

Verification Verification, in engineering or quality management systems, is the act of reviewing, inspecting or testing, in order to establish and document that a product, service or system meets, regulatory or technical standards.

Waste Heat Recovery (WHR) A process which enables recovery of energy from hot flue gasses, which would otherwise be vented to atmosphere; the recovered energy is then converted into a useful form, such as electrical power.

Work Package (WP) A major section of the Project scope of work, which may be identified in this Request for Proposals or in the Respondent’s Proposal, in order to break up the scope of work into separate manageable parts. A Work Package will usually consist of a number of Tasks.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Verification_and_validation




APPENDIX B – NOTIFICATION OF INTENTION TO SUBMIT A PROPOSAL

The following form is to be completed and received at the ETI address (postal or email) on page 2 no later than the date given at the front (page 2) of this RfP.

Notification of Intention to Submit a Proposal

Respondent Name: [Legal Name]

Address: [Registered Office Address]

Contact:

Email/telephone:

The above named Respondent hereby notifies the ETI of its intention to submit a Proposal in response to the ETI’s Request for Proposals entitled HDV Marine Waste Heat Recovery Project, issued on the date shown at the front of this RfP.

The Respondent submits this notification on its own behalf and on behalf of the following proposed [Consortium Members] [Subcontractors]:

Please list below the legal names of the organisations / entities proposed to deliver the Project.

1. [Enter Name]

2. [Enter Name]

3. [Enter Name]

4. [Enter Name]

5. [Enter Name]

6. [Enter Name]

7. [Enter Name]

8. [Enter Name]

9. [Enter Name]

10. [Enter Name]

Signed: _____________________________________

For and on behalf of the Respondent(s).

Name: ______________________________________

Date: _______________________________________




APPENDIX C – NON-DISCLOSURE AGREEMENT EXECUTION INSTRUCTIONS

The Non-Disclosure Agreement (NDA) protects the confidential information of the Respondents and the ETI during the period of the Project Commissioning Process. For the successful Respondent(s), the confidentiality provisions in the Project Contract (when executed) will supersede this NDA.

Notes

In order to ensure parity across different groups of Respondents, the ETI will not enter into negotiations on the terms of this NDA.

Respondents should note the definition of ‘Respondents’ in the ETI NDA: for the purpose of the NDA this just refers to named parties signing the NDA. The NDA allows exchange of information received from one party with another, but not sharing confidential information with other bidders.

NDA Execution Process / Instructions

A separate electronic version of the NDA is available on the ETI Website alongside this RfP document for completion and signature by Respondents in accordance with the following instructions.

In the case of a Prime Contractor as Respondent:

• The Prime Contractor should complete Schedule 1 of a single electronic NDA with its company (legal) details and a postal address for return by the ETI of a fully executed NDA.

• The Prime Contractor should print and sign TWO paper copies of the NDA. The NDA must not be dated on the front page.

• The Prime Contractor should scan a copy of a signed and undated NDA and email it to the ETI at the address given at the front of this RfP.

• The Prime Contractor should post both original signed and undated copies to the ETI.

• On receipt, the ETI will countersign and date the two original copies of the NDA. The ETI will retain one of these copies and post the other to the Prime Contractor at the address provided by the Prime Contractor at Schedule 1 of the completed NDA. Note that the ETI will not release confidential information (e.g. the draft Project Contract) until the NDA has been executed by both parties.

In the case of Respondents intending to submit a Proposal as a Consortium, the ETI intends to execute the NDA in counterparts as follows:

• The proposed Lead Coordinator should complete Schedule 1 of a single electronic NDA with the legal company details of all Respondents (the Lead Coordinator and each of the other proposed Consortium Members), together with a single postal address for return by the ETI of fully executed NDAs.

• The Lead Coordinator should circulate electronically the NDA with the fully completed Schedule 1 to all Respondents and to the ETI (at the email address at the front of this RfP).

• Each of the Respondents (all proposed Consortium Members including the Lead Coordinator) should print and sign TWO paper copies of the NDA. The NDA must not be dated on the front page.

• For each Respondent, one of the signed undated counterpart NDAs should be scanned and sent by email to the ETI at the address at the front of this RfP.

• For each Respondent, ONE original (hard copy) undated counterpart signed NDA should be sent to the ETI by post at the address in the Summary of Key Information table at the front of the RfP (we would recommend using a courier). The ETI recommends that the other original undated signed NDA is sent by the Respondents to the Lead Coordinator so that the Lead Coordinator may hold a complete set of original counterpart NDAs, one signed by each Respondent, on behalf of the Respondents.




• On receipt of a complete set of original counterpart NDAs (one signed by each Respondent), the ETI will sign and date two further counterpart copies of the NDA. The ETI will notify the Lead Coordinator of the date of the NDA (i.e. the date of the ETI’s signature) so that the original Respondent counterparts held by the Lead Coordinator may be dated on the front page. Note that the ETI will not release confidential information (e.g. the draft Project Contract) until the NDA has been executed by all parties.

• The ETI will retain one of the original counterpart NDAs signed and dated by the ETI; the ETI will return the other original ETI counterpart NDA to the Lead Coordinator to hold on behalf of the Respondents.

• The ETI and the Lead Coordinator should each then have a complete set of original, dated, counterpart NDAs.




APPENDIX D – PROPOSAL CONTENT AND FORMAT

The Proposal shall be arranged according to the structure defined below and shall explicitly include all the information listed. Proposals should not exceed a maximum of 30 pages. Appendices are in addition to this stipulation.

Executive Summary

[no more than 2 pages]

This should briefly describe:

• Your organisation and the Project Organisation structure (including whether bidding as Prime Contractor or Consortium basis);

• Your relevant experience and expertise;

• Summary of the proposed outcomes, approaches taken and key deliverables;

• Summary of the proposed technology and product costs;

• Proposed ETI investment, any investment from the Participant(s) (if relevant) and the basis of the ETI investment (i.e. Fixed Price or Capped Cost); and

• Confirmation of compliance with RfP requirements, including the Contract, and any material exceptions/deviations.

Background to Proposed Participants and Structure

[no more than 3 pages, plus appendices, if required, to include:]

• Project Participants – a brief description of each proposed Participant, together with any proposed Subcontractors, partners and suppliers of goods/services who have key roles to play in the Project;

• Key Individuals and Roles – identify all key roles and all key individuals, in addition to key technical and other specialists. It must specifically include the detail of the nominated Project Manager and Chief Technologist. The estimated proportion of each individual’s time to be dedicated to the Project should be identified and their skills and expertise in relation to the Project’s deliverables should be summarised. CVs should be included as an Appendix; and

• Project Organisation – a brief explanation of the intended contracting/Project organisational structure including an organisation diagram showing the organisation(s) and their principal roles, complete with key personnel and their roles.

Project Description

[no more than 5 pages, plus appendices if required to include:]

• Project Approach – Respondents should provide a summary of the overall approach to the Project, including a work flow description which clearly identifies the key Work Packages, their interdependencies and how they contribute to the overall Project outcome. This work flow should identify Project and technology Milestones and any other key review points where overall progress on the Project will be critically reviewed

• Programme of work (including but not limited to an overview of testing, verification and demonstration activities). The ETI has suggested a structured approach in Section 3.5 of the RfP body. Respondents should follow this for defining Part 1 of the Project (Specification). Beyond this Part 1, Work Packages that encompasses the required outputs (as a minimum and as listed in Section 3.5 of the RfP body) must be produced and detailed by the Respondents. Each Work Package should be broken down into Tasks and a Task-by-Task description of the proposed work provided, identifying for each Task:




The Task leader and others Participants (and/or Subcontractors) involved.

The Task objectives.

Key Dependencies / Interdependencies between tasks.

The technical approach (e.g. methodologies, tools, techniques).

Deliverables produced (labelled D1, D2 to Dn, where n = the total number of deliverables).

Issues or assumptions (including HSE risks and constraints).

Key resources (specific software tools, validation test rigs etc.).

As far as possible, Respondents should be specific about the activities within the Task. Where Work Packages involve experimental work, Respondents should identify the proposed test facility/site and provide a high-level justification for its use. Any relevant activities related to but not included within this Project and the relationships with these activities, should also be described. Proposed technologies for the Project should be described and the benefits assessed;

• Description of proposed technologies, critical features / functions. (Schematic illustrations are to be used to aid the detailed description of key technologies and critical features / functions. These include interfacing with the vessel (both physical and virtual (controls)), any sensor requirements and specific features to ensure the safe operation / fail safe behaviour of the system. Within this description, the technology / features utilised to ensure durability, reliability and safe operation must be described / illustrated and a statement must be made to confirm the ability of the system to achieve the system requirements.

• Technology potential: Estimates are required as part of the response to this RfP against the following criteria:

Ability to use the technology for all HDV UK Marine Fleet vessels.

Maturity of technologies at commencement of the Project (ETI does not fund pure research programmes; i.e. TRL levels <4, see Table 1).

Proficiency in design for robustness, risk management and systems analysis tools such as FMEA etc.

• Product cost: Respondents should produce justified cost estimates for the two representative vessels, for the two estimated volumes as per Section 3.4.1 (above). A short introduction to the approach used and any key information should be added to the main body of the Proposal. Comments should be included regarding the factory / production setup, and any changes associated with production volumes. Details justifying the cost estimate should be included in the Proposal appendix.

• Project Schedule: Respondents should provide a summary time schedule (preferably in the form of a Gantt chart) for the Project, highlighting:

Work Packages and tasks (including duration, inputs required from the ETI or other parties, other external dependencies, timing for required permissions and consents);

Project Milestones;

Project deliverables;

contingencies; and

critical path.

• Milestones (we expect 3-4 per year) with a set of deliverables associated with each;

• Project Management Approach and Activities.




Risk Management

• [no more than 2 pages, plus Risk Register]

• Respondents should identify the key risks and their approach to managing them. They should explain which risks will be managed exclusively by the Participant(s), which risks will be managed by the ETI and which risks will be jointly managed between the Participant(s) and the ETI.

Value Return and Exploitation Planning


• The potential Value Return proposed by the Respondent(s) should be detailed in this section of the Proposal. Respondents should read Section 4 (Project Commercial and Legal; Requirements) of the RfP body before completing this section of their Proposal; which should include details of:

potential value return to Respondents;

potential Value Return to the ETI and its Members; and

approach to commercialisation and exploitation of the proposed technologies and outcomes.

Due Diligence

• The ETI’s due diligence requirements in relation to the Submission of a Proposal are set out in Annex A1.

Health, Safety & Environmental Management

[no more than 1 page]

• Respondents should set out how they will meet the requirements of Section 8 of the Project Commercial and Legal Requirements document, as relevant for the proposed Project approach.

Intellectual Property


Respondents should fully familiarise themselves with Section 2 (Intellectual Property) of the Project Commercial and Legal Requirements document before completing this section.

Background IP and Third Party IP

Respondents should identify and describe any Background IP and Third Party IP (e.g. patents, copyright in reports, proprietary data, computer algorithms, know-how and other IP, and including specifically in relation to (but not limited to) deliverables, reports, data or software models) to the extent that there is Background IP and/or Third Party IP which will or may be needed:

• by the ETI, a Participant, a Subcontractor (or otherwise) to carry out the Project or otherwise during the Project; or

• by the ETI, a Member and/or any other third party to use and/or exploit the Project results/outputs/Arising IP.

The identification and description of any such Background IP and/or Third Party IP should detail:

• the nature of the IP (including the legal nature of the IP right); • the persons having ownership and control of the IP (whether this is a Respondent, Subcontractor or

any other third party); • the rights to that IP that are or may be required, by whom and for what purposes; and • whether there is any reason that such Background IP or Third Party IP (as appropriate) will (or may)

not be made available as and for the extent needed for the purposes of the Project and/or use and/or exploitation of Project results/outputs/Arising IP.




Previous patent searches/studies

Respondents should also, where possible, provide a copy of any patent study/searches previously obtained that may be relevant to the Project (for example, in relation to Background IP, Third Party IP and/or any relevant technology).

Additionally, and in any event, Respondents should identify in the Proposal a Chartered Patent Attorney or European Patent Attorney that the Respondents propose to use (if selected to proceed to the Project Shaping and Contract Negotiation Stage) to carry out any required Patent Study or Studies (see Section 2 of Annex A1).

Arising IP

Respondents should provide a brief overview of the nature of any anticipated Arising IP from each part of the Project (including where appropriate each Work Package), including the relevant areas of the technology and the form of the anticipated intellectual property rights. This should expressly include reference to development of any existing technology, any innovations, any results and know-how.

Respondents should indicate how their proposed Value Return relates to the Arising IP identified in this section.

It is anticipated (as part of the Value Return) that the Participant(s) should own the Arising IP and that some form of royalty shall be payable to the ETI upon successful implementation of resulting products in the market place. If any other proposal is to be made, early discussion with the ETI should be held to see whether any alternative proposal is capable of meeting the Project Objectives.

Respondents are reminded that, where Arising IP is owned by a Participant, the Participant will be required to license the Arising IP it owns to the ETI exclusively, so that the ETI can in turn sub-licence it to anyone who has exploitation rights (including, where appropriate, the Participant(s)). Respondents should, therefore, include in their Proposals details of the anticipated use and exploitation of Project results, and the (sub)licences of Arising IP they propose are required, by the Participant(s). This should also expressly include:

• reference to development in any existing technology, any innovations, any results and know-how;

• the sublicensing rights that will be needed in order to commercialise the technology; and

• a suitable Value Return proposal.

Respondents are also reminded (i) of the ETI’s approach in relation to Participants who are academic institutions, (ii) that profit will not generally be paid to a Participant in addition to the grant of a (sub)licence of Arising IP, and (iii) that the ETI does not generally grant Arising IP rights to Subcontractors (see Section 2 (Intellectual Property) of the Project Commercial and Legal Requirements document).

Respondents who are academic institutions should include details of their proposed requirements in relation to academic research and teaching in the relevant Proposal.

The ETI’s preference is that the Project be carried out by a Prime Contractor, with Subcontractors where appropriate (see Section 4). however, in the event that Respondents propose a Consortium contracting structure, the Proposal should identify which Participant (note – not a Subcontractor) would own each item of Arising IP and the reasons why such Participant should be the owner, including details of:

• the overall contribution of such Participant;

• the intellectual property experience and capabilities of such Participant which would justify granting it the rights and obligations of ownership, protection and maintenance of such Arising IP; and

• any other reasons why such Participant should be the owner of the Arising IP.




Dissemination

It is expected that the primary route for dissemination of the Project results will be through the Participant(s). The ETI welcomes any proposals for active dissemination from any Respondents and these should be set out, including specifically the areas of the Project outputs that Respondents would seek to disseminate and the strategy. The Project Contract will set out the ETI’s publication process.

Project Costs


The Respondent should provide a breakdown of the total Fixed Price contract value as set out in tables 7-9 (below). If there are any assumptions or limitations to this price, these should be clearly stated.

Respondents should provide:

• a figure for the proposed Total Project Cost;

• a figure for the proposed (maximum) ETI Investment;

• figures for any proposed Participant Funding and/or Third Party Funding (as appropriate);

• a statement on whether the offer is made on a Fixed Price or Capped Cost basis, and any assumptions or limitations to the price; and

• a breakdown of Total Project Cost (a) between Milestones and, in the case of a proposed Consortium contracting structure (noting that the ETI’s strong preference is for a Prime Contractor structure), between Participants against each Milestone, (b) between Participants and cost categories and (if relevant) (c) between the ETI Investment and other sources of funds, in the form shown in tables 7 - 9 below.

Notes to Respondents on Category Breakdown table

Labour should include direct add-ons (e.g. NI, pension etc.)

If a Prime Contractor/Subcontractor Project structure is proposed, major Subcontractors should be considered as Participants and fill in a column in the table.

If a Capped Cost approach is proposed, Participants will be required to provide justification of overhead calculations during the Project Shaping and Contract Negotiation Stage. ETI can provide a spreadsheet to calculate overheads on request.

Participants should note that, under State aid rules, profit cannot be paid to Participants if they wish to receive a licence for Arising IP.

Academic Consortium Members should determine their costs using the JeS system. Note that ETI funds academic Consortium Members at 100% Full Economic Cost.

Note that during the Project Shaping and Contract Negotiation Stage (prior to Project Contract signature) the ETI will require more detailed cost breakdowns, including a schedule of payments against the Milestones. This will require completion of ETI’s Project budget forms. Whilst not compulsory, it is recommended that Participants use these forms in support of this Proposal to produce the Project costings, particularly if a Capped Cost approach is proposed. These forms are available from the ETI on request.




Table 7: Project Costs

Finish Date Participant 1 (Lead Coordinator or

Prime Contractor)

Participant 2 Participant 3 Participant 4 etc. Total

Milestone 1

Milestone 2

Milestone 3

TOTALS





Participant 1 (Lead Coordinator or Prime

Contractor)

Participant/ Major Subcontractor 2


Participant/ Major Subcontractor 4 etc.

Total

Number of Person-days

Materials Consumed

Capital Equipment

Subcontracts; Consultancy; Fees including fees for Trial and Testing

Travel and Subsistence

Other Costs

Labour Costs

Profit

Overheads

TOTAL PROJECT COSTS (ELIGIBLE COSTS)

Respondents should note that this breakdown is required where (as preferred by the ETI) a Fixed Price is proposed, to enable the ETI to undertake a value for money assessment.





Participant 1 (Lead Coordinator or Prime

Contractor)



Participant/ Major Subcontractor 4 etc.

Total

ETI Investment (Project Contract)

ETI Investment (%)

Own Funds (Participant Funding)

Third Party Funding (Private Funding)

Third Party Funding (Public Funding)

ETI Equity Investment (if applicable)