EERE eXCHANGE: FAQs

Question 1: The FOA makes the following statement: “Applicants may only submit one Concept Paper and one Full Application for consideration under this FOA. This limitation does not prohibit an applicant from collaborating on other applications (e.g., as a potential Subrecipient or partner) so long as the entity is only listed as the Prime Applicant on one Concept Paper and Full Application submitted under this FOA.” For purposes of this FOA is the “entity” defined as a single investigator, or an organization? Is the intent here that an organization (University, National Lab, etc.) who is the prime on the project can only submit one concept paper and one Full Application in response to this FOA? Or are multiple, prime submissions allowed from a given organization?
Answer 1: Please refer to Section III.A. of the FOA, which defines eligible applicants. “Entity” refers to any one of the eligible applicants listed in this section of the FOA.

Question 2: How can we find what is new to BETO. I.e. what is already existing in BETO's portfolio.
Answer 2:

Please refer to the BETO website, as well as the Office's Multiyear Program Plan, design case reports, and conversion pathways. Additionally, key publications can be found in the “Information Resources” section of our website and in the Bioenergy Knowledge Discovery Framework (Bioenergy KDF).

Question 3: Will the FOA Webinar ppt presentation be available to us?
Answer 3: The FOA Webinar, as well as questions and answers from the webinar will be posted on EERE Exchange at: https://eere-exchange.energy.gov. Please note that you must first select this specific FOA Number in order to view the webinar slide deck and questions and answers.

Question 4: Under "submission of multiple applications" - FOA states that applicants may only submit one Concept Paper and One Application. Is the "applicant" a single PI, or an institution?
Answer 4: Please refer to Section III.A. of the FOA, which defines eligible applicants. “Applicant” refers to any one of the eligible applicants listed in this section of the FOA.

Question 5: I have a question clarifying your statement of 501(c)3 eligibility if it has engaged in lobbying activities over the past 19 years. Can you direct me to that policy in the FOA?
Answer 5: See the footnote under Section III.A.2 of the FOA.

Question 6: By "Road Map" are you referring to the May 2013 document entitled Multi-Year program Plan (of the Bioenergy Technologies Office)?
Answer 6: Yes.

Question 7: There appear to be four major overall topics that qualify for funding. Are applications sought which address one or multiple topics. They are, from the Roadmap: Feedstock Supply and Logistics, Conversion R&D, Demonstration & Deployment, Crosscutting.
Answer 7: Applications from one or more platforms from the MYPP would be sought, but the scope of the projects should be at TRLs 2-4. Since Demonstration and Deployment project are typically at TRLs > 4, proposers need to address innovative solutions to address scale-up challenges for biofuels (and bioproducts and biopower that enable biofuels production).

Question 8: Are multiple PIs allowed for this RFA?
Answer 8: Each application should list a primary PI and this person will serve as the main technical contact for the application; however, Co-PIs can be listed on the application.

Question 9: If I think my Technical Readiness Level (TRL) is between 1 and 2, am I still eligible to apply? I am asking if I can include fundamental scientific aspects connected to practical applications for a scientific understanding of new phenomena observed in a concept paper.
Answer 9: This FOA is “open” to any and all impactful areas which significantly advance the mission of the BETO (which BETO is not currently supporting in a substantial way), in all aspects of the bioenergy supply chain, from feedstock supply and logistics to conversion processes. Potential incubator projects are expected be at early TRL levels (2-4). Please see Appendix E for a full description of TRLs. Also, see Section I.C. of the FOA.

Question 10: The mission of the BETO office is stated as including both bioenergy and bioproducts, and the guidance in the FOA indicates that impactful areas that will advance this mission are being sought for the FOA. But, much of the language of the FOA seem to revolve around bioenergy research rather than on bioproducts. Are Concept Papers and Proposals being encouraged focussed on bioproducts as related to energy savings and efficiency to move from petroleum feedstocks?
Answer 10: Energy savings and energy efficiency of bioproducts are in important consideration, as it drives the overall economics of the production process. However, as described in the FOA (pgs. 1 and 2), BETO would encourage concept papers for bioproducts that enable the production of biofuels.

Question 11: At the section “B. Cost Sharing”, the FOA clearly stated that “The cost share must be at least 20% of the total allowable costs (i.e., the sum of the Government share, including FFRDC costs if applicable, and the recipient share of allowable costs equals the total allowable cost of the project) for research and development projects. (See 10 CFR 600.30 for the applicable cost sharing requirements.)” A few days ago, at the EERE-exchange website, I looked at the FAQs under “non-FOA related items” to get myself familiar with the EERE-exchange. I noticed that the content in Q&A # 7 and 34 (see attached) is different from this Incubator FOA. It appears that under this Incubator FOA, the cost-share involving FFRDC is different from other EERE FOAs. My question is, is there is change in EERE in general, or are FOAs in EERE-exchange different from one another concerning cost-sharing involving FFRDC?
Answer 11: Each FOA has its own cost sharing requirements and applicants should adhere to the requirements listed in the FOA that they wish to apply. For the Incubator FOA, the cost share must be at least 20% of the total allowable costs (i.e., the sum of the Government share, including FFRDC costs if applicable, and the recipient share of allowable costs equals the total allowable cost of the project) for research and development projects. (See 10 CFR 600.30 for the applicable cost sharing requirements.).

Question 12: In the instructions for the FOA on page 15 and 16, there is a significant confusion about the page limitation and structure of the concept paper. Within the table, it specifically states the concept paper is to be two (2) pages covering the following topics the “Applicants are required to describe succinctly: • The proposed technology, including its basic operating principles and how it is unique and innovative, especially with respect to the technologies in the BETO Multi-year Program Plan; • The proposed technology’s target level of performance (Applicants should provide technical data or other support to show how the proposed target could be met); • The current state-of-the-art in the relevant field and application, including key shortcomings, limitations, and challenges; • How the proposed technology will overcome the shortcomings, limitations, and challenges in the relevant field and application; • The potential impact that the proposed project would have on the relevant field and application; • The key technical risks/issues associated with the proposed technology development plan; and • The impact that EERE funding would have on the proposed project.” Then it states that up to one page is devoted to addendums for “Applicants may provide graphs, charts, or other data to supplement their Technology Description.” Then within that same cell (with the addendum instructions) in the table, it states additional requirements that must be met in the concept paper “Applicants are required to describe succinctly the qualifications, experience, and capabilities of the proposed Project Team, including: • Whether the Principal Investigator (PI) and Project Team have the skill and expertise needed to successfully execute the project plan; • Whether the Applicant has prior experience which demonstrates an ability to perform tasks of similar risk and complexity; • Whether the Applicant has worked together with its teaming partners on prior projects or programs; and • Whether the Applicant has adequate access to equipment and facilities necessary to accomplish the effort and/or clearly explain how it intends to obtain access to the necessary equipment and facilities.” Question: regarding the additional requirement about the team structure, qualifications, skill set, capabilities, experience, teaming partners, access to equipment (which I assume needs to be described) and how to obtain access – How many pages should be allocated to the additional requirements and where is that to be placed in the context of the topics that were to be addressed in the two-page limitation of the concept paper? Even in the most concise terms, simply retyping the additional topics to be addressed (after the addendum) would take 1/3rd of a page, thus making the two page paper and exercise in font and line spacing manipulations.
Answer 12: The additional requirements listed in the Addendum section of the Concept Paper on pages 15 and 16 of the FOA should be included in the addendum, which has a 1 page max limit. The other requirements of the Concept Paper, under the Technology Description Section of the Concept Paper on page 15 of the FOA have a 2 page max limit.

Question 13: I am seeking clarification on the number of Concept Papers that may be submitted. Is there a limit of one Concept Paper submission per university?
Answer 13: Applicants may only submit one Concept Paper and one Full Application for consideration under this FOA. If an applicant submits more than one Concept Paper or Full Application, EERE will only consider the last timely submission for evaluation. Any other submissions received listing the same applicant will be considered non-compliant and not eligible for further consideration. This limitation does not prohibit an applicant from collaborating on other applications (e.g., as a potential Subrecipient or partner) so long as the entity is only listed as the Prime Applicant on one Concept Paper and Full Application submitted under this FOA.

Question 14: Our professor is interested in collaborating with a national lab to have a technical service performed for his research. Under this FOA, can this service be included in our budget or would the DOE contract directly with the national lab?
Answer 14:

The value of and funding for the FFRDC portion of the work will not normally be included in the award to a successful applicant. Usually, DOE will fund a DOE/NNSA FFRDC contractor through the DOE field work proposal system and other FFRDC through an interagency agreement with the sponsoring agency. Note that although the FFRDC portion of the work is usually excluded from the award to a successful applicant, the applicant’s cost share requirement will be based on the total cost of the project, including the applicant’s and the FFRDC’s portions of the project.

Also, as stated in the FOA, if a DOE/NNSA FFRDC contractor is to perform a portion of the work, the Applicant must provide a DOE Field Work Proposal (FWP) in accordance with the requirements in DOE Order 412.1, Work Authorization System. DOE Order 412.1 and DOE O 412.1 (Field Work Proposal form) area available at the following link, under “DOE Budget Forms”: https://www.directives.doe.gov/directives/current-directives/412.1-BOrder-1/view

Question 15: Can you let me know when the slides from the FOA Webinar have been posted?
Answer 15:

The webinar slide deck will be available on EERE Exchange by 3/17.

Question 16: May individual companies make an application without partners? Or are teams or partnerships required? I see no mention of this requirement in the FOA.
Answer 16: Teams or partnerships are not required in order to apply to this FOA. For more information, please refer to Section III.A. of the FOA.

Question 17: Is your presentation on the subject topic is available online. Otherwise, would you mind share with me.
Answer 17: The FOA Webinar, as well as questions and answers from the webinar will be posted on EERE Exchange at: https://eere-exchange.energy.gov. Please note that you must first select this specific FOA Number in order to view the webinar slide deck and questions and answers.

Question 18: Could you forward a link to the full announcement for the DE-FOA-0000974 (Bioenergy technology incubator)? I did not see the attachment in the full announcement online.
Answer 18: The full announcement can be obtained at the DOE EERE Funding Opportunity Exchange website at: https://eere-exchange.energy.gov/default.aspx. To find this information, click on the FOA number, and the full text of the FOA will be available under “FOA DOCUMENTS”.

Question 19: I have two Japanese colleagues that will come to my lab for sabbatical research, and their focus would be on the same area that I would like to submit for this BETO FOA. Funding would be requested to support my lab, but part of that support would facilitate our cooperative research while they are in my lab. Can those Japanese researchers names be listed on the proposal, or are they better listed as collaborators, who would then provide letters of support with an indication that they would work jointly on portions of the proposed research with me?
Answer 19: Applicants must determine how best to structure their team to meet the applicants needs and the requirements of the FOA. If the work is being done at the University, the requirement of FOA section IV.I.3 Performance of Work in the United States will still be met. All work done under the award must allowable and allocable to the award (see 2 CFR 600 Part 220, Cost Principles for Educational Institutions (OMB Circular A-21)).

Question 20: First, I understand that all the organizations have to be incorporated. Would an LLC be eligible to apply as the prime recipient or as a sub-recipient?
Answer 20: Please refer to Section III.A. of the FOA, which defines eligible applicants.

Question 21: I want to submit the proposal in response to Bioenergy Technologies Incubator (DE-FOA-0000974) on behalf of a small start-up company. We want to apply for it as the PI along with a partner. The partner could provide up to 0.5 million dollars as the cost-sharing for this project. Is it allowable for our organization to use our partners cost-sharing as the convertible notes of our organization?
Answer 21:

As stated in Section III.B.#.

Every cost share contribution must be allowable under the applicable Federal cost principles, as described in Section IV.I.1 of the FOA. In addition, cost share must be verifiable upon submission of the Full Application.

Project Teams may provide cost share in the form of cash or in-kind contributions. Cash contributions may be provided by the Prime Recipient or Subrecipients. Allowable in-kind contributions include, but are not limited to: personnel costs, indirect costs, facilities and administrative costs, rental value of buildings or equipment, and the value of a service, other resource, or third party in-kind contribution.

Project teams may use funding or property received from state or local governments to meet the cost share requirement, so long as the funding was not provided to the state or local government by the Federal Government.

The Prime Recipient may not use the following sources to meet its cost share obligations including, but not limited to:

· Revenues or royalties from the prospective operation of an activity beyond the project period;

· Proceeds from the prospective sale of an asset of an activity;

· Federal funding or property (e.g., Federal grants, equipment owned by the Federal Government); or

· Expenditures that were reimbursed under a separate Federal Technology Office.

In addition, Project Teams may not use independent research and development (IR&D) funds to meet their cost share obligations. Project Teams may not use the same cash or in-kind contributions to meet cost share requirements for more than one project or program.

Cost share contributions must be specified in the project budget, verifiable from the Prime Recipient’s records, and necessary and reasonable for proper and efficient accomplishment of the project. As all sources of cost share are considered part of total project cost, the cost share dollars will be scrutinized under the same Federal regulations as Federal dollars to the project. Every cost share contribution must be reviewed and approved in advance by the Contracting Officer and incorporated into the project budget before the expenditures are incurred.

Applicants are encouraged to refer to 10 CFR Parts 600 and 603 for additional guidance on cost sharing, specifically 10 CFR §§600.30, 600.123, 600.224, 600.313, and 603.525-555.

Question 22: Would a team of US researcher (s) as the prime recipient and Israeli researcher (s) as a subrecipient be eligible to receive the grant and also required to submit a waiver to conduct work outside of the United States i.e. at a major Israeli research institution? Do EERE requirements supersede the US-Israel 1985 Free Trade Agreement allowing Israeli entities to openly apply for DOE grants?
Answer 22: Absent a legal requirement to allow DOE to directly fund work outside of the United States, applicants would have to submit a waiver request to allow performance of work outside of the US. See the Section III.A. of the FOA for more information.

Question 23: 1) For satisfying the requirement of category H, Section 3 of the terms and conditions, to be eligible to receive a grant from EERE and perform work outside the United States, the applicant is required to demonstrate United States economic interest. Would this be satisfied by performing desired work in a cost competitive fashion? What is necessary to document international expertise to develop technology which is not available in the United States? Would it further be satisfied by creating a shared proprietary agreement between the US and Israeli entities so that any future commercialization has tangible benefits to both countries? 2) For paired research between US and international partners, is there a maximum grant percentage international subrecipients can receive as a portion of the research deliverables?
Answer 23:

As long as work is performed within the US, there is no percentage requirement for this FOA.

Question 24: Would a non-profit 501(c)3 be disqualified from an award if our plan included using experts from Israel as subcontractors to our American lead technologists within a contractual structure that assures all results are assured of accruing to the United States.
Answer 24:

Non-profits are eligible for funding under this FOA. If work will be performed outside of the US, an applicant must get a waiver from the Performance of Work in the United States requirement (See Section IV.D.11 of the FOA).

Question 25: Further to your statement during the webinar that a 501(c)3 is ineligible to receive funding if it has engaged in lobbying since 1996, where is that detailed in the FOA? Is this related to lobbying in general or only for specific Department of Energy activities related to EERE/Biotechnology? Why then would a lobbying disclosure form be required?
Answer 25:

This can be found in Section III.A.2 of the FOA. Lobbying forms are required by law for all entities, not just non-profits (See Section IV.D.10).

Question 26: I do not clearly understand the TRL levels. We have built a 10 ft x 20 ft building housing a prototype Photobioreactor and a 30 inch cube prototype scrubber with which we have demonstrated algae production and capture of carbon dioxide from flue gas. Do these qualify as “breadboard” scale ? Would our TRL level be TRL-3 ?
Answer 26:

For this FOA, BETO is seeking proposals that are at an early stage of technology development.
As such, BETO is using the commonly used Technology Readiness Level (TRL) scale. There is, by design, some ambiguity to the descriptions for each level so that it may be used across disciplines.
To provide some clarity, the following may be helpful to determine what is in scope for TRLs 2-4.
• Mode of operation is batch; not continuous
• Separate unit operations that are not integrated
• Low level of reproducibility and predictiveness
• Processes have been developed but are not well-defined/optimized
• Volumes of key intermediate(s) or final target(s) is about or below 1 L/day

Please also see appendix E of the FOA.

Question 27: The FOA states that each Concept Paper must be limited to a "single concept or technology." Please define this further. For example, does the technology need to be focused on improving a single feedstock trait, or can the technology be engineering multiple traits into an organism to generate a greatly enhanced feedstock?
Answer 27: By "single concept or technology", BETO means that proposals should be focused in a coherent manner such that the tasks in the research plan have some relation and dependency. So in the question below, both examples would appear be a single concept for the purpose of the FOA.

Question 28: I manage the limited submission process for research programs and NC State University. We have several faculty in different disciplines who have expressed interest in sending Concept Papers for the Bioenergy Technologies Incubator solicitation. As our office interprets the RFP, higher education institutions are limited to one Concept Paper as a lead. If this is correct, we would need to conduct an internal review to determine which project to put forward to DOE. Please confirm this understanding.
Answer 28:

As stated in the FOA, Applicants may only submit one Concept Paper and one Full Application for consideration under this FOA. If an applicant submits more than one Concept Paper or Full Application, EERE will only consider the last timely submission for evaluation. Any other submissions received listing the same applicant will be considered non-compliant and not eligible for further consideration. This limitation does not prohibit an applicant from collaborating on other applications (e.g., as a potential Subrecipient or partner) so long as the entity is only listed as the Prime Applicant on one Concept Paper and Full Application submitted under this FOA.

Please refer to Section III.A. of the FOA, which defines eligible applicants. “Applicant” refers to any one of the eligible applicants listed in this section of the FOA.

Question 29: On the FOA EERE Funding Opportunity Exchange site, there is a "Funds and Costs" page. Will a party submitting a Concept Paper that is afterwards encouraged to submit a Full Proposal be held to the top-line figures for Federal and Cost Share funding identified on this page at the concept submission stage? If the answer is yes, our institution will require and must approve a comprehensive financial proposal including cost share details prior to submission of the Concept Paper. It will be extremely difficult to obtain Cost Share commitments at this stage of the process.
Answer 29: No, an organization will not be held to the information on the Funds and Costs page that is included with the Concept Paper submission.

Question 30: To whom it may concern: I am considering submitting a proposal to enable the next phase of the OMEGA project. The next phase of OMEGA is to identify and characterize in detail sites in the USA and globally where OMEGA can be implemented and to this end I have formed the OMEGA Global Initiative (OGI), which is currently a group of university students. We are thinking of submitting a concept paper to you, but I my question to you is: Would DOE support a project that is global in reach, i.e., is not limited to evaluating OMEGA sites in the USA?
Answer 30:

As stated in the FOA, EERE requires all work under EERE financial assistance agreements to be performed in the United States. This requirement does not apply to the purchase of supplies and equipment; however, the Prime Recipient should make every effort to purchase domestically produced supplies and equipment. If a recipient fails to comply with the Performance of Work in the United States requirement, the EERE Contracting Officer may deny reimbursement for the work conducted outside the United States and such costs may not be recognized as allowable cost share.

There may be limited circumstances where it is in the interest of the project to perform a portion of the work outside the United States. To seek a waiver of the Performance of Work in the Unites States requirement, the Applicant must submit an explicit waiver request in the Full Application, which includes the following information:

· The countries in which the work will be performed;

· A description of the work to be performed outside the U.S.; and

· The rationale for performing the work outside the U.S.

For the rationale, the Applicant must demonstrate to the satisfaction of the EERE Contracting Officer that a waiver would further the purposes of this FOA and is otherwise in the interests of EERE and the United States. For example, an Applicant may seek to demonstrate the United States economic interest will be better served by having certain work performed outside the United States (e.g., demonstrate the expertise to develop the technology exists only outside the United States, but the technology’s ultimate commercialization will result in substantial benefits to the United States such as improved electricity reliability or creating domestic jobs). The Contracting Officer may require additional information before considering the waiver request. Save the waiver request(s) in a single PDF file titled “ControlNumber_PerformanceofWork_Waiver”.

Question 31: Can a company, who is the applicant, transfer some of the DOE and cost share project funds to a university who is a co-applicant and performing project tasks. If so, do restrictions apply and if so, what are they?
Answer 31: As stated in the FOA, each Project Team is free to determine how best to allocate the cost share requirement among the team members. The amount contributed by individual Project Team members may vary, as long as the cost share requirement for the project as a whole is met.

Question 32: Can the proposal funding requested be less than the $0.5 to 2.0M range mentioned in the FOA?
Answer 32:

As stated in the FOA, EERE expects to make approximately $10 million of Federal funding available for new awards under this FOA subject to the availability of appropriated funds. EERE anticipates making approximately 5-15 awards under this FOA. EERE may issue one, multiple, or no awards. Individual awards may vary between $500,000 and $2 million.

However, there is nothing that prohibits an applicant from requesting funding that is less than the expected range.

Question 33: How quickly after the deadline for submission should we expect to receive an encouragement or discouragement?
Answer 33: As stated in the FOA, full applications are due by May 23, 2014 at 5:00pm EST. Applicants will have approximately 30 days from receipt of the Concept Paper Encourage/Discourage notification to prepare and submit a Full Application. Regardless of the date the Applicant receives the Encourage/Discourage notification, the submission deadline for the Full Application remains the date stated on the FOA cover page.

Question 34: We did not get a chance to join the informational webinar. Was the webinar recorded and/or may we view a copy of the presentation for reference?
Answer 34: The FOA Webinar, as well as questions and answers from the webinar will be posted on EERE Exchange at: https://eere-exchange.energy.gov. Please note that you must first select this specific FOA Number in order to view the webinar slide deck and questions and answers.

Question 35: If proprietary information is needed to provide a clear understanding of the proposed technology in the Concept Paper, should it be marked as such as if it were a full application?
Answer 35: Yes.

Question 36: Would a cover page also be required for the Concept Paper and would it be considered excluded from the two-page limit?
Answer 36: Please refer to Section IV.C. of the FOA, “Content and form of the Concept Paper.”

Question 37: What fraction of the project funds can be transferred by the applicant to co-applicants to perform project tasks. Is there any restriction on that fraction
Answer 37: There is no restriction on the fraction of the project funds that can be transferred by the applicant to proposed subrecipients and/or vendors.

Question 38: We need clarifications for this FOA. Is this technology R&D specific (technology lead), or can be a combination of analysis and technology R&D, or the combination lead by analysis?
Answer 38: As stated in the FOA, the intent of the BETO Incubator is to assess new technologies for their potential to be “on ramped” to future MYPPs. Analysis tasks that inform and provides input to the technical development of an R&D plan can be useful.

Question 39: In the FOA document section I.B Topic Areas/Technical Areas of Interest it states that "This FOA is “open” to any and all impactful areas which significantly advance the mission of the BETO (which BETO is not currently supporting in a substantial way), in all aspects of the bioenergy supply chain, from feedstock supply and logistics to conversion processes. Potential incubator projects are expected be at early TRL levels (2-4)". How much prior funding with BETO would constitute "substantial" BETO support?
Answer 39: BETO has not specified an amount for “substantial”. However, it is important to note that, as written in on pg. 1 of the FOA, “It is NOT intended to fund projects that are incremental improvements to current products or processes or for established work in BETO’s strategic plan or current portfolio.” In addition, on pg. 15 of the description for the concept paper requirements, applicants are required to describe succinctly “The proposed technology, including its basic operating principles and how it is unique and innovative, especially with respect to the technologies in the BETO Multi-year Program Plan”.

Question 40: Please send me a Concept Paper form for: DE-FOA-0000974: Bioenergy Technologies Incubator I tried to get the form from https://eere-exchange.energy.gov/Default.aspx but did not find it.
Answer 40: There is no Concept paper form for this FOA; please refer to Section IV.D. of the FOA for Content and Form requirements of the Concept Paper.

Question 41: For DE-FOA-0000974, for the Concept Paper, do we need any of the following documents to be completed? My interpretation is that these 3 documents are needed for the Application submission and not for Concept paper submission. Application for Financial Assistance (SF-424) Budget Justification (EERE 159) Disclosure of Lobbying Activities (SF-LLL) A confirmation of my interpretation will be appreciated.
Answer 41: Your interpretation is correct; please refer to Section IV.D. for the Content and Form requirements of the Concept Paper.

Question 42: In submitting a Concept paper, applicants are required to identify whether there is a Team member, and if so, the split of the effort and the cost. My organization is a lead organization and is currently talking to a potential team member. We are not able to reach a firm commitment for the teaming arrangement, nor can we decide on the split of the effort or the cost at this stage. When submitting the concept paper for my organization as the lead organization, I could not include any team member (as we are undecided) and thus the effort is 100% for the lead organization. My question is, if the concept is encouraged to submit a Full application, is my organization allowed to add a team member and change the split of the effort and the cost accordingly by the time the Full Application is submitted?
Answer 42: Yes, Applicants may revise this information in the full application.

Question 43: Can you let me know what TRL’s you are looking for through this FOA? And, what is the expected impact of the funding on the awarded technology’s readiness level?
Answer 43: As stated in the FOA, EERE anticipates making awards for projects that are at Technical Readiness Levels (TRL) 2-4 (see Appendix E) that range from $500,000 to $2,000,000. Also, see Appendix E.

Question 44: Can the Applicant still apply if the Applicant has filed a U.S. Patent for subject Process and Machinery
Answer 44: Yes, an applicant may apply to the FOA if the applicant has filed for a U.S. Patent on the process and machinery.

Question 45: Slide 25 of the webinar for DE-FOA-0000974 says “Obtain a control number at least 24 hours before the first submission deadline”. What do I have to do to get a control number? I have already logged-in to the http://eere-exchange.energy.gov website and have a user name and password. I could not find any information on securing a control number.
Answer 45: The control number will be assigned once you once you fill out the first screen of the application process in Exchange and hit the “Create Concept Paper” button.

Question 46: On page 14 you state that the control number must be listed in the top corner of each page of the concept paper, but later the document states that the control number will be issued at the time of submission. Please clarify.
Answer 46: The control number will be assigned once you once you fill out the first screen of the application process in Exchange and hit the “Create Concept Paper” button.

Question 47: One of the divisions under Lawrence Berkeley National Labs will be participating as a subcontractor in DE-FOA-0000974 due 3/31/2014. Being a FFRDC institution do we need to submit items 7,8,9,10 on page 27 of the FOA with the Concept Paper due on 3/31/2014?
Answer 47:

No, the items your reference on Page 27 are not required for the Concept Paper submission. Please refer to Section IV.D. for content and form requirements of the Concept Paper.

Question 48: Does the Concept Paper require an Authorized Organizational Representative (AOR) signature/approval in the system once the PI completes the Paper, or, can the PI register and direct submit their Concept Paper without AOR signature.
Answer 48: As stated in section VI.C.1.vi of the FOA, submission of an application and supplemental information under this FOA through electronic systems used by the Department of Energy, including EERE Exchange and fedconnect.net, constitutes the authorized representative’s approval and electronic signature.

Question 49: 1) Is the topic truly "open"? When I clicked on the funding link in the document sent, it brought me to a list of topics. 2) Would a biomass gasifier be a topic that could be submitted? 3) I applied for a SAM registration over 3 weeks ago and have yet to have it finalized. Does this mean we cannot submit a concept paper for this year?
Answer 49:

1. This FOA is open to those technologies that are not currently in BETO’s multi-year strategic plan and not represented in a significant way in the BETO portfolio.

2. BETO has funded a significant amount of work in biomass gasifiers.

3. For questions about SAM, please see pg. 40 of the FOA.

Question 50: Hello, I am trying to access the full DOE bioenergy technologies incubator application materials, but can't seem to find anything but the summary:
Answer 50: Instructions for completing the concept paper and full application are contained in the full text of the Funding Opportunity Announcement (FOA) which can be obtained at the DOE EERE Funding Opportunity eXCHANGE website at: https://eere-exchange.energy.gov/default.aspx. To find this information, click on the FOA number, and the full text of the FOA will be available under “FOA DOCUMENTS”.

Question 51: When submitting our concept paper, we have been asked to provide an abstract. This is not mentioned elsewhere in the FOA, except in the full application section of requirements. Can you please clarify as to whether the construction of an abstract is a requirement for the submission of the concept paper? Additionally could you please confirm that the abstract is the same as the One Page summary as listed in the FOA. This is not made clear in the FOA.
Answer 51:

Please see Section IV.C. of the FOA for the content and form requirements for the Concept Paper. An abstract is not a requirement of the Concept Paper.

Question 52: I registered with the exchange but where do I get a "control number"?
Answer 52: The control number will be assigned once you once you fill out the first screen of the application process in Exchange and hit the “Create Concept Paper” button.

Question 53: The FOA, page 27, item 7, says that a Subaward Budget Justification must be prepared for subawardee expecting to receiving $250,000 or more, or performing 25% of the total work effort (whichever is less). When I open the Budget Justification Workbook in excel, the instructions on the first tab state that each sub-recipient with estimated costs of $100,000 or more must complete the Budget Justification Workbook. For this FOA, is it $250,000 or $100,000? Thank you for clarifying.
Answer 53: As stated in the FOA, Applicants must provide a separate budget justification, EERE 159 (i.e., budget justification for each budget year and a cumulative budget) for each subawardee that is expected to perform work estimated to be more than $250,000 or 25 percent of the total work effort (whichever is less).

Question 54: Is there a mistake on the eere-Exchange? Why is there a requirement for a 4000 character abstract that must “match the abstract in the application” when there is no abstract required/allowed?
Answer 54: The abstract is not required for Concept Papers. Please refer to Section IV.C. of the FOA for the content and form requirements of the Concept Paper.

Question 55: Can an organization submit multiple applications from different principal investigators to this FOA?
Answer 55: The intent of this FOA is to allow one application per principal investigator. Therefore, if there are two or more principal investigators at the same organization, each principal investigator can submit one Concept Paper to the FOA.

Question 56: I just started to search for government opportunities today and see that the Bioenergy Technology Incubator appears to be a good fit for our program. However, I also see that the deadline for initial papers has passed as of a few days ago, and was wondering how to proceed. Is this solicitation now closed (and I need to then wait for the next solicitation), or is there a way to still participate in this round if we act quickly and provide a concept paper?
Answer 56: The due date for concept papers has been extended to April 8, 2014 at 5:00 EST.

Question 57: I am writing to ask for clarification for the following statement in DE-FOA-0000974. Does the statement "R&D or improvements to commercial available processes" mean no interest in R&D in general for hydrogen/syngas production or just R&D on commercially available hydrogen production processes? We have a new (not commercial) process for converting heavy hydrocarbons such as petroleum residuum into syngas (which could be used to make Fischer Tropsch fuels or hydrogen). We have done some preliminary work with biomass pyrolysis oil and this feedstock is very easy for us to process. If proposing to further develop our process for use with distributed pyrolysis oil to make synthesis fuels is responsive, we will submit a concept paper.
Answer 57: What you are proposing is within the scope of the FOA.

Question 58: Why did the concept deadline get pushed back?
Answer 58:

DOE wanted to clarify the statement in the FOA that states, “Applicants may only submit one Concept Paper and one Full Application for consideration under this FOA. If an applicant submits more than one Concept Paper or Full Application, EERE will only consider the last timely submission for evaluation. Any other submissions received listing the same applicant will be considered non-compliant and not eligible for further consideration. This limitation does not prohibit an applicant from collaborating on other applications (e.g., as a potential Subrecipient or partner) so long as the entity is only listed as the Prime Applicant on one Concept Paper and Full Application submitted under this FOA.”

The intent of this FOA is to allow one application per principal investigator. Therefore, if there are two or more principal investigators at the same organization, each principal investigator can submit one Concept Paper to the FOA.

Question 59: We have two groups of scientists at the Center for Biofilm Engineering at Montana State University that are interested in submitting separate Concept Papers to BETO. However, we are unclear if one of our Concept Papers will be rejected due to them being considered coming from a single entity. The bottom line is what is your definition of an applicant or entity – would a University be considered a single applicant or an entity? Or, one Department from a University? Or is it simply the same person acting as PI?
Answer 59: The intent of this FOA is to allow one application per principal investigator. Therefore, if there are two or more principal investigators at the same organization, each principal investigator can submit one Concept Paper to the FOA.

Question 60: Does the person reading the Budget Workbook & Justification also read the Technical Description and Workplan? If yes, may I shorten the budget justification by referring to specific task numbers, or would it be better to repeat the details of the technical plan and each task in each budget justification? In that case, the Budget Workbook will be longer, but more complete.
Answer 60: Applicants should make the application materials as complete as possible, even if some of the information is duplicative.

Question 61: We are a small for-profit company and the lead on a proposal. We are partnered with professors at a State university. For our proposal, the division of federal funds would be about 50/50 and both our company and the University group are expecting to spend more than $250,000. The University will prepare a subawardee budget. If our proposal wins an award, can we arrange with DOE for the University to bill DOE directly and be paid directly by DOE, rather than have their funds flow through our bank account?
Answer 61: As DOE does not have privity of contract with subawardees, DOE does not pay subawardees directly.

Question 62: When will applicants receive “Encourage/Discourage” notifications for the BETO Concept Papers?
Answer 62: As stated in the FOA, full applications are due by May 23, 2014 at 5:00pm EST. Applicants will have approximately 30 days from receipt of the Concept Paper Encourage/Discourage notification to prepare and submit a Full Application. Regardless of the date the Applicant receives the Encourage/Discourage notification, the submission deadline for the Full Application remains the date stated on the FOA cover page.

Question 63: Will your office give us any feedback on our concept paper? If not, can I assume we can submit a full application before Mar 23, 2014.
Answer 63:

As stated in the FOA, EERE makes an independent assessment of each Concept Paper based on the criteria in Section V.A.1 of the FOA. EERE will encourage a subset of Applicants to submit Full Applications. Other Applicants will be discouraged from submitting a Full Application. An applicant who receives a “discouraged” notification may still submit a Full Application. EERE will review all compliant and responsive Full Applications. However, by discouraging the submission of a Full Application, EERE intends to convey its lack of programmatic interest in the proposed project in an effort to save the Applicant the time and expense of preparing an application that is unlikely to be selected for award negotiations.

In order to provide Applicants with feedback on their Concept Papers, EERE will include general comments provided from independent reviewers on an Applicant’s Concept Paper in the encourage/discourage notification sent to Applicants at the close of that phase.

Question 64: Will we be getting encouragement / discouragement based on our Concept Papers 30 days prior to the Full proposal deadline (5/23) ?
Answer 64: The encourage/discourage notifications went out today, Monday 4/28/2014.

Question 65: Is the Full Application date unchanged at May 23rd? I ask because the due date for concept papers was extended
Answer 65: The Full Application due date remains unchanged. Full Applications are due May 23, 2014 at 5:00 pm (EST) and must be submitted through EERE Exchange at https://eere-Exchange.energy.gov.

Question 66: My concept paper was ‘encouraged’ to submit a full proposal and I would like to speak with someone regarding the critiques. Can I schedule a conference call with the Program Manager?
Answer 66: Unfortunately, EERE does not have a process whereby applicants can discuss reviewer comments at the Concept Paper phase. Replies to Review comments may be submitted at the Full Application stage – see Section IV.F. of the FOA.

Question 67: Our proposal has been "encouraged". Could you tell me how many others have for BETO in this round, and what percentage of those do you expect to fund?
Answer 67: As the FOA is open, DOE cannot discuss the number of concept papers that were encouraged to submit full applications. As stated in the FOA, EERE anticipates making approximately 5-15 awards under this FOA. EERE may issue one, multiple, or no awards.

Question 68: If I did not specify a team member (in other words, an organization other than the lead organization) in the Concept Paper, can I include a team member in the full application?
Answer 68: Yes, you may add or modify the team members that were listed in the Concept Paper.

Question 69: Is there a max fraction of the award that can be sub-awarded (both total amount sub-awarded and amount sub-awarded to individual partners)?
Answer 69: There is no restriction on the fraction of the project funds that can be sub-awarded.

Question 70: For the full application for DE-FOA-0000974 we have to submit the ‘Technical Qualifications and Resources’. Could you maybe give some clarification on what we should include for the following bullet points? • Describe the technical services to be provided by DOE/NNSA FFRDCs and GOGOs, if applicable. • Attach any letters of support from partners/end users as an appendix.
Answer 70: If your organization is proposing to have technical services provided by DOE/NNSA Federally Funded Research and Development Center (FFRDC) and/or Government-owned, Government-operated laboratories (GOGO), you will need to describe the services that will be provided. If you have letters of support from any partners or end users, you will need to add them as an appendix to the full application.

Question 71: Are the budget periods in the budget justification form defined by the applicant’s milestones or does DOE have a set timeframe for each budget period (i.e. is a budget period 6 months?)
Answer 71: The timeframe for a budget period is generally 12 months; however, this can be negotiated if your application is selected for award negotiations.

Question 72: In the Concept Paper submission, we estimated the total projected costs of the project will be ~$1,000,000. After we received quotes of several key components of an instrument that will be developed for this project, we realized that the total costs may exceed our original estimate. Would you please clarify whether the budget of the full proposal has to agree with that of the Concept Paper? Or there could be a small deviation as long as we can justify the proposed budget?
Answer 72: It is not a requirement that the budget that is submitted with the full application match the one that was submitted with the Concept Paper.

Question 73: Page 29 of FOA says “13. Data Management Plan - Applicants whose Full Applications are selected for award negotiations will be required to submit a Data management Plan during the award negotiations phase.” Appendix D of FOA, however, says “… shall require each applicant or team of applicants to submit an acceptable Data Management Plan (DMP) as part of its proposal or application to the FOA.”
Answer 73: Appendix D is incorrect, the Data Management Plan is not required to be submitted with the full application.

Question 74: As we are preparing the full application, I am not sure about SF-424. The online templates are available only for three year and five year projects. We intend to submit a two year project and therefore, would you please let me know what form should we use?
Answer 74: The SF424 can be found EERE Exchange at https://eere-Exchange.energy.gov. You will need to find the Incubator FOA and then click “Required Application Documents.” You can then click on the SF424.

Question 75: Please clarify the allowable term for DE-FOA-000974. Our BETO concept paper outlined a 36 month project and was recently "encouraged" to go forward as a full proposal. The PPT presentation from Mar. 3, 2014 however, (BioEnergy Technology Incubator FINAL pdf) identifies the allowable period of performance as 12-24 months. Is the maximum allowable period 24 or 36 months?
Answer 75: As stated in the FOA, the period of performance for awards under this FOA is 12-24 months.

Question 76: As we are preparing our proposal, I seek to understand the phrase "bioproducts that enable biofuels production". Is contributing to the profitability of biorefineries that already produce biofuels considered "enabling" biofuels production?
Answer 76: Yes, the phrase “bioproducts that enable biofuels production” is meant to recognize that as biomass is converted, the production of bioproducts or biopower (non-fuel intermediate or end products, such chemicals ) in addition to a biofuel stream, may enhance the economics of the overall process.

Question 77: At this juncture, we have a potential cost share partner who is willing to provide a letter of interest, but are unwilling to provide a full letter of support until they have done their due diligence, which they will be unable to complete by the time the full proposal is due (5/23/2014). If we, as the prime recipient, are selected for an award, but our cost share partner decides that they do not want to invest in the technology, do we have an option to withdraw our application prior to finalizing the contract during award negotiations in August 2014? Or are we obligated to pay the 20% cost share?
Answer 77: As stated in the FOA, Applicants are required to provide written assurance of their proposed cost share contributions in their Full Applications. Upon selection for award negotiations, Applicants are required to provide additional information and documentation regarding their cost share contributions. Please refer to Appendix B of the FOA for guidance on the requisite cost share information and documentation. If a cost share partner withdraws their support, and/or an applicant is not able to secure the required cost share amount, they may withdraw their application during award negotiations and will not be obligated to pay the 20% cost share.

Question 78: We have been unable to find an explicit description in the FOA of how DOE handles the delivery of funds to subrecipients. Do funds go first to the prime recipient and then to the sub or directly from DOE to the sub? In our case the prime is a company and the sub a university.
Answer 78: In the scenario as described, funds would flow from the Prime Recipient to the subrecipient.

Question 79: Can you please clarify who (subcontractor) needs to fill out the EERE 159 Detailed Budget Justification form?
Answer 79: As stated in the FOA, Applicants must provide a separate budget justification, EEERE 159 (i.e., budget justification for each budget year and a cumulative budget) for each subawardee that is expected to perform work estimated to be more than $250,000 or 25 percent of the total work effort (whichever is less). The budget justification must include the same justification information described in the “Budget Justification” section, above.

Question 80: Page 17 makes it look like the SF-LLL is a required document. However, page 34 says SF-LLL is required "if any non-Federal funds have been paid to any person for influencing ..." Page 34 makes it look like SF-LLL is optional if no funds have been used to lobby. Kindly explain, is SF-LLL required or optional for this proposal?
Answer 80:

As stated in the FOA, Prime Recipients and Subrecipients are required to complete and submit SF-LLL, “Disclosure of Lobbying Activities” (http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/grants/sflllin.pdf) IF any non-Federal funds have been paid or will be paid to any person for influencing or attempting to influence any of the following in connection with your application:

• An officer or employee of any Federal agency;

• A Member of Congress;

• An officer or employee of Congress; or

• An employee of a Member of Congress.

Question 81: I was wondering if we can add another Co-PI to this proposal, in addition to what we have now, since his expertise would be important for us.
Answer 81: The FOA does not restrict applicants from adding key personnel to the full application.

Question 82: For the full application, whom should our Letters of Support be addressed to?
Answer 82: They can be addressed to the Contracting Officer for this FOA, Geoffrey Walker

Question 83: Given that anaerobic digestion of salty seaweed biomass is a special problem not yet commercially available; IF we expend a small portion of the allowed budget to build small, "research-scale", new-designs of AD-digesters to test biogas production efficiency from various species of seaweeds under varying salty process conditions, would inclusion of this research and expenditures related thereto, render the proposal non-responsive to the solicitation..?
Answer 83:

As described, this would be of non-interest to DOE.

Question 84: Would our proposal still be judged non-responsive if we did the AD work outside of the asked-for DOE budget (including match) and scope..? For example under an additional, totally paid-for-by-SoCalGas Company test of seaweeds to biogas..?
Answer 84:

If the work is done outside of the DOE project, DOE does not have a position on this.

Question 85: Could you please clarify that inclusion of an FFRDC – does NOT need to be cost-shared?
Answer 85: As stated in the FOA, although the FFRDC portion of the work is usually excluded from the award to a successful applicant, the applicant’s cost share requirement will be based on the total cost of the project, including the applicant’s and the FFRDC’s portions of the project. The FOA further explains that, because FFRDCs and GOGOs are funded by the Federal Government, costs incurred by FFRDCs and GOGOs generally may not be used to meet the cost share requirement. FFRDCs may contribute cost share only if the contributions are paid directly from the contractor’s Management Fee or another non-Federal source.

Question 86: Can an applicant add teaming partners/ sub awardees after award notification and/or negotiation?
Answer 86:

If selected for award, the following provision will be included in your award package:

Except for subawards and/or subcontracts specifically proposed as part of the Recipient’s Application for award, the Recipient must notify the Contracting Officer and Project Manager in writing 30 days prior to the execution of new or modified subawards/subcontracts. This notification does not constitute a waiver of the prior approval requirements outlined in 10 CFR Part 600, nor does it relieve the Recipient from its obligation to comply with applicable Federal statutes, regulations, and executive orders.

In order to satisfy this notification requirement, the Recipient documentation must, as a minimum, include the following:

1. A description of the research to be performed, the service to be provided, or the equipment to be purchased;

2. Cost share commitment letter if the subawardee is providing cost share to the Award;

3. An assurance that the process undertaken by the Recipient to solicit the subaward/subcontract complies with their written procurement procedures as outlined in 10 CFR § 600.144, 10 CFR § 600.236, and 10 CFR § 600.331.

4. An assurance that no planned, actual or apparent conflict of interest exists between the Recipient and the selected subawardee/subcontractor and that the Recipient’s written standards of conduct were followed;¹

5. A completed Environmental Questionnaire, if applicable;

6. An assurance that the subawardee/subcontractor is not a debarred or suspended entity; and

7. An assurance that all required award provisions will be flowed down in the resulting subaward/subcontract.

The Recipient is responsible for making a final determination to award or modify subawards/subcontracts under this agreement, but the Recipient may not proceed with the subaward/subcontract until the Contracting Officer determines, and provides the Recipient written notification, that the information provided is adequate.

Should the Recipient not receive a written notification of adequacy from the Contracting Officer within 30 days of the submission of the subaward/subcontract documentation stipulated above, Recipient may proceed to award or modify the proposed subaward/subcontract.

Question 87: Is it possible to request not to include certain individuals in the review of a proposal? Some researchers are reluctant to consider other technologies potentially better than the technologies they have developed and hence will provide a biased (negative) review. A more impartial review might be possible if such reviewers are excluded from the review process at the request of the applicant.
Answer 87:

As stated in the FOA, in conducting the merit review evaluation, the Government may seek the advice of qualified non Federal personnel as reviewers. The Government may also use non-Federal personnel to conduct routine, nondiscretionary administrative activities. The applicant, by submitting its application, consents to the use of non-Federal reviewers/administrators. Non-Federal reviewers must sign conflict of interest and non-disclosure agreements prior to reviewing an application. Non-Federal personnel conducting administrative activities must sign a non-disclosure agreement.

Reviewers may be chosen to review any applications where a conflict of interest does not exist.

Question 88: We have received an "encourage" response for our concept paper. I have not found any language in the FOA that prohibits team changes at the full application stage. Can we change the prime (lead) institution for the full application? This change would not affect the scope of the proposed work.
Answer 88: The FOA does not restrict this scenario - a prime recipient can be revised for the full application. Please note that the control number should remain the same for the full application as the control number that was provided in the Concept Paper phase.

Question 89: Is a minority funded project sponsor expected to pay a lab’s "shared cost" ?
Answer 89:

As stated in the FOA, although the FFRDC portion of the work is usually excluded from the award to a successful applicant, the applicant’s cost share requirement will be based on the total cost of the project, including the applicant’s and the FFRDC’s portions of the project. The FOA further explains that, because FFRDCs and GOGOs are funded by the Federal Government, costs incurred by FFRDCs and GOGOs generally may not be used to meet the cost share requirement. FFRDCs may contribute cost share only if the contributions are paid directly from the contractor’s Management Fee or another non-Federal source.

Question 90: Regarding work performed outside the US for FOA-0000974: If a foreign work waiver is approved, is there a limit on how much of the project funds can be spent outside of the US?
Answer 90: There is no pre-determined limitation on how much work or related funds may be performed or expended outside the U.S. Rather, as part of the applicant’s waiver request, it must include a description of the work to be performed outside the U.S., and the rationale for performing that work outside the U.S., including why it is in the Government’s interest to perform the work outside the country. See FOA Section IV.I.3. “Performance of Work in the United States.” In making a determination on the waiver request, the Contracting Officer will apply the criteria described in Section IV.I.3 to establish how much work may be performed outside the U.S., which will impact the amount of project funds that can be spent outside the U.S.

Question 91: The 2 CFR 220 document says patenting costs are allowable if required by the sponsored agreement and unallowable if not required by the award. Are patenting costs allowable for DE-FOA-0000974? If they are allowable, then what is the upper allowed limit?
Answer 91: Patenting cost will not be reimbursable under this FOA or awards made under it.

Question 92: Can an applicant include an unspecified contract research organization in an application (ex. a CRO TBD)?
Answer 92: Yes, an applicant can include TBD subrecipients and/or subcontractors in the application. Please note that if selected for award, all subrecipients/subcontractors need to be identified prior to award, or conditions will be placed on the award that will restrict funding associated with the TBD subrecipient/subcontractor until such time as one is selected by the Recipient, and approved by the DOE Contracting Officer.

Question 93: I’m working with a PI who will be applying for this funding opportunity. A question has come up about whether it is allowable to list personnel costs as a percent of effort for a specific period. (For example, 50% time for 6 months at $4,000/mo would be $12,000.) Could you please confirm that this will be acceptable?
Answer 93: Yes, this would be acceptable.

Question 94: I have some questions regarding the Milestone Table and organizational requirements for The Workplan (Tasks, Milestones, and sub-tasks), and the Gantt chart, as the FOA document describes on pages 19-24. The organizational structure requested is not completely clear to me, nor does it appear possible to create the Milestone while maintaining 10pt font on a single page. I would appreciate speaking by phone to someone on these structural issues.
Answer 94:

Unfortunately, DE-FOA-0000974, “BioEnergy Incubator Program”, is a competitive solicitation and private discussions, while the announcement is open, are prohibited. All questions regarding this FOA must be submitted via e-mail to BETOIncubator@go.doe.govnot later than 3 business days prior to the application due date. All questions and answers related to this FOA will be posted on EERE eXCHANGE at: https://eere-exchange.energy.gov/ Please note that you must first select this specific FOA Number in order to view the questions and answers specific to this FOA.

As stated in Section IV.A. of the FOA, all pages of the full application must be formatted to fit on 8.5 x 11 inch paper with margins not less than one inch on every side. Use Times New Roman typeface, a black font color, and a font size of 12 point or larger (except in figures or tables, which may be 10 point font). A symbol font may be used to insert Greek letters or special characters, but the font size requirement still applies. References must be included as footnotes or endnotes in a font size of 10 or larger. Footnotes and endnotes are counted toward the maximum page requirement. Also see Section IV.D.2 for specific page requirements for the Technical Volume.

Question 95: Please provide guidance specific to the expected format and size(pages/words) for the “U.S. manufacturing plan” component of the DE-FOA-0000974: BIOENERGY TECHNOLOGIES INCUBATOR - full application. Given that we have a licensing based model, how should we specifically address the manufacturing plan? In other words, should we highlight the potential job creation, economic impact, capital expenditure in the US etc. that our partner/licensee might commit to a softwoods-to-sugar facility?
Answer 95:

The format of the U.S. manufacturing plans is the same as the rest of the application (see Section IV.A. of the FOA, “Application Process,” regarding, e.g., PDF formatting, paper and margin size, font color and size, etc.). There is no page or word limit. However, the intent of a U.S. manufacturing plan is to indicate the applicant’s measurable commitment to support U.S. manufacturing of the results from its award. The U.S. manufacturing plan should be limited to the applicant’s commitments to U.S. manufacturing that are measurable and, thus enforceable. The entire U.S. manufacturing plan will become part of the award terms and conditions.

Each applicant must determine the content of its U.S. manufacturing plan with understanding that (1) the proposed U.S. manufacturing plan will be evaluated based on the merit review criteria and program policy factors and (2) if selected, the U.S. manufacturing plan will become part of the award terms and conditions. Even if an applicant does not intend to directly manufacture products, the applicant can still support U.S. manufacturing through its commercialization and licensing strategies (e.g., consider U.S. manufacturing as a factor in licensing).

Question 96: We wanted to confirm if the Service Contract Act (SCA) will be applicable to this effort?
Answer 96: The Service Contract Act is not applicable to awards made under this FOA.

Question 97: Are visiting scientists from Japan with J-1 visa status doing research in an American University laboratory eligible to serve as co-PI's on the proposals for program DE-FOA-0000974 (primary PI would be US citizen) and if so what sort of documentation is needed? If they are not allowed to serve as co-PI's but would be participating in a meaningful way in the project, what is the proper designation and what sort of documentation is needed?
Answer 97: There is no prohibition against having foreign visiting scientists participate as Co-PIs.

Question 98: We are submitting an application which includes an FFRDC organization. The link to the appropriate FFRDC budget and work authorization forms does not seem to be current (it does not work). Can you point us to the appropriate links for these two forms? Also – if an FFRDC meets subawardee criteria – do we need to also submit a form 123.1 as well as the FFRDC budget form.
Answer 98:

We apologize that the link contained in the FOA would not open. Instead, please use this link for the Field Work Proposal: https://www.directives.doe.gov/directives-documents/0412.1-BOrder-a

You do not need to submit the PMC 123.1 for FFRDCs.

Question 99: Will the full submission application deadline be extended beyond May 23rd?
Answer 99: As of now, we do not believe that the full submission application deadline will be extended. Applications are due 05/23/2014 5:00 pm (EST).

Question 100: Is the Milestone Summary Table counted against the page total for the Technical Volume, or may it be included as an Appendix or a separate attachment?
Answer 100: The Milestone Summary Table is part of the Workplan requirement, which should constitute approximately 10-14 pages of the Technical Volume. It does count against the page total for the Technical Volume.

Question 101: We (ORNL) are recognized as an FFRDC. We require review and approval from the DOE/ORNL Site Office (OSO), which is also recognized as the “Authorization for NON-DOE/NNSA or DOE/NNSA FFRDCs” requirement that’s referenced in call. That letter should be addressed to whom? From my experience, the letter is normally addressed to a specific Contract Specialist (Name, Address, etc.)?
Answer 101:

These can be addressed to the Contracting Officer, Geoffrey Walker, at

15013 Denver West Parkway
Golden CO 80401

Question 102: We will be applying to DE-FOA-0000974 as a sub recipient. Please advise the B&R code for this project
Answer 102:

The B&R code is not required to submit an application to this FOA.

Question 103: Can ARCADIS be considered a Contractor providing goods or services under 10CFR 600.318 (b)?
Answer 103:

To earn fee or profit under a financial award, like a grant or cooperative agreement, the entity must be considered a vendor. A vendor is defined as an entity that:

(1) Provides the goods and services within normal business operations;

(2) Provides similar goods or services to many different purchasers;

(3) Operates in a competitive environment;

(4) Provides goods or services that are ancillary to the operation of the Federal program; and

(5) Is not subject to compliance requirements of the Federal program.

Question 104: Can the grant recipient apply discounts in the rates charged by ARCADIS to their cost share allocation?
Answer 104: No, discounts cannot be used as cost share.

Question 105: Please confirm that the U.S. citizenship or permanent resident requirement is applicable to proposals submitted by "Individuals" only; that this requirement does not apply to educational institution that is applying as Subrecipient.
Answer 105:

Section III.A.1. is only applicable to Individuals. Please refer to Section III.A.2., which states:

For-profit entities, educational institutions, and nonprofits that are incorporated (or otherwise formed) under the laws of a particular State or territory of the United States are eligible to apply for funding as a Prime Recipient or Subrecipient.

State, local, and tribal government entities are eligible to apply for funding as a Prime Recipient or Subrecipient.

DOE/NNSA Federally Funded Research and Development Centers (FFRDCs) and DOE Government-Owned, Government-Operated laboratories (GOGOs) are eligible to apply for funding as a Prime Recipient or Subrecipient.

Non-DOE/NNSA FFRDCs and non-DOE GOGOs are eligible to apply for funding as a Subrecipient, but are not eligible to apply as a Prime Recipient.

Federal agencies and instrumentalities (other than DOE) are eligible to apply for funding as a subrecipient, but are not eligible to apply as a prime recipient.

[1] Nonprofit organizations described in section 501(c)(4) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 that engaged in lobbying activities after December 31, 1995, are not eligible to apply for funding.

Question 106: How can I upload two sub recipients budget (EERE -159) as there is only one field to upload sub recipient budget?
Answer 106: Please email EERE-ExchangeSupport@hq.doe.gov.

Question 107: Where do I attach/upload sub award letter?
Answer 107: Please email EERE-ExchangeSupport@hq.doe.gov.

Question 108: If I have supporting letters, should these be enclosed in the technical volume, If not where to attach/upload these documents?
Answer 108: Yes, letters of support are part of the Technical Volume.

Question 109: With reference to the subject FOA, I have a question related to Section B. Cost Sharing. Were we to consider an item of equipment to be budgeted for this opportunity and the vendor that we were to purchase this item from provide a discount, can the discount count towards an in-kind cost share contribution?
Answer 109: Discounts are not allowable cost share.

Question 110: I am the Cognizant CO for Ames Lab. They are preparing a full application and need my authorization with the application due 5/23. I noted in the FOA, pg. 9 above cost share contributions by FFRDCs, “every cost-share contribution must be reviewed and approved in advance by the Contracting Officer and incorporated into the project budget before the expenditures are incurred”. Please clarify the intent of this requirement. Is this something the EERE CO does upon evaluation? Or…if it’s supposed to be my responsibility as cognizant CO, is this approval required prior to my authorization letter or with the full application? I haven’t seen this requirement in a FOA before so I’m seeking clarification. I don’t see how this would be possible for me to review and approve until after Ames was selected as an award recipient. If it is my responsibility, I would require the terms to be incorporated into the Work Authorization from EERE that would issue the funds and then validate the proposed cost-share at that time, which would meet the requirement to approve “before expenditures are incurred”.
Answer 110: Cost share contributions must be reviewed and approved in advance by the EERE Contracting Officer, not the Lab CO.

Question 111: Our Technical Volume is within the 30-page limit. However, our Workplan section is ca. 16 pages and the FOA lists approximately 10-14 pages. (The Project Overview is 2 pages, the Technical Description is 7 pages, and the Technical Qualifications is 4 pages.) Since the guidance for each section is approximate, we are assuming that 16 pages would be acceptable for the Workplan as long as the total is within 30 pages. Is that correct?
Answer 111: You are correct, as stated in the FOA, the Technical Volume to the Full Application may not be more than 30 pages, including the cover page, table of contents, and all citations, charts, graphs, maps, photos, or other graphics. The Workplan can be more than the approximate page limit shown in the FOA, as long as the Technical Volume does not exceed 30 pages.

Question 112: I was encouraged to respond with the Full Application on April 28th. I am doing all I can to meet the stated deadline of May 23 for the Full Applications. That said, I noticed that the FOA states that "Applicants will have approximately 30 days from receipt of the Concept Paper Encourage/Discourage notification to prepare and submit a Full Application." I was wondering if it would be possible to receive a deadline extension until May 27th, which would make it approximately 30 days between the notification and the deadline.
Answer 112: At this time, EERE does not expect to extend the Full Application due date. The due date is May 23, 2014 at 5:00 pm (EST) and full applications must be submitted through EERE Exchange at https://eere-Exchange.energy.gov.

Question 113: The FOA requires the EERE-159 Budget Justification to be submitted in Microsoft Excel format, but when I attempt to upload my file (.xls extension) I get an error that says “This file extension isn’t allowed.” Is there a different type of Excel file I am supposed to use?
Answer 113: The Budget Justification requirement is to create it in Microsoft Excel format; however, it should be saved in a single PDF file using the following convention for the title “ControlNumber_LeadOrganization_Budget_Justification.

Question 114: If a grant is awarded, and the Prime Recipient in the application is unable to secure matching funds, can the PI(s) and project team move to a different for-profit corporation and have that corporation provide the matching funds?
Answer 114: As stated in the FOA, Applicants are required to provide written assurance of their proposed cost share contributions in their Full Applications. Therefore, it is a requirement that all cost share be secured prior to applying to the FOA. Additionally, although the cost share requirement applies to the project as a whole, including work performed by members of the project team other than the Prime Recipient, the Prime Recipient is legally responsible for paying the entire cost share. Therefore, if circumstances change, the Prime Recipient is ultimately responsible for meeting the cost share requirement, which may entail securing the funds from a different source.

Question 115: The linked SF-424 document has an expiration date of 1/31/2009 in the upper right header. Is there a more up to date SF-424 form?
Answer 115: No, please use the SF-424 referenced in the FOA.

Question 116: Page 25 of the FOA requires that applicants “Attach one-page resumes for key participating team members as an appendix.” What is the required format and content of the EERE resume?
Answer 116: EERE does not require certain formats or content other than what is listed in the FOA.

Question 117: Question re item 14 on Application for Federal Assistance SF-424: For Areas Affected by Projects (Cities, Counties, States, etc.), would it be appropriate to include the location where the project work will be performed?
Answer 117: Yes, please include the location(s) where the project work will be performed.

Question 118: If an application component is not applicable to my application, should I upload a document stating that the component is not applicable, or should I not upload a document? For example, If my application does not include a subawardee, do I need to upload a Subaward Budget Justification (EERE 159) document? Similarly, for the Budget for Federally Funded Research and Development Center Contractor File
Answer 118: If a component of the application does not apply, it does not need to be submitted, nor is it required to upload a document stating that the component is not applicable.

Question 119: If there has been no lobbying by my organization, must I complete the SF-LLL, DISCLOSURE OF LOBBYING ACTIVITIES form?
Answer 119: This form is only required if applicable.

Question 120: The summary budget justification, EERE 159, has headers for 3 budget periods. Please explain what periods those are. Jason is applying for a 24 month grant. He assumes that period 1 is the first year and period 2 is the second year. What would period 3 be for?
Answer 120: If three budget periods are not applicable to your proposed project, you can leave them blank. It is acceptable to assume one budget period a year.

Question 121: On page 7 it says the cost share requirement is 20% On page 70 there is an example with varying cost share requirements. Where the demo task requires a 50% cost share. Are there any instances in this application where higher cost shares of 20% is required. If so where can i find this information.
Answer 121:

As stated in the FOA, the cost share must be at least 20% of the total allowable costs (i.e., the sum of the Government share, including FFRDC costs if applicable, and the recipient share of allowable costs equals the total allowable cost of the project) for research and development projects. (See 10 CFR 600.30 for the applicable cost sharing requirements.).

Question 122: How can I upload two sub recipients budget (EERE -159) as there is only one field to upload sub recipient budget?
Answer 122: You can combine the two sub recipient budget documents into one pdf and upload them as one file.

Question 123: TRL 2 is clearly the lowest level of interest. TRL 2-4 are listed as the levels for funding. Can the project run through TRL 6 during the funding phase, as long as it starts in TRL 3?
Answer 123: Yes, the starting TRL must be 2-4. This FOA is targeting those projects that are at the early research stage, with high levels of technical risk and innovation, but are in areas that that are not meaningfully addressed in BETO’s strategic plan or project portfolio. It is NOT intended to fund projects that are incremental improvements to current products or processes or for established work in BETO’s strategic plan or current portfolio.

Question 124: In section I.C. of the FOA, several areas of non-interest are listed, including: o R&D or improvements to commercially available processes including:  biogas production;  methane & hydrogen production; Can you please clarify if all biogas or biomethane projects are not of interest, or if only biogas and biomethane projects that involve commercially available processes are not of interest?
Answer 124: R&D for biogas and biomethane are not of interest for this particular FOA.

Question 125: We just tried to submit our full application package, and we are receiving the following message: This application has not been submitted. The application must be submitted for evaluation by the Department of Energy. The following items must be resolved before submitting the Full Application: • Additional information is required on the Upload and Submit tab. • Please upload the following required file: Subaward Budget Justification (EERE 159).,Please upload the following required file: Disclosure of Lobbying Activities (SF-LLL). We do not have any subawards or cost share partners that exceed the $250K work dollar requirement and consequently we don’t have that form to upload.
Answer 125: Please upload a page that states “Not Applicable.”

Question 126: Can the technical and business points of contact be different on the full application than on the concept letter?
Answer 126: Yes, you may revise the contacts on your full application.

Question 127: Is it possible to be a PI on one grant and a contributor to another?
Answer 127: Yes, you would need to ensure that your time was sufficiently segregated on each project (for example, you could not propose 100% of your time to both projects).

Question 128: Could you please confirm the B&R Code and Headquarters Program Manager that we should list on the FWP in our proposal submission for FOA 0000974?
Answer 128: You can leave the B&R Code blank and use Valerie Reed or Johnathon Male as the Program Manager.

Question 129: The BETO instructions state the budget justification is not required for subrecipients receiving less than $250,000 or less than 25%, whichever greater. However, the instructions on the budget justification template states that this form is required for all recipients receiving more than $100,000, which is still less than 25% of our proposed funding. Could you please let me know which requirement is correct?
Answer 129: As stated in the FOA, Applicants must provide a separate budget justification, EERE 159 (i.e., budget justification for each budget year and a cumulative budget) for each subawardee that is expected to perform work estimated to be more than $250,000 or 25 percent of the total work effort (whichever is less).

Question 130: I noticed that the submission deadline for Replies to Reviewer Comments (Funding Notice DE‐FOA‐0000974) is coming up this Friday at 5pm (EST). I’ve been checking our full application submission periodically and haven’t seen any comments come through as of yet, the status of our application is still in review mode. I was wondering if you might be able to let me know if the comments will be coming through shortly or if perhaps the deadline may be extended.
Answer 130:

The deadline to submit reply to reviewer comments has been updated through a modification to the Funding Opportunity Announcement. The current deadline is 7/2/2014 at 5:00pm (EST). We hope to have the review comments available for applicants early next week.

Question 131: I am worried that I cannot see the reviewer comments. I wonder if I am missing something or there is a delay in the system.
Answer 131:

Reviewer comments can be viewed on EERE Exchange as of Monday, 6/30/2014. Please ensure that you scroll to the bottom of the page. If you still cannot view the comments, you may not be listed as a POC for the submission, and do not have permission to see the submission in Exchange. The owner of the submission needs to explicitly share the submission with the Share Submission function.

Question 132: We are looking for guidance on the reply to reviewer’s comments. In some places it appears that each comment can merit a 3 page reply, whereas in others that all the comments must be addressed in 3 pages total. Are we allowed 3 pages total for all reviewer comments, or can individual comments be addressed with separate 3 page responses?
Answer 132: As stated in Section IV.F of the FOA,

EERE will provide Applicants with reviewer comments following evaluation of all compliant and responsive Full Applications. Applicants will have approximately three business days to prepare a short Reply to Reviewer Comments responding to comments however they desire or supplementing their Full Application.

EERE will not review or consider ineligible Replies to Reviewer Comments (see Section III of the FOA). EERE will review and consider each compliant and responsive Full Application, even if no Reply is submitted or if the Reply is found to be noncompliant.

Replies to Reviewer Comments must conform to the requirements stated in the FOA, including maximum page lengths. If a Reply to Reviewer Comments is more than three pages in length, EERE will review only the first three pages and disregard any additional pages.

Question 133: The reviewer response under Criterion 3 lists the same points as our strength and our weakness. The comments appear positive to us. How should we address this?
Answer 133: As stated in Section IV.F of the FOA,

EERE will provide Applicants with reviewer comments following evaluation of all compliant and responsive Full Applications. Applicants will have approximately three business days to prepare a short Reply to Reviewer Comments responding to comments however they desire or supplementing their Full Application.

EERE will not review or consider ineligible Replies to Reviewer Comments (see Section III of the FOA). EERE will review and consider each compliant and responsive Full Application, even if no Reply is submitted or if the Reply is found to be noncompliant.

Replies to Reviewer Comments must conform to the requirements stated in the FOA, including maximum page lengths. If a Reply to Reviewer Comments is more than three pages in length, EERE will review only the first three pages and disregard any additional pages.

Question 134: When are replies to reviewer comments due?
Answer 134:

The deadline to submit reply to reviewer comments has been updated through a modification to the Funding Opportunity Announcement. The current deadline is 7/3/2014 at 5:00pm (EST).

Question 135: What is the font size for replies to reviewer comments? Is Font 11 Times Newman OK?
Answer 135:

As the FOA states,

The Concept Paper, Full Application, and Reply to Reviewer Comments must conform to the following requirements:

· Each must be submitted in Adobe PDF format;

· Each must be written in English;

· All pages must be formatted to fit on 8.5 x 11 inch paper with margins not less than one inch on every side. Use Times New Roman typeface, a black font color, and a font size of 12 point or larger (except in figures or tables, which may be 10 point font). A symbol font may be used to insert Greek letters or special characters, but the font size requirement still applies. References must be included as footnotes or endnotes in a font size of 10 or larger. Footnotes and endnotes are counted toward the maximum page requirement;

· The Control Number must be prominently displayed on the upper right corner of the header of every page. Page numbers must be included in the footer of every page; and,

· Each must not exceed the specified maximum page limit, including cover page, charts, graphs, maps, and photographs when printed using the formatting requirements set forth above and single spaced. If Applicants exceed the maximum page lengths indicated below, EERE will review only the authorized number of pages and disregard any additional pages.

Question 136: One question we had on the Reply to reviewers comments was why they split this up into 2 pages of text then an additional page of text, graphs, or tables? Why not just say 3 pages is the limit? Why the split? Is it becuase you want graphs and tables not in the first two pages?
Answer 136:

Yes, the intent of applicant rebuttal is to clarify reviewer comments, so the first two pages is meant for the applicant to address these concerns via prose. Recognizing that sometimes graphs and tables may also clarify, we allow for that in the third page. The intent of the rebuttal is not to introduce completely new data, but again, just to clarify the questions from the proposal.

Question 137: We applied for grant DE-FOA-0000974 and we were expecting to hear a response on August 1, 2014. We have not yet received the status of our application. Please advise.
Answer 137: DOE is still evaluating the proposals and will make announcement selections as soon as we are able to.

Question 138: We have not yet received notification of whether or not our application has been selected for award negotiations. What is the timeframe for receiving notification?
Answer 138: Because of an unanticipated process delay, the Expected Date for EERE Selection Notifications will be later than the August 7th date reflected in the FOA. EERE currently hopes to provide Selection Notifications by the end of October, 2014.

Question 139: We were expecting a selection notification by the end of October, but no news yet. Is it going to take longer time and what is expected announcement date as of now?
Answer 139: DOE anticipates making selection announcements for this FOA early December.

Question 140: When will selections be announced? The last date previously provided has passed.
Answer 140: The Expected Date for EERE Selection Notifications has been delayed again due to unforeseen circumstances. EERE now plans to provide Selection Notifications by the end of January.

Frequently Asked Questions