{"text_format":"2","workbook":"xlsx","n_sheets":3,"sheets":["INSTRUCTIONS & TIPS","FOA CONTENT QUESTIONS","Admin Pick List"],"not_rendered":{"charts":0,"images":0,"macros":0,"external_links":0,"defined_names":2,"comments":0,"pivot_tables":0},"unopened":[],"bounds":{"document_bytes":16777216,"sheet_cells":100000,"run_cost":"one","rows_first":2000,"rows_last":500,"rows_between":2000,"halvings":0,"cell_chars":16384,"cell_head_chars":4096},"cells_cut":0,"cells_raw":0,"read":"whole","date_system":"1900"}

{"sheet":"INSTRUCTIONS & TIPS","index":0,"n_rows":12,"n_cols":2,"rows_kept":12,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[[0,0,0,1],[9,0,9,1]]}
["INSTRUCTIONS"]
[1,"All questions pertaining to this funding opportunity announcement should be emailed to MarineEnergyFOA@ee.doe.gov."]
[2,"All questions pertaining to EERE Exchange should be emailed to EERE-ExchangeSupport@hq.doe.gov. Include FOA name and number in subject line."]
[3,"All questions and answers pertaining to this FOA will be posted on EERE Exchange and EPIC within this spreadsheet."]
[4,"DOE will attempt to respond to a question within 3 business days, unless a similar question and answer has already been posted in this spreadsheet. "]
[5,"All questions should be submitted not later than 3 business days prior to the application due date. Questions submitted after this date will not be answered."]
[6,"Questions are assigned a number in accordance with when they are reviewed by DOE.  "]
[7,"Questions are assigned a topic area by DOE when reviewed."]
[]
["TIPS"]
[1,"Applicants may sort questions and answers in the question tabs of this spreadhseet by selecting the drop-down box arrow on the column headers and selecting any of the listed attributes."]
[2,"Applicants may search for questions and/or keywords by holding CTRL+F on the keyboard and typing in a phrase or keyword."]

{"sheet":"FOA CONTENT QUESTIONS","index":1,"n_rows":94,"n_cols":5,"rows_kept":94,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[[1,0,1,4],[0,0,0,4]]}
["ADMINISTRATIVE QUESTION AND ANSWER LOG"]
["DE-FOA0002415 - Advancing Wave Energy Technologies through Open Water Testing at PacWave"]
["Question #","Date Submitted","Topic","Question","Answer"]
[1,"2021-07-07","Cost Sharing","I am interested in this FOA, but the cost-share is a big burden to me.  Is there any way in which the cost sharing requirement can be waived?","No, the cost share must be at least 10% of the total allowable costs for research and development projects. See FOA Section III.B. for more information."]
[2,"2021-07-10","Technical Topics","Topic Area 1: This topic area appears to provide funding for detailed design, build and subsequent open-water testing. A key aspect of the de-risking and testing process is to test sub-systems (i.e. PTO) on a test-stand on land. Is it OK to propose tasks that are aimed at this incremental de-risking process? ","Yes."]
[3,"2021-07-10","Technical Topics","Topic Area 2: This topic has an aim to create a system design that is ready for testing at PAC wave. Funding is directed at pure design activities. Would it be OK to include some de-risking in the scope of work that includes sub-system testing? ","Yes."]
[4,"2021-07-11","Concept Paper","Can you please provide a 1 page example of a strong Concept Paper technical description that…(adheres to the requirements set forth in the FOA)","DOE is unable to provide examples of previously submitted Concept Papers. "]
[5,"2021-07-12","Webinar","How do I register for the informational webinar for the above FOA planned on July 22?","Webinar link is now available on Exchange: https://eere-exchange.energy.gov/Default.aspx#FoaIdfce24ff4-aa78-4591-a187-7e7ab6abc7ae\n\nThe PowerPoint Slides from the Webinar, along with the recording, have also been posted on Exchange."]
[6,"2021-07-13","Technical Topics","This specifically relates to Topic Area 3 R&D. These questions are:\n(1) Is there an auxiliary cable available to connect environmental monitoring instrumentation and if so is it possible to get some basic specifications (e.g., number of fibers)?\n(2) Is there seabed power available for environmental monitoring instrumentation? ","Not at this time.  It is anticipated that cables and seabed power will be available in 2024 as stated in the PacWave Client Handbook."]
[7,"2021-07-19","Technical Topics","An earlier question (#2) stated “This topic area appears to provide funding for detailed design…”. The answer was yes.\n\nIf the design modification activities are desktop-related only, are they allowed in BP1?","Yes, \"desktop-related\" design activities are allowed in BP1. As stated in the FOA,  no procurement, fabrication, or deployment activities may take place during BP1."]
[8,"2021-07-22","Application Reviews","How will the TRL levels be confirmed for designed units? Specifically for TA1?","Definitions of TRL levels can be found in APPENDIX E – DEFINITION OF TECHNOLOGY READINESS LEVELS."]
[9,"2021-07-22","Other","Can one team submit 2 applications to 2 different topics areas?(1 to each)","Yes."]
[10,"2021-07-22","Application Content/Format","Can/Should we include specifically (by name) FFRDC's and/or Universities to our Concept Paper Roles Matrix?","Your Roles and Responsibilities Matrix should include all responsibilities of project partners and anticipated subcontractors including any Universities or anticipated FFRDCs."]
[11,"2021-07-22","Technical Topics","Are there any limitations on the type of mooring to ground at PACWAVE? It seems not addressed in the Workbook? For example, piles, foundations, other structures, attached to sea bottom, material, size, limitations?","The only real limitation on anchors is that they must be removed at the end of any test. So no permanent anchors.\nIn Section 7 of PacWave's Client Handbook, \"Client’s Responsibilities\", its states:\nd. Deployment and Recovery (including Decommissioning) \nYou are responsible for the safe and responsible deployment of all equipment, including anchors and mooring systems. While PacWave personnel can assist in making introductions to marine industry representatives, it is your responsibility to plan, arrange, coordinate and implement all marine operations associated with your work at PacWave. This may include hiring professionals external to the PacWave organization.\n\nSimilarly, you are responsible for the recovery of all deployed equipment. Nothing may be left either on the surface or on/under the seafloor at PacWave South after testing is completed."]
[12,"2021-07-22","Intellectual Property","Is my understanding correct in that TA1a does NOT require that WEC designers make their previously patented work publicly available?  ","TA1b projects must test an open-source WEC system and generate publicly available data and knowledge that will advance the entire WEC industry. Applicants are not required to make previously patented work publicly available.\nDetail about Title to Subject Inventions is listed in FOA Section VIII.J. and VIII.K. Additional information on data rights is also available in Section VIII.K.iii"]
[13,"2021-07-22","Technical Topics","Regarding the PacWave testing site (A,B,C,D), are there constraints to the number/spacing of multiple WEC devices within a testing berth? I couldn't find the info in the Client Handbook¬","PacWave South is licensed for up to 20 devices, at any one time. It is assumed that this would mean up to five devices per berth.\nThe site is 2 x1 nautical miles in area and is divided into four test berths from north to south. Within a berth there are no limitations on the spacing between WECs."]
[14,"2021-07-22","Technical Topics","Regarding TA3,  is it an absolute requirement to conduct field tests for any proposal, or could lab tests be sufficient? ","Field tests in open water at PacWave are required. "]
[15,"2021-07-22","Cost Sharing","Lets say that you had a real game changer concept to extract wave energy, and you can't come up with 10% of the total cost, are you out of luck as far as funding goes?","See Q&A#1.  Applicants are encouraged to refer to 2 CFR 200.306 as amended by 2 CFR 910.130 for cost sharing requirements, as well as FOA Section III.B."]
[16,"2021-07-22","Eligibility","Can one PI submit different proposals to more than one topics as long as it satisfies single entity per topic area?","Yes."]
[17,"2021-07-22","Technical Topics","Do we need to use our own manufacturing contractors/partners, or are there manufacturers recommended by the FOA/DOE?","There are no partners recommended in this FOA. You do have to identify your own manufacturing partners and your own team in your application."]
[18,"2021-07-22","Technical Topics","How we know if our WEC system is qualified for pre-permitting at PacWave? Do we need to apply for permit before proposal submission?","Applicants do not need to apply for a permit since the site is pre-permitted. Applicants do need to know if their device falls into the category of pre-permitted.  The PacWave site is currently permitted to test point absorbers, accentuators, and oscillating water columns WECs, as well as any hybrid system comprised of these 3 types of WECs. If you are not sure if your device fits in these categories, you can submit a follow up question with details of your device."]
[19,"2021-07-22","Technical Topics","Are terminator WEC's included?","Terminators such as oscillating water column-type device are allowable.\nOver-topping-type devices are currently not permitted at PacWave South."]
[20,"2021-07-22","Technical Topics","About three pre-permitted WEC types, does the attenuator include the oscillating surge WECs? ","An oscillating surge device would be acceptable under the pre-permitting requirements."]
[21,"2021-07-22","Technical Topics","Does PacWave provide WECS for testing PTOs?","PacWave does not currently have WECs for testing of PTOs or other components."]
[22,"2021-07-22","Technical Topics","Are tests involving aspects within pending patents or granted patents generally discouraged, even if there is a comprehensive licensing plan?","No; Concept Papers and Full Applications are reviewed against the Technical Review Criteria in Section V.A. of the FOA. "]
[23,"2021-07-22","Eligibility","Are proposals which are not on WEC directly but on supporting systems such as specialized piling technologies that would be useful, be eligible for funding? Can this be as a separate proposal or do we need to team up with a specific WEC proposal as a part of it?","Applications for open water testing of supporting WEC subsystems and components are acceptable under Topic Area 3.  Partnerships with full WEC system developers are not required.  "]
[24,"2021-07-22","Eligibility","To follow up we have been awarded a Phase 2 DoE for a subsea Micropiles recently. Will a proposal that leverages that technology towards the WEC be eligible for this proposal?","Overlapping scope of a project would not be eligible, but technology developed under a separate Federally funded project could be applied to another Federally funded project. Any portion of that technology that was Federally funded could not be used as cost share towards a new Federally funded project. \nEERE will accept only new applications under this FOA. EERE will not consider applications for renewals of existing EERE-funded awards through this FOA."]
[25,"2021-07-22","Technical Topics","is 100W like enough to lit one incandescent light bulb?","WECs that can provide annual averaged power of 100 W have the potential to power a wide range of systems in the open ocean where other forms of energy generation (e.g., solar) are not possible. For example, wave energy power ocean sensors that require 100+ W of annual averaged power could expand the potential for remote ocean monitoring and deployment of persistent sensors that do not require expensive human intervention."]
[26,"2021-07-22","Technical Topics","For TA2, what is the minimum eligible WEC TRL (i.e. TRL at the START of the project performance period) and what is the TRL that should be attained by the END of the project?","There are no TRL requirements for Topic Area 2 projects. Table 5 in the FOA describes the design requirements that must be achieved by the end of Topic Area 2 projects."]
[27,"2021-07-22","Technical Topics","Also for TA2, the FOA indicates that during Budget Period Two (Month 7 to end of project), tank testing or component testing can be conducted to obtain physical data for validating design tools and methodologies used to produce the PacWave-ready WEC design.  Can this also include open-water testing of a subscale model in a more-benign wave climate on the US East Coast, as a means of de-risking the final design's PacWave readiness?","Note that Topic Area 2 has only one Budget Period during which testing is allowed. All testing activities must be performed with the maximum TA2 budget, as defined in the FOA. Further, any open-water testing permits are the responsibility of the applicant."]
[28,"2021-07-22","Concept Paper","Concept Paper: Word/PDF exact format? ","For Concept Paper content and formatting requirements, see FOA Section IV.C.i. For Full Application content and formatting requirements, see FOA Section IV.D.i."]
[29,"2021-07-22","Foreign Entities/Work","Who can apply? The FOA stated that there are no restrictions. Can foreign universities participate in some way? ","See FOA Section III.A.iii."]
[30,"2021-07-22","Eligibility","Does the limit of one applicant to TA1 or TA2 only apply to the application lead or all consortium participants? For example, could a partner organisation be listed on multiple applications as a sub-contractor?","Yes, the same subrecipient could be listed under several applications under any of the Topic Areas.\nOn the TA1 and on the TA2,  while the prime entity can only submit one concept paper and one full application to the FOA, this does not prohibit the prime applicant from collaborating on other applications as a potential sub-recipient or partner as long as the entity is only listed on one concept paper or one full application.\nFor Topic Area 3, an entity may submit more than one Concept Paper and Full Application, provided that each application describes a unique, scientifically distinct project and provided that an eligible Concept Paper was submitted for each Full Application.  This does not prohibit the prime applicant from collaborating on other applications as a potential sub-recipient or partner."]
[31,"2021-07-22","Technical Topics","The FOA indicates that during Budget Period Two (Month 7 to end of project), tank testing or component testing can be conducted to obtain physical data for validating design tools and methodologies used to produce the PacWave-ready WEC design.  Can this also include open-water testing of a subscale model in a more-benign wave climate on the US East Coast, as a means of de-risking the final design's PacWave readiness? ","Answer for this question for TA2 is provided in #28.\nIf this question is for Topic Area 1, in Budget Period 2 of Topic Area 1 Projects, subscale testing in a more being wave energy climate is acceptable and may be proposed by applicants. Note that permitting for testing activities not performed at PacWave will be the responsibility of the applicant."]
[32,"2021-07-22","Technical Topics","I do not find any requirement that TA2 requires any TRL Level as a prerequisite.\nIs this correct?","There are no TRL requirements for Topic Area 2 projects. Table 5 in the FOA describes the design requirements that must be achieved by the end of Topic Area 2 projects."]
[33,"2021-07-22","Technical Topics","Reading the FOA’s Appendix E, I would interpret TRL 1/2 as a reasonable prerequisite?","Topic Area 1: Applicants must have an existing WEC system design or an existing WEC (i.e., already fabricated) that has achieved a TRL 4 or greater for TA1a and a TRL of 3 or greater for TA1b, as defined in Appendix E.\nTopic Area 2: There are no TRL requirements for Topic Area 2 projects. Table 5 in the FOA describes the design requirements that must be achieved by the end of Topic Area 2 projects.\nTopic Area 3: The technology being tested under this TA must have a TRL greater than 3, as defined in Appendix E."]
[34,"2021-07-22","Technical Topics","I do not see any ‘pre-permitting’ provision in the FOA or in the Client Handbook Version 1.3 for a WEC structure to be ‘fixed to the sea floor’ using suction pilings.\nI proposed such a structure under a previous year's FOA which I would like to re-submit as an improved device for consideration.\n\nPlease advise if this is possible.\n\nIf it is possible to permit such a device, do any of the cited executed geophysical surveys provide enough data on the ‘sand sea floor’ that suction piling engineering can be performed?\nAt present the ‘Client Handbook’ and http://pacwaveenergy.org cite these surveys but do not provide specific access to this data.","As long as the suction pilings could be removed once the test phase was complete, they would be pre-permitted.\n\n\n\n\n\nThe inside cover of the Handbook (page 2 of the PDF) provides a link to available reports and data. This includes the geophysical surveys and the associated data."]
[35,"2021-07-22","Technical Topics","Why are there limitations to applicants’ not being able to speak directly to PacWave as well as National Laboratories?","We want to make sure that every applicant to the FOA is treated absolutely the same way and have each applicant have access to the same information. To ensure the fairness of each application we are restricting this communication so we are able to have all applicants have the same access. That’s why we provide information within the FOA as well as the Client Handbook."]
[36,"2021-07-22","Technical Topics","Regarding TA3, is it an absolute requirement to conduct field testing for any proposal or could lab testing be sufficient.","The answer to that question is that any proposal for TA3 has to include some testing at the PacWave site. It’s up to the applicant to propose what that testing is, but it has to be at the PacWave site. So, laboratory testing can also be part of the project, but it can’t be the only part of it. There has to be something that goes on at PacWave."]
[37,"2021-07-25","Technical Topics","Could you please provide some additional details about the specifications for the instrumentation node on the end of the auxiliary cable (e.g., interface communication protocols, bus voltages, etc.)? \nThis is briefly mentioned on pg. 7/29 in the PacWave Client Handbook.","The instrumentation node is still in the design phase, so no information is available."]
[38,"2021-07-27","Application Reviews","Concerning the above FOA, can you please advise how an application provided by a foreign entity will be evaluated compared with one from a US lead consortia, i.e. is there any dis-advantage. This assumes the applicable waiver has been completed successfully.  ","All applications are reviewed equally against the Technical Review Criteria in Section V.A.ii of the FOA. Program Policy Factors as stated in  V.B.i. of the FOA may also be considered. "]
[39,"2021-07-27","Other","May the applicant self certify as a minority own business or individual?","While the Applicant should use resources available to them for determining their entity classification, such as the Internal Revenue Codes and/or SBA Size Standards, entity certifications other than the self-certification in “Box 9 Type of Applicant” in the SF424 Application for Federal Assistance (a required Full Application form submission) are not required during the application stage of the award process. "]
[40,"2021-07-27","Intellectual Property","May the applicant use patented technology that was developed using private funding for TA-3?","Yes; Applicants can use patented technology developed using private funds.\nDetail about Title to Subject Inventions is listed in FOA Section VIII.J. and VIII.K. Additional information on data rights is also available in Section VIII.K.iii"]
[41,"2021-07-22","Intellectual Property","I want to be clear in my understanding. TA1a does not require that WEC designers make their previously patented work publicly available?  ","Issued patents are publicly available in nature. If the patent has a pending application status, it may or may not be made publicly available. Intellectual Property Provisions are negotiated with each individual entity if an application is selected for negotiations of an award. "]
[42,"2021-07-30","Technical Topics","I have reviewed supplied “PacWave Marine Geophysical Survey Report 10302014” and could not find a ‘hard number/numbers’ of sediment depth (vertical height) in the South Test Site:\n\nPage 25 describes and Figure 20 on this page cites: “Not enough data exist to map the surface in great detail, but the depth to the youngest surface (in two-way travel time) is shown in Figure 20.”\n1)\tIs this ‘two way travel time’ a measure of sediment depth (vertical height)?\n\nPage 28 “SETS Test Berth” cites ‘height of eroded dunes’ and ‘high backscatter 0.5-1m … transgressive gravel lag deposit’.\n2)            What is the depth of sediment (vertical height) under these varying dune heights to transgressive gravel lag deposit?\n3)\tWhat is the depth (vertical height) of transgressive gravel lag deposit?\n\n4)             Figure 23 on page 29 “Surficial Sediment Classification” provides great plan data, but does not offer depth (vertical height) of these sediments. Please advise as this data will be required to determine suction piles or suction bucket foundations.","The 2014 Geophysical Survey was conducted by a 3rd party. All the available information is at: \n\nhttps://oregonstate.box.com/s/s4fnpr7gbur352nf483od67m1j4xuoqg\n\nGIS data from the survey is contained in the file: PacWave Marine Geophysical Survey 2014.zip"]
[43,"2021-07-30","Eligibility","As a university spin-off, our company has one owner who is a professor of a university. He wants to work for the company on our proposed project for the FOA DE-FOA-0002415. May I ask if he is able to get paid as a consultant? If not, is he able to get paid as an employee of the company?\n\nI found there is one eligibility requirement in another DOE FOA (DE-FOA-0002381, SBIR) quoted here \"None of the employees or owners of the applicant small business may be paid as consultants.\" Wondering if this requirement applies to DE-FOA-0002415?","Employees of a company should be paid as employees, not consultants.  Language from any other FOA is not applicable to DE-FOA-0002415. Please refer to this FOA only. "]
[44,"2021-07-31","Technical Topics","For topic 1 and 3, what is the latest deadline for WEC ocean deployment at PacWave that is acceptable?","One of the TA1 requirements is to deploy the WEC in 2023/2024 and test the WEC for a duration of at least 6-24 months. \nGiven that TA3 is an open topic area, there is no deadline set for deployment. Please reference Table 1 on page 11 of the FOA for anticipated Period of Performance for all topic areas. "]
[45,"2021-07-31","Technical Topics","Will PacWave be able to accommodate multi-MW WEC devices? Are there any constraints on maximum capacity?","Each test berth is equipped with a dedicated 36 kV, 5 megawatt-rated subsea cable, so multi-MW devices can be accommodated."]
[46,"2021-07-31","Other","Is there any revenue generation support available for devices that export power to the grid? If so, please provide details.","No, program income is not applicable under this FOA."]
[47,"2021-07-31","Other","Can you please advise if there are any lease fees, mob fees etc payable to PacWave for the use of its site. If so, please advise fee structure.","There will be lease fees etc. for use of PacWave. However, DOE has allocated funding outside of this FOA for PacWave to support FOA projects. Accordingly, applicants do not need to reserve funds to pay for PacWave support out of their project budget."]
[48,"2021-07-31","Technical Topics","Can WEC devices be considered for longer ocean deployment durations than that specified for in the FOA for topic 1 and 3.","see answer to Question #44"]
[49,"2021-08-02","Technical Topics","This is a follow-up question to Q&A's #10 and #35:\n\n1. How we can identify, does the scope of services of those laboratories will fit our needs, if we cannot discuss with them details of such cooperation?\n\n2. And while we cannot define, their exact role in \"matrix\", does it mean that we can include those laboratories based on information described on their website, even if this probably not reflect correctly exact scope and amount of possible cooperation, at this stage?","1. Section B1.ii  provides information on National Laboratories' capabilities and lists the specific areas in which applicants are encouraged to work with the laboratories.\n\n2. Correct, please use information provided in Section B1.ii of the FOA to help you."]
[50,"2021-08-02","Concept Paper","Is there any official example of a compliant Concept Paper I can see for reference in terms of the content level of details and format? On a different topic is fine.","See Answer to Question #4."]
[51,"2021-08-02","Concept Paper","For Topic Area 2, is it encouraged to partner up with any existing companies in submitting my design? Or would I be able to change the submission team information (i.e. include a sponsoring company) later on, once the design receives \"encourage\" comment?","You may change partners anytime from Concept Paper to Full Application. However the same Control Number is Exchange must be used for both. "]
[52,"2021-08-02","Technical Topics","For TA3, will costs for deployments at the PacWave site be included or should they be budgeted for as part of this proposal? Specifically, if we would like to connect an instrumentation node to the aux cable, will these costs be covered?","All deployment costs must be met by the FOA applicants.  It is anticipated that cables will be available for use by 2024 and there is no aux cable at this time.  "]
[53,"2021-08-03","Technical Topics","This question is related to Topic Area 3.  Is it allowed to anchor a towing vessel at the PacWave site as a part of a WEC testing system for a few days of testing?","Anchoring of a vessel at PacWave South on a temporary basis would be allowed under the existing permitting."]
[54,"2021-08-03","Concept Paper","May the applicant submit letters of support along with the concept paper?","No. Anything over the listed page limit will not be reviewed. See answer to #57 below. "]
[55,"2021-08-03","Application Content/Format","What are the lead organization efforts percentage requirements?","There are not any lead organization efforts percentage requirements in this FOA."]
[56,"2021-08-04","Concept Paper","Are contractors or subcontractors considered partnering or \"teamed\" organizations? Or does the lead organization assume 100% of their efforts in the EERE application form? In other words, must our manufacturing subcontractors be listed as team member organizations in the concept paper application page?","Subrecipients and Vendors are considered partners and should be listed in the Concept Paper. A FOA modification will be posted soon to clarify this. "]
[57,"2021-08-04","Concept Paper","As we started to fill the form, we realized that the form's Abstract field had a larger word limit than that allowed by the single page restriction of the concept paper document. Can general information be placed in the form's abstract field, while more in depth information be present without an introduction in the concept paper document? Or does the concept paper document have to be able to stand alone from the application form?","There is not a Concept Paper form. The Concept Paper is a 2 page PDF that the Applicant creates and uploads to EERE Exchange. Only the PDF will be evaluated as part of the Technical Review. Please see Section IV.C.i. of the FOA for Concept Paper requirements. See also Section IV.A. for Concept Paper formatting requirements. "]
[58,"2021-08-05","Technical Topics","For Topic Area 3, would the support from PacWave and/or the national labs, be able to cover the cost of vessel operations for environmental monitoring instrumentation deployment and recovery or should project teams include these costs in their budgets?\n\nIf the answer is that this depends on the specific instrumentation and frequency of operations, we would be interested in deploying lightweight drifting instrumentation with vessels on the water for a total duration of <12 hours over two days and deploying fixed instrumentation with a weight of < 1000 lbs on the seabed for a period of 30 days. These activities would both occur three times within the project duration.","Project teams should include all costs for deployment of environmental monitoring instrumentation in the budget.  \n\nDeploying a fixed instrument within the PacWave South site would be allowed.\n\nDeploying drifting instruments that would end up well outside of the PacWave South test site would not be allowed under our existing permitting. However, the applicant may want to investigate what permits might be required for such a deployment and work to secure them independently of OSU/PacWave."]
[59,"2021-08-06","Concept Paper","The answer to Question #57 states: “The Concept Paper is a 2 page PDF that the Applicant creates and uploads to STRIPES.”\n\nPlease confirm that this is correct as the FOA does not seem to contain any information regarding use of STRIPES, and Section V.A states that all submissions should be made through EERE Exchange. \n","All submissions are made through EERE Exchange. That was a typo and has been corrected in the Answer to #57."]
[60,"2021-08-08","Technical Topics","The PacWave Client Handbook discusses pre-permitted mooring configurations in section 8 and says “standard mooring configurations and other support\nequipment (umbilical cables, subsea hubs, etc.)” are pre-permitted. \n\nIs energy storage on the seafloor included within the pre-permitted support equipment category, and more specifically, are battery and/or hydrogen storage allowed within the mooring system, e.g.., integrated within the gravity anchor? Is seafloor operating equipment contained within the mooring system, such as an electrolyzer, allowed? ","Battery storage within a mooring system could potentially be acceptable though it will require further discussions with the PacWave team if your Application is selected.\nHydrogen storage, or electrolyzers are not currently part of permitting and it is unclear if the permitting agencies would accept such applications as pre-permitted.  "]
[61,"2021-08-08","Eligibility","Are all tasks need to be performed strictly within the United States which include subcontractors from foreign countries? I am confused here because this call for proposal allows foreigners to be involved as subcontractors. The prime contractor shall be a US company in this case.","Please see section IV.J.iii. And Appendix B in the FOA. "]
[62,"2021-08-09","Technical Topics","Our solution “[REDACTED]” is a wave energy technology that is implemented in existing infrastructures exposed to sea (Port, offshore platform …), is this kind of technology is eligible for the program? And does PACWAVE testing area is suitable for it?","Applicants are encouraged to submit any applications that have the potential to advance the WEC industry provided they fall in the technical parameters specified in Section I.A., I.B., and I.B.1 of the FOA. "]
[63,"2021-08-09","Eligibility","Could we prepare a consortium with the infrastructure owner (host of the infrastructure where our technology would be implemented) as partner to participate in the program? ","Yes, see Section III.A. of the FOA"]
[64,"2021-08-11","Concept Paper","I have a question regarding the system schematic and dimensions for the Concept Paper submission. The technology we are submitting is a health monitoring and prognostics system that can monitor many of the components of any WEC system and is implemented entirely onshore. Because the system is not being implemented out at sea do we still need to include a system schematic and dimensions in the concept paper?","Yes, the Concept Paper needs to confirm to the content requirements listed in Section IV.C.I and they will be evaluated based on criteria listes in Section V.A.i"]
[65,"2021-08-24","Technical Topics","On page 17 of the FOA it is stated that \"LCOE calculations must be performed using the NREL System Advisory Model (SAM) (https://sam.nrel.gov/).\"\nHowever, according to the website, SAM only supports three types of wave energy converters:\n•\tHeaving buoy\n•\tOscillating surge weave converter\n•\tBackward bent duct buoy floating oscillating column\nnone of which is our type of WEC. There seems to be no provision to use different WEC geometries in SAM. Can we substitute our own LCoE calculation based validated simulations in combination with the NREL assumptions?","LCOE calculations must be performed using the NREL's System Advisor Model (SAM): this marine energy wave model supports all types of wave energy converters (WECs). The power matrices for Reference Models 3, 5, and 6 are available in SAM’s WEC library primarily as example cases. Users are not limited to using the device archetypes provided in the WEC library and can define a custom WEC by uploading a power matrix. An overview of SAM's marine wave and tidal energy models is provided in a webinar recording here: https://sam.nrel.gov/marine-energy.html."]
[66,"2021-08-24","Concept Paper","Our program recently received a discourage mark. But without any comments, according to my previous experience in DOE applications even if submission discouraged reviewers left comments which described weaknesses and strengths of proposal, shall we wait to such review comments in this case? if so how we can receive them?","The comments were omitted from initial encourage/discourage decision in error.  They are now available for view on EERE Exchange. "]
[67,"2021-08-25","Other","We would like to request a clarification meeting via video conference prior to starting the full application process. Could you please advise how this can be scheduled?","Per Section VII. of the FOA: Upon the issuance of a FOA, EERE personnel are prohibited from communicating (in writing or otherwise) with applicants regarding the FOA except through the established question and answer process as described below. Specifically, questions regarding the content of this FOA must be submitted to: MarineEnergyFOA@ee.doe.gov."]
[68,"2021-08-25","Technical Topics","We are proposing a technology to be tested under topic 3. A reviewer wonders if it is pre-permitted at PacWave. Who can we contact at PacWave or WPTO about this?We are proposing a technology to be tested under topic 3. A reviewer wonders if it is pre-permitted at PacWave. Who can we contact at PacWave or WPTO about this?","The PacWave site is currently permitted to test point absorbers, accentuators, and oscillating water columns WECs, as well as any hybrid system comprised of these 3 types of WECs. If you are not sure if your device fits in these categories, you can submit a follow up question with details of your device."]
[69,"2021-08-26","Application Content/Format","The FOA allots 6 Months for BP1 until the GnG decision point. The SOPO template states that a continuation application along with all BP1 deliverables are to be submitted to DoE 90 days (3 Months) before the end of BP1. This effectively shortens the time frame for BP1 work to be completed to 3 Months or half of BP1, which appears difficult to accomplish in light of the number of deliverables requested. It also poses the question what activities are expected / permissible for the other half of BP1  (the remaining 3 Months).","For Topic Area 1, as detailed in Table 3, it is assumed that all technical work for Budget Period 1 (BP1) will take place during the first 6 months of the project. Once the continuation application is submitted, a bridge task may be proposed to continue efforts on some non-essential work. Examples of work allowed in the bridge task: completing BP1 activities; preparing for Budget Period 2 (BP2) activities; participation in the go/no-go activities; and negotiating BP2 after a successful Go decision. Note that no BP2 tasks will be allowed to take place in this bridge task.\n\nTo allow for this, the words “No budget” were removed from  Table 3. And language for BP2 is updated to “Up to 85% of total project budget” in Table 3."]
[70,"2021-09-01","Concept Paper","Could you please provide an overview of the number of concept papers received for each topic area, and the number of papers encouraged/ discouraged to submit a full application?","EERE is not at liberty to disclose this information. "]
[71,"2021-09-01","Technical Topics","Are compressed air storage devices to be moored to the seafloor pre-permitted at Pacwave-South?","This would probably not be automatically pre-permitted. It is possible agencies would agree to it but it would require reopening discussions with them, which would have an unknown outcome."]
[72,"2021-09-02","Technical Topics","If selected for an award, what information will I need to consider when submitting NEPA related information about my device? ","Section VI.B.vi,  “Environmental Review in Accordance with National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)” includes information about NEPA requirements. \nIn addition, if you would like to see a sample of an Environmental Questionnaire (EQ1) form that is required for all selected awards during negotiations, you can find that form as well as an EQ1 submission guide under this link: \nhttps://eere-pmc-hq.ee.doe.gov/NEPA.aspx"]
[73,"2021-09-02","Technical Topics","How do I include technical assistance from National Laboratories in my application/SOPO when it is not in the budget? ","Technical assistance with National Laboratories will be managed by DOE under a separate agreement directly with the National Laboratories. This will be completed during negotiations, after award selections.\nFor the purposes of your SOPO, we recommend that you include a milestone or a deliverable that provides a recurring status of your technical assistance work with the National Laboratories throughout the project."]
[74,"2021-09-03","Application Content/Format","May an applicant add the cost of licensing technology to the budget justification?","Allowable costs may be negotiated, and unallowable costs will be removed from the budget, during negotiations towards an award, if an applicant is selected. \n\nSee 2 CFR §200.448(a)(1)(ii)   Intellectual property...(a) Patent costs. (1) The following costs related to securing patents and copyrights are allowable: (ii) Costs of preparing documents and any other patent costs in connection with the filing and prosecution of a United States patent application where title or royalty-free license is required by the Federal Government to be conveyed to the Federal Government."]
[75,"2021-09-03","Labs/FFRDCs","What information technology systems are required for collaboration with federal labs?","Specialized information technology systems are not required for collaboration with National Labs.”"]
[76,"2021-09-10","Technical Topics","A follow up to a previous question: Does PacWave South provide all the environmental monitoring necessary for compliance? In other words, should my proposal include a subcontractor that specializes in environmental monitoring methodologies and techniques or would this be redundant? "," PacWave will provide all the necessary environmental compliance monitoring. There is no need to include a subcontractor for environmental monitoring in proposals."]
[77,"2021-09-10","Technical Topics","Can you please provide the PacWave Reference for Permitting and Compliance referenced in the PacWave Client Handbook. \n \n“Clients will be required to comply with various permitting and compliance activities as described in section 8 and found in the PacWave Reference for Permitting and Compliance. (Please contact PacWave for a copy of the Reference.”","The PacWave Reference for Permitting and Compliance is still under development. However, the PacWave South best management practices (called the Protection, Mitigation & Enhancement Measures, or PM&Es) can be found at: https://oregonstate.box.com/s/s4fnpr7gbur352nf483od67m1j4xuoqg  "]
[78,"2021-09-14","Technical Topics","Where can I find  more information on performance metrics mentioned in the FOA? Are there any other industry accepted performance metrics I should be considering when developing my application?","See Mod 0004 of the FOA. Each Topic Area in the FOA has an associated “LCOE Calculation and Performance Metrics” section to help guide you in your application development. Appendix G also provides example performance metrics.  Additional resources were added to Appendix G- Example Performance Metrics in Mod 0004."]
[79,"2021-09-14","Application Content/Format","We believe BP1 for TA1a should be extended to 12 months - in our experience six months is too short to accomplish the tasks required to have a purposeful presentation for Go/No-go. Particularly to cover the following; \"Perform any necessary simulations, calculations, or design activities to inform other BP1 tasks\"\n\nA comprehensive mooring design, umbilical design and device design finalization are unlikely to be conducted adequately  in a six month period, particularly if modelling or tank testing is required to confirm designs for a PacWave deployment.  \n\nWe respectfully suggest that TA1a BP1 should be 12 months and have 36 months post go/no-go for fabrication, integration, deployment, operation and decommissioning etc.\n\nPacWave isn't a benign site so comprehensive technical design will be critical for Moorings, Umbilical and Device - this is apart from install plans which will also be required to be developed within the current BP1 six month period - these tasks are critical and aren't covered by the Bridge period in Mod #3.","The primary objective of BP 1 is project planning and budget planning to derisk the remainder of the award. Accordingly, the final system design does not need to be completed before the BP1 go/no-go. The BP1 go/no-go decision will be based on the completeness and quality of BP1 deliverables, as described in the FOA. The comprehensive system design can be completed in BP2, as described in Table 3 of the FOA.\n\nAs stated in the FOA, DOE is also allowing “necessary simulations, calculations, or design activities to inform other BP1 tasks” to be performed during BP1, as noted in Table 3 of the FOA. Note, however, that no procurement activities can be performed during BP1."]
[80,"2021-09-16","Technical Topics","How do we know how OSU or other involved institutions may be able to help us, if we are not able to contact them about the opportunity. Specifically, we are hoping to use OSU’s vessels to support the installation of our system at PACWAVE. Can we assume that the vessels will be available to us, and will those costs be covered separate from our award?","OSU vessels are primarily for scientific research. They can be used for deployments but can be difficult to schedule as they are in high demand.  Also, the crews are experienced in instrumentation deployments, not larger scale deployments. OSU vessels would need to be chartered and paid for like any other vessel, so the costs will need to come out of the award. PacWave does not have dedicated vessels."]
[81,"2021-09-18","Application Content/Format","Does this FOA qualify for Phase Zero assistance program? ","No, the DOE Phase 0 Program is only applicable to the Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) and/or Small Business Technology Transfer (STTR) programs. This FOA does not fall under those programs. "]
[82,"2021-09-21","Technical Topics","For the sake of clarity regarding TA1, WEC design and design modification activities are allowed in BP1 and can resume during the Go/No Go (GNG) period after submission of the GNG application provided no procurement or fabrication activities occur in either BP1 or the GNG?","That is correct, WEC design modifications activities are allowed to continue during the GNG period and into BP2 given a successful “Go” decision."]
[83,"2021-09-22","Technical Topics","It is possible to propose incorporating a hydrogen based production/storage/regeneration system onboard a deployed WEC (of a pre-permitted type of WEC for PacWave).  None of the hydrogen will be exported from the WEC and the onboard production, storage and regeneration will be done with existing standardized equipment.   \n\nWill this be covered by the pre-permitting at PacWave ?","This should be allowable under the pre-permitting. The regulatory agencies may require some additional information but if the WEC-type is under the pre-permitting, this should be acceptable."]
[84,"2021-09-24","Technical Topics","Quotes from industrial leaders for mooring and installation at PacWave South are coming back excessively high because they cannot find installation vessels based on the West Coast. They are projecting a need to bring installation and operations vessels from the Gulf Coast at an exorbitant rate.\n\nSince there will be many projects at the site needing vessels of this size, we imagine that costs will be cheaper since these vessels will be in the area, however it is skewing our cost projection at this time. Can you please provide guidance for how to state these costs? Is there a plan to provide common mooring and installation services for all PacWave projects?","At this time, there are no plans for common mooring and/or PacWave provided installation services. Accordingly, FOA applicants are responsible for determining both mooring and installation costs and should include these costs in their total project budget. While mooring and installation support services from PacWave are not available to projects being proposed under this FOA, note that the PacWave team is continuously assessing the needs of PacWave clients and the PacWave team may make additional marine operations capabilities available to clients in the future.\n\nPorts along the West Coast of the US provide a variety of marine operations vessels and services. It is anticipated that vessels on the West Coast can meet the needs of the majority of projects that will be deployed at PacWave under this FOA. However, in cases where vessels and/or capabilities are not available on the West Coast, the applicant must plan and budget for mobilizing the required marine operations assets as part of their proposed project."]
[85,"2021-09-27","Data Management","Regarding Data Management Plan. On page 56 you state:\n\n\"Note: All research and development (R&D) awards must submit a Data Management Plan (DMP) according to the timeline selected in the approved FRD.\"\n\nWhat does FRD stand for? This Acronym is not defined in the document.","This is instructional text that was inadvertently included. FRD stands for FOA Requirements Document which is internal and used for FOA planning. Please disregard this sentence. "]
[86,"2021-09-27","Data Management","In the past we needed to provide a detailed data management plan document, with a Table of Data Deliverables. Is it correct that now we only need to include the paragraph stated in Option 1 or Option 2? That's all you need for the proposal submission?, a copied paragraph ? I just wanted to be sure I understand your text correctly. ","Applicants should copy the paragraph in either Option 1 or Option 2 and paste into a Word document and upload that as your Data Management Plan. "]
[87,"2021-09-27","Application Content/Format","In the SOPO you stated \"Ninety (90) days before the completion of BP1\" we will be required to submit Go-No-Go documentation. Therefore, it would appear to me that the Go-No-Go decision point will need to be at the 21 month mark (if using a 24 month BP1)... it does not appear to be made clear in the FOA and is still different to the stated requirement of a go/no-go occuring at month 12 or 18.  ","Both TA1 and TA3 have two (2) budget periods:\nTA1 anticipated schedule is described in Table 3, setting GNG decision point at the end of BP1's technical work: Continuation Application will be expected at the end of Month 6 which is 90 days before BP1. \nTA3 does not provide a schedule in similar detail specifying only that Award duration is up to 48 months with two budget periods. It is left to the Applicants to propose how budget periods will be broken out. If BP1 is 24 months, a Continuation Application will be due on Month 21. Similarly, if Applicants propose BP1 to be 12 months, a Continuation Application will be expected in month 9."]
[88,"2021-10-01","Application Content/Format","I am assisting a PI team on the above referenced FOA and the solicitation allows up to 48 months, however the budget template provided on the EERE website for this opportunity only has space for 3 budget periods. I was able to find a template for 5 budget periods but not sure if it acceptable. Is there another form that has 4 budget periods that I should use, or is the referenced template the appropriate form?","The budget justification should be prepared on a budget period basis, not by year. See above Q&A #27 and #87. Topic Areas 1 and 3 should have only 2 budget periods, and Topic Area 2 should have only 1 budget period. Therefore the provided budget justification form with 3 budget periods is sufficient for the Topic Areas under this FOA."]
[89,"2021-10-04","Application Content/Format","We are wanting to increase our budget from that was listed in our concept paper.  Are we allowed to do this during the proposal phase?  Or are we limited to the budget figure listed on our concept paper? ","Yes, you may increase your budget between Concept Paper and Full Application.  Please review funding limits for each Topic Area in the FOA. "]
[90,"2021-10-05","Application Reviews","During the review period November 5th-8th will the applicant be allowed to submit a revised full application?","No; Applicants may only submit responses to reviewer comments. See FOA Section V.A.iii for more information on \"Criteria for Replies to Reviwer Comments\"."]
[91,"2021-10-06","Application Reviews","When will reviewer comments become available to the applicant?","EERE anticipates publishing Reviewer Comments by 11/03/2021. Note, Applicants will have 3 business days to submit their responses to Reviewer Comments, if they wish to do so. See FOA Section V.A.iii for more information on \"Criteria for Replies to Reviwer Comments\"."]

{"sheet":"Admin Pick List","index":2,"n_rows":17,"n_cols":1,"rows_kept":17,"cut":false,"hidden":true,"merged":[]}
["Pick List"]
[]
["Registration Requirements"]
["Webinar"]
["Concept Paper"]
["Eligibility"]
["Labs/FFRDCs"]
["Foreign Entities/Work"]
["Cost Sharing"]
["Due Dates"]
["Application Content/Format"]
["Intellectual Property"]
["Data Management"]
["Other"]
["U.S. Manufacturing Plan"]
["Application Reviews"]
["Technical Topics"]