{"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 PlatformBatManFOA@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 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":44,"n_cols":5,"rows_kept":44,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[[1,0,1,4],[0,0,0,4]]}
["ADMINISTRATIVE QUESTION AND ANSWER LOG"]
["DE-FOA0003236 - Platform Technologies for Transformative Battery Manufacturing"]
["Question #","Date Submitted","Topic","Question","Answer"]
[1,"2024-01-29","Registration Requirements","I am having trouble accessing the files from the website. Can you please send me a copy of the FOA?","Please try using a different web browser to open/download the .pdf document.  Usually one of these browsers: Google Chrome, Microsoft Edge or Firefox should work. If you are still unable to download the FOA from eXCHANGE, please contact EERE-ExchangeSupport@hq.doe.gov"]
[2,"2024-01-30","Registration Requirements","Is it correct to assume that the items on eXCHANGE listed under \"Applications Forms and Templates,\" do not apply to submission of the concept paper?  (i.e., those are required forms following submission of a concept paper AND invitation by DOE to submit an application","Correct. The forms listed under the \"Applications Forms and Templates\" section are only required once the Department of Energy has reviewed the concept paper and invites you to submit a full application"]
[3,"2024-02-01","Concept Paper","Is there a template available for the concept paper submission for DE-FOA-0003236?","There is no official template for the Concept Paper. See Section IV.C of the FOA for Concept Paper requirements and formatting information."]
[4,"2024-02-06","Technical Topics","Topic 1 relates to “next gen” batteries.  Topic 2 relates to smart manufacturing processes for batteries.  Do the “smart manufacturing” process have to relate to “next gen” batteries or can they be platforms for manufacture of, e.g., lithium-ion batteries?","Topic 2 focuses on smart manufacturing platforms for battery production and would be directed toward any type of batteries.  It does not need to relate to next generation batteries. "]
[5,"2024-02-07","Labs/FFRDCs","In most cases, partnering FFRDCs will be funded independently of the project team. Should those partnering FFRDCs still provide their project lead a completed subrecipient budget justification for the Full Application submission if the proposed federal share will exceed $250K or 25% of the total project costs?","FFRDCs do not need to submit a “subrecipient budget justification”, instead they are to submit a “DOE work proposal (WP)” as explained in the FOA. They also must submit a written “authorization” from their sponsoring federal agency. "]
[6,"2024-02-07","Labs/FFRDCs","Since DOE prohibits FFRDCs from lobbying to influence federal officials in connection with the awarding of grants or contracts, are federally owned and operated laboratories still required to provide a signed SF-LLL when there is nothing to report? ","FFRDCs do not have to submit a SF-LLL. "]
[7,"2024-02-07","Technical Topics","CVD is a technique that grows films on the scale of nanometers, while separators are usually on the scale of micrometers. Is the purpose of using CVD to grow free-standing thin films as separators, or to coat separators to improve their performance?","We are interested in new battery separators to improve battery performance.  CVD is one example of many possible approaches. We will consider the use of CVD to produce free standing separators or to improve current or new separators made by other processes. Regardless of the approach you wish to present, you need to demonstrate that the approach will improves battery performance and lead to energy efficiencies.  "]
[8,"2024-02-07","Technical Topics","Is the application of CVD in battery/supercapacitor to engineer the surface of electrodes an interesting topic in this call?","No, the topic is focused on new separators as replacements for existing separators used in current battery manufacturing.   "]
[9,"2024-02-07","Technical Topics","Regarding these quotes  from the FOA: \"In general, efforts should include work scopes between TRL 3 and TRL 6, although accelerating from TRL 2 is also important for fast-moving innovation in advanced materials and manufacturing.\" \"Proposals must show and justify the ability to validate the proposed technologies and processes at TRL 6 by the end of the project.\" Can you please explain is \"TRL 6 by the end of the project\" expected within 12-18 months with $1M in funding from DOE?  Or for example, is a project multiple grants, and this grant is the first of 2 grants? ","The project is a single grant and proposals must validate the proposed technologies and processes at TRL 6 by the end of the project. "]
[10,"2024-02-16","Technical Topics","I am interested in the Topic Area 2: Smart Manufacturing Platforms for Battery Production. May I have one question about the battery types that this DE FOA covers? Will PEM Fuel Cell manufacturing be considered as an interested Battery Production in this FOA Topic Area 2?","PEM Fuel cells are not covered under this FOA.  "]
[11,"2024-02-16","Technical Topics","Could you please provide a definition of what “battery” means in the above-referenced FOA? We’d like to understand specifically whether Topic 2 is limited to battery cells or if it includes battery packs and battery storage systems, inclusive of an inverter. Thank you!","Cells, modules, packs, and systems are units of gathered batteries. Inverter cases may be included within the definition of ‘batteries’ if it is part of the battery storage system, but an inverter case cannot be included within the definition if it is a stand-alone item."]
[12,"2024-02-16","Technical Topics","Could you please clarify the eligible applicants for Topic 2? Specifically, are lithium-ion module and pack manufacturers who are deploying the use of smart, automated and AI enabled technology to substantially expand capacity to manufacture battery energy storage systems eligible under Topic 2, or is it limited to the developers of the automation technology?  ","Yes, Li-ion module and pack manufacturers who are deploying the use of smart, automated and AI enabled technology to substantially expand capacity to manufacture battery energy storage systems are eligible for the topic."]
[13,"2024-02-16","Technical Topics","For the Platform Technologies for Transformative Battery Manufacturing is it 1 concept per topic area which is 2 total/institution or per subtopic area.  If it is one concept per subtopic that would be 4 total since there are 3 subtopics in topic 1 and a topic 2. I’m a little confused on the wording of this and I want to ensure we do not exceed our limit. ","Per Section III. F., “An entity may submit only one Concept Paper and one Full Application for each topic area/sub-topic area of this FOA. If an entity submits more than one Concept Paper and one Full Application to the same topic area/sub-topic area, EERE will request a determination from the applicant’s authorizing representative as to which application should be reviewed. Any other submissions received listing the same entity as the applicant for the same topic area/sub-topic area will not be 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 applicant on one Concept Paper and one Full Application for each topic area/sub-topic area of this FOA.” Each institution may submit four concept papers, one for each of the three subtopics, 1.1, 1.2, and 1.3 and one for topic 2.  "]
[14,"2024-02-16","Application Content/Format","We are preparing our application for FOA # DE-FOA-0003236. We are wondering if you have a template or example for the support letter from our potential collaborators to attach to our application. ","We do not have a template for this."]
[15,"2024-02-21","Technical Topics","I have a question about subtopic 1.1 related to sodium-ion anode / hard carbon processing. Is AMMTO expecting applicants to propose novel or high-risk hard carbon processing technologies, or is demonstrating technology similar to that used in China today (but made with US feedstocks and US  equipment) acceptable? ","Domestic manufacturing of hard carbon is a focus of the FOA, we are expecting novel, high-risk, high-return hard carbon processing technologies. \n\n“The objective of this subtopic is to develop processing machines that enable innovative NIB manufacturing processes. It is important that manufacturing processing machines have the capacity to adapt to an evolving battery manufacturing space and provide cross cutting capabilities to serve the production of different battery types. A processing machine with these capabilities serves as a platform technology applicable to a broad range of manufacturing process challenges.” p. 9. \n\n“Desired projects for NIB machines should focus on developing new processing machines with improved mechanisms that outperform existing technology or leverage adjacent existing technologies (e.g., LIB manufacturing machines) for NIB manufacturing.”  p. 11"]
[16,"2024-02-21","Technical Topics","Can you provide a rough guidance on the mass throughput per year that would be considered commercially relevant, and therefore not \"lab scale\"?  ","No, as performance metrics are defined by the applicant depending on the technology. "]
[17,"2024-02-21","Other","I had a few questions about the DE-FOA-0003236 available funding application. Would I be able to book a meeting to discuss?","The Department of Energy will not provide consultation calls to potential applicants. Please see Section III.G. and VII. of the FOA."]
[17,"2024-02-21","Technical Topics","Hi, can you please me know if the development of manufacturing processes and equipment for an electroplated alloy for our zinc-ion battery anode qualifies for subtopic 1.3? Also, can you please let me know the definition of “smart manufacturing machines”?","No, the focus of subtopic 1.3 is the development of nanolayered films for use as separators for batteries and as films for capacitors. \n\nSmart manufacturing machines are those machines that support smart manufacturing. Per Section I.B.ii, smart manufacturing is defined as “Smart manufacturing is the information-driven collaborative orchestration of physical and digital processes across the entire value chain. Smart manufacturing relies on a combination of manufacturing technologies (i.e., physical process ) and intelligent technologies (i.e., virtual process) to make designing, processing, and manufacturing faster and more cost-effective. The physical processes focus on controlling and optimizing processing conditions for desired performance, while virtual processes uncover complex linkages between them and gain insight into better ways to design and manufacture products (i.e., feedback for physical processes).” "]
[18,"2024-02-21","Technical Topics","Are processes and equipment for sodium-ion battery cathode active materials responsive to the solicitation under subtopic 1.1? There seems to be a special focus on anodes processing. Are anode processing machines more of interest than cathode processing machines?","Per Section I.B.i, there are two areas under subtopic 1.1: 1) Processes for hard carbon anode materials and 2) Machines for NIB materials and component manufacturing, cell assembly/finishing, or pack manufacturing. While hard carbon processing is of interest for the first area, development of machine/equipment for Na-ion battery cathode active materials (CAMs) processing is responsive to the solicitation (i.e., second area) under subtopic 1.1. "]
[19,"2024-02-27","Concept Paper","I have a question for the concept paper submission of FOA-0003236: Platform Technologies for Transformative Battery Manufacturing.\nDo I need to provide any budget numbers for the concept paper? ","Content and formatting of the Concept Paper can be found in Section IV.B of the FOA, p. 42."]
[20,"2024-02-27","Technical Topics","What if I have a manufacturing technology that benefits all of the other battery technologies?  That can produce Graphene very quickly, with a very pure form of the material, as well as vaporize radioactive material for generating Beta-waves for a particular type of nuclear battery technology?  However, this machine is not built yet, but there are many companies that would benefit from my patent pending Vapor Deposition machine and process.  To include, but not anywhere near limited to, super-capacitors, lithium batteries, Ni batteries, and every other form of battery that has issues with materials that are not as efficient as graphene for spacing material, nor others.  Graphene can also be used for many other technologies, as you may be aware.  ","To be responsive to this funding opportunity announcement your application must relate to the two topic areas below, else your application will be deemed nonresponsive. \n\nTopic 1. Platforms for next generation battery manufacturing with three subtopics: p. 8. \n•\tSubtopic 1.1.  Processes and Machines for Sodium-ion Batteries \n•\tSubtopic 1.2.  Processes and Design for Manufacturability of Flow Batteries\n•\tSubtopic 1.3.  Scalable Manufacturing of Nanolayered Films for Energy Storage\n\nTopic 2. Smart manufacturing platforms for battery production, p. 22. \n\nYou should also note Section I. C. Applications Specifically Not of Interest that points out applications that are not of interest. p.27"]
[21,"2024-02-27","Application Content/Format","Can I submit more than one application for this grant, or get a larger amount to have the resources to see the mass implementation on the scale this FOA is intended to achieve?","See FOA section III. J. p. 40, \n\nAn entity may submit only one Concept Paper and one Full Application for each topic area/sub-topic area of this FOA. If an entity submits more than one Concept Paper and one Full Application to the same topic area/sub-topic area, EERE will request a determination from the applicant’s authorizing representative as to which application should be reviewed. Any other submissions received listing the same entity as the applicant for the same topic area/sub-topic area will not be 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 applicant on one Concept Paper and one Full Application for each topic area/sub-topic area of this FOA.  \n\nand FOA section II.A. i. p. 31. \n\nEERE expects to make a total of approximately $15,700,000 ($15.7M) of federal funding available for new awards under this FOA, subject to the availability of appropriated funds. EERE anticipates making approximately 5-13 awards under this FOA. EERE may issue one, multiple, or no awards. Individual awards may vary between $1M and $4.1M."]
[22,"2024-02-28","Labs/FFRDCs","If a DOE national lab is the prime organization, how will partner organizations (industry and academic) be funded?  Will they be funded independently of the national lab, or will funding go through the national lab?  ","For lab-led FOA selections with industry subs, the expectation is that the lab will execute a CRADA and will pay the industrial/other partners itself (all funding flows through the prime awardee, which in this scenario is a national lab."]
[23,"2024-03-01","Concept Paper","We plan to submit a Concept Paper for DE-FOA-0003236 (due 3/4/24 at 5pm ET). Our Concept Paper includes confidential information. The FOA states that we are able to submit two versions of the Concept Paper, one marked “Confidential” with the sensitive information highlighted/in double brackets, and a “Non confidential” version, with the sensitive information redacted. \n \nHowever, I’m only able to upload one file in EERE eXCHANGE. Can you please tell me how to proceed with submitting both versions? ","Please combine both Concept Papers as a single file with the confidential version clearly labeled or watermarked. "]
[24,"2024-03-01","Technical Topics","I wonder if our following proposal is a fit for the solicitation Topic 2.  Electrode active materials are essential in determining the performance of a lithium-ion battery. They are in the form of fine powders with diameters ranging from sub-microns to tens of microns. Surface modification/processing is a crucial method used to enhance their performance. For instance, a common practice is to apply carbon coating to cathode materials like LiFePO4 and other cathode materials to increase conductivity. \n\nThe objective of this proposal is to establish a novel technology platform for CVD coating conductive carbon on battery electrode active materials for US battery manufacturers. The platform will provide on-site demonstrations for test runs and pilot-scale operations with 1.0 MT/day processing capacity. Additionally, with the data and test results obtained, customers will be able to order turnkey industrial units from local equipment manufacturing partners for their actual operations.","Topic 2 focuses on smart manufacturing platforms for battery production.  See section 1.B.ii. on p. 22 and the information on applications that are not of interest for Topic 2 on p. 26.   Per Section VII. Questions/Agency Contacts, EERE cannot provide feedback on individual concepts through the Q&A process nor discuss by any other means during any open FOA. Per Section III.G Questions Regarding Eligibility, it is the applicant’s decision whether to apply in response to this FOA."]
[25,"2024-03-01","Technical Topics","\n\nWe have material and manufacturing platform for fabricating electrodes. The innovation is agnostic to battery chemistry but we used iron oxide to validate our scalable manufacturing innovation, and addressed the limitations noted by the authors. We now have high performance binder-free anode with capacity of 1000 mAh/g, and high rate capability, including the ability to support 10C charge/discharge rate, while maintaining high capacity retention. Our manufacturing innovation is agnostic to battery chemistry. Can we apply for funding under this solicitation to further scale the process and machinery for making our anode for SIB?","Topic 2 focuses on smart manufacturing platforms for battery production.  See section 1.B.ii. on p. 22 and the information on applications that are not of interest for Topic 2 on p. 26.   Per Section VII. Questions/Agency Contacts, EERE cannot provide feedback on individual concepts through the Q&A process nor discuss by any other means during any open FOA. Per Section III.G Questions Regarding Eligibility, it is the applicant’s decision whether to apply in response to this FOA."]
[26,"2024-04-03","Concept Paper","Our concept paper for FOA: DE-FOA-0003236 with control number 3226-1554 was encouraged for full proposal submission. I was wondering if there is any feedback provided on the concept paper submission that we can use to improve our proposal? ","There will be no additional feedback provided on the concept paper submissions."]
[27,"2024-04-03","Application Content/Format","We are currently reviewing the documents for submission of a full proposal and were curious about the format/structure of the necessary documents. In particular, the 'Technical Volume' of 20 pages and the 'Statement of Project Objectives' of 15 pages. \n\nIt appears as though these two documents have very similar information, for example the Technical Scope Summary, Go/No Go, etc... appear to be requisite for both. Is there a description of how these documents are differentiated, or is the expectation that most of that information will be duplicated?","While there will be some information contained in the SOPO the Technical Volume that are similar/duplicative, the workplan as noted in the Technical Volume should provide additional insight into the work planned and summarizes the SOPO as noted “… should include a summary of the Project Objectives, Technical Scope, Work Breakdown Structure (WBS), Milestones, Go/No-Go decision points, and Project Schedule. A detailed SOPO is separately requested”.  The FOA Technical Volume also provides additional information on what the Workplan should contain."]
[28,"2024-04-03","Labs/FFRDCs","Per Section B.ii. In most cases partnering FFRDCs will be funded independently of the project team. Given that FFRDCs will be funded independently of the remainder of the project team, is a Budget Justification required for a DOE FFRDC National Lab that is performing a portion of the work, in addition to the DOE WP and DOE Authorization Letter?\n\nOur understanding from previous responses from DOE is that Budget Justification is not needed for FFRDCs.","Correct.  As noted in the FOA, “In most cases a budget justification is not needed for FFRDCs”. "]
[29,"2024-04-03","Other","What is/are the relevant B&R Code(s) to be entered in the WP for this submission?","Not sure what this is in reference to.  From my review I don’t see a requirement to site the relevant B&R codes in the WP."]
[30,"2024-04-03","Application Content/Format","Can we change aspects of the application from what we submitted with the concept paper? Such as: can we change the period of performance from 36 months to 30 months? Can we add new (US citizen) personnel to the subcontractor budget that were not listed in the portal for the concept paper?","You can update and revise your full application as necessary."]
[31,"2024-04-17","Application Content/Format","The FOA states that the period of performance should be between 24-36 months. Is there a specific timeframe for when the performance period must begin? For example, does it need to begin by November or December 2024, or could it begin in 2025? If it can begin in 2025, could it begin at any time in 2025? Natalie Photiadis","Upon selection for negotiation of financial assistance award, the applicant will work with the EERE to complete negotiations in a timely manner as specified in the Selection of Application or Negotiations letter.  The applicant will be required to be responsive during award negotiations (i.e., provide requested documentation) and meet the stated negotiation deadlines. Failure to submit the requested information and forms by the stated due date, or any failure to conduct award negotiations in a timely and responsive manner, may cause EERE to cancel award negotiations and rescind this selection. DOE reserves the right to terminate award negotiations at any time for any reason."]
[32,"2024-04-17","Concept Paper","Does DOE provide feedback on discouraged concept papers?","The DOE will not provide additional feedback for discouraged concept papers"]
[33,"2024-04-17","Application Content/Format","Our team was recently invited to submit a full proposal for DE-FOA-0003236. We are currently reviewing the documents for submission of a full proposal and were curious about the format/structure of the necessary documents. In particular, the 'Technical Volume' of 20 pages and the 'Statement of Project Objectives' of 15 pages. \n\nIt appears as though these two documents have very similar information, for example the Technical Scope Summary, Go/No Go, etc... appear to be requisite for both. Is there a description of how these documents are differentiated, or is the expectation that most of that information will be duplicated? ","While there will be some information contained in the SOPO the Technical Volume that are similar/duplicative, the workplan as noted in the Technical Volume should provide additional insight into the work planned and summarizes the SOPO as noted “… should include a summary of the Project Objectives, Technical Scope, Work Breakdown Structure (WBS), Milestones, Go/No-Go decision points, and Project Schedule. A detailed SOPO is separately requested”.  The FOA Technical Volume also provides additional information on what the Workplan should contain"]
[34,"2024-04-17","Labs/FFRDCs","Per section B.ii. In most cases partnering FFRDCs will be funded independently of the project team. Given that FFRDCs will be funded independently of the remainder of the project team, is a Budget Justification required for a DOE FFRDC National Lab that is performing a portion of the work, in addition to the DOE WP and DOE Authorization Letter?\n\nOur understanding from previous responses from DOE is that Budget Justification is not needed for FFRDCs. ","Correct.  As noted in the FOA, “In most cases a budget justification is not needed for FFRDCs”. "]
[35,"2024-04-17","Application Content/Format","We submitted a concept paper to this FOA, which was encouraged. We are wondering if it is possible to swap the lead applicant role with a subrecipient between the concept paper and the full application. ","You can update and revise your full application, as necessary."]
[36,"2024-04-17","Application Content/Format","The solicitation’s checklist has noted to submit SF-LLL – “Prime recipients and subrecipients are required to complete and submit SF-LLL, “Disclosure of Lobbying Activities.” However, neither the prime recipient, nor their subcontractor participates in any lobbying activities. As such, how should the prime and subrecipient fill out the SF-LLL form if they are required to submit it either way? ","Please follow the instructions when completing the SF-LLL form and note n/a where appropriate if no Lobbying has occurred."]
[37,"2024-04-17","Eligibility","Would it be allowable for an entity to lead a project for hard carbon manufacturing under subtopic 1.1 and participate in the sodium ion machine development as a sub-recipient under the same subtopic? ","Please refer to Section III. Eligibility Information, Subsection F. Limitations on Number of Concept Papers and full Applications Eligibility Review. As stated in this section”…….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 applicant on one Concept Paper and one Full Application for each topic area/sub-topic area of this FOA.”"]
[38,"2024-04-17","Technical Topics","In reference to the Topic 2 Only requirement on page 27 of the FOA – \"... applicants who will apply data-intensive methods will be required to publish project datasets through a designated, DOE-approved data repository using appropriate content models and/or data formats for the relevant field of study” – we had two questions:\n\nDoes “dataset” refer to collected data from different stages of battery manufacturing, such as from OPC UA processed as an input to AI, ML, DL methods, or is it meant to include all of the data generated during the project? We are wondering what the scope/limitations on data sharing are? If it includes all of the data, how do we define that data? E.g. In the case of external black box devices used, is it enough to provide input and output data, since we cannot provide its internals? ","The “dataset” refers to battery manufacturing process data collected during the project. However, it does not mean performers should include and publish all of their data. Upon selection for negotiation, we will discuss it in detail."]
[39,"2024-04-17","Labs/FFRDCs","If a DOE national lab is the prime organization, how will partner organizations (industry and academic) be funded?  In the answer to question 22, it is suggested that all funding would be through a CRADA and flow through the FFRDCs as the Prime Recipient.  This would seemingly go against the DOE CRADA Order 483.1, where CRADAs are specifically defined as (underlined emphasis mine):\n\n\"Cooperative Research and Development Agreement (CRADA). Any agreement between one or more Federal facilities and one or more non-Federal parties under which the Government, through its facilities, provides personnel, services, facilities, equipment, intellectual property, or other resources with or without reimbursement (but not funds to non-Federal parties) and the non-Federal parties provide funds, personnel, services, facilities, equipment, intellectual property, or other resources toward the conduct of specified research or development efforts which are consistent with the mission of the facility; except that such terms do not include a procurement contract or cooperative agreement.\"\n\nWith this is mind, how would non-Federal parties to the proposal receive their funding if the FFRDC is the Prime recipient? ","If a DOE/NNSA FFRDC is selected for award negotiation, the proposed work will be authorized under the DOE work authorization process and performed under the laboratory's Management and Operating (M&O) contract. if selected, the funds would be added to the lab’s M&O contract, and then they would use their normal procedures to pay any contractors under their proposal.  The question asked about CRADA’s, but  those are used when the lab is a subrecipient, not the prime, and thus not applicable in this situation. "]
[40,"2024-04-17","Concept Paper","We submitted a concept paper to FOA 3236, Topic 2. We hadn’t noticed at the time, but it seems the control number was assigned in error. The consequence is that it appears that our application was binned in the wrong FOA and wasn’t reviewed with the other applications with notifications sent earlier in April. Is there any way this could be reviewed or any other path forward? Brian Berland","There isn’t enough info in the question to address this issue. We would need more info on the CP submitted, the date it was submitted, the control number, the other FOA number, etc to look into this further"]

{"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"]