Question 1:
I am interested in submitting a letter of intent for the available funding opportunity. We are manufacturing our own line solar thermal modules and wanted to see if we qualify for this funding opportunity.
Answer 1:
As stated in SECTION III - ELIGIBILITY INFORMATION on page 17 of the Funding Opportunity Announcement (FOA): “Eligible applicants include but are not limited to: (1) institutions of higher education; (2) DOE and non-DOE national laboratories; (3) nonprofit and for-profit private entities; (4) State and local governments; (5) Federally Funded Research and Development Centers (FFRDCs) or (6) consortia of entities (1) through (5). If applying as a consortium, one member of the consortium that is an established legal entity and that meet the eligibility criteria must be designated as the lead applicant.”
Also note the Special Qualification Criteria as stated in SECTION III - ELIGIBILITY INFORMATION on page 19 of the FOA: “In order to be eligible for this award the application must include a team that includes at least one individual with demonstrated expertise at an eligible SC facility as well as at least one newcomer to one of these facilities. This will ensure that new users will be partnered with experienced peer mentors that can help to maximize the time and value of the facility tools and expertise. Additionally all selected applicants will be required to demonstrate that they have applied for and gained access to the eligible SC facility.”
Question 2:
I was wondering if novel energy storage technology would qualify for funding under the "Other" category in the Areas of Programmatic Interest.
Answer 2:
A novel storage technology may be considered for funding under this program. Please indicate the specific relevance to the SunShot goals in your application.
Question 3:
I am interested in submitting a proposal for FOA-0000654 (BRIDGE). In section 1C, it says particular areas of interest include:" (3) Technology development on an existing manufacturing line to enhance efficiency and/or reduce cost." However, Section 1D indicates that areas that are specifically NOT of interest for this FOA include "(3) Research involving incremental improvements to existing technologies, products, or solution." It looks like they contradict with each other. Would you please explain the difference between the definition of "existing manufacturing line" and the definition of "existing technologies."
Answer 3:
Thank you for your inquiry. The distinction lies in the word "incremental." This funding opportunity announcement is not aimed at incremental progress in technology development. If new, in-line metrology tools or processes can be developed that will result in significant improvements in existing products, processes and manufacturing lines, then the proposal will be responsive to the funding opportunity announcement. However, if the proposed work can only result in incremental improvements to an existing technology and does not result in a significant breakthrough in performance, it will not be considered responsive.
Question 4:
My question regarding the DE-FOA-0000654 is what if no SC user facility from Appendix C is related to the research area such as Power Electronics area on Page 10 of the FOA (area 5)? If the team proposal is related to power electronics topologies and MPPT control and Appendix C does not seem to include any SC user facility related to this area, then the SC facility related requirement may not be satisfied. How to I address this issue?
Answer 4:
In order to be eligible for this opportunity, research must include one of the SC user facilities. Power electronics may be explored via advanced computing models, materials characterization and sythesis or other analytical methods in collaboration with a facility. Proposed work need not be a continuation of existing work at an SC facility, but it must be approved by the facility as a new project.
Question 6:
If I describe my project to you, can you please tell me if I am eligible to apply for funding under this FOA?
Answer 6:
DOE cannot predetermine the suitability or viability of an application in advance of the merit review process. It is up to prospective applicants to determine if their project meets the requirements of the FOA.
Please refer to Section I.B - Program Objectives to determine if your project meets the stated objectives of this FOA. The FOA requires that work be carried out at one of the eligible U.S. SC facilities and that applicants have a partner with facility experience. This funding opportunity is aimed at illuminating general knowledge that can advance the state of the art in the field of PV science. Field characterization projects do not qualify unless a modeling component is included.
Please refer to Section III – Eligibility Information to determine whether your organization is eligible to apply.
As per the FOA, an eligible applicant is 1) a legal entity established pursuant to United States Federal or State laws, with operations in the United States or its Territories or; 2) a foreign legal entity having a place of business in the United States or its Territories. An eligible applicant must be able to demonstrate that its use of DOE funds will be in the economic interests of the United States, including, for example; creation of domestic manufacturing capability; use of American products, materials or labor; payment of United States taxes; or the creation of United States technological advancements.
Question 7:
I cannot complete the "Add Member section" because my colleagues and I are not located in the US.
Answer 7:
For questions regarding the submission of applications or letters of intent through EERE Exchange, please contact the exchange helpdesk at eere-exchangesupport@hq.doe.gov .
Question 8:
In the use of SC facilities is the applicant limited strictly to those described in the “Capabilities” and “Centers” columns in Appendix C, or would it also meet the FOA requirements if the applicant proposed the use of other facilities within the National Laboratories that are listed?
Answer 8:
The use of SC facilities required by this FOA is limited to those listed in Appendix C. You may involve partners from other National Laboratories, but you must include a component involving one of the eligible SC facilities.
Question 9:
DOE Bridge: I am trying to upload a letter of intent, and have found that the eere exchange requests funding amounts by year, by partner. The RFP description of a Letter of Intent does not include budget, and its too early in the proposal process to have these numbers. I suspect the system won't let us skip this step, so is there any placeholder you can suggest that doesn't commit us to an amount?
Answer 9:
Funding amounts included with letters of intent are not binding and will not be considered during the merit review process. Please enter your best estimate for this amount. Under- or over-estimation of funding amounts as included in letters of intent will neither positively nor negatively influence the review of your final application.
Question 10:
We are planning on submitting a proposal for the BRIDGE program, and were hoping to get some early feedback on our proposed project, is there a way we can recieve advice or feedback?
Answer 10:
DOE cannot predetermine the suitability or viability of an application in advance of the merit review process. It is up to prospective applicants to determine if their project meets the requirements of the FOA.
Please refer to Section I.B - Program Objectives to determine if your project meets the stated objectives of this FOA. The FOA requires that work be carried out at one of the eligible U.S. SC facilities and that applicants have a partner with facility experience. This funding opportunity is aimed at illuminating general knowledge that can advance the state of the art in the field of PV science.
Question 11:
In the FOA, the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) is not on the list of Eligible SC User Facilities.
However, if NREL researchers have used Eligible SC User Facilities in other national labs, can I still make NREL researchers as experienced researcher in my team?
Answer 11:
Yes, experienced users can be affiliated with National labs other than the facility.
Question 12:
My proposal will involve the use of 2 SC facilities, CFN and NSLS. I currently have an active User Proposal at the CFN, and so I can submit this CFN proposal to meet the requirement of an active User Proposal at an eligible SC facility. For NSLS, one of the CRT members is staff at NSLS. We plan to use some of his discretionary beam time for this work. Do we also need to submit any “proof” of his discretionary beam time (analogous to the accepted User proposal submission for CFN)?
Answer 12:
A letter from the individual staff member at NSLS indicating his time commitment to the project would be sufficient “proof” of his participation.
Question 13:
I was reviewing the information on the following website https://eere-exchange.energy.gov/#15a78564-c474-4af1-a25b-6ba0a0f627f5 and I noticed the webinar says 11:00 PM -12:30 PM ET. Should it actually read 11:00 AM - 12:30 PM? I just want to make sure I have the correct time for the webinar.
Answer 13:
The webinar will be 11AM-12:30PM ET.
Question 14:
The registration link for tomorrow's webinar on the BRIDGE funding initiative is expired and gives you a "This Webinar is over" message. The link is in 2 places on this page:
https://eere-exchange.energy.gov/
The broken link listed on the webpage is:
https://www1.gotomeeting.com/register/536819280
Will there be an updates link posted? Could you send me information about how to register?
Also, it says that past webinars will be posted, but there is no record for the April 4th webinar. Will it be posted before the April 25th LOI deadline?
Answer 14:
The link for tomorrow’s webinar has been updated on the exchange website. The following link will allow you to register for the webinar: https://www1.gotomeeting.com/register/940236608 .
Tomorrow’s webinar will be posted as soon as possible after its conclusion and will contain the same information as the April 4th webinar.
Question 15:
1: Do you have example documents for the Project Narrative File and other files? 2: Are the budget numbers presented in LOI final or can they be modified? 3: What are reasonable salary amounts for senior investigators? 4: Where can I state that I want to leverage substantial funding from NSF for doctoral student support?
Answer 15:
1: Additional example documents will not be posted.
2: Funding amounts included with letters of intent are not binding and will not be considered during the merit review process. Please enter your best estimate for this amount. Under- or over-estimation of funding amounts as included in letters of intent will neither positively nor negatively influence the review of your final application.
3: Salaries must be in compliance with the appropriate Cost Principles for each type of institution. Total compensation to individual employees must be reasonable, conform to the established policy of the organization, and consistently be applied to both Federal and non-Federal activities.
4: This information may be included in your Project Narrative, as appropriate.
Question 16:
I was unable to access your Webinar, so I couldn't see any of the slides, but I also don't see any of the webinars on this page (https://eere-exchange.energy.gov/Default.aspx?foaId=15a78564-c474-4af1-a25b-6ba0a0f627f5), and I don't see the slides from any of the webinars available anywhere either. Can you make this information available before Friday?
Answer 16:
DOE will post the link to the video of today's webinar as soon as we are able to do so. Thank you for your interest in BRIDGE.
Question 17:
I tried joining the webinar this morning but was unable to. It kept saying waiting for organizer. Was there an issue or possibly was it just my connection to the webinar?
Answer 17:
DOE apologizes for the technical difficulties you experienced this morning. DOE will post the link to the video of today's webinar as soon as we are able to do so.
Question 18:
1. Who submits the proposal: the principal investigator or the authorized representative of the institution? That is, who has the ability to push the final “submit” button?
2. The solicitation indicates that resumes of key personnel should be limited to two pages per person, but a few sentences later says one page per person. Which is correct?
3. The solicitation says that a template for the Statement of Project Objectives and an example Project Management Plan are posted on the web site, but I can’t find them. Can you please point me to the exact link?
Answer 18:
1) The authorized representative of the institution should submit the proposal.
2) Resumes are limited to two pages per person. There is no restriction on the total number of resumes that can be included.
3) Templates for the PMP and SOPO are located under Required application documents. The direct links are https://eere-exchange.energy.gov/FileContent.aspx?FileID=d8411e54-cd3c-4063-83a7-b9071ba847ae and https://eere-exchange.energy.gov/FileContent.aspx?FileID=162f62a0-0d35-431e-9d22-300d3c5c3298.
Question 19:
How is the cost-share waiver for universities obtained? Are there specific instructions for the budget submission relative to this?
Answer 19:
Recipients and Sub-Recipients that are Non-profit organizations (as defined in 10 CFR 600.3), Institutions of Higher Education, U.S. National Laboratories, or U.S. Federally Funded Research and Development Centers (FFRDCs) funded under this FOA are eligible for a waiver of cost share requirements.
No additional application materials are needed to qualify for the waiver and there are no specific instructions for the budget submission relative to the cost share waiver.
Question 20:
Another question: I see the “Project Summary Abstract File,” a Powerpoint document, listed under Required Application Documents on the EERE web site. However, there is no mention of this in the proposal preparation instructions. Do we submit it at all? If so, do we submit it as .ppt or .pdf?
Answer 20:
Please see Section IV.C.1 of the FOA for specific information. Briefly, applicants are required to provide a single slide summarizing the proposed project. The slide must be submitted in Microsoft PowerPoint format and conform to the format of the provided template. This slide is used during the evaluation process. The slide should include the following information: Description of the proposed project; Potential impact of the proposed project relative to the state of the art, i.e., uniqueness of the innovative concept; Project overview consisting of the proposed period of performance, requested DOE funding, proposed cost share, total budget for the entire project period, and a breakdown of the project’s key deliverables; and a listing of key personnel. . Save the information in a single file titled ““Control#_Institution_SummarySlide.ppt (or.pdf)”.
Question 21:
Could you please send me the slides from the Webinar which I attended yesterday, or point me to a URL where they are located?
Answer 21:
The slides for the webinar can be accessed via the link on this page: http://www1.eere.energy.gov/solar/sunshot/past_workshops.html .
Question 22:
I am trying to submit a Letter of Intent for FOA: DE-FOA-0000654. A text box is provided for "Abstract". Is that the same as the text of the letter, or should I upload the letter as a separate file?
Should the abstract cell be left blank for the LOI? Should the LOI be attached in a separate document?
Answer 22:
Please upload your Letter of Intent as an attached, separate document. In the Abstract box you may include a brief abstract of your proposed project or just a note that states, "Please see attached letter of intent."
Question 23:
I have uploaded my Letter of Intent.
At this point I see a need to make a revision to the budget information that was presented in the LOI.
Can you provide some guidance?
Answer 23:
Budget Information may be revised prior to submission of final application documents. Please refer technical questions regarding the EERE Exchange website to EERE-ExchangeSupport@hq.doe.gov .
Question 24:
I would like to submit our letter of intent, but see the cost share must be listed. In the webinar, the cost share was to be waived for universities and non-profits, correct? How do we proceed?
Answer 24:
Please list the non-federal share as $0 and proposed cost share percentage as 0%.
Question 25:
Are we allowed to submit a proposal which involves two SC user facilities? Should the proposal contain a letter of participation from each SC user facility? We have submitted a letter of intent. Are we allowed to make revision to it and reflect it in the full proposal?
Answer 25:
Applicants may submit proposals that involve multiple SC user facilities. The application should contain draft, recently submitted or recently approved eligible SC user facility proposals for each facility that will be involved.
Revisions to letters of intent may be reflected in the full application including addition of SC user facilities.
An application selected for negotiation of award under this FOA does not guarantee or otherwise have any impact upon an applicant’s chances of having their proposal accepted at any of the eligible SC user facilities. The application processes are completely separate and in the event an application is selected under this FOA for negotiation of award while the applicant’s proposal to the eligible SC user facility is still pending, awards under this FOA will be expressly contingent upon the eligible SC user facility accepting the applicant’s proposal to use the facility.
Question 26:
I am interested in possibly submitting a proposal to the BRIDGE program in collaboration with 3 other PIs. We have already submitted a LOI before the deadline.
At this point, we have two related questions that we hope you can help
answer:
1) Is an industry partner required for the proposal?
2) If yes, would a non-US company, e.g. Toyota, quality as an industry partner?
Answer 26:
Industry partners are not required for projects proposed under this FOA.
Question 27:
When will we be able to begin uploading files for a full proposal? And will there be additional instructions for this?
Answer 27:
Full proposals may be uploaded at this time. At this time, there are no additional instructions regarding full proposals. Please carefully review the instruction in the FOA prior to uploading your full proposal.
Question 29:
I’d like to request clarification on some of the Cost Share language within the FOA. On p. 19, it states the cost share amount is based on the recipient's amount and describes the eligible waivers, but everywhere else (p. 21, 42, and Appendix B (p.46+)), it says the amount is based on "Total Project Cost".
Specifically on p. 21 the following is stated:
Cost Share. The applicant’s cost share requirement will be based on the total cost of the project, including the applicant’s and the FFRDC contractor’s portions of the effort.
We are an FFRDC and plan to lead the project with a university and private industry company as partners. The private company is not requesting any funding. Therefore, would our total required cost share be $0 because we and the university are eligible for waivers and although the private company is ineligible, they will receive no federal funding?
Answer 29:
The Recipient or project partners are required to provide cost share in the amount of 20% of the allowable project costs of any project partners who are ineligible for cost share waivers. In your example, if the prime Recipient is eligible for a cost share waiver, but the subrecipient (or project partner) is not, then at least 20% of the subrecipient’s costs must be provided as cost share.
Please refer to Appendix E – Cost Share Information, example 3, “Eligible Prime Recipient with Non-Eligible Sub-Recipient.”
Question 30:
Does the Bibliography/References section count towards the 10-page limit of the Project Narrative File?
Answer 30:
As per page 26 of the FOA, the bibliography/references section does count towards the 10 page limit of the Project Narrative file.
Question 31:
I am putting together a proposal that includes both national labs and universities. Will the program manager and reviewers have a preference as to whether a national lab or university should be the prime recipient or funded as sub-recipients or as sub-contracts? Or, is this decision left up to our collaborative research team?
Answer 31:
It is up to the applicant to determine which organization will be the prime recipient and who will be the sub-recipients or sub-contracts.
Question 32:
We have a question about the Bridge proposal. Is it possible to upload supporting information, like support letters from industry? Or do we have to include these in the proposal narrative?
Answer 32:
Only the documents required by the FOA as indicated in Section IV.C, “Content and Form of Applications” will be considered during the merit review process. Please refer to FOA Section V. Application Review Information for more details regarding the merit review process.
Question 33:
Is it possible to submit a Level 2 proposal if one is not yet part of any CRT or has current DOE funding in the intended area of his/her proposal?
Answer 33:
All proposals must be submitted by a group of researchers that form a CRT. Current DOE funding is not a requirement for eligibility.
Question 34:
(a.) The “4. Project Narative and Statement of Project Objectives” Table on pp.26-28 of the FOA (Amendment 003) suggests that the SOPO should be included as part of the Project Narrative, but the “Summary of Required Forms/Files” Table on pp.29-30 of the FOA (Amendment 002) suggests that the Project Narrative and SOPO should be submitted as different pdf files. Should the SOPO be submitted both as a separate file AND included as part of the project narrative?
(b.) Same question for resumes. The Table on pp.26-28 suggests that the resumes should be included in the Project Narrative as an appendix, but the pp. 29-30 Table suggests the resumes should be included as a separate file.
Answer 34:
a. The SOPO and PMP should be submitted as one pdf file, separate from the project narrative file.
b. Resumes should be submitted as a one pdf file, separate from the project narrative file.
Question 35:
I just saw tonight that amendment 3 lifted the letter of intent requirement - my collaborators and I stopped working on this because we were not far enough along by the time the letter was due.
I respectfully request that the final deadline be moved back to give us at least a month from the date Ammendment 3 was released (move to June 4th at least) to respond now that there have been so many changes to the submission requirements.
Answer 35:
Currently the DOE does not have any plans to extend the deadline for this FOA.
Question 36:
In the FWP, there is a blank asking for ‘Headquarters/Operations OFC Program Manager’. I believe it’s asking who’s the program manager of BRIDGE.
I don’t think the announcement include the name of the manager. Can we simply leave it blank?
Answer 36:
Please include Elaine Ulrich as the Program Manager.
Question 37:
Could you please tell me to whom the Contracting Officer’s authorization letter for the subject FOA should be addressed?
Answer 37:
The Contracting Officer's authorization letter may be addressed to the FOA manager, Elaine Ulrich.
Question 38:
I am writing for [information removed] to ask for some information about application.
1. Is there difference between Letter of Intent and required abstract while submitting Letter of Intent through EERE eXCHANGE?
2. Do you have any restrictions for budget distribution for all Categories/ Object Classes in percentage terms?
3. Our foreign team member is experienced with necessary SC facilities (sure it can be confirmed). Is it enough to be allowed submitting application for the BRIDGE program?
Answer 38:
1. The Letter of Intent may be attached as a separate file or copied and pasted into the abstract box.
2. Applicants should create their budgets to most accurately reflect the total project costs necessary to complete the scope of work.
3. As per the FOA, CRTs should include at least one researcher with demonstrated eligible SC user facility expertise or experience with the techniques found in the SC user facilities; and one or more additional researchers who are new to the facility.
Question 39:
I cannot download the Budget Files that are specified for this solicitation!
When I go to the link that is shown on Page 24 (Paragraph 3) of this solicitation -there is a link to a DOE site that should give me access to the Budget form - which is clearly stated to be an EXCEL form. I cannot retrieve this form from this site.
I desperately need this form as well as the form SF-424A -EXCEL that is required for the SUBAWARD information submission.
Answer 39:
The excel version of the SF-424A can be found at https://www.eere-pmc.energy.gov/procurenet/FinancialAssistance/Forms/Standard_Forms/SF-424A.xls . Additionally, the template has been uploaded to the EXCHANGE website as an attachment. The same template should be used for the sub-award budget information.
Question 40:
Can you tell me the following regarding the proposal above:
Re: DE-FOA-0000654
DOE (B&R) budget and reporting code for this call.
Headquarters/Operations, OFC Program Manager Name for this call.
Answer 40:
The DOE B&R code for this call is EB21.
The Program Manager on this FOA is Elaine Ulrich.
Question 41:
(1.) Do you require a current/pending support page? I do not see a place to upload this information.
(2.) Are letters of support acceptable, however I do not see a place to upload the letters.
(3.) She logs in & goes to my submissions. Then she clicks on edit, &she receives an edit submission message.
Since she submitted a LOI intent, would she choose "unsubmit" to complete the application?
Answer 41:
(1.) At this time DOE only requires those documents listed in the FOA under Section IV.C., “Content and Form of Application”.
(2.) In making selections under this FOA, DOE will only consider those criteria listed under FOA Section V.A., “Criteria” when making selections for this FOA. Letters of support are not part of the Merit Review Criteria for this FOA.
(3.) If a Letter of Intent was previously submitted through the Exchange system, the applicant must choose to “unsubmit” their application, complete the required changes and uploads and resubmit their application prior to the closing date of the FOA.
Question 42:
The FFRDC is the lead. Is a FWP due with submission?
If so, is that page 1 and page 2 (budget) or only page 1?
Also, will need B&R# and Headquarters/Operations Program Manager
Answer 42:
As per the instructions in the FOA Section IV.C.3. a FWP is due with the application. If a DOE FFRDC contractor is to perform a portion of the work, you must provide a DOE Field Work Proposal (FWP) in accordance with the requirements in DOE Order 412.1 Work Authorization System. Please refer to the FOA for further instructions.
The B&R code for this FOA is EB21 and Elaine Ulrich is the Headquarters/Operations Program Manager.
Question 43:
We have a team involved in research on Organic photovoltaics, and two user centers. Our proposal involves a purchase and further development of the instrument to meet the requirements for Solar research. However, the cost of the instrument is about $450K (without overhead), which exceeds the yearly level funding.
Would such a purchase be allowed?
Answer 43:
Yes the purchase would be allowed. Funding Level 2 projects will average up to $300k/year for 3 years, but the spending distribution can be tailored over the funding period to accommodate upfront equipment purchases. Please refer to pages 14-16 of the FOA for more information about funding levels.
Question 44:
I am having trouble uploading my budget justification form for DE-FOA DE-FOA-0000654. The error message is "invalid file extension", although I am trying to upload the request excel spreadsheet with the proper extension.
Answer 44:
The error which prevented you from being able to upload excel files has been corrected.
Question 45:
1. When filling in the FWP I see the Program Manager is Elaine Ulrich correct? What is her official Headquarters Organization and DOE Org Code?
2. What is the B&R code for this funding?
3. I am looking for the competition Identification number and title for DE-FOA-0000654 and was unable to find it in the funding summary. Does this particular one not have this number?
4. Also, under type of applicant there is not a clear choice for National Labs. Are we expected to choose other and then specify what we are?
Answer 45:
1. The Program Manager is Elaine Ulrich. Her DOE Headquarters office is Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy. The DOE Organization Code is EE-2A.
2. The B&R code for this FOA is EB21.
3. The competition number is the same as the FOA number: DE-FOA-0000654.
4. If National Lab or FFRDC are not an option, please select 'other' and then specify your type of organization.
Question 46:
We recently submitted a Letter of Intent using our DUNS number. We would now like for our project partner to be the prime recipient. Is it possible to submit a full application using our project partner’s DUNS number?
Answer 46:
Since Letters of Intent are no longer required to apply you may begin a new application using your project partner’s DUNS number. The lack of a previously submitted Letter of Intent will not negatively impact your score in the Merit Review.
Question 47:
On page 29-30 of the FOA, it clearly states that a (6.) submitted or recently approved SC User proposal should be submitted along with the application as well as a (7.) letter from the applicant addressed to the DOE committing to notify the DOE in writing of the approval. However, I do not see it listed on the EERE exchange submission page as one of the required forms. Could you confirm that it should it be submitted under the "Additional Files" section or whether it should it be included with one of the other files?
Answer 47:
The submitted or recently approved SC User proposal has been added to the submission forms and is titled “Draft or recently submitted eligible SC user facility proposal”. DOE will also accept this document is if it has already been submitted under “Additional Files”.
The letter indicating when BES, BER or ASCR user facility proposal will be (or has been) submitted and committing to notify DOE of your acceptance/rejection from the facility has been added to the submission forms. DOE will also accept this document is if it has already been submitted under “Additional Files”.
Question 48:
I am working on the BRIDGE application due on May 21. I will need to attach our indirect rate and fringe rate agreements to the budget justification, which will mean I need to convert it into one pdf file. However, on the submission website, it requests a budget justification in Excel. Is it ok to submit a pdf so the required documents can be attached?
Answer 48:
You may upload your fringe and indirect rate agreements as pdfs by clicking “Upload New Additional File” on your “Upload and Submit” page in your Exchange application. Please upload your budget documents as Excel files, as per the FOA instructions.
Question 50:
If a national lab is one of our subawards, do we submit the SF424A and PMC123.1 for them or do we submit a Field Work Proposal for them?
Answer 50:
You do not need to submit the SF424A and PMC123.1 for FFRDCs. The Field Work proposal which contains their budget is sufficient.
Question 51:
In the BRIDGE FOA, the anticipated award notification date was scheduled for late June. I was wondering, is there is an updated anticipated notification date?
Answer 51:
Selections for this Funding Opportunity Announcement are expected in late July or early August. Thank you for your interest in the Solar Energy Technologies Program.
Question 53:
Could you please give me an estimate of when an announcement will be made for BRIDGE awards?
Answer 53:
DOE anticipates making an announcement before the end of August.