EERE eXCHANGE: FAQs

Question 1: Are publicly traded companies eligible for the funds assuming they meet the requisite criteria? What about non-public companies that are partially owned by public companies?
Answer 1:

Publicly traded companies and non-public companies that are partially owned by public companies are eligible to apply to this Funding Opportunity as long as they are incorporated in the United States and are not classified as 501(c)(4) organizations. Please refer to Section III.A. of the Funding Opportunity Announcement (FOA) for eligibility criteria. It is provided below for your convenience:

A. Eligible Applicants

All entities incorporated in the United States are eligible to apply for this FOA as prime recipients, except nonprofit organizations described in section 501(c)(4) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 that engaged in lobbying activities after December 31, 1995.

Entities not incorporated in the United States are not eligible to apply as the prime recipient. However, foreign participants are allowed as sub-recipients to a domestic entity provided that:

• The foreign sub-recipient(s), in aggregate, shall not receive more than 20% of the total estimated DOE funding and

• The foreign participant must provide at least 75% cost sharing (2/3 of that in form of cash) of their portion of the total project cost.

Question 2: For the SunPath FOA, if CAPITAL EQUIPMENT is purchased on this 75% / 25% cost share program, it the TITLE and OWNERSHIP of the equipment 100% in favor of the company, does the government take title or is the ownership shared? Buy American clause - What constitutes "not readily available" so that foreign-made new equipment could be purchased?
Answer 2:

For Grants and Cooperative Agreements to For-Profit organizations please refer to 10 CFR 600.321. Below is an excerpt from this guidance:

...(b) Title. Unless a statute specifically authorizes and the award specifies that title to property vests unconditionally in the recipient, title to real property or equipment vests in the recipient subject to the conditions that the recipient:

(1) Use the real property or equipment for the authorized purposes of the project until funding for the project ceases, or until the property is no longer needed for the purposes of the project;

(2) Not encumber the property without approval of the contracting officer; and

(3) Use and dispose of the property in accordance with paragraphs (d) and (e) of this section.

Please refer to Question 20 for information on equipment disposition (referred to in 3 above).

If a TIA is awarded, award terms related to equipment will be negotiated at the time of award. For Grants and Cooperative Agreements to Nonprofit Organizations, please refer to 10 CFR 600.134. For State and Local Governments, please refer to 10 CFR 600.232.

With respect to the second part of the question, the FOA states (on page 33):

" All new equipment purchased under the anticipated funding agreements must be made or manufactured in the United States, to the maximum extent practicable. This requirement does not apply to used or leased equipment. Project teams may purchase foreign-made equipment where comparable domestic equipment is not reasonably available."

It is up to the applicant to judge and demonstrate the availability of the equipment. For the purpose of this FOA, the equivalent standard would be "commercially reasonable" - in effect, the availability could be affected by overly expensive equipment as well as by a non-existing capability, to name a few.

Question 3: Can DOE please provide specific direction to my organization for involvement in this Funding Opportunity?
Answer 3:

Thank you for your interest in this Funding Opportunity Announcement (FOA). Unfortunately DOE does not engage in private discussions concerning specific application direction of a potential applicant. All questions must be submitted to the pertinent FOA question mailbox and answered in a public manner.

Question 4: We are a Solar Installer in the Phoenix area that is developing a single axis tracking parking canopy. Would a project such as this qualify for this initiative? If no are there other funds available to assist us in tooling for our project?
Answer 4:

The intent of this FOA is NOT to fund the development of components outside of panels (i.e. the balance of system such as the frame, the wiring, the racking, or any power electronics components). The FOA specifies cells, wafers, panels, or panel components.

Please refer to Section I. Funding Opportunity Description of the FOA document for the specific purpose of this FOA. Successful applications will intimately address the FOA Scope as outlined in this Section.

For other Solar Funding Opportunities and information, please visit our websites at: http://www.eere.energy.gov, http://www1.eere.energy.gov/solar, and http://www1.eere.energy.gov/solar/sunshot/.

For more technical solar information, please visit the National Renewable Energy Laboratory website at http://www.nrel.gov/solar/.

Question 5: I am a small business person, actually personally I am large, but my business is small. I have absolutely no experience reading grants and such, so I am lost. I am actually looking to see if there is a grant available for us to upgrade our roof to solar panels. We are a automotive parts recycler and would like to move farther in the green direction.
Answer 5:

The DOE does not currently provide direct funds to business owners or home owners for solar application installations at this time. However, the Federal Government does provide a tax credit for installing qualified solar water heating and photovoltaic systems. More information on the Residential Solar Tax Credit can be found at: http://www.dsireusa.org/library/includes/incentive2.cfmIncentive_Code=US37F&State=Federal¤tpageid=1&ee=0&re=1.

Question 6: I live in a small community (approximately 1100) homes and would like information on reducing heating and energy bills through solar power at a reasonable cost to a homeowner. Most of my neighbors are retired and on fixed incomes so this I need a very persuasive argument when it comes to cost and advantages. I would also be interested if any grants or low cost loans are available. All homes presently are using propane or electricity from a coal fired utility plant for their energy requirements. Any direction you can provide would be useful.
Answer 6:

The DOE does not currently provide direct funds to business owners or home owners for solar application installations at this time. However, the Federal Government does provide a tax credit for installing qualified solar water heating and photovoltaic systems. More information on the Residential Solar Tax Credit can be found at: http://www.dsireusa.org/library/includes/incentive2.cfmIncentive_Code=US37F&State=Federal¤tpageid=1&ee=0&re=1.

Question 7: I'm with a small hospital in Southeaster Kentucky. We are currently considering a roof-mounted solar array. Would we be eligible for any DOE grants? We are currently investigating the possibility of using our array as a teaching site for other hospitals considering something similar.
Answer 7:

The DOE does not currently provide direct funds to business owners or home owners for solar application installations at this time. However, the Federal Government does provide a tax credit for installing qualified solar water heating and photovoltaic systems. More information on the Residential Solar Tax Credit can be found at: http://www.dsireusa.org/library/includes/incentive2.cfmIncentive_Code=US37F&State=Federal¤tpageid=1&ee=0&re=1.

Question 8: We are trying to build up the equipment and certification to establish an outdoor ISO certified PV cell and module testing facility. Over the years we have built up the solar resource instruments and have the capability to measure the incident solar radiation to about 0.5% level of absolute accuracy. In addition we have spectral measurement capability. The university does have an indoor solar simulator and equipment to run IV curve tracing and other PV cell tests. Our goal is to be able to run tests on PV products manufactured in this country. While some of this can be done at the national renewable energy laboratory, there is a backload for these types of test and we hope to provide testing on a relative short time scale so manufacturers can test their product on a proprietary basis while they are developing improvements. With all the announcements for proposals coming from DOE, I haven’t seen one that would be appropriate for us to submit a proposal for consideration. Our proposal is more for building an infrastructure component that would help the solar industry while providing training for students rather than basic research. Is there an appropriate avenue for us to submit such a proposal?
Answer 8:

If your organization feels that DOE specific Funding Opportunities are not appropriate for your specific technology, the following paragraph outlines another method of proposal submission.

On a non-competitive basis, interested parties may apply directly to the DOE for funding of an "Unsolicited Proposal". DOE encourages the submission of Unsolicited Proposals that will contribute to its mission objective. DOE considers proposals in all areas of energy and energy-related research and development with emphasis on long-term, high-risk, high-payoff technologies.

An unsolicited proposal may be accepted by DOE if it:

• Demonstrates a unique and innovative concept, or demonstrates a unique capability of the submitter;

• Offers a concept or services not otherwise available to the Government; and,

• Does not resemble the substance of a pending competitive solicitation.

The Unsolicited Proposal is the document intended to persuade the staff of the DOE and other qualified members of the scientific and engineering community who review the proposed work, that the project represents a worthwhile approach to the investigation of an important, timely problem. Each proposal should be self-contained and written with clarity and thoroughness.

In the unsolicited proposal, the proposer must present objectives and the pertinence of the proposed work to DOE, the rationale of the approach, the methods to be pursued, the qualifications of the investigators and the institution, if applicable, and the level of funding required to attain the objectives.

To assist you, below is a link to a 25-page detailed booklet titled Guide for the Submission of Unsolicited Proposals that outlines the Unsolicited Proposals process:

http://www.netl.doe.gov/business/usp/USPGuide.pdf

Question 9: Please provide guidance on what is considered cash cost share vs. non-cash cost share. For example, to what extent is a manufacturer's donation of new equipment considered to be cash cost share: list price, most-favored-customer price, or cost to manufacture?
Answer 9:

For specific information regarding Cost Share, please refer to 10 CFR 600.30 Cost Sharing. Regulations, polices and guidance, including the 10 CFR 600.30 can be found at: https://www.eere-pmc.energy.gov/Forms.aspx#regs

In general, cash cost share refers to any item of cost share where cash is expended to cover the value of goods and services directly benefiting and specifically identifiable to the project or program.

In-kind cost share contributions means the value of non-cash contributions in the form of volunteer personnel labor, real property, equipment, supplies and other expendable property, and the value of goods and services directly benefiting and specifically identifiable to the project or program.

For specific information regarding the valuation of services and property, please reference the administrative Cost Share requirements in 10 CFR 600.123, 10 CFR 600.224 and 10 CFR 600.313 by entity type. Recipient contributions of services and property shall also be established in accordance with the applicable cost principles by entity type, 2 CFR 225, 2 CFR 230, 2 CFR 220, and FAR 31.2. A general rule of thumb is to ask the question, "What is the fair market value?"

Question 10: If a manufacturing module schedule and capital plan requires that long lead-time equipment be ordered in the fourth quarter of 2011 thus requiring an exemption to the proposed 90 day time period as described in the DOE proposal, at what point in the application process will DOE accept waiver applications? Has the DOE published or is the DOE anticipating publishing the criteria for issuing these waivers? Can you provide assurance that equipment ordered in October, November, and/or December will be allowed as capital expenses in our submission should a contract be awarded to a successful applicant?
Answer 10:

As stated in Section IV.G. of the Funding Opportunity, if selected for award:

"Recipients may charge to an award resulting from this announcement pre-award costs that were incurred within the ninety (90) calendar-day period immediately preceding the effective date of the award, if the costs are allowable in accordance with the applicable Federal cost principles referenced in 10 CFR Part 600. Recipients must obtain the prior approval of the Contracting Officer for any pre-award costs that are for periods greater than this 90 day calendar period. Pre-award costs are incurred at the applicant’s risk and pre-award costs may not be allowable if by incurring such costs the recipient is found to have taken an action related to the proposed project that would have an adverse effect on the environment or limit the choice of reasonable project alternatives prior to DOE providing either a NEPA clearance or a final NEPA determination regarding the project. DOE is under no obligation to reimburse such costs if for any reason the applicant does not receive an award or if the award is made for a lesser amount than the applicant expected.

If recipients are State or Local Governments, they may not incur pre-award costs prior to award, without prior approval of the DOE Contracting Officer."

As recipients must obtain the prior approval of the Contracting Officer for any pre-award costs that are for periods greater than this 90 day calendar period, after selection, recipients must submit a request to the Contracting Officer stating a specific date they wish to begin receiving reimbursement for the incursion of award costs. If approved, the Contracting Officer will notify the recipient via signed approval letter. No approved pre-award costs may precede the date of applicant selection for award.

Question 11: (ref pp 16) The submission guidelines state that each merit criterion must be separately addressed. Does this mean that anything written in the Project Objectives/Description section will not be considered against the merit review? If so, when addressing the merit criteria, can one cross-reference specific components of the Project Objective/Description to avoid writing something twice (subject to being within the 30 pp limit, etc.)? (2) (ref pp 16) Under Merit Review Criteria Discussion it states that each merit criterion must be separately addressed and it also then goes on to describe the Domestic Manufacturing Plan, which appears to only relate to Criterion 2 (ref pp 26). Can one solely address the Domestic Manufacturing Plan under its response to Criterion 2, or does it additionally need to be addressed as well?
Answer 11:

The Project Narrative File format is explicitly described in Section IV.C.4. The entire Project Narrative will be considered in the Merit Review. Applications should adhere to the specified format, however DOE cannot advise an applicant what to specifically write in an application. In general, the Merit Review criteria should be addressed in an itemized manner, applicants can summarize and cross reference information previously presented in the project description. The FOA excerpt describing the Merit Review Criterion Discussion is pasted below for your reference.

Merit Review Criterion Discussion:

The section should be formatted to address each of the merit review criteria and sub-criteria listed in SECTION V - APPLICATION REVIEW INFORMATION Part (A).(2), Merit Review Criteria. Provide sufficient information so that reviewers will be able to evaluate the application in accordance with these merit review criteria. DOE WILL EVALUATE AND CONSIDER ONLY THOSE APPLICATIONS THAT ADDRESS SEPARATELY EACH OF THE FOUR MERIT REVIEW CRITERIA AND THE CORRESPONDING SUB-CRITERIA.

Question 12: I work for an up and coming solar manufacturing company in the Bronx, NY. We manufacture solar thermal modules. I wanted to inquire if we qualify to apply for this opportunity.
Answer 12:

Under this Funding Opportunity, the DOE Solar Energy Technologies Program (SETP) is requesting applications for the first industrial scale demonstration of the applicant’s photovoltaic (PV) module, cells, or substrates that are at least 15% lower in cost per watt than the current market leading technology (the benchmarking is to be done at the proposed scale and at the time of the submittal of the proposal).

Please see Section III of the Funding Opportunity for information concerning Eligibility. It is pasted below for your reference.

A. Eligible Applicants

All entities incorporated in the United States are eligible to apply for this FOA as prime recipients, except nonprofit organizations described in section 501(c)(4) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 that engaged in lobbying activities after December 31, 1995.

Entities not incorporated in the United States are not eligible to apply as the prime recipient. However, foreign participants are allowed as sub-recipients to a domestic entity provided that:

• The foreign sub-recipient(s), in aggregate, shall not receive more than 20% of the total estimated DOE funding and

• The foreign participant must provide at least 75% cost sharing (2/3 of that in form of cash) of their portion of the total project cost.

Question 13: A potential applicant is a US based company whose technology has been produced in pilot amounts between 1-10 MW at a US factory with nominal nameplate 40 MW capacity. Additional capacity exists overseas. Can you confirm that only US output and capacity is relevant to the eligibility requirements of the FOA?
Answer 13:

Per Merit Review in the FOA:

"Requirement 1: The proposal will support the first industrial scale demonstration of approximately 40MW or more of PV wafers, cells, modules or module components. The applicant needs to have already demonstrated the production of commercially sellable product at a pilot scale (~1-10 MW) but at the same time the applicant does not already have the nameplate capacity of more than 50 MW."

The total nameplate capacity of 50MW applies to the products and technologies identified in the application, regardless of their location. If a company has a large capacity for one product, but is at a pilot stage for an innovative product identified in the application, then the latter product capacity will be evaluated.

Question 14: We have demonstrated a technology using a batch process. We do not have production capability for this technology yet and would like to build a 40 MW line. Will we qualify?
Answer 14:

If your total capacity (not output/production) for the product/technology you are proposing is under 50MW, you do qualify under that particular requirement. Please read the entire FOA for all of the qualification and merit requirements.

Question 15: Recognizing that the contracts are individual and negotiated with recipient, will a proforma contract or preferred contract conditions (or similar) be available for viewing prior to applications closing?
Answer 15:

As provided in Section VI.B.2. of the Funding Opportunity, below is the link to the common DOE Special Terms and Conditions for Use in Most Grants and Cooperative Agreements:

http://energy.gov/management/downloads/specialtermsandconditionsforusein

mostgrantsandcooperativeagreementspdf

Assistance Agreements and Special Terms and Conditions for these awards are not standardized and will be negotiated and provided to awardees at the time of selection and negotiation. All Terms and Conditions for Technology Investment Agreements will be negotiated at this time as well.

For general administrative regulations, please refer to the 10 CFR 600 and 10 CFR 603 for Technology Investment Agreements.

Question 16: Good morning, I am writing in interest of the Solar energy RFP listed on GeoRestore. I was hoping to obtain the electronic copy of the RFP as well as gather a couple more details regarding the project. Specifically, I'd like to learn the desired size of the project (in terms of megawatts or kilowatts) and any mandatory pre-bid meetings currently scheduled.
Answer 16:

All EERE Funding Opportunities are available at https://eere-exchange.energy.gov/. As stated in FOA document, proposals will support the first industrial scale demonstration of approximately 50MW or more of PV wafers, cells, modules or module components. There are no "pre-bid meetings" scheduled for this Financial Assistance Funding Opportunity.

Question 17: The website on page 27 of the Funding Opportunity Announcement (http: //www.management.energy.gov/documents/meritrev.pdf ) does not appear to work. Please can you direct me to the Merit Review Guide?
Answer 17:

Please use http://energy.gov/sites/prod/files/meritrev.pdf as the correct link.

Question 18: Equipment purchased under a project (or offered as part of the participant's cost share) will be installed in the proposed industrial scale manufacturing facility. This equipment will have a FMV at the end of the 2 year POP, but will be an integral part of the facility. We are familiar with the requirements in 10 CFR 600.321. What are DOE's plans for dispositioning this equipment at the end of the POP? Will the equipment remain at the facility without further obligation to DOE?
Answer 18:

For for-profit recipients, regulations governing the disposition of equipment with a fair market value greater than $5,000 are contained in 10 CFR 600.321. Commensurate with these regulations, the recipient has the choice to:

1. Use the equipment for other Federally sponsored projects.

2. Compensate the Federal Government for that percentage of the fair market value attributable to the Federal participation in the project (in this case it is a minimum of 25%) and retain recipient title to the equipment.

3. Request disposition instructions from DOE.

4. In some cases DOE will allow recipients to retain title to equipment and not compensate DOE for their value of attributable participation, if they agree to use the equipment to further the purposes of the project for the remaining life of the equipment.

At the end of the project, the recipient must report to DOE the fair market value of all equipment purchased during the award. They will then have choice of the above options, pending negotiation and approval of the disposition action by DOE.

Question 19: (1) Can you provide any insight into the preferred methodology and philosophy of how payment milestones will be established? Recognizing that payments will all be made subject to cost share requirements, what measures are likely to be used for milestones - for example placement of orders, equipment passing factory acceptance tests, installation of equipment, start of commissioning, start of production, fully ramped production etc. (2) Is it envisaged there will be any milestone payments after the plant is fully ramped? (3) Other than the domestic manufacturing commitment and reporting to this, are there any other ongoing commitments or reporting requirements?
Answer 19:

(1) The examples listed in the question could be payment milestones for various stages, but in general they will be negotiated between DOE and the awardee, based on the scope and stage of the project.

(2) The project duration (and thus the expected maximum time for award disbursement) is 24 months in anticipation of the approximate amount of time it takes to build a mid-size PV facility.

(3) All of the reporting requirements are listed in the FOA on p. 31 and 32.

Question 20: I have an Inquiry about the PV Manufacturing Initiative Part 1 & 2. I realize that the part 1 portion of this funding opportunity has come and gone. It seems like our company would have most likely been eligible for this portion of the financial assistance as we are a balance of systems provider. However, we are a large scale solutions provider for the Solar Industry both domestically and abroad. We are launching a new junction box that is called the Multi-Link. It has intention of providing a USB solution for micro inverters and alike to be able to attach directly to the back of the panel via our Multi-Link junction box. We already have numerous micro-inverter companies on board and we are moving forward very quickly with orders on the way. From my understanding of the part 2 initiative of SUNPATH, the main focus is to provide financial assistance to PV Manufacturers. Our company manufactures "balance of systems" components. Considering we are manufacturing Junction Boxes to be used on the back of PV modules are we eligible for any financial assistance from the part 2 portion of the SUNPATH initiative? Is there a way we can still have an opportunity to get assistance from the part 1 portion of the SUNPATH initiative?
Answer 20:

SUNPATH addresses photovoltaic (PV) panel, cell, wafer or panel components. This excludes balance of system, (BOS) components. BOS components are addressed through other parts of Solar Technologies program. PV Manufacturing Initiative 1 funding opportunity is closed (and awarded). Please monitor this website for future funding opportunities.

Question 21: Can applicants use State Energy Program (SEP) funds as cost-share. How about other state funds?
Answer 21:

State funds (of a non-federal origin) can be used for cost-share. However, the State Energy Program is a Federal (DOE) program (see below for more on SEP funds), and as such cannot be used for cost-share.

The Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy’s (EERE’s) State Energy Program (SEP) provides formula and competitive grants to states to address their energy priorities and adoption of renewable energy and energy efficiency technologies. The mission of SEP is to provide leadership and assistance to maximize the benefits of energy efficiency and renewable energy through financing, communications and outreach activities, technology deployment, and accessing new partnerships and resources. SEP regulations have provided authorization allowing states to use SEP funds in the form of grants, loans, and other financing mechanisms as defined under 10 CFR 600.420. Under these regulations and the recent infusion of funding from the American Recovery Act (ARRA) many states are providing funding support to increase manufacturing of energy efficiency and renewable energy products within their states. Over $100 million of SEP ARRA funds have already been obligated to manufacturing projects and more are expected.

Applicants are encouraged to contact SEP for a current list of states that may be contacted for additional funding support (other than cost-share for SUNPATH). All inquires for SEP should be directed to Rima Oueid at rima.oueid@ee.doe.gov .

Question 22: Please provide some guidance for completing form SF-424A. The instructions request that each 6 months of support requested be submitted using form SF-424A and that the submission be provided in a single file. If the applicant is requesting support for multiple 6 month periods, should those individual 6 month periods be separate tabs within the single file or identified in a some other manner?
Answer 22:

The Period of Performance for awards under this Funding Opportunity is up to twenty-four (24) months. Section A of the SF424A document should comprise the entire project budget. Section B of the SF424A has five (5) columns. The first four (4) of these columns should detail each six (6) month funding period of the project. The fifth (5) column will encompass the total project budget (the summation of the first four (4) six (6) month funding periods).

Question 23: File naming - The FOA requires a file name FORMAT as: CONTROL#_ORGANIZATION_NAME.PDF. Where do we find the CONTROL NUMBER?
Answer 23:

The eXCHANGE website issues each application a specific Control Number when you begin the application process. Go to the eXCHANGE website (https://eere-exchange.energy.gov/), scroll to the correct Funding Opportunity, click the "Apply" button, fill out the "General Information" tab, then click "Create Full Application." The next screen will provide you with a Control Number (e.g. 0549-1503).

Question 24: (A.) In the Merit Review Criteria: "Recipient must be prepared to deliver a total of 100 kW of finished modules from the pilot manufacturing line..." How do we do this if our application only covers cell manufacturing not module manufacturing? (B.) Requirement 1 states that we need to build the first demonstration line of >/= 50 MW of PV wafers, cells, etc. Does this mean 50 MW/yr off that line? In a response to a previous question you seem to indicate that building a 40 MW line was acceptable. Is it? (C.) At what point must the 50 MW capacity be in place to meet Requirement 1, at the end of the 2 year program?
Answer 24:

A. If the award recipient is manufacturing cells or wafers, they will need to deliver 100kW of modules built with the recipient's cells or wafers. The module delivery date will need to be no later than the award date which is now anticipated to be February 2012.

B. SUNPATH stated that it is aiming to demonstrate first at-scale production of the proposed PV module, cell, wafer or other module component at about 50-100MW scale nameplate capacity. Requirement 1 on page 26 of the FOA NOW states "The proposal will support the first industrial scale demonstration of 40MW or more of PV wafers, cells, modules or module components." That capacity is for the line that is being funded through this program (and not a cumulative capacity).

However, an applicant with the lowest $/W cost, higher non-federal fund contribution, and a better scale-up plan will score better on the relevant merit review criteria.

C. The fully funded line capacity is to be built out during this program, which has a duration of 2 years.

Question 25: Are community colleges and universities subject to the 75% cost share?
Answer 25:

All entities eligible to apply to this Funding Opportunity Announcement are subject to the stated cost share requirements. This includes colleges and universities. The cost share requirements are stated below for your reference.

The cost share must be at least 75% of the total project cost (i.e., the sum of the Federal award share, and the recipient share of allowable costs equals the total project cost). Two thirds (2/3) of the cost share must be in the form of cash. The entire cost share must come from non-Federal sources. (See Appendix C or 10 CFR Part 600 for the applicable cost sharing requirements.)

Question 26: Are the SUNPATH program applications subject to the Executive Order 12372 Process (Question from the SF-424)?
Answer 26:

ANSWER: As stated on page 23 of the Funding Opportunity, this program is not subject to Executive Order 12372 - Intergovernmental Review of Federal Programs.

Question 27: We are considering making a bid on this RFP but need to know how you are defining “current market leading technology” and if your RFP is open to China based PV manufacturing companies. Please let me know and thanks in advance for your answer.
Answer 27:

In order to be eligible as a prime recipient for this Funding Opportunity, your entity / organization must be incorporated in the United States. Foreign participants are allowed as sub-recipients to a domestic entity provided that:

• The foreign sub-recipient(s), in aggregate, shall not receive more than 20% of the total estimated DOE funding and

• The foreign participant must provide at least 75% cost sharing (2/3 of that in form of cash) of their portion of the total project cost.

In other words, the company can be based in multiple countries, but must also be incorporated in the United States and the project must be built in the United States. As described in the FOA, DOE is looking for technologies with an advantage over "current market leading technology." For the purposes of this Funding Opportunity, “current market leading technology” is not strictly defined because photovoltaic market is a dynamic market. In general, we will look to the recipient to benchmark their proposal relative to the appropriate technology (for example, at the time of writing this answer, if the efficiency is in the low teens (%) then the lowest price, 25-yr warranted and bankable cadmium telluride (CdTe) would be appropriate, while for high teens efficiencies, lowest price, 25-yr warranted and bankable single-crystal silicon would be appropriate; similarly, wafer manufacturers can choose an appropriate wafer benchmark). As mentioned, it will be up to the recipient to benchmark their technology - the reasonableness of their approach will be judged during the review process. The most important benchmark is the pathway to $0.50/W panel price by 2020, with the 15% guide set in the near period. Obviously, an applicant who proposes a convincingly faster path to $0.50/W will score higher in the merit review.

Question 28: For the environmental checklist that the latest amended FOA added, Is the full response to be entirely on the form provided or can supporting documents be submitted with the form to answer the request for details?
Answer 28:

Responses to the Environmental Questionnaire (EF1) application requirement should be contained entirely on the EF1 form provided on the eXCHANGE website. During the application review process or if selected for award, DOE reserves the right to ask for additional information or supporting documentation.

Question 29: For the SunPath FOA, if CAPITAL EQUIPMENT is purchased on this 75% / 25% cost share program, it the TITLE and OWNERSHIP of the equipment 100% in favor of the company, does the government take title or is the ownership shared? Buy American clause - What constitutes "not readily available" so that foreign-made new equipment could be purchased?
Answer 29: