Question 8:
Does “meeting SunShot targets by 2020” mean that the proposal aims to achieve the targets in a commercial implementation by 2020, or that by 2020 it will reach a point of development where it would be expected to meet the targets if subsequently commercialized?
Answer 8:
The goal of the SuNLaMP solicitation is to fund projects
that enable achieving the SunShot targets for $/W or $/kWh by 2020, or greatly
exceed these targets in a relevant time frame.
Question 9:
Under the Soft Cost Focus Area there is a Topic heading as follows “Topics 1-6” yet there are 10 bullets following it. How do you recommend applicants refer to any one of the topics under that heading? Should they, for example, refer to them as Topics1-6a-Topics1-6j? Alternatively, should they be renamed Topics 1-10, which would require Topic 7 to be renamed to Topic 11?
Answer 9:
The bullets are not intended to align with the Topic Area numbers. Applicants should submit Concept Papers and/or Full Proposals under
the Topic Area appropriate for the primary activity proposed.
Question 10:
The list of topics on page 45 of the SuNLaMP call for proposals lists topics 1a-7, which more or less apply to the bullets listed on page 46-47, with a few exceptions. Topic 2a does not apply to a single bullet. More importantly, the second bullet “Techno-economic….” does not seem to apply to a specific topic on page 45. If the proposed work is under the second bullet (“Techno-economic, market characterization…”) which topic number should be used?
Answer 10:
The bullets are not intended to align with the Topic Area numbers. Applicants should submit Concept Papers and/or Full Proposals under
the Topic Area appropriate for the primary activity proposed.
Question 11:
What level of feedback are you going to give on the concept papers? For example, are you going to just leave it a “encourage” or “discourage” or are you going to be more specific about which aspects of the concept paper you liked and didn’t like.
Answer 11:
DOE will provide feedback on strengths and weaknesses of the
Concept Paper, but DOE will not provide instructions on what content to include
or approaches to be used with some limited exception for certain
"restricted eligibility" topics.
Question 12:
Can we combine concepts at the proposal stage? Or do they need to be combined at the concept stage? For example, if two separate concept papers are being submitted and then later we determined that they would lend themselves well to one proposal, is it OK to combine at a date later than the concept paper stage?
Answer 12:
As stated in the SuNLaMP Call for Proposals, “each Full
Proposal should be limited to a single cohesive concept or technology and not
be a collection of projects.” Collection of multiple Concept Papers into a
single Full Proposal is, therefore, explicitly discouraged. If such collection
would form a single cohesive Full Proposal, with a common objective and
addressing the challenges of one or more of the Topic Areas in the Call for Proposals, it should be presented as a single cohesive Concept Paper.
Question 13:
I was hoping to get clarification on the minimum budget for SI proposals. In the SI section of the document the minimum for an SI proposal is listed as $2 million over FY16-18 (on page 28) and at another place it is listed as $1 million over FY16-18 (on page 52). Which is the anticipated minimum funding size for an SI proposal?
Answer 13:
Amendment No. 001 was posted to eXCHANGE on January 28, 2015
to clarify that the minimum award size for SI proposals is $2 million.
Question 14:
On page 54, it says "The following components are required in the Concept Paper, and must be assembled exactly in the order given below and submitted as a single PDF file, to be compliant for a merit review."
Then, on page 55, it lists the components…
Up to this point we have interpreted the "components" to be items #1 and #2 and thought the 6 bullets under item 2 were just a guide for the content of component #2. An NCPV staff member is asking whether we are supposed to address the bullets "exactly in order" or be considered non-compliant. Please let us know since most believe it is an unusual flow to talk about the proposed technology second and the current state of the art fourth.
Answer 14:
The phrase “assembled exactly in the order given below”
refers to the order of the sections. Within the Technology or Concept
Description, the bullets in the solicitation may be addressed in any order. The
Concept Paper should consist of a Cover Page with all required content,
followed by a Technology or Concept Description. The Full Proposal should be
assembled as directed on pages 56-58 of the SuNLaMP Call for Proposals.
Question 15:
There appears to be an inconsistency in the minimum award size under the Systems Integration topic. In particular, the FOA says the minimum award is $2M in Section 4 (pg. 28). However, in the table in Section 7 (pg. 52), it says the minimum award is $1M. Please clarify what the minimum award size is.
Answer 15:
Amendment No. 001 was posted to eXCHANGE on January 28, 2015
to clarify that the minimum award size for SI proposals is $2 million.
Question 16:
I have question about the minimum funding amounts for proposals submitted under the Systems Integration focus area. Page 28 of the funding call indicates that the minimum is $2M over 3 years, whereas the table on page 52 indicates that the minimum amount is $1M over 3 years. Please clarify: Is the minimum funding amount under Systems Integration $1 million over 3 years (as stated on p. 52) or $2 million over 3 years (as stated on p. 28)?
Answer 16:
Amendment No. 001 was posted to eXCHANGE on January 28, 2015
to clarify that the minimum award size for SI proposals is $2 million.
Question 17:
I wanted to know if there was a particular structure preferred if 2 DOE National laboratories were to submit a proposal as equals. Do we need to elect one as the lead for submission purposes?
Answer 17:
One laboratory must be designated as the primary recipient
of the award.
Question 18:
Other FOAs offer the ability to upload application components individually. Would it be possible to have this ability for SuNLaMP responses? This would reduce possibility for errors and allow us to focus extra time on the technical requirements that otherwise we would need to spend creating a single pdf.
Answer 18:
As stated in Section 8.3 of the SuNLaMP Call for Proposals,
"[a]ll Proposals must be written in English, must be submitted as a single
PDF document and adhere to page limits listed in Section 8.3.7.
Question 19:
On page 54 of the SUNLAMP CFP, it states that the components of the concept paper must be “assembled exactly in the order given.” Is this meant to require that proposals address each of the bullet points under “Technology or Concept Description” in the order listed on page 55? Or does it simply mean that the Cover Page must come before the Technology or Concept Description?
Answer 19:
The phrase “assembled exactly in the order given below” refers to the order of the sections. Within the Technology or Concept Description, the bullets in the solicitation may be addressed in any order. The Concept Paper should consist of a Cover Page with all required content, followed by a Technology or Concept Description. The Full Proposal should be assembled as directed on pages 56-58 of the SuNLaMP Call for Proposals.
Question 20:
I’m writing to seek clarification of the minimum budget for SUNLAMP proposals in the Systems Integration Focus Area. On page 28 of the SUNLAMP CFP, it says the “anticipated minimum award size for each Systems Integration project… is about $2M (total for 3 years)”. But in the table on page 52, it says the minimum award size for SI is $1M (3-year total). Can you please clarify the minimum award size for the SI Focus Area?
Answer 20:
Amendment No. 001 was posted to eXCHANGE on January 28, 2015 to clarify that the minimum award size for SI proposals is $2 million.
Question 21:
Please expand upon what you want to see under 2.1 Basic Operating Principles in the concept paper and whether this section is applicable to all areas (including Soft Costs).
Answer 21:
SunShot seeks to fund new or unique technologies and
approaches that can reduce hardware and non-hardware costs and accelerate the
deployment of solar. Hardware-focused Concept
Papers should describe how the proposed innovation would improve upon or would improve beyond existing technologies and provide detail on how the it operates to do so. Other Concept Papers should demonstrate significant
new impacts in line with current, desired and anticipated market conditions.
Question 22:
The scope of the Photovoltaics Area Topic 1 is described as PV module performance and reliability. Will proposals related to PV system performance and reliability considered within the scope of the lab call?
Answer 22:
System-level reliability research and development may be
proposed to the extent that they address the target metrics of the Topic areas
in the SuNLaMP Call for Proposals.
Question 23:
The scope of PV Area Topic 2 seems to exclude PV system components other than modules. Will PV system components such as racking, mounting structures, cables, etc. considered within the scope of the lab call?
Answer 23:
PV Topic 2 states, “Novel module concepts, designs and
geometries, which may include innovative balance of systems hardware
components.” Racking, mounting structures, and cables are considered balance
of systems hardware components.
Proposals in this topic may focus on or include balance of systems
hardware components.
Question 24:
When an organization has more than one PI with the same last name, is it acceptable reference code to add the first initial to the Last Name? For example: SmithG or SmithF
Answer 24:
It is acceptable to refer to PIs with the same last name by
adding the first initial to the end of the last name as described in the
question.
Question 25:
If we propose a 2 year project what is the minimum amount of funding we can request?
Answer 25:
Page 52 of the funding announcement details the minimum
award sizes for each Focus Area. The proposed budget must be appropriate for
the work proposed.
Question 26:
I registered on EERE Exchange. When I click on the Apply icon button for SuNLaMP, I am asked to manually fill in a lengthy form. I do not see a path to simply upload a pdf file. Please explain to me how to do that.
Answer 26:
DOE requires certain basic information from each applicant,
which is submitted through the brief forms in eXCHANGE. There is an “upload”
button for the Concept Paper pdfs on the last tab, entitled “Upload and
Submit.”
Question 27:
I have been using the reference code to name submissions. I notice that the exchange cuts off anything after the last period. Do you have a suggestion for naming the files?
Answer 27:
Unfortunately, the eXCHANGE system is unable to accommodate the
full naming convention. Submissions with the PI name truncated will be
accepted.
Question 28:
In reference to the FOA Page 61, “The file should receive the same name as the reference code for the project.” Is it acceptable for the PI’s name to be truncated after upload? For example, PV.TopicX.LABX.Name.pdf becomes PV.TopicX.LABX.
Answer 28:
Unfortunately, the eXCHANGE system is unable to accommodate the
full naming convention. Submissions with the PI name truncated will be
accepted.
Question 30:
Can we list as Key Project Team Members university partners, and/or industry partners who will support our proposed research at no cost to DOE?
Answer 30:
You may include university and/or industry
partners who will support the proposed research at no cost to DOE; the time
spent by these partners may be listed as cost share under Personnel.
Question 36:
Can you please clarify whether discouraged concept papers are explicitly prohibited from submitting full proposals?
Answer 36:
As stated in Section 10.1.1.B of the SuNLaMP Call for Proposals, [emphasis added] "Full Proposals are deemed compliant if: The Applicant submitted a compliant Concept Paper corresponding to the Full Proposal or the Applicant is applying to PV topic 7…". Therefore, as long as an Applicant's Concept Paper was not returned as non-compliant the Applicant is eligible to submit a Full Proposal on the idea contained with their Concept Paper.
Question 37:
What are the Government’s detailed instructions and formatting requirements for the “project overview” stated in Section (E.) of the SOPO Template? May the Project Summary appear on the title page if the page remains within the one-page limit?
Answer 37:
The instructions for the SOPO Title Page within the SOPO template state the Title page is to contain "two to three sentences describing the technical area addressed." This is the "project overview" being referred to and therefore should be contained on the Title Page.
Question 38:
Can an additional project partner be added in comparison to the concept paper (to address comments received on the concept paper)?
Answer 38:
The level of effort, budget, and project partners may be modified from the original Concept Paper as appropriate. However, as stated in Section 8.3 of the SuNLaMP Call for Proposals, new proposals for technologies or concepts for which a Concept Paper was not submitted will not be accepted, with the exception of the PV Focus Area’s Topic 7. This requirement also applies to Full Proposals to be submitted under “Restricted Eligibility” for certain Focus Areas.
Question 39:
Can the anticipated DOE budget be slightly increased in respect to what indicated on the concept paper (if a project partner is added)?
Answer 39:
The level of effort, budget, and project partners may be modified from the original Concept Paper as appropriate. However, as stated in Section 8.3 of the SuNLaMP Call for Proposals, new proposals for technologies or concepts for which a Concept Paper was not submitted will not be accepted, with the exception of the PV Focus Area’s Topic 7. This requirement also applies to Full Proposals to be submitted under “Restricted Eligibility” for certain Focus Areas.
Question 40:
What should I do if the list of CO/PIs exceeds the available space in the list of the cover page (only 5 allowed on the cover page)? If I add just 1 more name, then the cover page will exceed 1 page.
Answer 40:
List the 3 Co-PI's with the largest amount of effort in the first 3 spaces available. List all other Co-PI's in the fourth available space and leave the remaining columns for that row blank.
Question 41:
We have a proposal involving a lead lab (with PI, co-PIs, and other staff), a partner lab, and non-lab subcontractors. Is it sufficient to include CVs for all individuals that will be involved in the effort, but include "Current and Pending Support" documents only for the PI and co-PIs of the lead lab?
Answer 41:
As stated section 8.3 of the SuNLaMP Call for Proposals and as specified in the Current and Pending Support template, “All current support which has a related or similar scope of work from whatever source (e.g., Federal, State, local or foreign government agencies, public or private foundations, industrial or other commercial organizations) must be listed.”
Question 42:
For proposals with multiple lab partners, are the full set of budget forms and documents needed only for the "lead" lab (with budgets for other labs included as line items within those forms)? Or should each lab include its own set of budget justification forms and documents within the proposal?
Answer 42:
Each project partner, lab or otherwise, should submit a separate budget using the SuNLaMP Budget Template provided on Exchange.
Question 54:
What are the project reporting requirements? For example quarterly, annually?
Answer 54:
SunShot typically requires quarterly reporting and a continuation report for each Budget Period. Final reporting requirements will be determined upon the nature of the project given an award.
Question 55:
If we are the sub awardee to another National Laboratory will our portion of the funding come directly to our lab or will it pass through the Prime Recipient lab?
Answer 55:
Subawardees that are also DOE national laboratories will receive funding directly from SunShot, if the proposal is selected for award. However, the prime Applicant's budget must include the proposed funding for ALL subawards.
Question 56:
Previous FAQ responses confirm that each partner must fill out the Excel budget file. Should each partner also submit a separate budget justification document?
Answer 56:
THE ORIGINAL RESPONSE TO THIS QUESTION WAS INCORRECT. THE CORRECT RESPONSE FOLLOWS.
Each partner should submit a completed SuNLaMP budget template and budget justification as described in section 8.3 in the call for proposals.
Question 58:
The SOPO template and example provided are tailored for technology/experimental R&D and will be challenging to use for Soft Cost proposals. In order to ensure that the SOPOs submitted for analysis-oriented Soft Cost proposals meet expectations, would it be possible to provide either an alternate SOPO template or, at a minimum, an alternate SOPO example that is tailored to analysis-oriented Soft Cost proposals?
Answer 58:
In order to demonstrate how progress will be measured and evaluated, all SOPOs should follow the requirements in the SOPO template provided in eXCHANGE. Soft Costs may differ from R&D proposals in terms of the types of milestones, evaluation criteria and assessment methods used; however, these elements must be addressed by all applicants and should be quantifiable. Soft Costs topics may use social science methods for progress assessment.
Examples of milestones and deliverables include:
- All working groups (WGs) have been formed, met regularly over the term and have determined workplans and outcomes for BP1.
- A majority of WG deliverables have been met. If certain deliverables have not been met, a detailed explanation has been delivered to DOE, including options for other methods of reducing BOS costs.
- All implementation plans have been created for BP2.
- X trainings and workshops trained Y people with Z skills.
- X tool or portal is running and demonstrates Y functions.
- X jurisdictions have completed solar maps.
- X states/counties/cities are working together collaboratively and have taken meaningful steps to share X information. The jurisdictions have committed to concrete actions in BP2.
Please note that reports and presentations are not appropriate stand-alone deliverables.
Question 59:
The SOPO states that it should be divided into three sections: Title page, project overview and technical work plan. But there are no detailed instructions given for the “project overview” as stated below. Could you please provide the instructions? If a “project overview” is not needed, please clarify what exactly is needed for SOPO.
Answer 59:
The instructions for the SOPO Title Page within the SOPO template state the Title page is to contain "two to three sentences describing the technical area addressed." This is the "project overview" being referred to and therefore should be contained on the Title Page.
Question 60:
There are items in the Excel budget form that do not appear to be working properly, both on the "Summary" sheet: 1. The personnel names rows do not pre-populate and are protected. Unless fixed, these will therefore be BLANK. 2. The summary sheet is not correctly summing the previous sheets.
Answer 60:
The budget template has been revised to correct the formulas.
Question 61:
The call ask for equipment to be itemized in the budget justification. What is the definition for permanent equipment in this call?
Answer 61:
For the purpose of this solicitation, equipment is defined as hardware above $5,000 in value, that is not a consumable material or supply.
Question 62:
If we have another government agency (for example DoD) that is also contributing funding toward our project how should it be identified?
Answer 62:
Such contributions should be identified on the cover page under "DOES THIS PROPOSAL RELY ON FUNDING FROM OTHER OFFICES IN DOE OR ANOTHER FEDERAL AGENCY? YES/NO; IF YES, LIST THE OTHER ORGANIZATIONS:” and explained in the budget justification. Please note that financial contributions made by other federal entities may not be counted as cost share.
Question 63:
Please clarify if budget should not be included in the SOPO per the last paragraph on page 9 of the SOPO instructions - or - if it is to be included per Title page guidance on page 11.
Answer 63:
No budget information should be included in the SOPO.
Question 64:
FAQ 56 is different than Version 3 of FOA- Will another Version be released?
Answer 64:
The original version of FAQ 56 is incorrect (the correction is in the answer to FAQ57). Each partner should submit a completed SuNLaMP budget template and budget justification as described in section 8.3 in the call for proposals.
Question 65:
I looks like the formula in cell K61 is incorrect. I believe the formula should be =(K56+K59)*K60. This formula is protected so I am unable to change it myself. Would you please fix this on each tab and send out an updated template?
Answer 65:
The budget template has been revised to correct the formulas.
Question 66:
Our concept paper was discouraged but the weaknesses noted appear quite simple to address in a full proposal. Still, if the chances are exceedingly low the time investment in a full proposal seems unwise. Is there any precedence for an EERE Solar full proposal being funded that was discouraged at the concept stage?
Answer 66:
Sections 8.3 and 10 of the call for proposals describe the concept paper and full proposal submission and review process.
Question 67:
Topic 7 of the Photovoltaic portion of the call (p. 16 of the call) indicates that proposals to this topic are to be abbreviated. The format is given by formatting instructions for a concept paper found in section 8.2. Which cover page should applicants use - the Cover Page for Concept Papers or the Full Proposal Cover page?
Answer 67:
They should use the Full Proposal Cover Page Template found on EERE Exchange.
Question 68:
Topic 7 in the Photovoltaics section did not require submission during the concept paper phase, per the call on page 16: "For this topic only, there is no requirement to submit a concept paper by the concept paper deadline in order for to submit a Proposal by the Full Proposal deadline.” It seems that the “Apply” button has been removed from the SuNLaMP area of eXCHANGE – how should Topic 7 papers be submitted?
Answer 68:
Applicants planning to submit a full proposal under Photovoltaics Topic 7 must send an e-mail addressed to sunlamp@ee.doe.gov no later than 5:00 p.m. Eastern on April 9, 2015. The e-mail should include the following information:
• Lead organization name
• Project name
• Technical Point of Contact/Principal Investigator
• Name of person submitting application (eXCHANGE user name)
• E-mail address of person submitting the application
Following receipt of this information, a mock concept paper will be uploaded on your behalf and you will be assigned a control number enabling you to submit a full proposal. The control number will be e-mailed to the person submitting the application.
Question 69:
Regarding the newly released 4620 (budget template):
• Should the summary tab have yellow cells indicating an input is required?
• Should cells H14-18 and H22-23 be formatted as Numbers for FTE’s, not as $?
• Should header information pull from the YR 1 page or should it be re-entered on each page?
Answer 69:
· Please input budget data in the yellow cells, except for those in Columns H-K on the Summary tab (which will be automatically populated by formulae).
· Cells H14-18 and H22-23 require numbers to indicate person-month as appropriate (calendar, academic or summer).
· Information at the top of the page needs to be re-entered on each of the YR 1, YR 2 and YR 3 tabs.
Question 70:
Can we change the PI between the concept paper and the proposal (as long as the original concept and control # remain the same)?
Answer 70:
The level of effort, budget, proposal title, and project partners (including the Principal Investigator) may be modified from the original Concept Paper as appropriate. However, as stated in Section 8.3 of the SuNLaMP Call for Proposals, new proposals for technologies or concepts for which a Concept Paper was not submitted will not be accepted, with the exception of the PV Focus Area’s Topic 7. This requirement also applies to Full Proposals to be submitted under “Restricted Eligibility” for certain Focus Areas.
Question 71:
Can the wording of the Title in the Full Proposal be different than that in the Concept Paper?
Answer 71:
The level of effort, budget, proposal title, and project partners (including the Principal Investigator) may be modified from the original Concept Paper as appropriate. However, as stated in Section 8.3 of the SuNLaMP Call for Proposals, new proposals for technologies or concepts for which a Concept Paper was not submitted will not be accepted, with the exception of the PV Focus Area’s Topic 7. This requirement also applies to Full Proposals to be submitted under “Restricted Eligibility” for certain Focus Areas.
Question 72:
We were approached by a national laboratory about collaborating in a SUNLAMP proposal that they're writing after getting a green light on their concept paper. It would involve giving us a small subcontract to validate some of their theoretical work based on our relevant knowhow and experience. Is there a special procedure for them to subcontract to a foreign entity?
Answer 72:
Individual labs must refer to their Management and Operating Contract with their respective oversight office to determine the rules for engaging foreign entities. This lab call does not contain restrictions on foreign involvement; it only requires that the lab be the prime recipient.
Question 73:
The provided Sunlamp Cover Page, as downloaded (attached to this email) has formatting issues. If the PI name is typed into the form field, it is only partially visible. This is the case for all PI and co-PI fields. Can you provide a corrected cover sheet, or do we just make our own?
Answer 73:
A corrected SuNLaMP proposal cover sheet has been uploaded to eXCHANGE.
Question 74:
When a partner’s cost share is in the form of cash sent to the prime recipient, how should we reflect that on the budget forms? Should we add it into the prime recipient’s budget amount or just show it in the cost share section of the budget? Also, is it necessary for the partner providing this cost share to fill out the budget forms if they aren’t requesting any DOE funding?
Answer 74:
Entities that are only providing cost share should still fill out a budget form. If they are only providing cost share, meaning that they do not receive any DOE funds, then they only need to fill out the cost share section of the form (line L). For the recipient receiving the cost share, this should be reflected in the cost share portion of the budget as an offset to total project costs.
Question 75:
Do we need to fill out budget forms for partners that are only providing cost share (are not requesting any DOE funding)? If so, do they only fill out the cost share sections of the budget forms?
Answer 75:
Entities that are only providing cost share should still fill out a budget form. If they are only providing cost share, meaning that they do not receive any DOE funds, then they only need to fill out the cost share section of the form (line L).
Question 76:
Is an explicit “Project management” task necessary in the SOPO for SuNLaMP?
Answer 76:
Section 8.3 of the SuNLaMP Call for Proposals and the attached SuNLaMP SOPO Instructions & Template describe the requirements for Full Proposals, including the SOPO.
Question 77:
As part of our proposal, we plan to work with two professors as consultants. The contract with the professors will be “fixed price” based on a set of tasks and deliverables (e.g. review certain documents and provide feedback, participate in design reviews, etc.). The contract price will be a small percentage of the overall budget (e.g. less than ~5%). Can we list this contract on line G-5 (SUBCONTRACTS) on our budget page?
Answer 77:
It would be appropriate to list the fixed price purchase of a service that is a minor portion of a proposed project's budget on the SUBCONTRACTS line of the SuNLaMP Budget Form.
Question 78:
Can we submit a “business confidential” addendum to the proposal? Alternatively, can we submit a proposal that “promises” a “business confidential” addendum be generated at the time of negotiations?
Answer 78:
All information pertinent to the selection process must be submitted with the proposal. Proprietary or sensitive information must be identified as such by highlighting or otherwise marking the relevant portions. Proposals are not shared with the public, and reviewers sign non-disclosure agreements in order to protect sensitive intellectual property.
Question 79:
The lead PI for two of our accepted concept papers has left the Lab and we have new PIs assigned to the proposals. I have two questions:
1. Do we change the Reference Code to reflect the new PI name or leave it the same so it matches with the accepted concept paper?
2. We ought to change the cover page to reflect the new PI as well. Will that cause any confusion?
Answer 79:
The Principal Investigator for the Full Proposal may be modified from the original Concept Paper. Please include the new PI name where appropriate in the Full Proposal and file name.
Question 80:
I have a question on the detailed budget form (4620.1). I am the prime for a proposal and I have three other institutions in the team including another national lab. Each budget form has 5 tabs which when printed becomes 6 pages in pdf. So do I need to put all 6 pages for each of their 4620.1s in the complete proposal pdf? That means total 24 pages of financial forms. This is not clear in the FOA. Please clarify.
Answer 80:
Please include the complete 4620.1 and budget justification for each project participant as described in section 8.3 of the call for proposals.
Question 81:
Are we allowed to partner with a foreign company? One of our potential partners is a foreign company that has leading market share in the US, has US employees, and will be providing significant in kind cost share.
Answer 81:
Individual labs must refer to their Management and Operating Contract with their respective oversight office to determine the rules for engaging foreign entities.
Question 82:
On the cover sheet template, what is supposed to go in the box labeled “Provide Related Concept Paper Reference Code?” Is it the control number (i.e. 000-1647) or the code we put at the top of our concept papers (i.e. PV.Topic1.XNL.Smith.B)?
Also, can we change the code we used for the concept paper when we submit the full proposal (i.e. PV.Topic1.XNL.Smith.B changed to PV.Topic4.XNL.Smith.B)?
Answer 82:
As described in section 8.3 of the call for proposals, “All proposal documents must include a reference code in the top corner of the header, as described in Requirements 5 and 5 for Concept Papers in Section 8.2.
Only those applications that received feedback to change topics numbers for their Concept Papers may change topic numbers for the Full Proposal.
Question 83:
Can we submit a classified addendum to the proposal? Alternatively, can we submit an unclassified proposal that “promises” a classified addendum be generated at the time of negotiations?
Answer 83:
Please do not submit classified information in your proposal.
Question 84:
Will the government allow, individual references within the reference section, to contain hyper-texted links to outside content available on the Internet?
Answer 84:
No hyper-texted links are permitted within a Full Proposal.
Question 85:
Could you please clarify the following for the cover sheet?
1) NAME OF PERFORMING ORGANIZATION, IF DIFFERENT FROM ABOVE, What should we include in this section? I have two organizations as partners and both will perform work related to the proposal.
2) CO-PI/PD, This is the last section in the cover page. Do we need to include one Co-PI from each organization or do we need to list everyone’s name? Note that the space is limited to include everyone.
Answer 85:
The name of the lead organization should be inserted into the "Performing Organization" section.
List the 3 Co-PI's with the largest amount of effort in the first 3 spaces available. List all other Co-PI's in the fourth available space and leave the remaining columns for that row blank.
Question 86:
If a Co-PI does not have any relevant Current & Pending Support do we need to submit a blank C&P form or leave out the doc for that individual?
Answer 86:
Please include a C&P form stating that the Co-PI does not have any Current & Pending Support.
Question 87:
NREL and Sandia have specific requirements. Are these requirements expected of NREL/Sandia as a prime and sub, or just if a prime?
Answer 87:
The multiplier does apply to NREL and SNL even if they are subawardees. To account for this on the budget sheet, the multiplier should simply be scaled according to the proportion of the budget going to either NREL or SNL.
Question 89:
Could an applicant specify a FY17-18 period for a two-year project and get an award now or must a two-year project start in FY16 in the current solicitation?
Answer 89:
All Full Proposals submitted to the SuNLaMP Call for Proposals should be for projects scheduled to begin in FY 2016.
Question 90:
Can an applicant ask to exclude reviewers from a certain group from reviewing his/her proposal since they are clearly direct competitors in the national laboratory system? This is something that NSF allows.
Answer 90:
SunShot has an established Conflict of Interest process that will be followed as part of the SuNLaMP Call for Proposals Full Proposal review process.
Question 91:
Should proposal budgets include travel costs to the annual SunShot meetings? If so, where will these meetings take place?
Answer 91:
Budget for at least one review trip per year should be included in Full Proposals. The location of the review will vary. Standard costs for a cross-continental trip of a duration lasting three days may be used as an estimate.