EERE eXCHANGE: FAQs

Question 1: With reference to the topic area 4 "Module service lifetime model": Does this topic area involve analysis of module data that can be obtained from field installations, without actual measurement of module data during the course of the project.
Answer 1: Applications to PREDICTS2 may use fielded module data collected before the beginning of an award, and would not necessarily collect further module data during the course of the award, so long as the project proposed meets the objectives of the FOA.

Question 2: For past sunshot initiatives, universities were granted a 10% cost share. Why does this no longer seem to be the case for PREDICTS?
Answer 2: In past years DOE has had a cost share waiver approved for use through various FOA's. DOE is currently in the process of getting approval to renew the cost share waiver, but does in no way guarantee that the cost share waiver will be approved. Applicants should plan on meeting cost share requirements as per Section III.B. of the FOA.

Question 3: How does the participation of a federal agency as a subrecipient affect the cost sharing requirement? FAQ #34 suggests that any Sunshot funding ultimately transferred (via the prime recipient) to the federal agency is not subject to a cost-sharing percentage. Is this correct? Likewise, the same federal agency cannot provide in-kind work that could be used to reduce the cost-sharing requirement of the prime recipient (or the cost sharing required for any for-profit subrecipients), right
Answer 3:

Please see section III.B. of the FOA regarding Cost Sharing requirements.
Note under section III.B.4. The Prime Recipient may not use the following sources to meet its cost share obligations including, but not limited to:
• Revenues or royalties from the prospective operation of an activity beyond the project period;
• Proceeds from the prospective sale of an asset of an activity;
• Federal funding or property (e.g., Federal grants, equipment owned by the Federal Government); or
• Expenditures that were reimbursed under a separate Federal Technology Office.

Applicants must meet cost share requirements as per Section III.B. of the FOA.

Question 4: I have following questions regarding the DE-FOA-0001195 (PREDICTS-2): 1) It appears that no cover page is necessary at concept paper stage and 3 page technical description and 2 page team description would suffice. Is that correct? 2) The EERE system requires two separate files for technical description and team description. Is the same reviewer going to review both files? Do we need to provide long forms of the abbreviations and background information in both- technical and team description documents, or it would suffice if they are provided only once- in technical description document? 3) The two merit review criteria for concept papers are "Overall Scientific and Technical Merit and Impact (50%)" and Project Strategy and Team (50%). Is it correct that these criteria will be applied to the concept papers as a whole and not like former criterion is only applicable to technical description file while the latter is only applicable to team description file? 4) For each project partner, the EERE system asks if the work will be performed at the address provided (yes/no). If a foreign organization is listed as a sub-recipient, and their main role is to provide consultation, components, and share data from past experiments carried out at their facility, for designing experiments that will be performed at our facility in the US, (foreign entity is not going to perform any experimental or theoretical work as such), what should be the answer for above question (yes/no)? I suppose we are expected to provide a waiver to "work must be performed in the US" clause only if the answer is yes, is that correct?
Answer 4:

1. Yes

2. Concept papers (which consist of the technical description document and team description document) will be reviewed as a package by several individual reviewers.

3. The review criteria will be applied to the concept paper package as a whole.

4. Please see section IV.D.11 of the FOA regarding work in the US, and any potential need for a Waiver. If work is to be performed outside the US other than supplies or equipment purchase a waiver will be required for foreign participation.

Question 5: We have early development on new ARC and Encapsulation layers for Silicon Cells that could go into manufacturing and improve reliability. Would developing an empirical reliability model for the ARC on Silicon Solar cells be in line with the areas of interest in this solicitation?
Answer 5:

If a new subcomponent or component is added or replaced within a module to increase its reliability, the PREDICTS2 FOA would consider projects proving the usefulness of this approach by developing models that provide convincing correlation with field data documenting a relevant failure mechanism or degradation pathway.

Below DOE highlights types of applications not of interest that may be applicable to your question.

“The following types of applications will be deemed nonresponsive and will not be reviewed or considered (See Section III.D of the FOA):

 Incremental improvements over current reliability models
 Models , scientific findings, and test methods correlations with outdoor field data which cannot be verified independently by a third party
 Proposals which address reliability, degradation, and failure issues by examining failure modes that occur due to a manufacturing process or deployment situation that does not comply with the manufacturer’s specifications.”

Question 6: Are we permitted to include references in the footnotes for Concept Papers?
Answer 6: Yes, references may be included as footnotes as long as the Concept Paper still complies with the page limits specified in the FOA.

Question 7: Section IV A of FOA does not specify if it is prohibited to use italics or bold text in concept papers. Does it mean it is allowed?
Answer 7: Italics and bold text are allowable as long as the Concept Paper remains within the specified page limit.

Question 8: What are the requirements for compliance to cost accounting standards, if any, for a for-profit organization applying as prime recipient? Moreover, do any of these requirements change if a for-profit organization is listed as a sub recipient instead of prime recipient?
Answer 8: To qualify for Financial Assistance, compliance with 2 CFR part 200 as amended by 2 CFR part 910 is required. This includes assurance of an adequate accounting system for estimating, accounting and billing for governmental funding received. The Accounting System must be in accordance with Generally Accepted Accounting Principles applicable to the circumstances and associated applicable Federal regulations. The same requirements apply to subrecipients.

Question 9: If a sub recipient is a state university receiving 40% funding. The primary recipient is responsible for cost sharing 20% of the remaining 60% of funding.The cost sharing for the university is only 10% of the 40% funding and the primary is also responsible for the compliance. Is this correct understanding?
Answer 9:

This is incorrect. The cost share waiver is only applicable if:

1. The Prime Recipient is a domestic institution of higher education; domestic nonprofit entity; FFRDC; or U.S. State, local, or tribal government entity; and

2. The Prime Recipient performs more than 50% of the project work, as measured by the Total Project Cost. Therefore, in this instance the full 100% of funding would be cost shared at a rate of 20%.

Question 10: If any IP is generated how is the information owned between the partners? What guidelines need to be followed? Does DOE own any IP generated?
Answer 10: Please refer to Section VIII.L through VIII.O of the FOA.

Question 11: What is the max % of the funding that can be awarded to sub-recipients that are outside USA? Are there any guidelines for determining what is the typically acceptable level of funding share going out to partners outside the USA? If the sub-recipient outside USA is a university or non profit research center, is the cost sharing 10% or 20%?
Answer 11: There is not a maximum percentage of funding that may be awarded to subrecipients outside of the USA. The cost share waiver does not apply to foreign entities, therefore the required cost share would be 20%. In addition please see Section D.IV.11 for Waiver Requests: Foreign Entities and Performance of Work in the United States.

Question 12: Much of the wording seems to suggest that only fully-commercialized products/technologies with identifiable field history are in play (i.e. TRL 9). Is this indeed the case? To this end, would technologies that are commercialized but do not yet have any substantial field data be considered appropriate (e.g. TRL 8/9)? Further, would the development of lifetime/reliability models for a not yet commercialized technology (e.g. TRL 5/6) be considered appropriate?
Answer 12: The PREDICTS2 FOA is open to technologies that are not yet fully commercialized, and experimental systems that are still in development are within the scope of the program. If fielded data is not available, a strong justification should be provided to convincingly demonstrate that the failures or degradation mechanism addressed would be observed in real-world situations (fielded). As described in the “Areas of Interest” (Section 1.B), understanding the fielded performance is emphasized, and addressing the “Areas of Interest” is an evaluation criterion stated in Section V.A.

Question 13: We plan on using a DOE-FFRDC as a team member (subrecipient). How is the DOE-FFRDC compensated for their efforts in support of the project? Are they paid “up-front” prior to the delivery of their services or do they invoice the prime recipient based on actual their expenditures for a specific billing period?
Answer 13: Please see Section II.B.2 of the Funding Opportunity Announcement.

Question 14: If a manufacturer provides a major piece of capital equipment at a reduced cost, then can this be counted as a cost share? Furthermore, if the prime is an FFRDC, then can the FFRDC establish an agreement with the manufacturer that allows the FFRDC to assume full ownership of the equipment?
Answer 14: If a major piece of capital equipment is provided at a reduced cost the "donated discount" may not be counted as cost share. Please refer to 2 CFR §200.306 cost sharing or matching for additional information. Title to equipment funded under a federal award is subject to the rules as described in 2 CFR §200.313 Equipment.

Question 15: What are the manufacturing requirements? We will be supporting general solar U.S. manufacturing through knowledge generation. Are there other requirements regarding manufacturing in the U.S.?
Answer 15:

The FOA states that the applicant is required to generate a US Manufacturing Plan that is appropriate for the TRL level of the work being proposed. The U.S. Manufacturing Plan should explain the extent in which the applicant is planning and willing to commit to the manufacturing of products in the U.S. that benefit from the technology likely to result from the proposed DOE-funded project. While each U.S. Manufacturing Plan must include specific and measurable commitments to U.S. manufacturing, the type and degree of the commitments made in the U.S. Manufacturing Plan is in the sole discretion of the applicant. The commitments made in the U.S. Manufacturing Plan will become part of the terms and conditions of the award if the proposal is selected for funding.

The class patent waiver section on page 65 of the FOA also discusses U.S. manufacturing that might apply to a domestic large business that wants to benefit from the class patent waiver.

Question 16: Can the same person be listed as Pricipal Investigator (PI) on multiple proposal?
Answer 16: Applicants may submit more than one Concept Paper and Full Application to this FOA, provided that each application describes a unique, scientifically distinct project as determined by EERE. A Principal Investigator (PI) may be listed on multiple proposals.

Question 17: In discussions with our partners, we believe that our team organization would be more effective if the lead organization who submitted the Concept paper became a partner, and we took over as the lead for full proposal. This would change the PI as well. Is this allowed? Are there particular steps we need to take to communicate this to EERE, or can we simply submit the full proposal under the same concept paper ID, with us as the lead and with a different PI?
Answer 17:

The project lead organization and teaming partners may be changed between the Concept Paper and the Full Application. However, new proposals for technologies or concepts for which a Concept Paper was not submitted will not be accepted. Note that to be eligible to submit a Full Application, applicants must have submitted a Concept Paper on the technology or concept to be covered in the Full Application.

The control number received by Exchange for the Concept Paper must be provided in the Full Application. No additional steps are needed, please just update the field for lead organization, principal investigator, and team members as needed in EERE Exchange.

Question 18: Can you explain the how the U.S. manufacturing requirements should be interpreted when the program lead is an academic institution? If subcontracts are awarded to more than one industry partner how should the manufacturing requirements be interpreted for them? Should they be treated as a group or individually in terms of satisfying the requirements?
Answer 18: For universities, it is understood that the likely commercialization path is through licensing because universities are not in the business of manufacturing and selling products. Therefore a U.S. manufacturing plan from a university should focus on its licensing strategy and how that strategy would support U.S. manufacturing. The licensing strategy could be requiring licensees to manufacturing in the U.S. or having a preference to U.S. manufacturers. If subcontracts are awarded to multiple industry partners, a U.S. manufacturing plan should be submitted for the whole group and the whole group will be bound to it.

Question 19: The FOA states, "Applicants are strongly encouraged to submit their Concept Papers and Full Applications at least 48 hours in advance of the submission deadline." Does submitting our application 48 hours earlier than the stated deadline improve our chances of selection under this FOA?
Answer 19: The purpose of this statement within the FOA is not to indicate that the application will be reviewed more favorably if it is submitted 48 hours in advance. This 48 hour suggestion is made simply to ensure that technical difficulties during the submission process will not cause a Concept Paper or Full Application to be rejected due to missing the deadline. 48 hours is expected to be ample time to troubleshoot and solve any technical problems that could delay an applicant's submission. Concept Papers and Full Applications must be submitted in EERE Exchange by the deadline listed in the FOA.

Question 20: We noticed that a budget justification is not required for sub-contracts under $250,000. However, are we required to provide the budgets themselves for these on these subcontract? If not required, is it permissible to provide a budget anyway?
Answer 20:

Applicants must provide a separate budget justification, EERE 159 (i.e., budget justification for each budget year and a cumulative budget) for each subawardee that is expected to perform work estimated to be more than $250,000 or 25 percent of the total work effort (whichever is less). For subawards less than $250,000 or 25 percent of the total work effort it is permissible to include budgets in your application, however, they will not provide an advantage to your application, as eligible Full Applications will undergo a comprehensive technical merit review according to the criteria identified in Section V.A of the FOA.

Question 21: One of our partnering organization is requesting if they can get paid in Euro instead of USD. Is there any provision to take into consideration the fluctuations in currency exchange rate?
Answer 21: There is not currently a provision to take into account fluctuations in exchange rates. As per FOA Section IV.D.11.ii., "All work under EERE funding agreements must be performed in the United States. This requirement does not apply to the purchase of supplies and equipment, so a waiver is not required for foreign purchases of these items. However, the Prime Recipient should make every effort to purchase supplies and equipment within the United States. Section IV.I.3 lists the necessary information that must be included in a request to waive the Performance of Work in the United States requirement."

Question 22: The EERE 159 form on the EERE-Exchange website has expiration date of 01/31/2015. If this form cannot be used, where can I find the most recent form?
Answer 22: The new version of the form is available on EERE Exchange under FOA Documents.

Question 23: Is every partnering organization supposed to submit an individual EERE 159 form as subaward budget justification with hourly rates etc?
Answer 23: Please see question 20, above.

Question 24: Must the PREDICTS II program run 39 months with an initial 15 month period followed by up to two 12 months periods? Can the entire program be proposed as a 15 month program, a 27 month program or a 39 month program?
Answer 24: The budget periods should align with the time frames included in the FOA. Budget Period 1 - 15 months, Budget Period 2 - 12 months, Budget Period 3 -12 months. If the project is selected and successfully negotiated and work is completed ahead of schedule, a Recipient may request a continuation into the subsequent budget period ahead of schedule.

Question 25: The FOA mentions that the milestone summary table should be approximately 1 page long. With the format provided, and considering the number of milestones in our project, it is not possible to fit it in one page. Since we will be writing the task numbers in the milestone summary table to uniquely identify the tasks, is it acceptable to just write brief task descriptions instead of writing complete task titles in order to save the space and fit the table to one page?
Answer 25: Yes, you may abbreviate your task titles as necessary.

Question 26: I am completing the EERE 159 Budget Justification form and it appears that the auto populated entries under “Federal” are understated. The Instructions & Summary states, “4. The total budget presented on tabs a. through i. must include both Federal (DOE) and Non-Federal (cost share) portions. However, I do not see where I can input the Non-Federal cost share in these tabs. This is particularly true for the indirect tab i.
Answer 26: There is no need to differentiate between Federal and Non-Federal dollars on tabs a through i. All dollars associated with the project, be they Federal or cost share, are subject to the same rules and regulations. All Cost Share dollars should be included in their appropriate item of cost tabs (a through i) AND are then also identified on tab j.

Question 27: There are two forms, the SF-424 and the SF-LLL which are a bit daunting. Is the Federal Action Number the same as the Funding Opportunity Announcement, 'DE-FOA-0001195'? The CFDA number is 81.087. Are there sample forms filled out for this FOA? There is a Federal Award Identifier, etc. Is this considered a Preapplication or Application? There is a competition identifier number/title - is this the same as the FOA? It looks like Q. 19 is that this is subject to E.O. 12372, but we haven't been contacted/selected.
Answer 27:

For the SF-424 and SF-LLL, fill out the forms to the best of your ability per the instructions provided. There are not sample forms. The applications are typically not subject to E.O. 12372, however applicants should confirm with their organization’s general counsel.

Submission to the FOA at this stage would be considered an Application. The Federal Agency has not assigned an Applicant Identifier, Federal Entity Identifier, Federal Award Identifier, or Competition Identification Number.

Question 28: If we have no lobbying effort, does the SF-LLL need to be filled out?
Answer 28: Yes, please fill out the SF-LLL and indicate N/A as appropriate.

Question 29: For the one PowerPoint slide, we have a template; is there a template for the one page 'Summary For Public Release' document?
Answer 29: There is not a template, however section IV.D.5 of the FOA contains a detailed description of what is expected.

Question 30: I noted on the DOE submission site that for the submission, there are *two* places for a U. S. Manufacturing Plan; one is singular, one is plural. Is this the same plan?
Answer 30: This is an error that we are working to correct. Please feel free to upload the same USMP in both spaces.

Question 31: The SF-424 document contains a reference to the Certifications and Assurances documents. Do we have to submit this signed file (http://energy.gov/sites/prod/files/CERTSASSURANCESSF424.pdf) with the SF-424 document?
Answer 31: You are not required to submit a signed certifications and assurances file as by checking the box in item 21 on the SF424 you are agreeing to comply with the certifications and assurances contained therein.

Frequently Asked Questions