{"text_format":"2","workbook":"xlsx","n_sheets":3,"sheets":["INSTRUCTIONS & TIPS","FOA CONTENT QUESTIONS","Admin Pick List"],"not_rendered":{"charts":0,"images":0,"macros":0,"external_links":0,"defined_names":2,"comments":0,"pivot_tables":0},"unopened":[],"bounds":{"document_bytes":16777216,"sheet_cells":100000,"run_cost":"one","rows_first":2000,"rows_last":500,"rows_between":2000,"halvings":0,"cell_chars":16384,"cell_head_chars":4096},"cells_cut":0,"cells_raw":0,"read":"whole","date_system":"1900"}

{"sheet":"INSTRUCTIONS & TIPS","index":0,"n_rows":12,"n_cols":2,"rows_kept":12,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[[0,0,0,1],[9,0,9,1]]}
["INSTRUCTIONS"]
[1,"All questions pertaining to this funding opportunity announcement should be emailed under the DE-FOA0002423 - FY21 BETO Feedstock Technologies and Algae FOA submit questions link at https://epicweb.ee.doe.gov. "]
[2,"All questions pertaining to EPIC should be emailed to eere-epichelpdesk@ee.doe.gov.  Include FOA name and number in subject line."]
[3,"All questions and answers pertaining to this FOA will be posted on EPIC within this spreadsheet."]
[4,"DOE will attempt to respond to a question within 3 business days, unless a similar question and answer has already been posted in this spreadsheet. "]
[5,"All questions should be submitted not later than 3 business days prior to the application due date. Questions submitted after this date will not be answered."]
[6,"Questions are assigned a number in accordance with when they are reviewed by DOE.  "]
[7,"Questions are assigned a topic area by DOE when reviewed."]
[]
["TIPS"]
[1,"Applicants may sort questions and answers in the question tabs of this spreadhseet by selecting the drop-down box arrow on the column headers and selecting any of the listed attributes."]
[2,"Applicants may search for questions and/or keywords by holding CTRL+F on the keyboard and typing in a phrase or keyword."]

{"sheet":"FOA CONTENT QUESTIONS","index":1,"n_rows":66,"n_cols":5,"rows_kept":66,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[[1,0,1,4],[0,0,0,4]]}
["ADMINISTRATIVE QUESTION AND ANSWER LOG"]
["DE-FOA0002423 - FY21 BETO Feedstock Technologies and Algae FOA"]
["Question #","Date Submitted","Topic","Question","Answer"]
[1,"2020-12-10","Due Dates","What is the deadline for Topic 2? EPIC and the FOA have two different deadlines. ","The full application deadline for Topic Area 2 is 4/7/2021."]
[2,"2020-12-10","Other","Where can I find the forms and templates for this FOA?","The forms and templates for submitting an application to this announcement will appear under the DE-FOA-0002423 Funding Opportunity Announcement at https://eere-exchange.energy.gov. "]
[3,"2020-12-16","Labs/FFRDCs","Are National Labs (FFRDCs) required to submit an SF-LLL in response to this FOA? ","Prime recipients and subrecipients other than National Labs (FFRDCs) are required to complete and submit SF-LLL, “Disclosure of Lobbying Activities.” National Labs (FFRDCs) are not required to submit a SF-LLL."]
[4,"2020-12-18","Technical Topics","Would it be permitted to submit a system solution against sub-topic 2b that significantly improves productivity with ambient air, while using phagotrophic algae? ","FOA Topic area 2 states that “Applications that propose heterotrophic algae cultivation strategies” are not of interest. The applicant would need to justify why phagotrophy is not heterotrophy. If the cultivation strategy were mixotrophic, a mixture of phototrophic and heterotrophic cultivation, it would be an application of interest."]
[5,"2020-12-21","Technical Topics","Regarding this FOA topic area 1b \"Development of novel methods for rapid/real-time measurements\" If we develop a novel method for the real time rapid measurement, are we expected to test the system within a Waste facility utilizing a conveyor belt system?","No. As stated in the FOA, “For applicants proposing real-time measurements, the sensors are expected to be located on a conveying system and tested at multiple speeds with a justification of the speeds to be tested. If the sensor/sensor array is not to be located on a conveyance, a rationale for an alternative location is required.”"]
[6,"2020-12-22","Technical Topics","For topic 2, would ocean based yield improvements in macroalgae production, for example, via strain selection and/or upwelling, be within scope? ","Ocean based yield improvements in macroalgae production, via strain selection and/or upwelling, are within scope.\n\nThe BETO Algae SOT for areal productivity is based on cultivating microalgae on land-based aquatic cultivation systems and topic productivity metrics are reported in g/m2/day. Because macroalgae is typically cultivated in the ocean, it is anticipated that there could be significant differences in areal productivity than the BETO Algae SOT. The differences are allowable per “Topic Area 2 Requirements for establishing baselines on FOA topics.” Specifically, the topic states the applicant is required to: “Provide the applicant’s initial baseline productivity and composition data from experiments under actual or simulated environmental conditions. Compare the baseline to BETO’s published Algae SOT for areal productivity (see 2020 BETO Algae State of Technology and 2030 areal productivity technical projections Table and Topic Area 2 Metrics). If different, explain the relevance of the applicant’s baseline and why achieving the final and stretch targets will lead to cost-effective biofuels and will improve the state-of-the-art for the algae industry.” \n\nWithin “Topic Area 2 Requirements for specifying the subtopic and improvement emphasis of the application” the topic states that macroalgae is an eligible feedstock and that the applicant is required to “identify whether the application is emphasizing strain and/or cultivation improvement approaches.” Strain selection would be an example of a strain improvement approach, upwelling would be an example of a cultivation improvement approach."]
[7,"2020-12-22","Technical Topics","Does ocean water (e.g. macroalgae cultivation systems in the ocean) count as a \"traditional\" CO2 source in Topic area 2?","Applications that cultivate macroalgae on dissolved CO2 in ocean water qualify should be submitted to subtopic 2B, “Improvements in productivity with Direct Air Capture (DAC) of CO2 from ambient air.”"]
[8,"2020-12-29","Other","For Topic 1, does the allowable budget include facility operational costs to meet the objectives of the grant?","Yes, the allowable budget can include facility (i.e., lab, pilot plant) operational cost as indirect cost, to meet the objectives of cooperative agreement"]
[10,"2020-12-30","Technical Topics","For Topic 2, would applications that propose mixotrophic algae cultivation strategies be permitted?","The FOA states that Topic Area 2 Applications Specifically Not of Interest include “applications that propose heterotrophic algae cultivation strategies.” Mixotrophic algae cultivation strategies are permitted."]
[11,"2020-01-04","Technical Topics","Is it required to test out any novel devices that are developed in an actual waste processing facility (MRF) utilizing an existing waste transport system such as a conveyer belt?","No. As stated in the FOA, “For applicants proposing real-time measurements, the sensors are expected to be located on a conveying system and tested at multiple speeds with a justification of the speeds to be tested. If the sensor/sensor array is not to be located on a conveyance, a rationale for an alternative location is required.”"]
[12,"2021-01-06","Technical Topics","We plan to submit a concept paper for the Feedstock Technologies and Algae FOA, DE-FOA-0002423, specifically under 1a: Measurement of Variability of Key MSW Characteristics within and across Unique MSW Streams. We have a question about how to select characteristics: Should we include all critical characteristics of feedstocks for the conversion technology, or just focus on few of them that have been less investigated?","It is not required that all critical characteristics be measured. The purpose of Subtopic 1a is to provide a characterization that would be useful for the specified conversion technology. The conversion technology and importance of each\nkey characteristic you propose to measure must be clearly explained."]
[13,"2021-01-11","Technical Topics","The FOA states the following requirements for Subtopic 2b. Can you elaborate the language about \"(1) develop new DAC technology that is part of the algae cultivation system or the algae itself\" and \"(2) integrate existing DAC technology with the algae system and develop strategies to overcome integrated performance challenges\" on p19? What does \"new DAC technology that is part of the algal cultivation system or the algae itself\" mean? If an applicant proposes to develop a new DAC technology that concentrates CO2 from ambient air and introduces it to algae system as part of the proposal, is it considered to respond to the Subtopic 2b? Also, how is the statement for (2) about \"integrate existing DAC technology and develop strategies\" different from that for \"development of a new DAC technology\"? On p20, it is stated that developing a new DAC technology is not of interest unless the new technology is the algae cultivation system or algae itself. Does that mean that a new technology that can be integrated with algae system to introduce high CO2 concentration is not of interest? However, if there is an existing DAC technology without a need to develop a new one, can it be proposed to be integrated with algae system? ","Per the topic language, applicants to subtopic 2B are required to “either (1) develop new DAC technology that is part of the algae cultivation system or the algae itself or (2) integrate existing DAC technology with the algae system and develop strategies to overcome integrated performance challenges.” Strategies that develop new DAC technology as part of the algae cultivation system are modifications to cultivation equipment or operations to increase DAC potential of the cultivation systems. Strategies that develop new DAC technology as part of the algae itself are modifications to the organism that increase the net fixation of CO2 into biomass. 2B applications that propose “strategies that integrate existing DAC technology with the algae system and develop strategies to overcome integrated performance challenges” would propose research questions and a strategy to improve the performance of an existing DAC technology (for example, alkaline solvents or functionalized sorbents) with regards to its ability to deliver CO2 to the algae system and achieve topic objects.  Per the topic language, applications specifically not of interest are “Subtopic 2b applications that propose new DAC technology development if the DAC technology is not the algae cultivation system or algae itself.” This means that if an applicant proposes scope to develop a new DAC technology that is not part of the algae cultivation system or the algae itself, the application is not of interest. In general, an example of an application that proposed developing new DAC technology and would not be of interest, would be a strategy that invested significant scope to designing, building, and/or testing a new DAC system that’s core components or operations did not inherently relate to an algae cultivation system or the algae itself."]
[14,"2021-01-14","Concept Paper","Can concept papers be submitted through the EPIC system question and answer process?","Concept Papers should be submitted under the EPIC system when starting an application, and are not able to be submitted via the Q&A process. Any questions related to technical issues when submitting a concept paper into the EPIC system should be directed to eere-epichelpdesk@ee.doe.gov."]
[15,"2021-01-19","Other","There are two topic areas; one is focused on “conventional” algae cultivation, which entails supplying algae with a constant CO2 feed. The other is based on Direct Air Capture (atmospheric CO2). But both approaches have the same target productivity (g/m2/day) and fuel production (GGE/ton biomass) metrics. Was this intentional?","The metrics on algae productivity and biomass quality are the same for subtopics 2A and 2B. The language reads, “Applicants to Topic Area 2 should target a 20% productivity increase over their baseline productivity using strain and/or cultivation improvement approaches under both environmentally simulated and outdoor conditions… Applicants to Topic Area 2 should target an algal biomass quality that translates to at least 85 gallons of gasoline equivalent per ton of biomass” (Emphasis supplied).\n\nFurther details on establishing baselines are available in “Topic Area 2 Requirements for establishing baselines on FOA targets.”"]
[16,"2021-01-19","Technical Topics","On page 20 of FOA DE-FOA-0002423, Topic 2 (APEX), a Table is provided for the Biomass Quality Benchmark.  Will DOE provide the basis for the GGE calculation from biomass measurement composition, for example by relating CHNO elemental composition to GGE, or must the proposer define this calculation basis?","Per Topic Area 2 requirements for establishing baselines on FOA targets, the applicant must “describe the method for determining biomass composition expected to be used in the project” and “provide the project’s minimum and stretch targets.” Topic Area 2 did not prescribe a specific method for determining biomass composition or translating biomass quality to GGE. Therefore, the applicant must justify their calculation basis for determining biomass composition and provide the project’s biomass quality minimum and stretch targets."]
[17,"2021-01-19","Technical Topics","On page 26 of FOA DE-FOA-0002423, Topic 2 (APEX), a Table is provided for the award information.  The Minimum Award size is $2,500,000.  Will lower budgets, for example $1,800,000 over 48 months, be considered?  If so, what is the mechanism for consideration?","For Topic 2, the minimum award size and period of performance are both anticipated. Therefore, an application with a budget lower than the award size minimum (for example $1,800,000) and/or longer than the anticipated period of performance (say 50 months) would be considered for award. The applicant must submit as part of their application a SF424 and a detailed budget justification to assist in the evaluation of the budget and period of performance. "]
[18,"2021-01-19","Technical Topics","On page 16 of FOA DE-FOA-0002423, Topic 2 (APEX), it states that “Propose to work with macroalgae, eukaryotic microalgae, or cyanobacteria, referred to as algae in this FOA.”    Macroalgae are presently not part of the present BETO DISCOVR pipeline.  Is this an issue for Topics 2a/2b? ","Macroalgae are not currently represented in the 2020 BETO Algae SOT; however, applicants proposing to work with macroalgae are still eligible for Topic 2 awards. \n\nPer Topic Area 2’s requirements for establishing baselines on FOA targets, the applicant must compare their baseline productivity with data in the “2020 BETO State of Technology and 2030 areal productivity technical projections Table” and Topic Area 2 metrics. Further if different, the applicant must “explain the relevance of the applicant’s baseline and why achieving the final and stretch targets will lead to cost-effective biofuels and will improve the state-of-the-art for the algae industry.” \n\nTherefore, because macroalgae is not represented in the 2020 BETO Algae SOT, it is anticipated that applicants proposing to work with macroalgae will need to describe the difference in productivity and explain the relevance of their baseline."]
[19,"2021-01-20","Technical Topics","May the baseline productivity for Topic Area 2 be constructed from data published in the literature using the same species and similar climatology?","Per Topic Area 2’s requirements for establishing baselines on FOA targets, the applicant must describe their own “proficiency in culturing algae, especially with their proposed strain(s) of interest, under industrially relevant and actual or simulated climate conditions” and provide their own “initial baseline productivity and composition data from experiments under actual or simulated environmental conditions.” The applicant’s own published and/or unpublished data can be used to state their own initial baseline productivity and composition.\n\nFurther, the applicant is to compare their “baseline to BETO’s published Algae SOT for areal productivity (see 2020 BETO Algae State of Technology and 2030 areal productivity technical projections Table and Topic Area 2 Metrics). If different, explain the relevance of the applicant’s baseline and why achieving the final and stretch targets will lead to cost-effective biofuels and will improve the state-of-the-art for the algae industry.” The applicant can rely on published literature to make this comparison and state the relevance to topic area final and stretch targets.”"]
[20,"2021-01-20","Technical Topics","Would a hybrid concept of using a membrane to separate out CO2 from flue gas and then feeding it to algae for capture and utilization be considered responsive?","Per the topic language, “Applications to Subtopic 2a must propose improvements in productivity through strain improvements and/or cultivation improvements while utilizing traditional methods of delivering CO2 as necessary to support growth.” The described concept would qualify as a traditional method of delivering CO2 and would be responsive for subtopic 2a."]
[21,"2021-01-22","Other","Where can I find the forms and templates for this FOA?","See revised answer to Question #2 above."]
[22,"2021-01-22","Other","Hi, will this FOA migrate to eXCHANGE, and will the deadline be extended. ","Yes - please see the FOA now posted on the Exchange website at https://eere-exchange.energy.gov for more information regarding the FOA modification, and submission due dates."]
[23,"2021-01-26","Technical Topics","We are completing a Concept Paper for the “DE-FOA-0002423” funding opportunity and have 2 questions that need to get your input for clarification,\n\n1. need to confirm that semi-enclosed Photo-Bioreactors built with acrylic materials; i.e. closed systems vs. open systems are acceptable equipment to participate in topic area 2, Algae productivity exceeding expectations. \n\n2. also wanted to confirm that Traditional Carbon Dioxide supply relates to or includes combustion gases, such as Flue gases.  ","Photobioreactors are an applicable cultivation technology for subtopic areas 2a and 2b. Flue gases and other combustion gases are examples of traditional carbon dioxide supply. "]
[24,"2021-01-27","Technical Topics","With respect to Topic 2, both A and B subtopics, must the target areal productivity match or exceed the current SOT?","Topic area 2 has a minimum and stretch targets for areal productivity, that apply to both subtopics A and B, which are described in the “Topic Area 2 Metrics” section and “Topic Area 2 Metrics Table” (page 22 of FOA). For both the minimum and stretch targets, a 20% improvement in areal productivity over the applicant’s baseline, NOT the 2020 BETO Algae SOT, is required.  Applicants are strongly encouraged to read the answer to FOA Question 19 to be reminded of Topic Area 2’s requirements for establishing baselines on FOA targets and comparing differences between the applicant’s baseline and the 2020 BETO Algae SOT."]
[25,"2021-01-29","Technical Topics","I wonder if managing animal manure would be considered as “Measurement of Variability of Key MSW Characteristics within and across Unique MSW Streams","For the purposes of this FOA, animal manure is not considered MSW."]
[26,"2021-02-02","Other","What is the nature of the confidentiality of submitted concept papers under review? We are in the process of securing a patent for our design and are curious as to what extent we can explain the principles of our technology without jeopardizing our intellectual property.","See FOA Sections IV.C.i regarding concept paper requirements, and VIII.D. Treatment of Application Information."]
[27,"2021-02-02","Other","Are there concept papers for reference or a guidline resource?","DOE does not provide templates for concept papers, please see the FOA document section IV.C for more information on the content and form of the concept paper."]
[28,"2021-02-05","Due Dates","What the anticipated timeframe is in which we can anticipate learning whether our proposal is going to be encouraged and/or receive comments on the paper?","It is anticipated that applicants that submit a responsive Concept Paper should receive an encourage/discourage notification around the end of Februrary 2021.\n\nPlease see FOA Section VI.A.ii. Concept Paper Notifications. \"EERE will notify applicants of its determination to encourage or discourage the submission of a Full Application. EERE will post these notifications to EERE Exchange.\" The Concept Paper decision notification message sent out by the EERE Funding Opportunity Exchange website directs applicants to visit the website and open the Concept Paper Details page to see the response."]
[29,"2021-02-08","Technical Topics","Can livestock manure be a source of the biomass in this offer? It appears this is more geared toward a cities' waste stream than rural. Also, our project would be centered on a new type of anaerobic digester; methane to power, reclaiming water and nutrients. Would this be acceptable for the project?","For the purposes of this FOA, livestock manure is not an acceptable feedstock. Projects are required to be focused on characterization of municipal solid waste going into a conversion process (such as anaerobic digestion), rather than the conversion technology itself."]
[30,"2021-02-12","Other","Where can we find the FOA-specific questions for this FOA?","The FOA-specific questions for this FOA will be located under the \"Documents\" section of the posted DE-FOA-0002423 Funding Opportunity Announcment at https://eere-exchange.energy.gov. "]
[31,"2021-02-12","Other","Regarding the SF424 form, is there an way to determine whether the program is subject to review by the state under the Exec Order 12372 process?","DOE cannot advise applicants on how to make that determination. Applicants would need to consult with their legal department to make that decision."]
[32,"2021-02-16","Other","Does this solicitation allow administrative costs to to be charged as direct costs?","Please be advised, DOE cannot make this determination on behalf of an applicant. This must be made in consultation with the applicants accounting department, and in accordance with the applicable federal regulations and GAAP principles."]
[33,"2021-02-24","Other","i need help finding funding. i was wondering if you could help find funding.","Thank you for your interest in DE-FOA-0002423.  Please visit EERE-Exchange.energy.gov for future funding opportunities which may align with you organizations interest. "]
[34,"2021-02-25","Concept Paper","It is clearly stated in the FOA (page 29) that foreign entities are allowed to participate in projects - a waiver is required. We understand that the waiver may or may not be granted, but there is only one domestic partner that can play this same role and they have declined to participate in the project. Accordingly, if this partner is excluded from the project team we no longer have a project. Can you please clarify the statement regarding replacing xxxxx with a US partner?","Please note, DOE will not make project partner determinations at this time. Additional information may be required should your application be selected for an award. Also, please note, DOE will not provide further debriefs of Concept Papers. "]
[35,"2021-03-01","Other","Do foreign collaborators (Subawards) need to have a DUNS registered in SAM prior to submission of the full application, or can that be completed at time of award or before a subaward can be issued? The Prime applicant has a DUNS and is registered in SAM. ","Subawards do not need to have an active DUMS registered in the SAM system prior to the prime full application submission, however an active SAM registration for subawards must be in place before an award can be issued."]
[36,"2021-03-01","Application Content/Format","For topic in file names, do we use just Topic1 or Topic2, or do we include the subtopic as well in the file naming convention? As in 12345678_UChicago_Topic2A_Resumes","The applicable topic/subtopic should be listed in the file naming convention for file names."]
[37,"2021-03-01","Technical Topics","Our project will focus primarily on DAC. Is it ok if a subset of the work in the project also tests growth utilizing concentrated CO2? ","Subtopic 2b has a specific requirement “to include an outdoor cultivation campaign with CO2 supplied from the ambient air or a direct air capture unit.” The proposed work of using concentrated CO2 is outside of the requirements, but if the proposed concentrated CO2 work is limited and the majority of the effort is focused on direct air capture or ambient air would be allowable."]
[38,"2021-03-01","Concept Paper","I am writing to inquire of the status of my concept paper notification.  ","Please see FOA Section VI.A.ii. Concept Paper Notifications. The Concept Paper decision notification message sent out by the EERE Funding Opportunity Exchange website directs applicants to visit the website and open the Concept Paper Details page to see the response. All applicants were notified simultaneously.  Please check any \"junk\" or spam folders for correspondence pertaining to your concept paper. "]
[39,"2021-03-02","Other","Can you clarify on what cooperative agreement this FOA will require? Can we get a draft so that we can review it beforehand? ","Please see the FOA document for items included in the cooperative agreement, and what the cooperative agreement will require."]
[40,"2021-03-02","Technical Topics","1. Can you confirm whether or not the specific requirements around MSW streams under subtopic 1a are also required under subtopic 1b? For example, is the use of a single MSW stream acceptable for subtopic 1b, or are multiple MSW streams preferred?\n2. If the project team was able to procure organic material extracted from landfill-bound MSW via an organic extrusion (OREX) press, would this material be preferred over a regular MSW stream? \n3. Machine learning has wide application, and can you specifically define what part of application do you target for the proposals to utilize? \n\n\n\n\n","Answer #1: There are specific but separate requirements for subtopic 1a and subtopic 1b in the FOA language, and the specific requirements under subtopic 1a are not required under subtopic 1b. Both single MSW stream and multiple MSW streams are accepted for subtopic 1b on the development of novel methods for rapid/real-time measurements, as long as the a baseline is provided for the conventional or current system used to characterize the MSW stream, and the minimum target of 25% characterization throughput improvement over baseline is proposed and justified in the proposal. \nAnswer #2: If the project works on the OREX extracted organic materials characterization for a conversion process, and diverts material away from landfills, it is acceptable. \nAnswer #3: As stated in the FOA, “Rapid analysis technology, in conjunction with artificial intelligence, will be an important aspect of any preprocessing system and will allow for increased feedstock quality and reduced costs of feedstock production. On-line systems also allow for process control systems, which can be employed to improve preprocessing performance when there are variances in attributes”. Expectations of FOA application include, but are not limited to, the incorporation of computational statistics, machine learning algorithms, prediction model development, data mining and analysis, artificial intelligence, etc. It will be up to applicants to define the clear rationale for their system and proposal ideas on the specific application.  \n\n"]
[41,"2021-03-11","Other","Is there a template for the IPMP included in the full proposal?","Please see FOA section VI.B.x for more information on what, if required, an IPMP may cover. DOE does not have a template for the IPMP, as this is not required in submission of a full application."]
[42,"2021-03-10","Other","I am unable to access the EPIC website to locate and distribute the notification of encouragement to file a full application due to technical issues on the DOE's side of the network","As stated in Section IV.A of the FOA, application documents must be submitted via EERE Exchange at https://eere-exchange.energy.gov."]
[43,"2021-03-16","Other","I see specific requirements for techno-economic analysis and lifecycle analysis under Topic 2 requirements; however, I do not see any under Topic 1a or 1b.  I wanted to confirm my understanding there is no requirement for TEA or LCA for Topics 1a or 1b?  Is there perceived benefit if included in a proposal","Your understanding is correct. There is no requirement for TEA or LCA for Topics 1a or 1b. Topic 1b, however, does state that, “A system performance and cost analysis for a proposed system to operate at a commercial scale is required.” For Topic 1a, cost considerations could be included in the required justification of the MSW characteristics to be measured."]
[44,"2021-03-16","Labs/FFRDCs","As a DOE FFRDC with a budget that exceeds $250,000, are we exempt from submitting a subrecipient budget justification since we are required to submit a work proposal (WP)?  Or will we need to submit both?","A Budget Justification is not required for FFRDC partners.  FFRDCs are only required to submit a Field Work Proprosal and Authorization Letter. "]
[45,"2021-03-17","Other","May we change the title of our full application from the originally submitted concept paper?","Yes, the title of the proposal may change between the submission of a Concept Paper and the submission of a full application. "]
[46,"2021-03-17","Other","May we change a subcontractor from concept paper to full proposal submission, add or drop a subcontractor?","Yes, project partners may change from the submission of the concept paper and the full application"]
[47,"2021-03-17","Other","Uniform Guidance allows foreign subrecipients with US federally negotiated rates to use those rates,  If no US negotiated rate exists, does DOE allow foreign organizations to recover indirect costs at the 10% de minimis MTDC rate?","Yes, the regulations allow a Recipient or Subrecipient to elect the de minimis rate if no negotiated billing rate exists.  Ref. 2 CFR 200.414(f)"]
[48,"2021-03-17","Other","If  a Foreign Subrecipient has a negotiated rate with their home government that is higher than the de minimis rate, can they use the differential as Cost Share?","Prior approval must be provided for any under-recovered billing rates to be applied as cost share.  This would require the Subrecipient to provide the negotiated agreement to be reviewed in advance of allowing any under-recovery to be applied towards the cost sharing requirement.  Ref. 2 CFR 200.306"]
[49,"2021-03-17","Other","If the Prime recipient’s actual Indirect Cost Rate is higher than the DHHS Indirect Negotiated Rate,  can the Prime Institution use the differential as Cost Share? If so, do we need prior approval and from whom?","Prior approval from the Grants Officer is required for any under-recovered billing rates to be allowed as cost share.  This would require the Negotiated Rate to reflect a predetermined, fixed, or fixed carry-forward billing rate in order for the under-recovery to be applied towards the cost sharing requirement.  Ref. 2 CFR 200.306."]
[50,"2021-03-17","Other","Could you please clarify the deadline for DE-FOA-0002423? I see a deadline of 4/5/21 on the initial announcement and 4/7/21 in the mod FOA. What is the deadline for the Topic Area 2 of this FOA?","As specified in modification #0003 of the FOA, the deadline for all topic areas for this FOA is 04/07/2021 5:00pm ET."]
[51,"2021-03-17","Other","We have an FFRDC listed as a team member in our proposal, and I see a requirement about getting authorization from the Contracting Officer for FFRDC. How do I determine if FFRDC is a non-DOE/NNSA or DOE/NNSA FFRDC?","Please see FOA section III.E.i of the FOA \"Requirements for DOE/NNSA and non-DOE/NNSA Federally Funded Research and Development Centers Included as a Subrecipient\". Applicants should work with their proposed FFRDC to determine the FFRDC status. "]
[52,"2021-03-22","Other","Is there a technical volume template I can use for this opportunity? ","DOE does not provide templates for the technical volume, please see FOA section IV.D.ii under the Content and Form of the Full Application for Technical Volume elements."]
[53,"2021-03-22","Other","May a subrecipient use the same budget justification template as the prime recipient?","Yes, subrecipients may use the same budget justification form template as the prime recipient."]
[54,"2021-03-25","Other","Last year the deadline for full proposal submissions was extended, largely in recognition of difficulties associated with COVID-19.  Many of those same difficulties persist this year.  Will BETO/DoE consider a similar schedule accommodation in 2021, given that the solicitation implicitly encourages teaming arrangements that can be difficult to coordinate in a 30 day turnaround period?","No, the FOA full application deadline will not be extended, and will remain as indicated in the FOA, at 4/7/2021 at 5pm ET. "]
[55,"2021-03-25","Other","Can you confirm the monthly breakdown of the Budget Periods? There does not appear to be a specific breakdown in the FOA so I interpreted this to be broken out in 12 month periods, but I do see the “Verification” section mentioning 3 month verification periods","Please see FOA section II.A.ii Period of Performance \"EERE anticipates making awards that will run from 24 months up to 48 months in length, comprised of one or more budget periods\".  Please see FOA Section IV.D.ii Technical Volume,  the Workplan and Market Transformation Plan state \"At a minimum, each project must have at least one project-wide Go/No-Go decision point for each budget period (12 to 18-month period) of the project.\"  "]
[56,"2021-03-26","Other","Can you please confirm if the budget periods for the DE-FOA 0002423 Topic Area 1 must follow the Verification stages as indicated in the FOA? More specifically does Budget Period 1 (BP1) must be three months? ","Yes, Budget Period (BP) 1 could be longer than 3 months. \n\nThe length of the other BPs is discussed in the FOA document \"EERE 540.131B: Statement of Project Objectives,\" where it states in section C: \"Go/No-Go Decision Points:  The SOPO should include project-wide go/no-go decision points at the end of each budget period.  A go/no-go decision point is a risk management tool and a project management best practice to ensure that, for the current budget period or period of performance, technical success is definitively achieved and potential for success in future budget periods or periods of performance is evaluated, prior to actually beginning the execution of future budget periods.  Unless otherwise specified in the FOA, the minimum requirement is that each project must have at least one project-wide go/no-go decision point for each budget period (approximately each 12 to 18 month period) of the project.\"  "]
[57,"2021-03-26","Other","We are in the process of writing a response to this FOA.  We have noticed there isn’t a summary slide template provided on the EERE website.  DO we assume correctly that we just need a slide that meets the internal FOA requirements, or is there a slide template located elsewhere we should use?","Please see FOA Section IV.D. Content and Form of the Full Application.  There is no template for the Summary Slide.  Applicants are advised to use the requirements listed on page 49 of the FOA."]
[58,"2021-03-26","Other","My proposal team is interested in applying for Topic 2b with a 3-year project period.  We have three budget periods, one of which has a budget period of 21 months.    Can we have one budget period longer than 18 months?","Yes, a budget period lmay be longer than 18 months."]
[59,"2021-03-26","Other","Should a government-owned, government-operated entity (for example, NETL) be selected for award as a subrecipient, what kind of funding agreement would be leveraged? The solicitation discusses FFRDCs but not GO-GOs specifically.","Typically the funding mechanisms for government-owned, government-operated entities is through the inter-agency funding process."]
[60,"2021-04-02","Application Content/Format","I am assisting a PI with a proposal submission and we were wondering if the SFLLL form had to be the Word version listed on the Funding opportunities page","The SF-LLL should be submitted as a single PDF file as indicated in the Decription section of the Full Application Submission Files under the applicant submission section of EERE Exchange."]
[61,"2021-04-05","Due Dates","Due to the Easter Holiday, our project team has had some difficulty getting timely responses from industry partners with support letters and commitments. As this proposal (Topic 1A) requires substantial collaboration with waste management companies and state institutions across multiple states, we would kindly ask for an extension for the deadline of the full proposal submission to allow our team to have sufficient time to collect signed letters. ","No, the FOA full application deadline will not be extended, and will remain as indicated in the FOA, at 4/7/2021 at 5pm ET. "]
[62,"2021-04-07","Other","I see an 'Edit' button in the EERE Exchange system after previously submitting an application. Can I edit the submission after it's been submitted?","Yes, edits to applications can be made up until the stated FOA full application deadline, however please ensure to to \"re-submit\" the application after making any edits."]
[63,"2021-04-07","Other","We can't sign SF-424 electronically, it only allows us to enter names, no electronic signatures. Our AOR manually signed and scanned the form, and we have uploaded it to the eere-exchange. Is that ok? Or should we enter name and date instead of actual signature?","Yes, a manually signed form by an authorized representative is permissible."]
[64,"2021-04-07","Other","When I submitted my application, I realized that the summary slide should have only 1 page.  I thought I could make multiple pages from p49 of the FOA.  But, I noted it when submitting it from the website.  Is there any way that I can replace the summary slide submitted with the attached 1-page slide?","Edits to applications in the EERE Exchange system after the stated full application deadline in the FOA cannot be made. Any slides in excess of the stated FOA requirements will not be reviewed."]

{"sheet":"Admin Pick List","index":2,"n_rows":17,"n_cols":1,"rows_kept":17,"cut":false,"hidden":true,"merged":[]}
["Pick List"]
[]
["Registration Requirements"]
["Webinar"]
["Concept Paper"]
["Eligibility"]
["Labs/FFRDCs"]
["Foreign Entities/Work"]
["Cost Sharing"]
["Due Dates"]
["Application Content/Format"]
["Intellectual Property"]
["Data Management"]
["Other"]
["U.S. Manufacturing Plan"]
["Application Reviews"]
["Technical Topics"]