{"text_format":"2","workbook":"xlsx","n_sheets":4,"sheets":["INSTRUCTIONS & TIPS","FOA CONTENT QUESTIONS","Sheet1","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 to MHKFOA@ee.doe.gov. "]
[2,"All questions pertaining to EERE Exchange should be emailed to EERE-ExchangeSupport@hq.doe.gov. Include FOA name and number in subject line."]
[3,"All questions and answers pertaining to this FOA will be posted on EERE Exchange 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 spreadsheet 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":65,"n_cols":5,"rows_kept":65,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[[1,0,1,4],[0,0,0,4]]}
["ADMINISTRATIVE QUESTION AND ANSWER LOG"]
["DE-FOA0001837 / Marine and Hydrokinetic Technology Advancement and Data Dissemination"]
["Question #","Date Submitted","Topic","Question","Answer"]
[1,"2018-04-30","Application Content/Format","Our company manufactures high efficiency oil free chiller for building and we are working on developing similar product for marine application. Do you think we could be eligible for this program?","DOE cannot provide advice on whether a Concept Paper should be submitted. Section I of the FOA contains specific information on Areas of Interest as well as Applications Not of Interest."]
[2,"2018-05-01","Application Content/Format","There is NO limit on the number of Concept Papers for this FOA. The limit is only placed on the number of applications, correct?","No, that is not correct. Applicants may submit one Concept Paper and one Full Application per Topic Area."]
[3,"2018-05-03","Eligibility","A question in regards to the number of full applications per topic area. In the case of a university applicant, is the university limited to one full application per topic area or one full application per department/research group/PI?","An Applicant is limited to one Concept Paper and one Full Application per Topic Area. This is true regardless of the nature of the Applicant entity."]
[4,"2018-05-03","Foreign Entities/Work","We would like to partner with a foreign university and I want to make sure I understand the rules for foreign participation before we proceed.  As I read the FOA instructions: Foreign entities (in this case, a university) can participate as subrecipients; We must submit a waiver for performance of work in the U.S. at time of proposal submission which provides justification for why we want to use a foreign entity.","Correct. Note that FOA Appendix C Number 2 contains instructions for preparing a waiver request for work to be performed outside the United States."]
[5,"2018-05-03","Foreign Entities/Work","Can a foreign university provide the cost share?","Yes. See Section III. B. and Appendix A of the FOA for information on cost share."]
[6,"2018-05-08","Application Content/Format","A subset of our technology has been thoroughly tested such that it has achieved TRL 7.  However, a fully-integrated system, i.e. one that comprises all components working together, has never been tested/validated. Thus it could be argued that the fully integrated system has only achieved TRL 3.  The goal of our proposed research program would be to build and test a fully-integrated, prototype-scale version of our technology and thus our question is: “If we were to submit a proposal under Topic Area #1, would it be viewed as meeting the “early stage” criteria?","Topic Area (TA) 1 applications must provide information necessary for a determination that the planned project will materially “advance MHK technologies that will be ready for future testing and validation in the open ocean at sites.”  The criteria are “Techno‐economic potential” and “Design readiness”.  The Applicant should tailor their application to clearly convey how their system’s design readiness can be meaningfully enhanced by an award.  EERE is aware that there is a spectrum of design readiness of current designs, and is looking forward to reviewing applications that detail the design improvements that can be achieved under TA 1 while maintaining high Techno‐economic potential.  "]
[7,"2018-05-09","Webinar","The webinar is scheduled for tomorrow. When will instructions for attending be provided?","A pre-recorded informational webinar will be posted to DOE’s You Tube channel on May 10, 2018. A link will be provided in the summary for this FOA in EERE Exchange when it is posted. In addition, a PowerPoint version of the webinar will be posted under the \"Documents\" heading in the summary for this FOA in EERE Exchange."]
[8,"2018-05-10","Eligibility","Please advise if the following proposed project falls within the scope of FOA under Topic Area 1 (TA1): Early Stage Device Design Research. ","The decision whether to submit an application in response to this FOA lies solely with the Applicant. DOE cannot advise in advance whether an applicant is eligible to apply, or whether a particular concept would be responsive to the FOA. Section I of the FOA contains information on Areas of Interest as well as Applications Not of Interest."]
[9,"2018-05-14","Cost Sharing","Due to the nature of the topics we would propose, we are thinking about proposing the use of same type of internal software and/or tools for different applications. Is it possible to use the same software to match fund different applications (for different topics) when the software is required within the topic? (i.e. can we use the software as match funding in a Topic 1 and Topic 2 application) or match funding needs to contain different tools).","If usage of the software and/or tools is required for both projects; i.e., is included as a necessary cost in the budget for both projects, it can be proposed as cost share for both projects, but only if the value is sufficient to distribute between the projects. For example, if you can document that the value of the software and/or tools usage is $40,000, you may propose $20,000 per project (or any other distribution that equals $40,000). You may NOT propose $40,000 for each project.  In other words, the costs for the software/tools could be pro-rated and charged to each project directly as long as there is a reasonable basis for doing so, such as percentage of time used.  If the software/tools are utilized for multiple projects in addition to the two proposed projects, the costs should be included in the Indirect Rate pool for proper allocation, and should NOT be included as direct costs to the projects.  Section III.B. and Appendix A of the FOA contain more information on cost share."]
[10,"2018-05-14","Application Content/Format","Does a PI have to be directly employed by the Prime Recipient or can the PI, as an example, have a committed, contracted relationship with the Prime, including a commitment of hours to the proposed project?","It is not a requirement that the PI be an employee of the Prime Recipient. The Prime Recipient of an award is responsible for ensuring that all project participants are qualified, and also for ensuring the sufficiency of any contracts or agreements."]
[11,"2018-05-14","Technical Topics","Regarding part B ) of Technology Description, “[Describe] The target level of performance for the proposed technology (applicants should provide technical data or other support to show how the proposed target could be met)”: Is the “proposed technology” being referenced here the device we are proposing to test, or the eventual commercial device we would like to deliver? Are we describing what we want to build with help from EERE, or the full-scale MHK platform we want to build after we conclude the prototyping?","For an existing technology, there is a baseline or existing level of performance which can be measured using a number of different metrics.  Applications should propose research and development that advances the design and improves performance, where testing is completed to validate the performance of the new design.  In most cases, the testing results would be scaled up to full scale where the performance of the ‘eventual commercial device’ is predicted using numerical models.  Metrics would then be used to show the improved performance of the eventual commercial device at full or commercial scale.  LCOE for example, is calculated according to the DOE guidance document and represents system performance and commercial viability. The device you are proposing to test will generate information that allows you to validate numerical models and predict full scale performance.   "]
[12,"2018-05-16","Technical Topics","Is it allowable to propose multiple Wave Energy Converter concepts in a single application to Topic Area 1?","Applications proposing work on a single design concept where a few variations are investigated during optimization are acceptable.  However, applications proposing work on more than one device where the design is completely different are not desired.  In addition, applicants may only submit one application for each topic area.  "]
[13,"2018-05-21","Foreign Entities/Work","1.) If a U.S.-based applicant was to subcontract part of the work to a wholly-owned subsidiary that is based outside of the U.S. what rules apply in terms of the requirement to perform work within the U.S?  2.)  If a U.S.-based applicant was to subcontract part of the work to an unrelated company that is based outside of the U.S. what rules apply in terms of the requirement to perform work within the U.S?","The answer to both questions is the same. See Appendix C Number 2, Waiver for Performance of Work in the United States."]
[14,"2018-05-22","Application Content/Format","I am trying to access https://eere‐exchange.energy.gov to upload a concept paper for Marine and Hydrokinetic Technology Advancement and Data Dissemination (DE‐FOA‐0001837). It seems there is a problem with the website as I cannot open the portal.","The link you entered is correct, but I was not able to access the website by clicking on it either. Please try manually typing in the URL for the website. If that does not work, please contact the Helpdesk - EERE-ExchangeSupport@hq.doe.gov"]
[15,"2018-05-24","Technical Topics","We are designing a large structural component for an existing Wave Energy Converter (WEC) device. Is wave tank or open water testing required for the entire WEC device in BP2? Or is structural testing of the component in a laboratory sufficient to meet the Budget Period (BP) BP2 expected deliverables?  ","Topic Area 1 (TA 1) supports the priority to advance MHK technologies that will be ready for future testing and validation in the open ocean. A structural optimization analysis is required in BP1.  Testing of the system in BP2 should generate the data improving the confidence that the structural optimization analysis was sufficient and that the design readiness of the system was materially matured. The Applicant should tailor their application to clearly convey how their system’s design readiness can be meaningfully enhanced by an award.  "]
[16,"2018-05-24","Technical Topics","If wave tank testing or open water testing is required of the entire device, does the subscale wave device tested need to \"be capable of capturing wave or tidal/current energy and converting it into electricity, drinkable water, or other non‐grid product.\" (as described on page 6 of Topic area 1)? ","Topic Area 1 (TA 1) supports the priority to advance MHK technologies that will be ready for future testing and validation in the open ocean. TA1 applications must provide information necessary for a determination that the planned project will materially “advance MHK technologies that will be ready for future testing and validation in the open ocean at sites.  Budget Period 2 testing does not need to generate the end product (electrical power, desalinated water, etc.,) but it must increase certainty of techno-economic potential of the full system. Applicants should tailor their applications to clearly convey how their system’s design readiness can be meaningfully enhanced by an award.  "]
[17,"2018-05-23","Technical Topics","Topic Area 1 (TA 1) of the FOA allows an alternative LCOW metric for desalination projects. For other non-grid applications where LCOE is not necessarily a relevant measure, can the Applicant propose alternative economic metrics to replace LCOE, such as ‘Total Cost of Ownership’, which may be more appropriate to the market application. Or is LCOE required regardless?","Yes, the LCOE calculation is required.  To establish techno-economic potential, the Applicant is also required to “propose performance metrics tailored to the technology” as stated in Section B TA 1 and as applicable."]
[18,"2018-05-22","Application Content/Format","From the EERE online documents: \"The technology description is limited to 3 pages\" and \"The Concept Paper can also include graphs, charts, or other data (limited to 3 pages)\" Topic 3 does not pertain to the description of a specific technology. Is there a 6 page maximum for the Concept Paper including graphs, charts, and other data? Please advise us of any length restrictions on the Topic 3 Concept Paper.","Per Section IV. C. of the FOA, Concept Papers are limited to a maximum of 1 page for a Cover Page, 3 pages for a Technology Description and 3 pages for an Addendum, a total of 7 pages. The FOA does not prescribe different page limits for Topic Area 3. Applicants submitting Concept Papers for Topic Area 3 should use the 3 pages designated for Technology Description to describe how the proposed project will “ensure that the most up-to-date scientific understanding of environmental impacts will inform and facilitate federal and state regulatory processes, with the ultimate aim of reducing the time and costs of permitting MHK devices.”  Applicant should conform to the content requirements and page requirements in the FOA as applicable. "]
[19,"2018-05-24","Technical Topics","For Topic Area 1 (TA1) it states on page 10: Design readiness of the MHK technologies must be demonstrated in the application by a combination of the following readiness indicators: (a) Prototype design with initial numerical performance modeling completed (b) Hydrodynamic modeling completed (c) Power capture modeling completed (d) Applicant provided metric or readiness indicators tailored to the technology.  Is this stating that that to quality one must have COMPLETED all (a) - (d) tasks?. That is to say a complete hydrodynamic model of the device must have been developed at time of proposal submission.  Or are you asking us to QUANTIFY the readiness of each task completion STATUS. For instance, we may have a prototype but not have completed the hydrodynamic modelling yet.  Are you asking for the status of each readiness indicator only? or that it must have already already been competed at time of proposal submission. ","Topic Area (TA) 1 applications must provide information necessary for a determination that the planned project will materially “advance MHK technologies that will be ready for future testing and validation in the open ocean at sites.”  Section B, page 4 as paginated states “Applicants must establish a baseline techno‐economic potential and design readiness for their system. The application must demonstrate that preliminary design, numerical modeling, and, to the extent practical, scale testing validation has been completed.  This will ensure that the system is ready for Budget Period 1 (BP1) activities.”  Applicants should tailor their applications to clearly convey how their systems' “design readiness” is prepared for BP1 activities and how the proposed systems can be meaningfully enhanced by an award.  "]
[20,"2018-05-24","Application Content/Format","This FOA includes the following section regarding limitation on proposal submissions from each prime institution/ applicant: Limitation on Number of Concept Papers and Full Applications Eligible for Review:  Applicants may only submit one Full Application for each topic area of this FOA. If an applicant submits more than one Full Application to the same topic area, EERE will only consider the last timely submission for evaluation. Any other submissions received listing the same applicant for the same topic area will be considered noncompliant and not eligible for further consideration. This limitation does not prohibit an applicant from collaborating on other applications (e.g., as a potential Subrecipient or partner) so long as the entity is only listed as the prime applicant on one Full Application submitted under this FOA.  Can you advise this limitation applies to both concept paper submissions and full proposal submissions or if this limitation applies only to full proposal submissions? ","See answer #2 "]
[21,"2018-05-24","Technical Topics","For Topic Area 1 (TA1) on page 9 it states: The goals of this Topic Area are to support early‐stage research to (1) design high techno‐economic potential prototype next‐generation wave and tidal/current systems, and (2) mature the readiness of the system designs for future larger scale testing. Whilst on page 10 it specifically says for budget period 1: Applicants should outline the tasks required to progress the device concept from an early‐stage prototype/design to a larger‐scale prototype system. It would appear that the budget period 1 is focused  on moving existing designs from the small scale prototype to a larger scale prototype and therefore very early stage ideas will not qualify.  However, the goal (1) seems to indicate that both mature ideas as well as \"early-stage research\" are wanted. Could you clarify as I don't see how the budget requirements connect with goal (1).   Can you clarify?","See answer #6"]
[22,"2018-05-24","Technical Topics","Are you able to state what TRL level MHK devices would be considered eligible for this solicitation. I did not see this stated anywhere.  This might clear up my misunderstanding.","See answer #6"]
[23,"2018-05-25","Application Content/Format","I reviewed the instructions for the this FOA and page 49 lists a calculation addendum. Can you clarify if there are any page limits for that addendum?","There is not a page limit on the Calculation Addendum. EERE is looking forward to reviewing applications where Applicants’ quantitative claims made in the Technical Volume are clarified in the Calculation Addendum. This will assist the reviewers’ assessment in several ways including (1) how well the Applicant understands their quantitative claims and (2) assess if the proposed technology is based on sound scientific principles (see Section I.C Applications Specifically Not of Interest).  Section IV.D.xv provides additional information on the Calculation Addendum and does not set a page limit for the Addendum. No additional narrative should be included in the Calculation Addendum. Any page with narrative in the Calculation Addendum will be removed prior to being provided to the reviewers. "]
[24,"2018-05-29","Application Content/Format","I am writing to ask for information on the FOA “Marine and Hydrokinetic Technology Advancement and Data”, as specified in the object.  As to par. VIII “Other Information”, section J “Requirement for Full and Complete Disclosure”, could you please confirm that “full and complete disclosure of all information requested” refers to those information that are required for the application process (e.g. information concerning the applying company, details of the points of contact, etc.)?","Section VIII. J. of the FOA refers to any and all information that is required for the application process.  See Section VI. B. vii. of the FOA for specific “Applicant Representations and Certifications”."]
[25,"2018-05-29","Due Dates","  I am trying to coordinate team members in order to apply for the above referenced DOE FOA.  It's proving to be difficult due to vacations, graduation, etc.  Is there any way I could submit a letter of intent before this Friday's deadline for the Concept Paper submission date?  Or could I get an extension for submitting the required documents?  I'm afraid I don't have enough time to apply by May 31.  Please help.","EERE does not plan at this time to extend the deadline for Concept Papers or for Full Applications."]
[26,"2018-05-29","Application Content/Format","Under the EERE portal, there are 4 listed documents under required application documents with the header “Full Application” I read this as these are only required for the submittal of the full application. Is my interpretation correct?","Yes, that is correct."]
[27,"2018-06-01","Application Content/Format","\nI understand we may submit a calculation addendum to support claims in the Technical Volume. 1) Should this be uploaded as a separate file, or as extra pages at the end of the 20 page Technical Volume? 2) If as a separate file, can it be in Excel (to help reviewer follow it)?\n\n","See the table in Section IV.D. i. and the narrative in Section IV. D. xv. of the FOA. The Calculation Addendum is required for Topic Areas 1 and 2 (only) and should be uploaded as a PDF using the naming convention in the table. "]
[28,"2018-06-14",null,"We have submitted a concept paper on May 31st and would like to know how to proceed regarding the full proposal. Please could you let us know whether you officially plan to invite or not to move forward with the full proposal? If yes, when should we expect that communication from DOE?","EERE will encourage a subset of applicants to submit Full Applications. Other applicants will be discouraged from submitting a Full Application. An applicant who receives a “discouraged” notification may still submit a Full Application. The encourage/discourage notifications for Concept Papers will be posted on EERE Exchange around June 19, 2018. Please monitor EERE Exchange around this timeframe to view the notification. "]
[29,"2018-06-18","Application Content/Format","The instructions for the EERE_335_Budget_Justification for the FOA state that vendors, including contractors,  who provide $250,000 or more of project costs must submit a vendor quote.  How can an applicant meet the vendor quote requirement if the project scope includes development work for a PTO design and the fabrication of a PTO by a vendor/contractor with a cost >$250k when a detailed design, which is to be part of the proposed project,  is required by a vendor in order to provide a quote?  Please advise.","A successful Applicant will be required to provide a quote for a vendor/contractor expected to receive $250,000 or more before an award budget can be approved.  For the purpose of completing the EERE 335 Budget Justification for an application, if you are not able to secure/provide a quote, please provide a best estimate based on your experience and your current expectations of the work."]
[30,"2018-06-19",null,"How does an applicant get insight into the lack of programmatic interest in the concept paper if the applicant was “Discouraged” from submitting a full application?","Reviewer Comments are now available for Concept Paper Submissions under DE-FOA-0001837: Marine and Hydrokinetic Technology Advancement and Data Dissemination in addition to Encourage/Discourage results.  Please log in to EERE Exchange to review the Comments related to your Encourage/Discourage Notification."]
[31,"2018-06-20",null,"We have compared our concept paper very carefully to the FOA requirements and without any explanatory comments in the response we are so confused as to why it was discouraged that we suspect there may have been a clerical error and it may have been marked \"discourage\" when actually it was meant to be marked \"encourage\".  Could you please double check the response for the following concept paper and let us know if it is truly a \"discourage\" or if it should be changed to \"encourage\"? ","EERE has established standard comments that address the majority of concerns and areas of improvement.  This standardization enables EERE to maintain consistency and fairness for all applicants with regard to the level of feedback provided. Reviewer comments are provided as written and DOE does not provide additional or follow-up comments."]
[32,"2018-06-21",null,"Would you be able to share the Terms and conditions associated with the FOA 0001837?","Documents associated with a “Model Cooperative Agreement”, including Special Terms and Conditions, can be found about halfway down the webpage here - https://www.energy.gov/eere/funding/eere-funding-application-and-management-forms.  These are templates and, as noted, the final documents can vary significantly depending on the award and the performing organization."]
[33,"2018-06-22","Application Content/Format","Can you please confirm that the correct template to use for the SOPO is the one titled  statement_of_project_objectives_eere_303´ found on the energy.gov website? The link prescribed in the Marine and Hydrokinetic Technology Advancement and Data Dissemination document for this did not function and I was unable to locate a SOPO template within the exchange portal.","Please use the template versions of required documents available on EERE Exchange for this FOA. Find DE-FOA-0001837 in the list on the EERE Exchange homepage and click on the FOA number or name to go to the summary. Click on “View Required Application Documents” under the “Required Application Documents” heading for a list of all template documents required for this FOA. "]
["34","2018-06-24","Application Content/Format","Please elaborate on the distinction between \"description\" and \"narrative\" regarding the calculation addendum: The FOA states that the calculations on which the performance claims are based need to be detailed in the calculation addendum, where \"Descriptions of the calculations, data, and figures are required\". It goes on to say that \"No additional narrative should be included in the  Calculation Addendum. Any page with narrative in\nthe Calculation Addendum will be removed prior to being provided to the reviewers.\" . Some examples of what is considered \"narrative\" rather than \"description\" would help. Or an example of a calculation addendum that meets these requirements. Or, approaching the issue from the other end: Would a typical section from a scientific publication that would be titled \"Numerical Approach\", containing a combination of equations, description, tables and figures be acceptable for inclusion in this addendum, or would the text portion explaining the equations etc. be considered \"narrative\" and removed  (thus likely rendering the remainder incomprehensible to the reviewers)?\n","In the calculation addendum, the merit reviewers may benefit from a description that adds clarity to a calculation, data, or figure. Please add a description as necessary to aid the merit reviewers’ assessment of the applicant’s quantitative claims.  Any discussion including but not limited to the technical merits of the proposed technology or proposed project belongs in the technical volume and counts against page count.  Also, see answer #23.  "]
[35,"2018-06-26","Application Content/Format","We are working with several partners – an FFRDC, two other educational institutions, a non-profit, and a company. Our organization will be serving as the lead, or prime, applicant. Are there any guidelines or requirements regarding the budget breakdown among the partner organizations? As the lead, do we need to make sure we have the highest percentage of the budget? Any guidance provided is appreciated.","The FOA does not prescribe a certain minimum or maximum percentage of the budget that must be assigned to the Applicant/Prime Recipient or other project participants except for the following reference to FFRDCs. Per Section III. E. 6. of the FOA, “The scope of work to be performed by the FFRDC may not be more significant than the scope of work to be performed by the applicant.”  See Section IV. D. of the FOA for requirements regarding documentation of participant budgets."]
[36,"2018-06-26","Technical Topics","Would it be permissible to conduct 1/50 scale testing in BP1 in order to do some risk mitigation and get some preliminary feedback during the design process?","Applications must demonstrate that preliminary design, numerical modeling, and, to the extent practical, scale testing validation have already been completed for the proposed technology. Applicants may propose scale testing in Budget Period 1 to the extent that it is necessary for and directly supports the Budget Period 1 design readiness objectives outlined in Section I.B of the FOA."]
[37,"2018-06-26","Cost Sharing","One of our partners has a test site that is integral to the proposed project. The partner has indicated that they have a fixed cost of $60,000 associated with use of their test site. They would like to reduce that cost to $50,000 and count the difference ($10,000) as inkind cost share. Is this allowable?","Per the FOA, Vendors/Contractors may not provide cost share. If the “partner” is a Subrecipient, and can document the stated full value of use of the test site, the full value should be listed in the appropriate cost category tab within the EERE 335 Budget Justification, and the portion of that amount being proposed as cost share should be included in the Cost Share tab."]
[38,"2018-06-28","Due Dates","I have been watching for an announcement that DOE is ready to receive Letters of Intent for the subject project, but I must have missed the announcement. Can I have the instructions and still propose on the project?","Funding Opportunity Announcement (FOA) DE-FOA-0001837 was posted to the EERE Exchange website on 4/30/2018 and the deadline for submission of Concept Papers was 5/31/2018. Per the FOA, an eligible Concept Paper must have been submitted by the deadline in order for a Full Application to be submitted. You may want to monitor the EERE Exchange website on a regular basis to see if there are opportunities that your organization is interested in and eligible to apply for. All of EERE’s RFIs, NOIs and FOAs are posted there. Note that at the top of the list of postings on the homepage there is a dropdown that allows you to select the Program you are interested in."]
[39,"2018-06-28","Application Content/Format","We have received ‘Encouraged’ status on our recently filed preliminary Grant Application under the referenced entity. Is it possible to change the Lead Organization with one of the current Team Members, after the full application submission? ","The FOA does not prohibit changing the Successful Applicant to a different team member after the application is submitted. If the application is chosen for negotiation of an award and the Successful Applicant wants to propose a different Team Member as the Prime Recipient, the Applicant can request that the award be made to that Team Member, provided that no teaming partners or technical expertise are impacted by the transfer. A request for transfer would be subject to a review process and approval is not guaranteed."]
[40,"2018-07-02","Application Content/Format","Could you please tell me to whom the CO authorization letter should be addressed for the subject FOA?  I'm helping compose the CO letters.","Please address the letter to \"DOE Contracting Officer\" or \"To Whom It May Concern.\" "]
[41,"2018-07-04",null,"We welcome the encouragement to submit a full bid.  In reviewing the decisions we note there seems to have only been one reviewer comment on our concept paper.  Is this correct as there were no feed-back type comments?","Yes, this is correct.  Descriptive, detailed feedback is not provided at the Concept Paper stage.  "]
[42,"2018-07-06","Application Content/Format","If our team uses pre-approved GSA rates, that are currently being used in other DOE funded projects, for the budget  justification which don't include fringe benefit rates, would our submission be considered compliant? ","For purposes of this application, you may use those rates and your application will be considered compliant. If selected for award negotiations, all rates will be evaluated for allowability and reasonableness."]
[43,"2018-07-06","Technical Topics","The FOA only discusses testing at less than full-scale. For certain applications, e.g., sensors, commercial-scale and required performance is significantly smaller/less than other non-grid applications, e.g., desalinization. Is full-scale testing allowed if an applicant can demonstrate that it is appropriate given the application, test site, and design readiness?","As indicated in Section I.B (page 6 of the FOA), for Topic Area 1 “The physical scale of the system to be tested in a wave tank or open water is anticipated to be 1/30th to 1/10th scale; however, the scale should be proposed and justified by the applicant in order to meet Topic Area 1 objectives.” For Topic Area 2, as indicated in Section I.B (page 10 of the FOA),  “The scale of the prototype PTO and control system should be large enough to allow for results to be accurately scaled up to understand performance of a full scale system. In some cases, full scale or near full scale prototypes may be necessary.”"]
[44,"2018-07-06","Technical Topics","Clarification is requested regarding techno-economic metrics to be supplied in the application and the use of the term “baseline”. The FOA uses the term ‘baseline’ with regard to both metrics (“baseline techno‐economic potential”) and the pre-existing technology concept (“baseline technology”) on which “design readiness” is based in the application. Does “baseline techno‐economic potential” refer to a single set of targeted metrics for just the proposed technology? Said a different way, are the metrics to be provided in the application just for the device to be tested in BP2?","Per FOA, Section I.B “MHK technologies need to maintain high techno‐economic potential, defined as technical feasibility and cost competitiveness for the target market, while the technology is matured during the project duration. Also, see FOA Question/Answer #11: “For an existing technology, there is a baseline or existing level of performance which can be measured using a number of different metrics.  Applications should propose research and development that advances the design and improves performance, where testing is completed to validate the performance of the new design.  In most cases, the testing results would be scaled up to full scale where the performance of the ‘eventual commercial device’ is predicted using numerical models.  Metrics would then be used to show the improved performance of the eventual commercial device at full or commercial scale.” "]
[45,"2018-07-06","Application Content/Format","We plan to use faculty salary and fringe as part of our cost share.  Since the fringe are included in the on the same sheet in the EERE 335 Budget Justification (tab b. Fringe), will that fringe be included in the cost share calculations?","Salary and fringe benefits costs may be proposed as cost share. The full estimates of salary and  fringe benefits costs should be entered in the Personnel and Fringe cost category tabs of the EERE 335 Budget Justification, and the amount of those costs being proposed as cost share should be entered in the Cost Share tab."]
[46,"2018-07-10","Technical Topics","The FOA specifies that for a 3-year total project period, each Budget Period should be 18 months. Is it permissible to have a 1-year Budget Period 1 and a 2-year Budget Period 2?","Applications should comply with the timeframes specified in the FOA.  If selected for negotiation of an award, exact start date and time frame for each budget period will be discussed as part of the negotiation process."]
[47,"2018-07-10","Technical Topics","Section I.B of the FOA describes the metrics that are required within each proposal.  The first bullet on numbered page 5 states: “Levelized Cost of Energy (LCOE) and Levelized Cost of Water (LCOW) if applicable”. For low-power systems, LCOE isn’t an applicable measure with respect to the openei.org LCOE guidance discussed in Appendix E, e.g., the required array must produce 260,000MWh/yr. For devices producing a few hundred watts of power, this will not provide a meaningful metric. Clarification is requested that the “if applicable” wording applies to both LCOE and LCOW in that bullet and that alternative metrics can be provided. Alternatively, can an LCOE metric be provided using application-relevant criteria as long as this calculation and assumptions are outlined in the Calculation Addendum? \n","TA1 of the FOA is intended to advance wave and current energy converters that have the potential to become \"cost competitive for the target market\". As such, LCOE for the device should be reported at a deployment scale (i.e. # of MWh/year and device) at which the technology will be deployed/sold commercially. The LCOE reporting guidance is most relevant for technologies that are intended to produce electricity at the utility scale. If your device is intended to produce power at a smaller scale or for a non-electric utility market, please report LCOE using your proposed \"LCOE metric\" and justify why this metric is most relevant to your technology."]
[48,"2018-07-11",null,"1. Please advise the arrangements for claiming of funds from DOE.  Are claims made monthly, against milestones or at the end of a budget period?  Is there a guidance document on procedure?  ","Payment procedures will vary by award and will be specified in the Special Terms and Conditions for the successful applicant. In all cases, submission of invoices “should coincide with the Recipient’s normal billing pattern, but not more frequently than every two weeks.”  "]
[49,"2018-07-11",null,"2. If subcontracting to affiliates, is it permissible for the affiliate to invoice at commercial rates?","Please review the information on subrecipient and contractor relationships found at the top of the Contractual tab within the EERE 335 Budget Justification and in 2 CFR 200.330 Subrecipient and contractor determinations. In the case of an affiliate or subsidiary, if it is the prime recipient’s normal practice to pay a commercial rate to its affiliate, the DOE Contracting Officer would have to review and determine whether that would constitute the charging of a fee or profit by the prime recipient or its subrecipient, which is not allowed under Federal awards."]
[50,"2018-07-13",null,"Whilst there is a specification for the typeface, font size and margins for the SOPO, there does not seem to be any specification for the Technical Volume.  Please confirm that for the Technical Volume, we may use any legible typeface / font combination (e.g. Calibri 10pt) and that margins may be less than 1 inch providing there is reasonable space for printing / binding.","Per Section IV.A. of the FOA, “All pages must be formatted to fit on 8.5 x 11 inch paper with margins not less than one inch on every side. Use Times New Roman typeface, a black font color, and a font size of 12 point or larger (except in figures or tables, which may be 10 point font). . . . .”"]
[51,"2018-07-13",null,"The solicitation indicates that all “requested documentation (e.g., a Federally‐approved rate agreement) be included with the Budget Justification Workbook. However, the budget justification workbook is uploaded in excel and the negotiated rate agreement is in pdf. Is there a specific place you would like to see the negotiated indirect cost rate agreement attached/uploaded?","If selected for an award, applicants will be required to submit their negotiated rate agreement at that time.  For this application, you may submit only the EERE 335 Budget Justification.   "]
[52,"2018-07-13",null,"On some of the required documents it asks for an, \"award number,\" and on the SOPO it asks for a, \"mod number.\" These numbers are not applicable yet correct as we have not received the award? Please advise.","Please use the Control Number assigned to you by EERE Exchange."]
[53,"2018-07-16",null,"For TA1, we have included a written description of the model, assumptions and setup that provided the inputs to the techno-economic metric calculations in the ‘Calculation Addendum’ . Is this considered acceptable content or “narrative” that must not be included.","Calculation Addendum should provide calculations and data to support quantitative claims made in the Full Application. It is a supporting document and should not include information that is requested in the technical volume.  See also Q&A #34."]
[54,"2018-07-16",null,"Can The form SF-424 be signed digitally? Or is a wet signature required?","Please either use a certified electronic signature or print and sign the form."]
[55,"2018-07-17",null,"We have significant equipment available from a non-US affiliate which can be loaned to the project.  For example electro-hydraulic test equipment that would otherwise cost the project a large sum to procure.  Please confirm (1) that contribution of equipment from non-US sources is allowable as cost share and (2) how such a contribution would be valued.  Is this the avoided cost to the project (i.e. the purchase cost less the disposal receipt per 2CFR200-312), or some other notional lease value for which there is no market precedent?","(1) Contribution from non-US sources is allowable. (2) Please carefully review 2 CFR 200.306. "]
[56,"2018-07-19",null,"Is there a decided date when applicants will receive reviewer’s comments on the full application submissions?","It is anticipated that reviewer comments will be published in EERE Exchange on August 17-20. As posted in the FOA, the expected submission deadline for replies to reviewer comments is 5:00 pm EST on Wednesday, August 22nd.”"]
[57,"2018-08-01",null,"Is there a known review period for DE-FOA-0001837 final submissions?","Full Applications are currently in review. Expected Submission Deadline for Replies to Reviewer Comments is 8/22/2018. Applicants should anticipate having approximately three (3) business days to submit Replies to Reviewer Comments. Expected Date for EERE Selection Notifications is September 2018."]
[58,"2018-08-20",null,"We are responding to reviewers comments on our DE-FOA-0001837 submission. An identified weakness was two missing letters of support. One of these we received before submission, but somehow neglected to upload. Or the upload failed and we did not notice an error message.These letters of support will take up two of our three page response limit. Question: Can letters of support still be uploaded through EERE exchange, and if not, can they be excluded from our three page limit?","You cannot submit letters of support to your originally submitted application. You can either upload them as part of your Reply to Reviewer comments (as part of 3 allowed pages), or submit a summary reply to a reviewer comment summarizing that you have those letters secured."]
[59,"2018-10-04",null,"I would like to be informed of the revised timeline for the DE-FOA-0001837: Marine and Hydrokinetic Technology Advancement and Data Dissemination. We submitted a full application and have not yet received a final decision.","You will receive a formal letter by email informing you whether or not you have been selected for negotiation of award. We anticipate the letters to be emailed at the end of November."]
[60,"2018-11-30",null,"Is there a new award announcement / notification date now that the old one has passed?","We now anticipate notifications will be sent by mid-December. "]
[61,"2018-12-15",null,"I wanted to follow up on the below FOA. As I understand the award notification was supposed to be by the 15th and looking to see if you extended the date?","Notifications are expected to be sent on or before January 15, 2019. Thank you for your patience."]
[62,"2019-01-09",null,"Will we get a brief on the decision process and why we were not selected, so we can better prepare going forward?","DOE does not provide individual debriefs to applicants.   The Merit Review Strengths and Weaknesses provided to applicants via EERE Exchange serves as the official debrief. "]

{"sheet":"Sheet1","index":2,"n_rows":0,"n_cols":0,"rows_kept":0,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[]}

{"sheet":"Admin Pick List","index":3,"n_rows":15,"n_cols":1,"rows_kept":15,"cut":false,"hidden":true,"merged":[]}
["Pick List"]
[]
["Registration Requirements"]
["Webinar"]
["Eligibility"]
["Labs/FFRDCs"]
["Foreign Entities/Work"]
["Cost Sharing"]
["Due Dates"]
["Application Content/Format"]
["Intellectual Property"]
["Data Management"]
["U.S. Manufacturing Plan"]
["Application Reviews"]
["Technical Topics"]