{"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 to  AMOEmergingResearch@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 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":132,"n_cols":4,"rows_kept":132,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[[48,2,49,2],[48,3,49,3],[48,0,49,0]]}
["ADMINISTRATIVE QUESTION AND ANSWER LOG"]
["DE-FOA-0001465: Advanced Manufacturing Projects for Emerging Research Exploration "]
["Question #","Date Submitted","Question","Answer"]
[1,"2016-12-23","How do I participate in the Jan 05 webinar?","The Informational Webinar mentioned in the FOA will be held on January 5, 2017 at 1:00 PM ET Eastern Standard Time. To participate in the Information Webinar, please click or copy and paste this link in your browser for registration: https://attendee.gotowebinar.com/register/7609726952255956994"]
[2,"2016-12-27","Would chemical anti-counterfeiting technology for additive manufacturing be potentially relevant for this procurement? ","Potential applicants to this FOA must determine for themselves whether to submit a Concept Paper or Full Application in response to this Funding Opportunity Announcement (FOA).  Potential applicants should carefully review the Topic Areas described in this FOA and determine whether or not their proposed project is responsive to one of the topics.  If an applicant submits a Concept Paper, feedback in the form of an encourage or discourage determination to submit a Full Application will be provided (please see Section VI.A.ii of the FOA).  Please note this funding opportunity is focused on clean energy manufacturing in advanced materials and processes.  Concept Papers and Full Applications should therefore include the energy impact of the technology being proposed in order to be considered as responsive.  It is important to understand that, while additive manufacturing itself can provide significant energy impacts in certain applications, applicants justifying incremental improvements to additive manufacturing processes (or to any clean energy process) should not ascribe the entire energy benefit of the underlying technology to the incremental advance."]
[3,"2016-12-28","I have a question about an eligibility issue for your new FOA DE-FOA-0001465 (Advanced Manufacturing Projects for Emerging Research Exploration). So the applicants must be US citizens/permanent residents prior to the time of submission of the concept paper, or the full proposal, or the time of the award announcement?","Individuals applying to this FOA must be U.S. citizens and lawful permanent residents. The applicant must meet eligibility requirements at the time the Full Application is submitted. See Section III of the FOA to reference additional information on Eligibility Information. "]
[4,"2017-01-03","I am writing regarding the topic/subtopic structure in DE-FOA-0001465 Advanced Manufacturing Projects for Emerging Research Exploration.\n\nSpecifically, if I would like to propose a novel process for making a metal with greatly reduced cost, energy and emissions, it is not clear to me which Topic Area and Subtopic to use.  There is no Subtopic in Topic Area 2 Advanced Processes which would seem to cover this.  And while Subtopic 1.1 describes the example of steelmaking, its presence under Topic Area 1 suggests that it only covers \"Advanced Materials\", as opposed to advanced manufacturing of existing bulk commodity materials.\n\nCan you please clarify which subtopic would be best for such a technology, or whether it falls outside the scope of this FOA?\n","For Subtopic 1.1, steel is one example of an advanced materials system and, while it is of particular interest, process advances for the clean energy manufacturing of other advanced materials systems could similarly be responsive to Subtopic 1.1."]
[5,"2017-01-04","There is some chance now that I will not be able to attend the Informational Webinar. Will the slides presented be available for download after the webinar? Will an audio recording be available?","Yes, the webinar slides will be available to download in the “DOCUMENTS” section of this FOA in EERE Exchange. An audio recording of the webinar will be available in the form of a link at the bottom of the FOA description in EERE Exchange. The DOE will post the webinar slides and provide a link of the audio recording for the Informational Webinar within a few days of the scheduled webinar. "]
[6,"2017-01-05","I believe I have a promising technology relevant to subtopic 1.3 and want to submit a concept paper. In preparing to form a team, I’d like to receive some clarification on the final goals and deliverables. My idea is appropriate for a Tier 1 project, I believe, and will focus on the development of novel materials for thermal energy extraction. Would a Tier 1 project be required to demonstrate a full system or is it acceptable to focus on the innovative components and materials while clearly showing a feasible path to system integration?  ","Please see the definition of a Tier 1 project in Section 1.A of the FOA including the deliverables requested. Demonstration of a full system is not required. "]
[7,"2017-01-05","Does the Advanced Manufacturing Projects for Emerging Research Exploration allow research proposals in the area of hydrogen processing?","The FOA has Subtopic 2.1, Approaches to Cost‐Effective Hydrogen Use in Manufacturing Processes, which requests applications to research use of hydrogen in manufacturing processes.  Note that the subtopic is not necessarily to reduce the cost of hydrogen generation, but rather to explore options for the potential use of hydrogen feedstock.  The applicant will need to justify how their proposed project is responsive to this subtopic and whether to submit a Concept Paper and Full Application.  "]
[8,"2017-01-05","Is a cost share required for university submissions whether as the lead applicant or as a sub-contractor?","Cost share of 20% of the total project costs is required under this FOA, regardless of the entity type of the applicant. Each Project Team is free to determine how best to allocate the cost share requirement among the team members. The amount contributed by individual Project Team members may vary, as long as the cost share requirement for the project as a whole is met. Although the cost share requirement applies to the project as a whole, including work performed by members of the project team other than the Prime Recipient, the Prime Recipient is ultimately responsible for ensuring the full cost share contribution is met. See Section III.B of the FOA to reference additional information regarding cost sharing requirements."]
[9,"2017-01-05","I would like to ask if the following topics overlap with the topics that are of interest for DE-FOA-0001465:\n\n1) Advanced manufacturing methods for engineered substrates that enables high yield GaN epitaxy enabling reliable GaN devices\n2) GaN transistors for high-temperature/high-radiation environments with ability to withstand extended thermal cycling\n\nWe will be thankful for your comments to help clarify the above questions.\n","Potential applicants to this FOA must determine for themselves whether to submit a Concept Paper or Full Application in response to this Funding Opportunity Announcement (FOA).  Potential applicants should carefully review the Topic Areas described in this FOA and determine whether or not their proposed project is responsive to one of the topics.  If an applicant submits a Concept Paper, feedback in the form of an encourage or discourage determination to submit a Full Application will be provided (please see Section VI.A.ii of the FOA).  Also, please note that EERE is currently funding the PowerAmerica Institute (https://www.poweramericainstitute.org/) whose focus includes GaN devices.  We encourage you to contact this Institute to explore collaboration opportunities.    "]
[10,"2017-01-05","I just participated in the webinar but could not get a change to ask \nquestions directly. We are forming a lab - Pao Sustainable Engineering \nand Materials Lab in Columbia University and were excited to learn this \nopportunity. One technology our lab is developing fits this call but I \nhave some concerns. I hope we can reach you by email in this manner with \nthe following questions:\n\nQuestion 10.1: We are working on manufacturing some thermal energy storage materials with cementitious materials, which might be covered by Subtopic 1.1 – Innovative Advanced Materials Manufacturing for Clean Energy. However, our particular materials have not been mentioned in the presentation or FOA. I am wondering if this solicitation is open to all Advanced Materials Manufacturing for Clean Energy or just focus on those that were mentioned?\n\nQuestion 10.2: Regarding to Tier 1 (TRL 2-3) or Tier 2 (TRL 3-5) options, our work is in Tier 2 but our plan is a bit ambitious: we would like to spend 6-9 months for proof of concept and then spend 24~30 months to push it from the lab to field applications toward full commercialization. Shall our plan be responsive to this call or shall we split our future work into several phases but use only one phase to compete for this fund with life cycle limited to TRL 3-5?\n\n\n\n","Response 10.1: Per the FOA, Subtopic 1.1 “will accelerate the development of new, high performance materials systems for clean energy applications.”  There are examples of materials listed in the FOA, however it is not all inclusive.  Applicants will need to support how their projects are responsive to the Topic Areas in the FOA. DOE will provide feedback to Concept Papers submitted in the form of an \"encourage\" or \"discourage\" notification to submit a Full Application.  \n\nResponse 10.2: Applicants should follow the prescribed limitations in the FOA including TRLs for the application's Tiers to be considered responsive.  As part of their application, applicants are requested to show their plans for commercialization after the project is completed. "]
[11,"2017-01-05","Are topics in additive manufacturing included or excluded in this solicitation?","Applicants need to support how their project is responsive to the Topic Areas described in the FOA. Feedback will be provided in response to Concept Papers in the form of an \"encourage\" or \"discourage\" notification to submit a Full Application. Also, applicants need to clearly explain the incremental benefits of their improvements over existing technology. \n\nPer Section III.G of the FOA, “EERE will not make eligibility determinations for potential applicants prior to the date on which applications to this FOA must be submitted. The decision whether to submit an application in response to this FOA lies solely with the applicant.”\n\n"]
[12,"2017-01-05","Can we submit a proposal to target two topics (topic 1.3 and topic 2.4)?","Yes. An Applicant can submit one application per Topic Area.  "]
[13,"2017-01-05","Please clarify what are the limits of the Total Cost of a Tier 1 or Tier 2 proposal.  On page 2 of the FOA it describes: \n\nFor Tier 1: DOE Federal Funding Share Range of $250,000 ‐ $1,000,000.\n\nFor Tier 2: DOE Federal Funding Share Range of $750,000 ‐ $2,500,000.\n\nMy assumption is that these are the limits of the Federal Share and so the total cost limit of a Tier 1 program would be $1,000,000 (Fed) + $250,000 (20% Cost share) for a total of $1,250,000.  Is this correct? \n","The funding range limits listed in your question (and on pg. 2 of the FOA) for Tier 1 and Tier 2 applications only represent the DOE federal funding share. Also, the Applicant is required to provide cost share of at least 20% of the total project costs under this FOA.  Therefore, your assumption and example are correct. Assuming an applicant is seeking $1,000,000 in Federal funding and is only meeting the minimum cost share requirement of 20%, $250,000 of cost share is required (equaling total project cost of $1,250,000). Please note, an applicant can choose to propose cost share above the 20% minimum requirement. See Section III.B of the FOA to reference additional information regarding cost sharing requirements. "]
[14,"2017-01-05","Is there are minimum percentage of the budget required for the prime Applicant? ","No, a minimum percentage of budget is not required for the prime Applicant. "]
[15,"2017-01-05","On page 27 of the FOA is a description of the content and page limits for the concept paper.  During the webinar it was mentioned that there was an optional page of figures and graphs for the technical description.  This was confusing.  Did that statement suggest that within the three pages of technical description that there should be no more than 1 page worth of figures and graphs with the total length of the Concept paper of 5 pages? Or is there an optional, additional page of graphs, charts and other data to support the Technology description that allows a total of 6 pages? ","Per pg. 27 (or Section IV.C) of the FOA, the Concept Paper should be no longer than 5 pages, including a Cover Page (1 page maximum), a Technology Description (3 pages maximum), and an Addendum (1 page maximum). Within the 1 page Addendum, applicants may provide graphs, charts, or other data to supplement their Technology Description. "]
[16,"2017-01-05","Question 16.1: We are a private corporation interested in applying for this FOA under Subtopic 3.2 – Open Source Tools for Energy Efficiency in Manufacturing. We understand the desire for open source tools. It is not clear, however, how we can cost share if the resulting software is to be open source and only data services are eligible for commercialization. Are there alternative non-cost-share or low-cost-share solutions available for this particular subtopic?\n\nQuestion 16.2: In addition, our proposal would revolve around a web-based tool, as controlled sharing of data between manufacturers will be a key leverage factor in energy efficiency. In addition, it is our experience that desktop and client-server software will soon be obsolete. Would this approach be acceptable, and if so, could the ongoing hosting of the application be commercialized under this grant?\n","Response 16.1: Cost share of 20% of the total project costs is required for all subtopics under this FOA. See Section III.B of the FOA to reference additional information regarding cost sharing requirements.  Please note that cost share to support the project may come from sources other than the recipient of the award.  \n\nResponse 16.2: DOE cannot provide comments at this stage of the FOA regarding whether specific projects are responsive to the FOA.  Please note that the FOA does not specify a platform for the software and that projects should be proposed within the TRL limits specified for each project Tier in the FOA.  "]
[17,"2017-01-05","Please clarify the definition of “entity” as stated in Section III Eligibility Information, subsection F on page 23 entitled “Limitation on Number of Concept Papers and Full Applications Eligible for Review.”   What is the definition of ‘entity’?  Would a parent company and any subsidiaries be considered separate corporate entities since they operate as distinct companies with different tax ID numbers, state registrations, and/or different corporate structures?  ","For purposes of the “Limitation on Number of Concept Papers and Full Applications Eligible for Review,” parent companies and their subsidiaries are considered separate entities and each may submit an application. However, different divisions within a company are not considered separate entities, and DOE would not consider applications from multiple divisions within the same company (i.e., the company may only submit one application). "]
[18,"2017-01-05","I herewith seek clarification about Section F (Limitation on Number of Concept Papers and Full Applications Eligible for Review) of FOA Number DE-FOA-0001465, \"Advanced Manufacturing Projects for Emerging Research Explorations\".\n\nThe statement in question, and I quote is, \".....An entity may only submit one Concept Paper and one Full Application for each of the three Topic Areas identified in Section I.B for consideration under this FOA....\".  Does this mean an institution is limited to a maximum of three concept papers and 3 full applications, not exceeding one concept paper or full application in each topic area, or can an institution submit one concept paper and one full application in each of the eleven (11) subtopics (not exceeding one paper in each of the subtopic areas).\n","An Applicant can submit one Concept Paper and one Full Application for each of the three Topic Areas identified in Section I.B of the FOA. This means an Applicant is limited to a maximum of three Concept Papers and three Full Applications, not exceeding one Concept Paper and one Full Application for each Topic Area. "]
[19,"2017-01-06","Would developing positioning equipment capable of atomically accurate positioning across macro dimensions to enable other atomically precise methods be responsive to Subtopic 1.5?","Applicants need to support how their project is responsive to the Topic Areas described in the FOA. Feedback will be provided in response to Concept Papers in the form of an \"encourage\" or \"discourage\" notification to submit a Full Application. Also, applicants need to clearly explain the incremental benefits of their improvements over existing technology. \n\nPer Section III.G of the FOA, “EERE will not make eligibility determinations for potential applicants prior to the date on which applications to this FOA must be submitted. The decision whether to submit an application in response to this FOA lies solely with the applicant.”"]
[20,"2017-01-06","Does my proposed technology fit into a specific Topic Area?","Applicants need to support how their project is responsive to the Topic Areas described in the FOA. Feedback will be provided in response to Concept Papers in the form of an \"encourage\" or \"discourage\" notification to submit a Full Application. Also, applicants need to clearly explain the incremental benefits of their improvements over existing technology. \n\nPer Section III.G of the FOA, “EERE will not make eligibility determinations for potential applicants prior to the date on which applications to this FOA must be submitted. The decision whether to submit an application in response to this FOA lies solely with the applicant.”"]
[21,"2017-01-09"," Is this FOA institutionally limited? How many faculty per higher-education institution can apply to this FOA, or is it not limited at all? Please elaborate.","Yes, this FOA is institutionally limited. An entity may only submit one Concept Paper and one Full Application for each of the three Topic Areas identified in Section I.B for consideration under this FOA. For example, EERE will only consider one Concept Paper and one Full Application per university for each of the three Topic Areas identified for this FOA (not one submission per each college or school within the university). 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 Concept Paper and Full Application submitted per Topic Area under this FOA. See Section III.F of the FOA for information regarding the limitation on the number of Concept Papers and Full Applications eligible for review. "]
[22,"2017-01-10","Our institution is a government-owned, contractor-operated DOE national laboratory operated by and located on the campus of a major state university. The two institutions have separate sponsored research programs. Does the submission limitation allow for a concept paper and resulting proposal to each Topic Area to be submitted by each the laboratory and the contractor? ","Both the university and the laboratory would be considered separate entities under this FOA and each could submit an application. Therefore, each entity would be limited to a maximum of three Concept Papers and three Full Applications, not exceeding one Concept Paper and one Full Application for each Topic Area."]
[23,"2017-01-11","I have two questions regarding DE-FOA-0001465.  \n\nQuestion 23.1: Am I correct to interpret that National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), which is within the Department of Commerce, is to be considered a government agency and therefore not able to be the primary recipient on a funding opportunity? \n\nQuestion: 23.2: As a government entity, is NIST not able to use any government funds or government funded activities for cost sharing purposes as a sub-recipient?\n\n\n","Response 23.1: That is correct. Federal agencies and instrumentalities (other than DOE) are eligible to apply for funding as a Subrecipient, but are not eligible to apply as a Prime Recipient. See Section III.A of the FOA to reference additional information on eligible applicants. \n\nResponse 23.2:  Project teams may use funding or property received from state or local governments to meet the cost share requirement, so long as the funding was not provided to the state or local government by the Federal Government. As specified in Section III.B of the FOA, all cost share must come from non‐Federal sources unless otherwise allowed by law (See 2 CFR 200.306 and 2 CFR 910.130 for the applicable cost sharing requirements)."]
[24,"2017-01-12","What are the TRL objectives of the program from the start date to the end date?","The TRL objectives are described in the Tier 1 and Tier 2 discussion in Section I.A of the FOA. "]
[25,"2017-01-17","I found the following RFP online and wanted to confirm the deadlines\n\nJan. 31st: Is this a white paper submission for prescreening?\nMarch 30th: Is this is the full proposal deadline?\n\nhttp://www.grants.gov/web/grants/view-opportunity.html?oppId=290880\n\nRegarding the link above, is there a better link to the RFP with more details that I am missing?\n","Yes, the Concept Paper submission deadline is 1/31/2017 5:00 PM ET. Yes, the Full Application submission deadline is 3/30/2017 PM ET. Note that a compliant Concept Paper by the deadline is required to be able to submit a Full Application to this Funding Opportunity Announcement.  Lastly, the full Funding Opportunity Announcement is posted on the EERE Exchange website at https://eere-exchange.energy.gov."]
[26,"2017-01-17","Good morning. Regarding submission of the Concept Paper, could you please clarify if Institutional Signature is required? In other words, for some EERE submissions, the PI or an administrator may submit the materials, but the Sponsored Contracts Office is either not involved, or, is just the \"button-pusher\" on the EERE website.  For others there is explicit understanding that by submitting through EERE, institutional approval is granted.\n\nI need to make sure our contracts office is involved in the correct role.\n","Submission of Concept Papers and Full Applications via the EERE Exchange system should be completed by an authorized person in the applicant’s organization.  The Concept Paper does not have a signature requirement, however, the SF 424 Application (part of the Full Application) does require a signature from the Applicant’s authorized representative. This is the person at the organization who has the signatory authority to legally commit the organization.  The PI or an administrator may submit the materials through EERE Exchange, however the SF 424 Application must be signed from someone with authority to provide the organizational approval. "]
[27,"2017-01-17","Please help me understand how to obtain this required “Control number” mentioned on slide #50 of this webinar: “Obtain a “control number” at least 24 hours before the first submission deadline”.  Is it the same as DUNS number? Thanks","No, a control number is not the same as a DUNS number. An applicant’s control number is generated through EERE Exchange. In order to obtain a control number, the applicant must first register and create an account on the EERE Exchange website. A control number will be issued when an applicant begins the Exchange application process. Applicants should include that control number in the file name of their Full Application submission (i.e., Control number_Applicant Name_Full Application). The Users' guide for applying to Department of Energy, Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy’s Funding Opportunity Announcements through the Exchange website can be found at https://eere-exchange.energy.gov/Manuals.aspx. Also, see Sections IV.A and IV.D of the FOA to reference information regarding the control number and application and submission information. "]
[28,"2017-01-17","Is it critical to name the Sub-recipients when we submit the Concept Paper, as discussions with potential participants are on-going?  We would however, identify the competencies that will be involved. Sub-recipients would be finalized in time for the submission of the full proposal.","It is not critical or necessary to identify Subrecipient(s) at the Concept Paper phase. See Section IV.C of the FOA to reference content and form requirements of the Concept Paper."]
[29,"2017-01-17","Is (a) SAM registration and (b) having a DUNS number needed for submission of a concept paper?\n\nThe FOA document states on page 41 that the DOE cannot make an award without compliance with the SAM+DUNS requirement.  It does not say, however, that a submission cannot be made without this compliance.\n\nWe are considering submitting a concept paper on behalf of a start-up company that is currently undergoing legal formation.  It is unlikely to have SAM/DUNS compliance on Jan 31 (concept paper submission date).  It should, however, be able to show such compliance before the date of submission of the full application (Mar 30).\n","SAM registration and a Dun and Bradstreet Universal Numbering System (DUNS) number is not required to submit a Concept Paper or a Full Application. However, prior to receiving an award, a Recipient is required to: (1) Be registered in the System for Award Management (SAM) at https://www.sam.gov; and (2) provide a valid DUNS number. Per the FOA, “DOE may not make a Federal award to an applicant until the applicant has complied with all applicable DUNS and SAM requirements and, if an applicant has not fully complied with the requirements by the time DOE is ready to make a Federal award, the DOE may determine that the applicant is not qualified to receive a Federal award and use that determination as a basis for making a Federal award to another applicant.”"]
[30,"2017-01-17","If the data is subject to public knowledge, we are interested in these two:\n- How many companies/individuals were on the webinar?\n- Based on previous funding cases, do you have a projection of what percentage of applicants you are expecting to fund this time?\n","DOE cannot release the number of participants in the webinar for this Funding Opportunity Announcement. DOE cannot project the percentage of applicants we expect to fund based on the release of previous Funding Opportunity Announcements. Additionally, DOE cannot anticipate how many applicants will apply to this FOA. Please note, EERE expects to make approximately $35 million of Federal funding available for new awards under this FOA. Funding for all awards and future budget periods are contingent upon the availability of funds appropriated by Congress for the purpose of this program and the availability of future-year budget authority. EERE anticipates making approximately 24 to 40 awards under this FOA.  See Section II.A.i of the FOA to reference additional information on the estimated funding available under this FOA.  "]
[31,"2017-01-18","The FOA-0001465 requires 20% cost share. If the primary party is an educational institute, can this cost share requirement be reduced?","Cost share of 20% of the total project cost is required under this FOA, regardless of the entity type of the applicant. See Section III.B of the FOA to reference additional information regarding cost sharing requirements."]
[32,"2017-01-18","My organization is looking to submit to the EERE call “Advanced Manufacturing Projects for Emerging Research Exploration” (DE-FOA-0001465) and have the following question:\n \nCan an organization submit a single proposal to both Tiers 1 and 2, or must each proposal target a specific Tier?\n","No, an organization cannot submit a single application to both Tiers 1 and 2. Each application must target a specific Tier. Please note, an Applicant can only submit one Concept Paper and one Full Application per Topic Area.  "]
[33,"2017-01-18","I have a question about DE-FOA-0001465, Advanced Manufacturing Projects for Emerging Research Exploration. We are trying to determine where to locate figures and references. \n\nIn the concept paper, are references (as footnotes and endnotes) and figures included in the 3-page limit for the Technology Description? \n\nOr could references and/or figures be in the 1 page Addendum?\n","References (as footnotes and endnotes) are included in the page limits for Concept Papers and may be incorporated into the 3-page Technology Description section or into the 1-page Addendum at the discretion of the applicant.  "]
[34,"2017-01-18","There is guidance in the FOA for AMO Emerging Research that identifies the estimated number of proposals that may be funded in each topic area. However, there seems to be lacking any guidance on how funds will be apportioned between Tier 1 and Tier 2 projects.  Is there a target for the distribution of funds between Tier 1 and Tier 2 categories?","There are no specific targets for numbers of Tier 1 or Tier 2 projects within each of the Topics and Subtopics.  The number of awards by Subtopic identified in Section II.A.i of the FOA are estimates for both Tier 1 and Tier 2 awards.  "]
[35,"2017-01-19","In reference to the FOA section \"Limitation on Number of Concept Papers and Full Applications Eligible for Review,\" is there any limit on the number of applications or topics on which an entity is a Subrecipient or partner? For instance, can a university be a partner on two or more Topic Area 2 proposals so long as the university is not the Lead Organization on any of the proposals?","An entity may only submit one Concept Paper and one Full Application for each of the three Topic Areas identified in Section I.B for consideration under this FOA. However, 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 Concept Paper and one Full Application submitted per Topic Area under this FOA. So to specifically answer your question, a University (as well as other organization types) can be a Subrecipient or partner on two or more Topic Area applications. However, the same University can only submit one Concept Paper and one Full Application as the lead organization for Topic Area 2. "]
[36,"2017-01-19","For DE-FOA-1465, there is confusion on concept topics.  \n\nFor example, Area 1 – Advanced Materials references that\n“Applications with a strong linkage to relevant Chapter 6 of the 2015 QTR Technology Assessment topics are highly encouraged.” \n\nThen the FOA provides 5 subtopics such as \n\nSubtopic 1.1 – Innovative Advanced Materials Manufacturing for Clean Energy\n\nThe question is: Do concept papers needs to be in response to subtopics 1.1 through 1.5, or can other subtopics be proposed that have linkage to Chapter 6 of the QTR for Area 1 – Advanced Materials?\n","Concept Papers and Full Applications need to be responsive to the Subtopics identified in the FOA.  The FOA necessarily had to limit the topics in consideration of other federally funded research activities, funding availability, and to those believed to provide the most impact.  "]
[37,"2017-01-19","We have Army Research Laboratory as one of the collaborator for this submission. I am determining the cost share distributions among collaborating partners. Question ----- Since ARL is funded by government, are they allowed to provide cost share? Are they considered as GOGO’s laboratory?","All cost share must come from non-Federal sources.  See Section III.B of the FOA.  Please confirm with Army Research Laboratory to confirm whether it is a government or contractor operated laboratory and whether its proposed cost share (if any) is from a non-Federal source. Note, government owned national laboratories operate with Federal funds regardless if they are government or contractor-operated. "]
[38,"2017-01-19","I am writing to ask whether it is appropriate to interact with the Program Manager to better understand the intents of the topic areas.  I understand that the Program Manager cannot encourage or discourage an application and the Concept Paper is due by 1/31/2017 at 5pm ET, for which an applicant is provided feedback.  However, questions regarding the nature and the scope of each of the topic areas remain.  Could I request a phone call?  ","In order to ensure all potential applicants have access to the same information, DOE personnel cannot engage in phone calls or other discussions with potential applicants regarding the topic areas or any other aspect of the FOA. If you have a specific question regarding a Topic Area, please submit the question to the FOA mailbox. Potential applicants to this FOA must determine for themselves whether to submit a Concept Paper or Full Application in response to this Funding Opportunity Announcement (FOA).  Potential applicants should carefully review the Topic Areas described in this FOA and determine whether or not their proposed project is responsive to one of the topics. "]
[39,"2017-01-23","I am trying to start submission of a concept paper to DE‐FOA‐0001465 ADVANCED MANUFACTURING PROJECTS FOR EMERGING RESEARCH EXPLORATION.  The instructions say I need to start the application process to get a control number.  When I do it says I need to submit an abstract to proceed.  But the FOA says nothing about an abstract.  Should I write an abstract to submit here?","The Abstract is a required field when creating a Concept Paper in the EERE Exchange system.  A brief description of the project should be entered in this field.  "]
[40,"2017-01-23","Question 40.1: The contribution can be of several different kinds: facilities, equipment, time, cash.  How is the dollar value of the equipment contribution defined? Original purchase price of the equipment? Depreciated value? Replacement value?   And how is the contribution value determined for a piece of equipment used 100% for the project, as opposed to only 50% for the project?\n\nQuestion 40.2: We are planning on submitting more than one Concept Paper. What is the proper way to deal with equipment in these circumstances, both for the Concept Papers, the proposals, and then for final grant accounting?  For example:  say that you had an HPLC that would be required full time to support a project. Could you list it as part of your contribution for both Concept Paper #1 and Concept Paper #2?  If only one of these concepts were to be viewed favorably, the equipment would then be allocated to that project.  However, suppose that both concepts were viewed favorably.  Could you still list the same HPLC in both proposals, given that only one proposal is likely to win an award? Or do you need to identify another contribution at the time of proposal submission?  If you listed the same HPLC in both proposals and both proposals won awards, are you allowed at that point to substitute another contribution?\n","Response 40.1 – Per 2CFR200.306(i), “The value of donated property must be determined in accordance with the usual accounting policies of the non-Federal entity, with the following qualifications:  (2) The value of donated equipment must not exceed the fair market value of equipment of the same age and condition at the time of donation.”  If the equipment is going to be used partly for the DOE award and also for other uses, only the portion of fair market value the anticipated to be used for the project should be proposed as cost share or a usage charge should be determined based on typical lease or rental value of the equipment.  Specific situations and allowable costs will be negotiated if selected for award.  \n\nResponse 40.2 - An applicant is not restricted from listing the same piece of equipment in two separate applications. If both applications were selected for negotiation, valuation of a single piece of equipment listed in both applications could only be used as cost share contribution to one of the projects selected.  In this case, the applicant would still need to identify the needed equipment and meet the cost share requirement of the second project, while maintaining the original integrity of the scope of work proposed.  Specific situations will be addressed during award negotiations.  \n"]
[41,"2017-01-23","We plan to submit a concept paper to solicitation of DE-FOA-0001465. This is my first time of submitting a concept paper to DOE. Thus, may I ask a few questions about the format? In the webinar information, it says that technology description is limited to 3 pages and figure is limited to one page. Does it mean that we have to separate technical statement and the figures? Can we just simply insert the figures among the paragraphs? If yes, is it totally limited to 4 pages? Is there any requirement on the page size, margin, and font size? Another question is about the budget. Do we need to include a rough budget in the concept paper? ","The Concept Paper should be no longer than 5 pages, including a Cover Page (1 page maximum), a Technology Description (3 pages maximum), and an Addendum (1 page maximum). There is not a restriction on incorporating figures within the 3 page Technology Description or the 1 page Addendum. 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). A symbol font may be used to insert Greek letters or special characters, but the font size requirement still applies. References must be included as footnotes or endnotes in a font size of 10 or larger. Footnotes and endnotes are counted toward the maximum page requirement. Lastly, a Budget submission is not required at the Concept Paper phase. See Section IV.C of the FOA for specific information regarding the content and form of the Concept Paper. "]
[42,"2017-01-23","I have a question about this FOA. I apply to apply the Tier 2 under this FOA. The FOA says expected TRL 3-5 for Tier 2 project. Is the TRL 3-5 expected at the submission or at end of project?","For Tier 2 projects, the TRL at the start of the project should be no lower than TRL 3 and the TRL at the completion should be no higher than TRL 5.  The entire scope of the proposed project should be within these TRL limits.  "]
[43,"2017-01-23","Does the source of the hydrogen need to be renewable or could it be a process gas intermediate for Topic 2.1? ","The FOA does not specify the source of the hydrogen for the proposed project.  However, applicants should include a discussion of the hydrogen source in their techno-economic analysis and commercialization plan for potential applications, as well as in the energy impact of the technology requested for both Tier 1 and Tier 2 project Applications.  "]
[44,"2017-01-24","Our planned project would require us to budget ~$500k for equipment. Would such funding request be frowned upon for this FOA?","It is the responsibility of the Applicant to determine what equipment to propose in their application, to estimate the amount to budget for equipment, and to determine whether their budget for equipment would fit within the funding range for their proposed project. The DOE will not comment on an Applicant’s allocation of proposed costs in their Budget during the application process.  See 2 CFR 200.310 – 200.316 as amended by 2 CFR 910.360 for additional requirements regarding equipment. "]
[45,"2017-01-24","On Page 4 of the FOA, under Subtopic 1.1 it says “the important goal is to provide a significant lifecycle energy impact in the applicant’s target application space”. Could you clarify on what is considered significant? Does DOE has a target level for the energy impact, say for a high performance conductor? Does DOE have a preferred method to estimate the energy impact?","The FOA doesn’t specifically define “significant”, however the evaluation of submitted applications will include how the project contributes to meeting national energy goals including AMO’s goal of reducing by 50% in 10 years, the life-cycle energy consumption of manufactured goods, by targeting the production and use of advanced manufacturing technologies.  See Section I.A of the FOA.  "]
[46,"2017-01-25","Can you address the following questions?\n\nA: Re cost-share requirement?\n\nQuestion A1:  Is there an exception to this requirement? Our group is underfunded and this is a serious cash challenge. \n\nQuestion A2: Can this money be raised between concept paper and application? \n\nQuestion A3: Can some of this money be raised as work progresses? \n\nQuestion A4: Is only meeting 20% a liability to getting a full application approved? \n\nQuestion A5: Can our labor contribution to the funding agreement apply to our cost share? \n\nB: Eligibility requirements?\n\nQuestion B1: The FOA states that individuals are eligible.  But the EERE web site shows no such category for concept paper submission. Is that an oversight? Or is submission under an individual undesirable from EERE’s perspectives? \n\nQuestion B2: The Dun and Bradstreet number is listed as optional on the concept-submission page. Is it required for the concept paper or full application? \n\nC: Collaborations in negotiation\n\nQuestion C1: Can the PI be changed or amended before final application? \n\nQuestion C2: Does each party to a negotiated agreement have to file a concept paper? \n\nQuestion C3: Can EERE pay a non-DOE Federally Funded Research and Development Center (FFRDC) directly for their part of the project? \n\nQuestion C4: Can the subtopic category be changed after concept submission?  \n\nQuestion C5: Or should we file two concept papers, one for each subtopic? \n","Response A1: There is not an exception to the cost sharing requirement. Cost share of 20% of the total project cost is required for all applications submitted under this FOA.\n\nResponse A2: Yes. Cost share can be identified between the Concept Paper and Full Application phase. It is not required to identify cost share at the Concept Paper phase. Cost share of at least 20% of the total project costs must be included in the applicant’s SF424 submission and the proposed sources of cost share must be identified in the submitted budget justification for the project. \n\nResponse A3: The DOE expects the Prime Recipient to have identified the sources of its 20% cost share requirement prior to submitting their budget as a part of the Full Application. If selected, the cost share must be committed and verifiable by the start of the award. In addition, the cost share must be provided on an invoice by invoice basis once a selected project commences, unless a waiver is approved by the DOE Contracting Officer. \n\nResponse A4: Cost share of at least 20% of the total project cost is required under this FOA. There is no selection criteria that is based on the amount of cost share proposed. \n\nResponse A5: Yes, labor contribution can be considered cost share. The specific sources of cost share should be included in the submitted budget for the project.  \n\nResponse B1: “Individual” is one of the options in the lower part of the pull-down for Organization Type in the Concept Paper submission process.  \n\nResponse B2: A Dun and Bradstreet Universal Numbering System (DUNS) number is not required to submit a Concept Paper or a Full Application. If available at the time of submission, we recommend the DUNS number be included. Please refer to Q&A #29 for additional information on this question. \n\nResponse C1: Yes, the PI can be changed prior to submitting the Full Application. \n\nResponse C2: No, only the Prime Recipient should submit a Concept Paper. \n\nResponse C3: Yes, if your organization is selected for negotiation, DOE has the ability to fund a non-DOE FFRDC directly through an Interagency Agreement. However, the funding can also flow through the Prime Recipient as well. The Prime Recipient should discuss its options with the non-DOE FFRDC and determine which option is best. \n\nResponse C4: Yes, but we strongly encourage applicants to submit Full Applications that are consistent with their Concept Paper submission.  \n\nResponse C5: An Applicant can only submit one Concept Paper and one Full Application for each of the three Topic Areas identified in Section I.B of the FOA. This means an Applicant is limited to a maximum of three Concept Papers and three Full Applications, not exceeding one Concept Paper and one Full Application for each Topic Area. \n"]
[]
[47,"2017-01-26","Is it appropriate or desirable to include the project ABSTRACT on the cover page of the Concept Paper?  Or do you want the ABSTRACT ONLY included in the Abstract section on the submission form?  The guidelines for the Concept Paper say nothing about whether or not to include the ABSTRACT on the cover page of the PDF file.  Thanks so much.","The Abstract is a required field when creating a Concept Paper in the EERE Exchange system.  A brief description of the project should be entered in this field. An abstract is not required on the cover page of the Concept Paper. The cover page should include the project title, the specific FOA Topic Area, Subtopic and Tier being addressed, both the technical and business points of contact, names of all team member organizations, and any statements regarding confidentiality. Please reference Section IV.C.i for information on the content and form of the Concept Paper.  "]
[48,"2017-01-27","Question regarding Limitation on Number of Concept Papers and Full Applications Eligible for Review:\n\nCan a company who is a member of a incorporated consortium apply with the consortium as a  member and also apply individually as a corporation?  \n","For purposes of this FOA, an incorporated consortium and a member would be considered separate entities. If both entities individually meet the eligibility requirements in the FOA, they can each submit separate applications.  "]
[49,"2017-01-27","An item of additional information one needs to provide when submitting a concept paper is % effort by participants.\n\nIs % effort proportional to budget distribution? Or is it mainly related to the amount of time and work each subrecipient contributes? \n","Applicants may estimate the Lead Organization Percent and the percentage for Team Members using either budget or other measures.  "]
[50,"2017-01-27","We have a faculty member who has been approved to submit a Concept Paper by Tuesday’s 5pm deadline, to the subject FOA.\n \nOn the cover sheet of this FOA, it states that “applicants must register with and submit application materials through…”  However, when I tried to access the link, it told me “the site cannot be displayed.”\n \nSo, a couple of questions we have before we proceed:\n \n1. Is our organization a current registered applicant institution?\n2. Is the formal submission of our Concept Paper completed by our organization’s Authorized Organizational Representative (AOR)?\n3. Does the Principal Investigator (PI) have to also register on the EERE Exchange application portal?\n \nPlease advise as soon as possible so we can proceed with our submission.\n","For technical questions regarding the EERE Exchange system and to verify if your organization is a current registered applicant, please contact the EERE Exchange helpdesk at EERE-ExchangeSupport@hq.doe.gov. The formal submission of a Concept Papers via the EERE Exchange system should be completed by an authorized person in the applicant’s organization. The PI is not required to separately register in the EERE Exchange system.  "]
[51,"2017-01-27","Please inform us if we are able to change to a prime or a subprime after we submit the concept papers but prior to the award?","The organization that registers in the EERE Exchange system and submits the Concept Paper is considered the Prime Applicant moving into the Full Application phase. "]
[52,"2017-01-27","On Page 23 of the FOA, 6. Limit on FFRDC Effort. “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.” Our question is that, the “effort by applicant” means the effort of the lead applicant only, or the entire effort of the non-FFRDC team members? \n\nIn our case, we have multiple industry participants involved in the proposed R&D, with each of them making significant effort. So in our case, the lead applicant’s effort would not be more than 50% of the entire project effort as measured by the amount of funding (DOE fund + cost-share).\n","For this FOA, when determining significance of the FFRDC’s effort under Section III.e.ii.6, the other applicant’s team member’s scope of work may be considered part of the applicants for the purposes of this section.  "]
[53,"2017-01-30","I am wondering whether the list of project participants submitted in the concept paper can be expanded in full proposal application if the prime applicant is the same as well as the technical contents of the proposed project.","Yes, the list of project participants and technical details submitted in the concept paper phase can be expanded in the Full Application. The DOE understand that all project participants and technical details may not be identified at the Concept Paper phase of the application. "]
[54,"2017-01-30","A faculty member at our University’s regional campus is interested in applying for the above referenced opportunity.  Our regional campus operates with its own governance, but shares the same institutional authorizing official assigned to sign off on proposals submitted and grants made to our University as a whole. Are regional campuses eligible to submit an application separately and in addition to others within the same university system based on your eligibility criteria? ","If the award will be issued to the regional campus of the university and not to the main university campus, then the regional campus is considered a separate entity and can submit an application in addition to the main campus.  If both awards would go to the main campus of the university (regardless of where the work actually would occur), then the restriction of one Concept Paper and one Full Application per each of the three Topic Areas would apply.  "]
[55,"2017-01-30","My question for DE‐FOA‐0001465 is: Can we modify the total budget and % allocation between submitting the concept paper and submitting the full application? We have has an issue in the past with an EERE program where we were not able to do this and had to stick to the original budget and % allocation originally submitted with the concept paper.","Yes, the estimated total budget and allocation of the budget among the team members can be updated between the Concept Paper and Full Application.  "]
[56,"2017-01-30","I have a question regarding DE‐FOA‐0001465 ADVANCED MANUFACTURING PROJECTS FOR EMERGING RESEARCH EXPLORATION. Is there an explicit requirement or even a rule-of-thumb on the proportion of work that is expected to be conducted by the Lead Organization?  If the Lead Organization has partnered with several organizations and intends to spread specialized work among them, what breakdown of work load would you deem reasonable or appropriate and not?  We are familiar with SBIRs/STTRs, which have well-delineated proportional breakdowns, but does not appear to be the case here.  I see the requirement for sub-awardee budget justification for sub-awards of $250k or 25% of the project, but no other guidance.  Any guidance would be appreciated.  Thanks so much.","It is the responsibility of the Prime Applicant to determine the proportion of work they should conduct as the Lead Organization and the scope to be completed by its partners to best accomplish the objectives of the project.  The only limitation is outlined in Section III.e.ii.6 of the FOA where it states “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 also response to question 52.  "]
[57,"2017-02-06","I am emailing to see if there is a chance that I could still upload or email a Concept Paper for this FOA. Due to traveling I had missed the opportunity deadline of 1/31/17. ","No. A Concept Paper cannot be submitted after the deadline. Furthermore, the Exchange system is designed to enforce hard deadlines for Concept Paper and Full Application submissions."]
[58,"2017-02-08","I submitted a concept paper. The opportunity number was DE-FOA-0001465.  Could you please tell me how long it make take to receive a concept paper response?","Encourage/Discourage notifications are expected to be provided to Applicants in late February or early March.  "]
[59,"2017-02-13","Is it possible to change the Prime Applicant after submission of the Concept Paper, provided that the paper is encouraged and that it would not put the new prime in violation of the one prime per topic area?","No. The Prime Applicant cannot be changed after the submission of the Concept Paper. "]
[60,"2017-02-15","Our organization wishes to clarify whether it can serve as the lead organization on a proposal if its team partner commits to providing the mandatory cost share.","Yes, the Prime Applicant can serve as the lead organization if its team partners commit to providing the required cost share. However, the Prime Recipient is legally responsible for ensuring the cost share requirement is met. See Section III.B of the FOA for additional information on cost sharing. "]
[61,"2017-02-16","Is there a date when we should expect to receive notification that a Full Application is Encouraged from your organization?","Encourage/Discourage notifications are expected to be provided to Applicants in mid to late March. Please note, this is an update to the response to question 58."]
[62,"2017-02-16","If an FFRDC is the Prime Recipient for a proposal that gets awarded, will the funding for the sub-recipient(s) be sent to the FFRDC for the FFRDC to distribute to the sub-recipients, or will the sub-recipients receive their funding directly from EERE?","If the FFRDC is the Prime Recipient for a proposal that gets awarded, the FFRDC would be responsible for flowing down any funding to sub-recipient(s) included in the project. "]
[63,"2017-02-23","Will the full proposal deadline be pushed back (currently 3/30/2017) if responses to Concept Papers were delayed to mid to late March?  ","The DOE anticipates processing a modification to update the Full Application submission deadline, which will provide applicants a minimum of 30 days from the Encourage/Discourage notification. This modification will likely be processed around the same time Encourage/Discourage notifications for Concept Papers are sent out."]
[64,"2017-03-06","In the FOA it mentions that applicants should include “costs associated with required annual audits and incurred cost proposals in their proposed budget documents.” We do have a cost for an A-133 audit but was not sure if something greater would need to be done on an annual basis. Any clarification you can provide would be great.","An Annual Incurred Cost Proposal may also be required to be submitted, but only if EERE is the Cognizant Federal Agency. It is up to the Applicant to determine costs budgeted for annual audits and incurred costs. "]
[65,"2017-03-09","Is it allowed to submit full proposal (deadline: 3/30/17) without submitting a concept paper?","No. To be eligible to submit a Full Application, applicants must submit a Concept Paper by the specified due date and time. "]
[66,"2017-03-23","I have a question regarding the sentence \"Modification No. 0001: The purpose of this modification is to extend the submission deadline for Full Applications to 5/2/2017.\"\n\nIt says full application submission deadline is 5/2/2017. \n\nOne thing I am not clear is about the Full application. The full applications are: \n\n• EERE 303 - Statement of Project Objectives (SOPO) (Last Updated: 12/15/2016 01:59 PM ET) \n• EERE 335 - Budget Justification (3 Budget Periods) (Last Updated: 12/15/2016 02:00 PM ET) \n• SF-424 - Application for Federal Assistance (Last Updated: 12/15/2016 02:01 PM ET) \n• SF-LLL - Disclosure of Lobbying Activities (Last Updated: 12/15/2016 02:01 PM ET)\n\nWhen I applied for this program through internet, there was no place to submit those documents. I thought those documents are required to whom pass the review from EERE, so I have waited the review from EERE if I have a chance to submit those documents since I made a submission\n\nHowever, new modification implies that I had to submit those documents when I applied for DE-FOA-0001465 at first time. \n\nIf I had to submit those documents, could I resubmit all the paper again including those documents.\n","Due to the large number and diverse nature of Concept Papers submitted to this FOA, the review of the Concept Papers has taken longer than originally planned.  DOE is planning to issue its Encourage/Discourage decision by the end of March, after which applicants will be able to submit Full Applications in the Exchange system.   Please refer to section IV.D. of the FOA for Full Application content requirements.  "]
[67,"2017-03-24","Hello, I saw the headline \"DEADLINE: Advanced Manufacturing Projects for Emerging Research Exploration Application - March 30\" in the newsletter from energy.gov.  However, when I click the link, all information seems to suggest that that the deadline was 1/31/17 for concept papers and 5/2/17 for full proposals.  Is there a separate March 30 deadline, or is the link somehow misdirecting me?  I am extremely interested in the program scope, but did not submit a concept paper by 1/31, so I'm not sure whether I've missed the deadline for this year.","The link you are referencing is now outdated. There is not a separate March 30th deadline for Full Applications. Modification 0001 of the FOA was processed on 3/22/2017. One of the purposes of modification 0001 was to extend the submission deadline for Full Applications from 3/30/2017 to 5/2/2017. Additionally, this modification did not extend the Concept Paper deadline. Therefore, the response to question 65 remains valid. To be eligible to submit a Full Application, applicants must have submitted a Concept Paper by the specified due date and time of 1/31/2017 5:00 PM ET."]
[68,"2017-03-28","The Concept Paper response is still not available on EERE Exchange as of today (3/28/2017). When will the Concept Paper responses be available on EERE Exchange? Additionally, I noticed that Modification 0001 has extended the Full Application due date to 5/2/2017. Will the Full Application deadline be extended again if Encourage/Discourage notifications are not received by March 31, 2017?","Due to the large number and diverse nature of Concept Papers submitted to this FOA, the review of the Concept Papers has taken longer than originally planned. DOE anticipates issuing its Encourage/Discourage decisions in April, but cannot provide a specific date at this time. This is an update to the response to question 61. \n\nThe DOE will provide applicants a minimum of 30 days from the Encourage/Discourage notification to submit a Full Application. Therefore, the DOE will process another modification (Modification 0002) to update the Full Application submission deadline once Encourage/Discourage notifications are sent out to applicants.   \n"]
[69,"2017-04-07","Are decisions (encourage/discourage) being released in a rolling fashion, or will they all be released on a single date.","Encourage/Discourage notifications will all be released on a single date. "]
[70,"2017-04-17","We note that the submission deadlines have been extended for full proposals under the subject topic.  Will concept paper submission be permitted through 5/2/17 as well?\n\nWe were not able to submit a concept paper in time given that there was not a 30 day period between information session and the due date.  We’re grateful for your consideration.\n","The Concept Paper deadline remained unchanged in Modification 0001. Therefore, the response to question 57 remains valid. A Concept Paper cannot be submitted after the deadline of 1/31/17 5:00pm ET. There is no intention to change the Concept Paper deadline in a future modification. "]
[71,"2017-04-21","My team was just notified that we are encouraged to submit a full proposal for this FOA.  Is the due date for the Full Application still May 2nd as stated on the EERE Exchange website?","No. The Full Application date has been extended. Modification 0002 of the FOA was processed on 4/24/2017. One of the purposes of this modification was to extend the submission deadline for Full Applications from 5/2/2017 to 5/23/2017. Additionally, this modification extended the expected submission deadline for Replies to Reviewer Comments to 6/30/2017, revised the expected date for EERE Selection Notification to August 2017, and revised the expected timeline for Award Negotiations to August-September 2017."]
[72,"2017-04-21","How many concept papers were given the \"encouraged\" designation.  What is the expected award percentage of those encouraged to submit?","DOE cannot publish the number of concept papers received or the number “encouraged”.  Please refer to section II.A.i. of the FOA for the estimated number of awards by subtopic.  "]
[73,"2017-04-23","Can the title of a full application be changed from that submitted on the concept paper?","Yes. The project title input in Section 15 of the Application for Federal Assistance (SF-424) will be considered the project title of the application. "]
[74,"2017-04-24","I was wondering if there was any way to get feedback on the Discourage rating. Was there something that we could have done better?  ","Comments from the review of Concept Papers will not be provided to all applicants, whether they were \"encouraged\" or \"discouraged\".  The Concept Papers were evaluated based on the criteria in section V.A.i of the FOA.   "]
[75,"2017-04-24","Do all applicants need to submit a U.S. Manufacturing Plan or only Tier 2 applicants?","All applicants are required to submit a U.S. Manufacturing Plan as a part of their application.  However, due to the increased development stage (TRL) of Tier 2 projects, additional emphasis is placed on the U.S. Manufacturing Plan in both the Technical Volume and the Technical Review Criteria for Full Applications.  See Sections IV.D. and V.A.ii. of the FOA."]
[76,"2017-04-24","We have received the encouragement to submit a full application.  A lot has changed since we first submitted the concept paper.  I would like to ask two questions:\n\nCan we change the requested funding amount from the figure indicated in our concept paper?\nCan we add a national laboratory collaborator, if one was not included in our concept paper?\n","Yes. An applicant can change the funding amount requested from the figure indicated in the Concept Paper. However, the DOE funding share cannot exceed the top end of the funding range indicated in the FOA for each Tier. See Section I.A of the FOA to reference the DOE Federal Funding Share Range for each Tier. \n\nSecondly, yes, an applicant can add a National Laboratory (or other entities) as a partner, even if the laboratory was not included in the Concept Paper. \n"]
[77,"2017-04-25","On page 35 of the BAA, it states to include all work to be performed by the Prime Recipient and its Subrecipients and Contractors in the Budget Justification Workbook (EERE 335) and to save it as a single Microsoft Excel file titled “ControlNumber_LeadOrganization_Budget_Justification”.  On page 36 of the BAA, it states Applicants must provide a separate budget justification, EERE 335 for each subaward that is expected to perform work and to save as a Microsoft Excel file titled “ControlNumber_LeadOrganization_Subawardee_Budget_Justification”.  Can you please clarify if the Applicant should include costs for the Subcontractor in the Applicant’s budget justification workbook or if the Subcontractor cost should be provided in a subawardee budget justification workbook?  If a separate subawardee budget justification workbook is required, will a subaward budget justification template be provided? (Please see below for BAA guidance in question).\n\nRegarding the budget periods, is there any specification as to how many months are in each budget period?  For example, for a 24 month effort, is it acceptable for Budget Period 1 to be 6 months, Budget Period 2 to be 12 months, and Budget Period 3 to be 6 months?\n","Yes, the Prime Applicant should include estimated costs for all Sub-Recipients, Vendors, and FFRDCs (as applicable) in the Contractual tab of the Budget Justification (EERE 335).  A separate EERE 335 is also required for each Sub-Recipient that is expected to perform work estimated to be more than $250,000 or 25 percent of the total work effort (whichever is less). The total costs reflected in the Contractual tab of the Prime Applicant’s Budget Justification should match the totals costs in the Sub-Recipient Budget Justification (if required to be submitted). \n\nBudget Periods are typically 12-18 months in length. It is at the discretion of the Applicant to propose specific time periods for each Budget Period which best aligns with their project and when natural decision points occur to determine whether the project is successful and should continue into the following Budget Period.  Please note that a go/no-go decision point with technical criteria is required at the end of each Budget Period. "]
[78,"2017-04-25","Can you please tell me what the page requirement/limit is for the manufacturing plan for the full proposal submission of this FOA?","There is no page number requirement/limit for the U.S. Manufacturing Plan. See Section IV.D.x.iii of the FOA to reference the content that should be included in the U.S. Manufacturing Plan. Also, see Q&A 75 for additional information regarding the U.S. Manufacturing Plan for Tier 2 applications. "]
[79,"2017-04-25","In the event of a government shutdown is there an expectation that the proposal due date would change?","There is not an expectation that the Full Application due date would change in the event of a government shutdown. "]
[80,"2017-04-26","When putting the budget together can you combine personnel by position and only list them once with all the task they will be working on or do they have to be listed separately in all the task they will be working on? ","Listing all SOPO tasks in one line item for each position is the more common approach. However, both approaches are acceptable."]
[81,"2017-04-26","We are submitting a full proposal to the referenced FOA.  We do not currently have an approved indirect cost rate.  Are we required to submit an Indirect Cost Proposal as part of the application by May 23rd or can we submit the proposal after the submittal deadline if selected for negotiations?","An Indirect Cost Proposal is not a required document as a part of the full application. Applicants should include Indirect costs as part of their budget estimate, even if they do not have an approved rate.  If selected for Award and Indirect costs are proposed in the Budget, an Indirect Cost Proposal or an Indirect Rate Agreement will be requested by DOE. Lastly, if selected for award, EERE reserves the right to request additional or clarifying information for any reason deeemed necessary.  See Section IV.F.iii for other information the DOE may request if selected for award. "]
[82,"2017-04-26","I am preparing a full proposal to FOA 1465.  The link of the FOA document to the template for a statement of program objectives has problems, and when I go to (manually type in) https://eere‐Exchange.energy.gov/ I can't seem to find an SOPO template.  I have found two other SOPO templates but they appear to be specifically for other programs and have different page limits.  \n\nCould you point me to the link to download the SOPO for 1465?\n","The link to EERE Exchange is https://eere-exchange.energy.gov/. Select FOA Number DE-FOA-0001465. Under “REQUIRED APPLICATION DOCUMENTS” click “View Required Application Documents” for a Statement of Project Objectives template. "]
[83,"2017-04-26","Our University plans to submit a proposal related to \"DE-FOA-0001465: Advanced Manufacturing Projects for Emerging Research Exploration\".  A National Lab will be a sub-recipient.  How should their budget be shown in our budget?  How should indirect costs (on the first $25,000 expensed) be calculated for their portion of the budget?   If awarded, will the Lab’s budget be awarded directly to them, or would it flow down from the University. ","Proposed costs for Federally Funded Research and Development Centers (FFRDCs) should be captured in the Contractual tab of the Prime’s Budget Justification (EERE 335). In this tab, there is a section which specifically captures FFRDCs and their proposed budget amount for each Budget Period. Please note, for each FFRDC, a Field Work Proposal (Budget for FFRDC) and Authorization Letter (Authorization from the cognizant Contracting Officer for FFRDC) are required to be submitted as a part of the Full Application. See Section IV.D.ix and IV.D.x to reference these requirements. \n\nTypically, DOE does not allow the Prime to charge overhead costs on any portion of DOE FFRDC or National Lab subrecipients’ budgets.  \n\nLastly, the Lab will likely be funded directly. If selected for award, there are limited circumstances that may come up in negotiations in which it may make more sense administratively for funding for an FFRDC to flow through the Prime Recipient, but it is not likely. \n"]
[84,"2017-04-26","I am following the Registration Requirements instructions in section VI.B.i of your DE-FOA-0001465.  In section B.i.3 you indicate that we must register our company on the System for Awards Management at www.SAM.gov.  In that registration process on the SAM website, I must choose between two options:  (a) registering \"to obtain federal contract awards\", or (b) registering for \"federal assistance opportunities, such as grants and loans.\"  FOA section II.B.iii states \"EERE generally does not fund projects through Grants.\";  this would seem to imply that I must choose option (a) above, which entails very arduous and extensive information requirements.  I would prefer to choose option (b).  Please advise which option you intended for SAM registration on this FOA.","This is an Application for Federal Assistance (which includes Cooperative Agreements), and therefore, option (b) is the appropriate option to select."]
[85,"2017-04-27","Question 1: The organization registered in the EERE Exchange for the subject control number does not maintain a \"federally approved accounting system\" and, therefore, does not have a \"federally approved rate agreement.\"  Are these conditions necessary for successful submission of a full application?\n\nQuestions 2:  Given the information provided in Question 1 and the merits of the technology proposed, would the DOE make an exception and allow a concept paper team member to step forward as the prime for the full application?\n\nQuestion 3:  As an alternative to (2) above, would the DOE allow the current organization registered in the EERE Exchange to submit the full application structured as a pass through to a team member that maintains the requisite accounting system and maintains a federally approved rate agreement?\n","Response 1: As indicated in the response to question 82, an Indirect Rate Agreement is not a required document as a part of the Full Application. Applicants should include Indirect costs as a part of their budget estimate, even if they do not have an approved rate. If selected for award and Indirect costs are proposed in the Budget, an Indirect Cost Proposal or an Indirect Rate Agreement will be requested by DOE. Per 2 CFR 200.414, the orginization also has the option to use the 10% de minimis rate if you prefer not to submit an Indirect Cost Proposal. \n\nHaving an Accounting System in place is not required as a part of the Full Application. However, to qualify for Financial Assistance (if selected for award), compliance with 2 CFR 200 as amended by 2 CFR 910 is required. This includes assurance of an adequate accounting system for estimating, accounting and billing for governmental funding received. \n\nResponse 2: As indicated in the response to question 51, the organization that registers in the EERE Exchange system and submits the Concept Paper is considered the Prime Applicant moving into the Full Application phase. \n\nResponse 3: No. The DOE will not allow the current organization registered in EERE Exchange to submit the Full Application structured as a pass through entity that maintains the Accounting System and federally approved Rate Agreement. The requirements indicated in the response to question 1 still apply to the Prime applicant. \n"]
[86,"2017-04-27","I am the PI of a concept paper that is encouraged for a full application. I plan to join another university in July.\n\nCan I submit my full proposal with the new affiliation of the university I will be joining? \n","The organization that registers in the EERE Exchange system and submits the Concept Paper is considered the Prime Applicant moving into the Full Application phase. Subrecipients and other partners can change between the Concept Paper and Full Application.  "]
[87,"2017-04-28","I was trying to access this document, Chapter 6 of the 2015 QTR, as referenced in the FOA. However, the webpage does not seem to exist anymore. Has it been taken down, or am I doing something wrong? Could you please attach it to the FOA page similar to where you attach the FOA?","The link to Chapter 6 of the 2015 QTR has not been taken down. For your convenience, I have included the URL in this response: https://energy.gov/under-secretary-science-and-energy/downloads/chapter-6-innovating-clean-energy-technologies-advanced. Additionally, the DOE has uploaded an MS Word version of the FOA to ensure the links remain active."]
[88,"2017-04-28","Having been encouraged to do so, we am preparing a full proposal.  \n\nWe have a government agency as a subcontractor on this proposed program.  Do we treat them as we would an academic or industrial sub-contractor?  Would DOE send money directly to the government agency (as DoD funding agencies have)?  \n\nIf the DOE were to send funds directly to the government agency, would we still be responsible for their cost share portion?\n","Funding for another agency of the federal government would typically be provided via an Interagency Agreement between DOE and that agency.  There are limited circumstances where funding could be provided to the agency via the recipient of the DOE award.  Funding requested for the other federal agency should be listed in the FFRDC section of the EERE 335 budget form.  An authorization letter from the agency would is required as specified in section IV.D.x of the FOA.  If selected for award, it is the responsibility of the Prime applicant to meet the cost share requirement against the total project amount proposed, which will include any funding to a government agency.  "]
[89,"2017-04-28","I don’t see a summary slide template included in the required application documents.  Will it be added to the site?","No. A template does not exist for the Summary Slide. See Section IV.D.vii of the FOA to reference the content required in the Summary Slide. "]
[90,"2017-04-28","Our team has a question about the handling of Project Management activities in the Project Schedule (Gantt Chart).  The Workplan section of the Technical Volume and the template for the SOPO both utilize separate sub-sections to describe Project Management activities, keeping Project Management segregated from the technical activities (i.e., tasks and subtasks) of the project.  \n\nShould Project Management activities and deliverables be include or excluded from the Project Schedule (Gantt Chart)?  If yes, then should Project Management activities and deliverables also be described in section C (“Tasks to be Performed”) of the SOPO and in the “Work Breakdown Structure (WBS) and Task Description Summary” sub-section of the Technical Volume?\n","In order to provide a complete picture of all project activities, project management tasks, including deliverables, should be included in the project schedule and described in the project’s WBS and SOPO.  The level of detail provided is at the discretion of the applicant.  "]
[91,"2017-04-28","Our team has a couple questions about Go/No-Go decision points.  The FOA includes the following two statements:\n• “the minimum requirement is that 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”\n• “Award durations will be for 1‐2 years for Tier 1 projects and 2‐3 years for Tier 2 projects, with a Go/No‐Go decision point after each year.”\n\nFor our proposed three-year project, we think that two 18-month budget periods would work best.  When using two 18-month budget periods, are we required to identify Go/No-Go decision points for every 12 months (i.e., for each year) or for every 18 months (i.e., for each budget period)?  Does DOE have a requirement or recommendation for the relative timing of a Go/No-Go decision point and the end of a budget period (e.g., a Go/No-Go decision point must be scheduled within 6 months of the end of each budget period)?\n","Budget Periods are typically 12-18 months in length. It is at the discretion of the Applicant to propose specific time periods for each Budget Period which best aligns with their project and when natural decision points occur to determine whether the project is successful and should continue into the following Budget Period.  Please note that a go/no-go decision point with technical criteria is required at the end of each Budget Period. "]
[92,"2017-05-01","Regarding cost-share expenses allowed, one of the categories we’re planning to use is salary for the professor, and for grad students or postdocs. We are operating under the assumption that the benefit costs that the university pays, attached to salary, are also allowed, but we do not know about overhead that is attached to the salary-plus-benefits. Our Federally-allowed overhead (indirect cost) is 56.6% of MTDC. \n\nAssuming we cite, for example, $10,000 in faculty salary and benefits as cost-shared, would we also be allowed to cite our overhead, which would be $5,650?\n","It is allowable to contribute cost share in the form of Indirect/Overhead costs included in the Budget. If the University has an approved rate of 56.6% of the Modified Total Direct Cost, which includes only salary and fringe benefits totaling $10,000 (regardless of whether the base amount of $10,000 is federal share or cost share), the Overhead calculation would be $5,660. See Section III.B of the FOA for additional information on cost sharing."]
[93,"2017-05-01","We submitted a concept paper for DE‐FOA‐0001465, which was encouraged for full application submission by EERE. The proposal used an SBIR-developed technology by ourselves and a university, working with a larger company as the prime contractor. Unfortunately, that large company's circumstances have changed due to financial difficulties and they are no longer able to bear the cost share, and therefore cannot serve as the prime contractor on this project. However, they are supportive of us and the university submitting a full proposal with another prime contractor. Is such a change of prime contractor for the full proposal relative to the concept paper acceptable?","No. As indicated in the response to question 51, the organization that registers in the EERE Exchange system and submits the Concept Paper is considered the Prime Applicant moving into the Full Application phase. It should be noted that cost share contribution can be proposed by Subrecipient(s) to meet the cost share contribution. However, the Prime Recipient is legally responsible for ensuring the cost share requirement is met. See Section III.B of the FOA for additional information on cost sharing."]
[94,"2017-05-03","If a company has a Tier 2 technology that could address Topic Area 2: Advanced Processes, does its submission have to focus on one of the four Subtopics? Or, can it just be written to address Topic Area 2 more broadly? In other words, will the proposal be considered less favorably if it does not specifically address one of the four subtopics?","The Full Application submitted in response to this FOA needs to be responsive to one of the Subtopics identified in the FOA and also be consistent with the Concept Paper submitted.  The Technical Volume’s Cover Page needs to include the Topic and Subtopic being addressed.  Also, only applicants who have submitted an eligible Concept Paper will be eligible to submit a Full Application."]
[95,"2017-05-03","For our proposal submission, we are collaborating with a Prime Applicant. We are being asked to provide a \"subrecipient budget justification document provided in the EERE proposal guidelines.\"  On the website, I have only been successful with locating the \"EERE 335 - Budget Justification.\" Will you please advise how I may obtain the subrecipient version?","There is not a separate Budget Justification (EERE 335) for Subrecipients. Subrecipients should also use the EERE 335 to meet this requirement. Please note, a separate EERE 335 is required for each Sub-Recipient that is expected to perform work estimated to be more than $250,000 or 25 percent of the total work effort (whichever is less). "]
[96,"2017-05-04","An FFRDC is the prime on a proposal which has multiple subrecipients on the proposing team. If the FFRDC’s proposal gets an award, how will funds be distributed? All through the FFRCD? Or only the FFRDC’s funds directly to it and the funds to sub recipients directly to them from DOE? Or another arrangement? If another arrangement, please explain.","If an FFRDC is the prime recipient selected for award, the funds would flow down through the FFRDC to each subrecipient. "]
[97,"2017-05-04","Our University works closely with a National Laboratory in several areas, and some professors from our University have joint appointments at the National Laboratory.  Likewise, some National Laboratory scientists have joint appointments with our University.  For this proposal, we would like to include a National Laboratory scientist who holds a joint appointment between our University and the National Laboratory.  Because of the close relationship between the University and National Laboratory, no subcontract is needed, and this person would be paid from our University via their joint appointment, and listed on the proposal with their University affiliation.  Do you anticipate any issues with this?","DOE cannot provide a definitive response to this question due to the lack of details provided on the work planned and the relationship between the university and the Lab.  If selected for award negotiations, additional information may be required including, but not limited to, where the work will be performed, how intellectual property is managed, and any potential conflicts of interest between the Lab and the university.  The university should follow its own policies when completing the application forms.  "]
[98,"2017-05-10","Many applicants schedule staff availability to ensure acceptable time to produce a quality full application submission for a grant of this scale.  With the repeated delays to the concept paper notification it was difficult or impossible to ensure adequate coverage for both applicants and sub-awardees.  We respectfully request an additional one week be added to the submission deadline for all applicants to account for the scheduling challenges imposed by the sudden release of the encourage/discourage decisions.","It was indicated in the Q&A spreadsheet that the DOE would provide a minimum of 30 days to submit Full Applications from the date Encourage/Discourage notifications were sent out. The DOE does not intend to process a modification to extend the Full Application deadline beyond 5/23/17 5pm ET."]
[99,"2017-05-11","An academic institution is a prime applicant and they are partnering with a FFRDC national laboratory.  Per the FOA, the FFRDC needs to provide a budget for DOE/NNSA FFRDC field work proposal and an authorizing letter, do they also need to complete the EERE 335 budget justification form?","No, an FFRDC is not required to complete the EERE 335, Budget Justification form. The Field Work Proposal contains the needed budget information for the application."]
[100,"2017-05-11","Our institution will provide institutional funds to support the 20% cost share. A separate account will be established for this purpose. Direct expenses such as salary will be charged to that account and reflected in our GL. However, two types of costs- F&A costs and fringe benefits- are not captured on this type of account at our institution. We would like to calculate the applicable fringe benefits and indirect costs based on our federally negotiated rates and report those amounts as part of the 20% cost share. However, those costs are not isolated on any particular account. Would this be acceptable to DOE?","It is allowable to contribute cost share in the form of Fringe and Indirect costs included in the Budget. Tracking cost share should be determined by your organization’s internal policy.  Please note, to qualify for Financial Assistance (if selected for award), compliance with 2 CFR 200 as amended by 2 CFR 910 is required. This includes assurance of an adequate accounting system for estimating, accounting and billing for governmental funding received."]
[101,"2017-05-15","For DOE accounting purposes, what counts as cost sharing, and who makes the judgement?","Any of the cost categories included in the Budget Justification (EERE 335) can be considered a source of cost share. All costs in the budget, including cost share, must be allowable per 2 CFR 200 and allocable to the objectives of the proposed project. Each Project Team is free to determine how best to allocate the cost share requirement among the team members. The amount contributed by individual Project Team members may vary, as long as the cost share requirement for the project as a whole is met. See Section III.B of the FOA for information regarding cost sharing. "]
[102,"2017-05-15","If we were encouraged to submit a full proposal, can we submit the full proposal to a tier that is different from the tier proposed in the concept paper?","The tier level submitted with the Full Application needs to be consistent with the Concept Paper submitted.  "]
[103,"2017-05-15","I have a question on filling out the EERE 335 cost share part of the form.  The \"Instruction and Summary Tab\" indicates that the cost share should be included in tabs \"a\" through \"i\".  Are we to include cost share volunteer personnel hours in tab \"a\" on a separate line?  Are we then to enter the total cost share amount per budget period in tab \"g\"?\n\nA second question is, can we include other budget categories, such as fringe benefits, indirect costs, or travel, as cost share?\n","It is not necessary to enter cost share items on separate rows in each of the budget categories.  If separate rows are utilized, please indicate the task(s) that the items are being utilized for.  Regarding your 2nd question, other budget category items may be used as cost share as well as long as they are allowable per 2 CFR 200 and allocable to the objectives of the proposed project (see response to Question 101).  For the Applicant, cost share on tab “j” may be represented in one row of the spreadsheet with an explanation of what items it includes, as well as broken out by Budget Period.  Separate rows may also be utilized if desired.  If a third party is providing cost share, this must be listed on a separate row with a description of the cost share item.  "]
[104,"2017-05-15","I am trying to understand who all must fill out form SF-LLL, “Disclosure of Lobbying Activities”. The proposal states that  \"Recipients and Subrecipients are required to complete and submit form SF-LLL, Disclosure of Lobbying Activities”.\n\nWill you define who is considered a Subrecipient?  Are subcontractors to the prime applicant such as consultants or vendors sub recipients? \n","As required by Section IV.D.xi. of the FOA, Recipients and Subrecipients must submit the SF-LLL form. Per 2 CFR 200.93, a Subrecipient means a non-Federal entity that receives a subaward from a pass-through entity to carry out part of a Federal program; but does not include an individual that is a beneficiary of such program. A subrecipient may also be a recipient of other Federal awards directly from a Federal awarding agency. Also see 2 CFR 200.330 to help determine the whether a project partner should be considered a subrecipient (and thus required to submit the SF-LLL form) or a contractor (also called a vendor and thus not required to submit the SF-LLL form).  "]
[105,"2017-05-15","We have a subrecipient that is a non-DOE federal agency that is receiving more than $250,000. Is a separate Budget Justification (EERE 335) form required this other federal agency?  Is a Field Work Proposal also required?","Federal agencies and instrumentalities (other than DOE) that are being included as part of the proposed project, must submit a budget justification with the application. An EERE 335 form may be utilized or other documentation that includes the proposed costs broken down by the standard budget categories (personnel, fringe, travel, etc.) as appropriate to the agency’s budgeting process, and what is typically provided for an interagency agreement. A Field Work Proposal is not required for the agency. "]
[106,"2017-05-16","I have a questions on DOE-FOA-0001465 regarding the calculation of Indirect Costs.  The instructions specify using an Overhead Rate and a G&A Rate.  We do not have a currently federally approved rate agreement.  We have historically used one rate.  We apply Indirect Costs to Direct Labor only.  We have used this method of accounting on 3 other large Federal research projects, which have allowed this approach.  Can we continue to use this approach or make an estimation using the 2 rates?  ","For purposes of the application, you should use the method that best estimates the expected indirect costs.  If selected for an award, DOE will review your proposed rates, determine your cognizant agency, and provide an approval based on these factors.  "]
[107,"2017-05-16","I have a question on Cost-Sharing:  Should the cost sharing portion be included in our total budget?  We are Tier 1.  So that’s $1,000,0000.  We are currently figuring $1,000,000, plus the 20% cost share, which would be $1,200,000.  Or, should it be $800,000 from Federal funds, and $200,000 cost share?  ","Cost share needs to be included in the total costs of the project and is not treated separately.  The cost share requirement for this FOA is 20% of the total project cost.  In your example, if the total project cost is $1,200,000, then the minimum required cost share would be 20% of that or $240,000, and the federal share would be $960,000.   Please reference Appendix B of the FOA for examples on calculating required cost share. "]
[108,"2017-05-16","I cannot locate the basic information about the required Summary Slide.  I see a question in the FAQs about whether it’s supposed to be landscape or portrait mode….but other than that I can’t seem to find any information at all. I’ve been through all the basic documents many times. Where should I look?","For information regarding the Summary Slide requirements, please reference Section IV.D.vii of the FOA. "]
[109,"2017-05-16","Do cost share letters-of-commitment need to be included with the full application submission?","No, cost share commitment letters are not required as a part of the full application submission. However, applicants are required to include cost share information, including the source of the cost share in the applicant’s budget (EERE 335 form), as well as the budgets for any subrecipient that exceeds $250,000. Although the cost share requirement applies to the project as a whole, including work performed by members of the project team other than the Prime Recipient, the Prime Recipient is legally responsible for paying the entire cost share and this total amount must be reflected in the SF-424 Application for Financial Assistance form. Upon selection for award negotiations, applicants are required to provide additional information and documentation regarding their cost share contributions, including cost share commitment letters. See Section III.B. of the FOA for additional information regarding cost sharing."]
[110,"2017-05-17","In filling out the EERE 335 Budget and Justification, I am not sure where to put two items:\n• Instrument time – for example, the use of microscopes, and\n• Computer time – for example, the use of a high-performance computer facility.\n\nBoth of these are internal to our organization, which is applying as Prime.\n\nThe question is: do I put these in Supplies, which is Tab e, or in Other, which is Tab h?\n","Based on the examples described in the question, the costs would be best categorized in Tab h, Other Direct Costs. In the EERE 335, please reference the instructions at the top of each tab, which defines each cost category. "]
[111,"2017-05-17","We are preparing a full proposal for FOA-1465.  Does each recipient/sub-recipient need to submit a Disclosure of Lobbying Activities form if it does not engage any lobbying activity? ","No, Prime Recipients and Subrecipients proposed in the application are not required to complete and submit an SF-LLL - Disclosure of Lobbying Activities form if they do not engage in lobbying activity. "]
[112,"2017-05-18","I'm assisting with my organization’s proposal. Who do we address the cost share commitment letter to? ","Cost share commitment letters are not required as a part of the full application submission. However, cost share commitment letters are normally addressed to the Prime applicant from their partners committing cost share to the project. Please also see the response to question 109. "]
[113,"2017-05-18","The lack of the proprietary information will make the 1 page summary document read somewhat differently than the technical proposal.  I am concerned that this difference will confuse the reviewers.  However, I would imagine that this occurs all the time for everyone submitting a proposal with confidential information, and that it isn’t something to worry about. Is it?","The content of the one page Summary for Public Release document should contain the information requested in Section V.D.vi  of the FOA and should not contain any proprietary or business sensitive information.   It is understood that content will be at a different level of detail due to this lack of the proprietary or business sensitive information.  "]
[114,"2017-05-18","Question(s) regarding budgets—\n\n1. Is voluntary committed cost share permitted? \na. The FOA states that the cost share must be 20% of the total allowable costs. Is it permissible to exceed the 20%?\n2. If yes, can it be fulfilled by in-kind, external cost share?\n","Yes, it is permissible for the applicant to exceed the 20% cost share requirement. The type of cost share can be either in-kind or cash and can come from the Prime applicant and/or their partners. However, the Prime Recipient is legally responsible for paying the entire cost share and this total amount must be reflected in the SF-424 Application for Financial Assistance form."]
[115,"2017-05-19","The instructions in the SOPO template say that Subcontractors, vendors or individuals by name should not be included.  How can we explain what the subcontractors are doing if we cannot mention their names? ","EERE prefers not to include subrecipient and vendor names in the SOPO of the DOE Award since the specific entity may change during the course of the award, thus requiring frequent administrative award modifications.  In the Technical Volume of the Full Application, applicants should identify specific entities that will be supporting the project, particularly for those who are considered critical to success of the award.  The SOPO submitted with the application may also include specific names if the applicant believes this is necessary to show this information.  Alternatively, the applicant can reference the entities generically in the SOPO as “partner” or “subrecipient”."]
[116,"2017-05-19","We are a small business of only five people.  Is there a mechanism for waiving the cost share for a small business?","Under this FOA, there is no mechanism to waive (or reduce) cost share. The cost share must be at least 20% of the total allowable costs for research and development projects (i.e., the sum of the Government share, including FFRDC costs if applicable, and the recipient share of allowable costs equals the total allowable cost of the project) and must come from non-Federal sources unless otherwise allowed by law. See Section III.B of the FOA for additional information on cost sharing. "]
[117,"2017-05-23","On the top of the SOPO form, there is a spot for \"Award Number.\"  What is the award number for DE-FOA-0001465? ","For purposes of the application, you can either leave the “Award Number” blank or insert the FOA number (DE-FOA-0001465). An Award number is not available at this time and is only provided once an applicant is selected for award."]
[118,"2017-05-23","The Technical Volume of the solicitation DE-FOA-0001465 should not exceed 25 pages. My PI has the following items as Appendices in the Technical Volume area:\n\n• Resumes for the sub-recipients (4 pages)\n• Letter of commitments (2 pages)\n\nThis exceeds the page limit criteria of 25 pages. Should the Appendices be removed from the Technical Volume area and be uploaded to the \"Upload New Additional File\" area?\n","Resumes and letters of support do not count towards the page limit and can be included as a part of the Technical Volume and uploaded in Exchange as one document. If for any reason the size limit of the file exceeds the maximum allowable,  additional pages can be uploaded to the “Upload New Additional File” area. See Section IV.D.ii. for additional information on the Technical Volume. "]
[119,"2017-05-23","Quick question about adding equipment quotes (in pdf file) in excel spreadsheet. I can't add a separate pdf file as an embedded attachment. Also there is no extra attachment apart from excel file under budget justification. How do I attach the equipment quotes. Do I just remove quotes?","Equipment quotes are not required in the application phase. However, equipment quotes may be requested if selected for Award. "]
[120,"2017-06-07","When will the reviewer comments be posted and what will the deadline be for Reply to Reviewer comments?","At this point, comments are expected to be available in late June or early July.  Applicants will be notified when the comments are available in Exchange and when the Replies are due.  A minimum of 3 business days will be provided to prepare Replies to the comments.  "]
[121,"2017-08-08","We received the Reviewer’s Comments, and there is some questions regarding the subrecipient’s budget, i.e., there needs more details about the budget breakdown. \n\nCan the subrecipient resubmit the budget justification as part of the Reply to Reviewer’s Comments? And if so, can they email it separately to AMO due to the proprietary information?\n","The DOE will not accept an additional submission of the Subrecipient’s Budget Justification. However, you may address the Subrecipient Budget as a part of your reply (up to three pages) to Reviewer Comments. See Section IV.E of the FOA for information regarding the content and form of replies to Reviewer Comments. "]
[122,"2017-08-09","The instructions say \"two pages of text,\" but can we include a chemical structure, graphs, etc. in those 2 pages in order to explain the text?","Applicants may include graphics and other items in the first two pages of the Reply to Reviewer Comments document.  The total number of pages of the Reply must not exceed 3 pages."]
[123,"2017-08-29","I submitted the reply to reviewer comments in the beginning of August for a full proposal I submitted in May. Can you let me know when DOE will announce the award decisions?","DOE expects to complete its review and selection process, and make announcements in October/November timeframe.  "]
[124,"2017-09-12","Now that any potential award date for this program has slipped from FY ‘17 to FY ‘18 does that mean that the originally budgeted funds for this program (in FY ’17) have been lost and that any funding is now dependent on the FY ’18 budget?","EERE is planning to carryover funding into FY18 to support selections and awards made under this FOA.  Selection decisions will be made based on the funding available when those decisions are made.  "]
[125,"2017-11-01","We submitted a proposal in response to DE-FOA-0001465. We received very positive feedback from reviewers and responded to their questions in early August. I currently checked the status on eere-exchange and it shows “in review”. We as a team were wondering when we will receive some feedback on our response to reviewer’s comment?","Selection decisions are pending and DOE is planning to complete the selection process in the near future.  DOE will not be providing feedback on the applicant’s reply to reviewer comments.    "]
[126,"2017-11-07","We submitted the “Reply to Reviewer Comments” for our proposal (DE-FOA-0001465). We are wondering when we can expect a decision since it has been three months? ","The schedule has been delayed slightly due to the shift to the new fiscal year.  At this time, DOE expects to complete its review and selection process, and make announcements in December.  "]
[127,"2017-11-08","I see that this past year’s opportunity, DE-FOA-0001465, has been delayed. Do you anticipate announcing a funding opportunity announcement for this program in 2018?","For those interested in upcoming funding opportunities, please visit the Advanced Manufacturing Office’s website at: https://energy.gov/eere/amo/advanced-manufacturing-office.  As funding opportunities become available, they will be publicized on this website, as well as the EERE Exchange website. You can also sign up to receive updates via email at the bottom of the webpage.  "]
[128,"2017-12-31","It was indicated on the FOA FAQs that the announcement will be made in December 2017 but I have not received any notification. Is the announcement duration changed?","Yes. The schedule has been delayed slightly due to the shift to the new fiscal year.  At this time, DOE expects to complete its review and selection process, and make announcements in January.  "]

{"sheet":"Admin Pick List","index":2,"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"]