{"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 FY17FCTOofficewidefoa@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":57,"n_cols":6,"rows_kept":57,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[[1,0,1,5],[0,0,0,5]]}
["ADMINISTRATIVE QUESTION AND ANSWER LOG"]
["DE-FOA0001647 - Fuel Cell Technologies Office Annual FOA"]
["Question #","Date Submitted","Topic","Topic Area","Question","Answer"]
[1,"2016-11-21","Technical Topics","2B: HydroGEN","Are only concept papers/proposals that focus on developing best practices all all four research areas (low-T electrolysis, high-T electrolysis, PEC, and STCH) at both the bench-scale and large-scale in a single proposal being considered for funding, or will proposals that focus on developing best practices for individual research areas also be considered?","This subtopic is soliciting concept papers that address the development of best practices for all four research areas at both the bench-scale and large-scale in a single proposal. "]
[2,"2016-11-23","Technical Topics","2: HydroGEN","Can you clarify the following statement posted on FAQ page of the HydroGEN AWSM website? \"Once the FOA is released, communication with HydroGEN will be restricted to public webinars and teleconferences; accordingly, interested applicants are encouraged to begin interfacing with the HydroGEN Steering Committee as early as possible.\n\nAre interested applicants prohibited from directly contacting individual node capability experts to clarify any questions about use of these capabilities in proposed research?","Applicants are prohibited from directly contacting node capability experts, now that the FOA has been issued.  At this point, any questions regarding the content of this FOA may only be submitted through FY17FCTOofficewidefoa@ee.doe.gov, and will be posted on EERE Exchange."]
[3,"2016-11-22","Eligibility","All","I work in a National Lab that is part of ENM consortium, therefore is ineligible to respond to a topic in FOA (even though I am not associated with the consortium). Could I respond to the FOA through a joint position at local university?","Applicant eligibility is based on the institution, not individual researchers (i.e., it is the entity who is applying, not an individual researcher).  Thus, if an entity is eligible based on the information in Section III of the FOA, then that entity is eligible to apply.  With that said, the ineligible national laboratory may not be part of the application in any capacity (e.g., subcontractor).  Also, any apparent or perceived conflict of interest will be addressed during project negotiation, as necessary, should such an application be selected for negotiation that has involvement of personnel from an EMN consortium."]
[4,"2016-12-01","Labs/FFRDCs","All","The FFRDC Contractor Authorization letter that’s required should be addressed to whom, name and mailing address, please?","Lalida Crawford\nContracting Officer\nGolden Field Office/ Financial Assistance Office\nU.S. Department of Energy/Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy\n15013 Denver West Parkway\nGolden, Colorado 80401"]
[5,"2016-12-01","Application Content/Format","All","We are interested in participating in the above FOA and work jointly with NREL on water electrolysis cost reduction. We have in-house expertise in fuel cells, but have not done any work in Hydrogen production, but aspire to. Can you suggest who in NREL or in other appropriate national lab we can work with to write a concept paper?","DOE does not provide suggestions on who to partner with for concept papers. Applicants should refer to Section III. Eligibility Information of the FOA when considering who to partner with. For Topic 2, National Laboratory members of the HydroGEN EMN consortium are ineligible to apply as prime or subrecipients. This includes National Renewable Energy Laboratory, Sandia National Laboratory, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, Idaho National Laboratory, Savannah River National Laboratory, and Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory. Applicants should specify “nodes” (i.e., capabilities) within the HydroGEN consortium that they will utilize in their proposed research, and describe how these nodes will be incorporated. Further information on the national laboratory core team’s capabilities can be found on the HydroGEN website: https://www.h2awsm.org/ as well as a previous FCTO webinar: http://energy.gov/eere/fuelcells/2016-webinar-archives#date111516.   However, as stated in a previous answer, applicants cannot communicate directly with the consortium members regarding the FOA. If you have specific questions about the capabilities in HydroGEN, please submit them to FY17FCTOofficewidefoa@ee.doe.gov and we will relay them to the HydroGEN Steering Committee.  The questions and answers will then be posted on EERE Exchange."]
[6,"2016-12-01","Technical Topics","4:Carbon Fiber Precursor","Do you have any guidance on the level of LightMAT involvement that can be used for each or all of these projects.","DOE is encouraging applicants to leverage the carbon fiber capabilities within the DOE- supported LightMAT consortium, however leveraging is not required. Applicants can identify appropriate technical capabilities (nodes) within LightMAT to assist with their proposed effort. DOE will provide supplemental funding up to a total of $300k per project directly to LightMAT over the project duration. While supplemental funding to LightMAT should not be included in the applicant’s budget, nor the proposed work to be carried out by LightMAT included in the applicant’s SOPO, applicants need to identify the technical capabilities in their proposal."]
[7,"2016-12-01","Technical Topics","1: ElectroCat","I could not contact “Electrocat” steering committee before the FOA was released and now the committee and capability experts are strictly prohibited to directly interact with me. As developing a collaboration requires sets of conversation, a single question and answer may not serve the purpose.  Is there still any permitted way for detailed discussion with Electrocat?","Since the FOA has been released, any communication regarding the FOA must now be occur exclusively through FY17FCTOofficewidefoa@ee.doe.gov to ensure fairness for all potential applicants.  You may submit as many questions to this email as you’d like, including technical questions about the capabilities of any of the consortia.  These questions will be relayed to the appropriate personnel, and then answered as quickly as possible (within 72 hours).  All questions and answers will be posted in the FAQs on EERE Exchange."]
[8,"2016-12-06","Technical Topics","2: HydroGEN","Thanks for all the effort in putting together the FOA as it's great to see the continued focus on thermochemical cycles.  However, we would question the absence of focus on developing new catalysts for the hybrid decomposition cycles as it's clearly within the scope of the EMN and was pointed out in the Advanced Water-Splitting Workshop as a critical need for these cycles.  We somewhat understand the omission of advanced reactor materials for the high temperature water splitting techniques as it resides on the system side but this issue will be key to containing any of the high-temperature reactions and be even more severe for the metal-oxide cycles.  Is there any chance that this FOA can be opened/amended to address the development of novel catalysts for the hybrid high-temperature decomposition cycles and/or possibly high-temperature reactor materials?  For the HyS Cycle in particular, the acid decomposition catalyst can have a tremendous impact on the overall cost of the chemical plant and the efficiency of the reactor, which all directly impacts the overall cost of hydrogen.  ","An amendment is not required. The FOA does not say that new catalysts for the hybrid decomposition cycles are non-responsive. Therefore, concept papers on this topic will be evaluated and submitting one on this topic would be the best approach to gauge DOE’s interest in a full proposal."]
[9,"2016-12-06","Eligibility","All","I am an assistant professor at a University. I am planning to submit a Concept Paper to this FOA. However, I read in the FOA that individuals who apply must be U.S. citizens or lawful permanent residents. My current visa status is H1B, and I am applying for permanent residency. I am wondering if I can submit a concept paper in response to this FOA.","As stated in Eligibility section of the FOA (section III.A.i.), individuals who apply to the FOA must be U.S. citizens and lawful permanent residents. However, since you are an assistant professor employed at a University, you would not apply as an individual even if you were a U.S. citizen or lawful permanent resident. The University would be the applicant and submit the concept paper, and you would presumably be the Principal Investigator for the project. Please check with your Office of Sponsored Programs or Research Office regarding whether or not you are eligible to be a Principal Investigator on a concept paper. If so, your Office of Sponsored Programs or Research Office will also assist you in submitting a concept paper."]
[10,"2016-12-08","Cost Sharing","All","If the lead organization is an FFRDC that performs 40 % as measured by total project cost.  However the share of the academic partners and FFRDC is 70%.  The other 30% share is industry. Would this scenario qualify for the Cost Share Waiver for all partners or at least to the academic and FFRDC? ","Please refer to Section III, C, Cost Sharing. The cost share requirement is based on the lead organization’s entity type and is not affected by the entity types of the proposed partners/sub-recipients. Specifically, recipient cost share requirement for applied research and development activities projects is reduced from 20% to 10% where:                                            1. The Prime Recipient is a domestic institution of higher education; domestic nonprofit entity; FFRDC; or U.S. State, local, or tribal government entity; and                                                       2. The Prime Recipient performs more than 50% of the project work, as measured by the Total Project Cost."]
[11,"2016-12-08","Application Content/Format","2A: HydroGEN","We are planning to submit a new proposal to the FOA DOE-EERE 0001647. We are aiming to propose under topic 2A. We would like to discuss our idea with the program manager.","DOE personnel cannot have individual discussions with potential applicants.  Please submit any specific question(s) to the FOA specific inbox, FY17FCTOofficewidefoa@ee.doe.gov, and the associated answer(s) will be posted to the FOA FAQs spreadsheet in EERE Exchange for all potential applicants to view."]
[12,"2016-12-07","Technical Topics","2A: HydroGEN","Under Topic 2A, HydroGEN, Section 4 (STCH) the FOA states that the hybrid cycles are covered under the low temperature electrolysis thrust where R&D will be focused on the development of the electrolysis step.  However, the high temperature sulfuric acid decomposition step represents a key component of the sulfuric acid hybrid STCH cycle.  Overall process efficiency is mainly affected by the performance of the sulfuric acid decomposer and the overall thermochemical process cost is strongly affected by the cost (installed cost and lifetime cost) of the component. The development of a high temperature catalyst and high temperature materials are critical material needs for the hybrid cycle.  Since a proposal focusing on the acid decomposition for a hybrid STCH cycle is compliant with the FOA, should it be submitted under Section 1 (Low Temperature Electrolysis) or Section 4 (STCH)?  ","It is acceptable for a proposed concept to span multiple sections within Topic 2A.  With that said, materials research in a concept paper focused on the electrolysis step of a hybrid STCH cycle is consistent with Section 1, and the concept paper should identify compliance with Section 1 guidance.  Materials research in a concept paper focused on non-electrolysis steps (e.g., an acid decomposition step) is consistent with Section 4 and should identify compliance with Section 4 guidance."]
[13,"2016-12-09","Technical Topics","2A: HydroGEN","I am interested in submitting a proposal to Topic 2A: Durable, High-Performance Materials and Interfaces for Advanced Water Splitting. My question is whether I need to limit my proposed interactions to members of the HydroGEN consortium or can I also interact with members of the ElectroCat consortium? ","Applicants can only apply to a single FOA topic (and thus a single consortium).  However, if applicants applying to one topic believe that they could use the expertise of core lab members from another consortium, then they may include those members as subcontractor(s) in their proposal as long as those subs are eligible (i.e., not members of HydroGEN in this case).  The budget for subcontractors should be included in the proposal budget.  Applicants may also submit two separate applications under two separate topics.\" "]
[14,"2016-12-12","Application Content/Format","All","We have a request for clarification on the concept paper: In the concept paper where we describe needs and alignment with consortium nodes. Should we identify specific capabilities, equipment and scientists or just the needs from the consortium?","Please provide as much detail as is possible, given the information available about the nodes on the consortium website; some nodes have been detailed more thoroughly than others online.  You do not need to identify specific scientists that you would like to work with, or describe more attributes of a node than the information readily available on the consortium’s website; e.g. if a node description online does not include specific equipment, then you do not need to reference specific equipment in your concept paper."]
[15,"2016-12-12","Technical Topics","2B: HydroGEN","Is it DOE’s intent in topic 2B to have the awardee manage the collection and public dissemination of information that documents best practices, as opposed to conduct R&D to develop them?","As stated in the FOA, topic 2b “solicits applications to develop comprehensive, documented Best Practices for public dissemination, covering procedures and protocols for screening, characterizing, and benchmarking of materials systems in each of the four HydroGEN Consortium’s advanced water splitting technologies [of interest]”. These standardized methodologies and reporting procedures are critical for facilitating materials RD&D, but developing and maintaining the Best Practices is not itself an RD&D activity. "]
[16,"2016-12-12","Application Content/Format","All","It looks like you don’t have a template for concept paper. Please clarify if one will be released.","A template for the Concept Paper will not be provided. However, please see section IV.C. of the FOA for the required Content and Form of the Concept Paper. "]
[17,"2016-12-12","Technical Topics","All","When we are working on preproposal or proposal, do we need to contact the potential node leaders to ask their willingness for future collaboration if the proposal is selected? My understanding is that, at the Concept Paper or Full Proposal step, we just need to cite the node and describe how we will use the capabilities without contacting with labs. Please help me clarify this.","Applicants should not contact potential node leaders (or anyone involved with the consortiums) nor should letters of recommendation from node leaders be requested.   Your understanding is correct - as stated on page 8 of the FOA “Applicants should specify “nodes” (i.e., capabilities) within the respective EMN consortia that they will utilize in their proposed research, and describe how these nodes will be incorporated (within both the Concept Paper and Full Applications).” "]
[18,"2016-12-12","Cost Sharing","2B: HydroGEN","I’m starting to submit concept papers for this call. Topic 2B does not require cost share, and certain team compositions are eligible for 10% cost share, but I am getting a fatal error for cost share less than 20%. Can you fix this in Exchange?","We are sorry for the inconvenience.  This issue has been resolved and you should no longer receive this error in Exchange. "]
[19,"2016-12-12","Application Content/Format","All","I need some clarification: There is mention of budget for the concept proposal, I assume the DOE wants an estimated $ amount for Phase I and not for phase II. Also, we need not add an Excel sheet with details. Do we have to add a section on Phase II objectives and budget or is this not needed? ","For the concept paper submission, EERE Exchange requires that you estimate the funding needed for your entire proposed project (all phases). This information is understood to be a broad estimate. A detailed budget justification (EERE 335 Budget Justification from) is not required for concept papers. The concept paper estimated funding amount is not binding and is not expected to match the EERE 335 Budget Justification form that is required with a Full Application submission."]
[20,"2016-12-20","Application Content/Format","All","We will aim to work with 3 different nodes that all happen to work at a given national lab. The expected work load breaks down as: University (60%), National Lab 1a (20%), National Lab 1b (10%), and National Lab 1c (10%). However, using the add organizations button does not allow for multiple entries under a given facility. It will just give an error statin that you cannot have the same entry multple times. What is the correct submission format? ","Please submit your concept paper with the university listed as 100%.  Within the concept paper itself, please list the nodes you are planning on using and detail the scope of work they will execute.  "]
[21,"2016-12-20","Cost Sharing","All","Cost share designations during concept paper submission phase is typically understood as being \"ball parked.\" What is the correct general minimum amount for $750K award with this cost share included? That is, should the request funds be (Federal share at $750K and University share at $75K)  or  (fed = $675K and univ = $75K)? ","Please refer to Section III, C, Cost Sharing. The cost share is calculated using total project costs, including any funding going to a national lab. To calculate total project costs, “The sum of the Government share, including FFRDC (national lab) costs if applicable, and the recipient share of allowable costs equals the total allowable cost of the project. The correct calculation from the example given is (fed = 675K and univ = 75K and total project costs = 750K) with the assumptions that no costs are being requested for the Lab and the prime is eligible for the cost share reduction from 20% down to 10%.” "]
[22,"2017-01-17","Due Dates","All","When will encourage/discourage notices be sent to those who have submitted a concept papers?","DOE is currently in the process of reviewing all of the Concept Papers that were submitted under FOA0001647.  It is anticipated that each Concept Paper will receive an encourage/discourage notification by close of business on Wednesday, January 18th.  Thanks for your patience."]
[23,"2017-01-18","Technical Topics","All","We have a collaborator that is not part of the EMN but that we would like to work with a bit in our project. Can we include them as an unfunded collaborator (i.e. not as sub-awardee or co-PI)? ","Yes.  For topic areas, 1, 2, and 3 as long as they are unfunded, that is permissible. This answer is not applicable to Topic Area 4. "]
[24,"2017-01-22","Application Content/Format","All","In summary slide, what should we provide for the “Technical POC Name” area?  What should we put for the “ Main idea of the proposed program” box?  Is it something like the title/project goal or the topic area?","The Principal Investigators name should be placed in the Technical POC field. The “Main Idea of Proposed Program” field should be a short one liner that captures the true goal of the proposed project."]
[25,"2017-01-22","Application Content/Format","All","In the SOPO document: What should we put for the “Award Number” and “Mod Number” two boxes?  There is not a place for the Control number, or actually one place is for it?","Please use the control number as the Award Number at this time. The modification field can be ignored. "]
[26,"2017-01-23","Cost Sharing","All","Our institution has a Federally negotiated indirect cost rate of 46.5%. The PI would like to use the indirect rate to help meet the cost share. Please advise if this will be an allowable cost share match.","Indirect costs are considered allowable costs, therefore your institution may provide those funds as cost share to the project with an understanding that the overall cost share percentage must be met. "]
[27,"2017-01-24","Due Dates","All","I just received an email from ISTIHelp indicating that EERE eXCHANGE will be unavailable beginning at 8pm EST on Feb. 17 for a system upgrade. The email did not say how long the outage will last, but given that the application deadline for the 1647 FOA is the first business day after that outage, is there any possibility the application deadline could be extended?","The eXCHANGE system upgrade will be offline starting at 8 PM ET on 2/17/2017 and should be available again by approximately 6 AM ET on Saturday 2/18/2017. Since the eXCHANGE system is only scheduled to be down for a  short period over a weekend night, DOE has decided not to extend the due date at this time. "]
[28,"2017-01-26","Application Content/Format","2A: HydroGEN","Can you please clarify if the budget we submit should only include project cost for phase 1 (a single 12-18 month budget period) or should we include cost for other budget periods as well.","Yes - applicants should provide a budget and budget justification that covers the entire project, that includes all years / budget periods even though we will only be awarding budget period 1 to begin with. "]
[29,"2017-01-27","Data Management","2B: HydroGEN","Regarding Topic 2B, does DOE anticipate that any library of data and documents (as detailed on the 2nd bubble of pg 14) will only include references/metadata?  Our research library informs us that copyright law will disallow public dissemination of already published materials unless the source is ‘open’, we have been given publisher permission, and likely paid fees.","Data management of projects associated with the HydroGEN EMN consortium will be required to adhere to broader EMN guidelines for data which allow for efficient collection and curation of data and metadata while honoring copyright requirements of previously published work.   Bibliographies of relevant publications can be maintained for reference without the copyrighted sources themselves."]
[30,"2017-01-31","Application Content/Format","All","We are currently preparing the budget forms and SOPO.  Our project will have roughly 5 tasks each with a few sub-tasks.  Must I track expenditures at the sub-task level or can I roll the sub-tasks up into their respective task for the purpose of budgeting and financial reporting?","Expenditures can be tracked at the main task level and must also be tracked by budget period."]
[31,"2017-01-31","Cost Sharing","All","Is it allowed to use students’ Teaching Assistantships (TAs) for the in-kind cost share?  TAs include stipend, health insurance, fees, etc.","Yes, Teaching Assistantships would be considered allowable cost share as long as the students benefiting are directly working on the proposed project.  "]
[32,"2017-01-31","Application Content/Format","All","During the period of the project, do researchers need to travel for reporting the project progress?  If so, How often, who should/can attend (PIs, postdocs, students, or technician), and where to travel?  Furthermore, In this context, I assume we can budget monetary support for such travels, right?","Projects should plan for the P.I. to make two trips a year, and should budget monetary support (lodging, airfare, meals or company per diem) for these travels.  One trip would be to FCTO’s Annual Merit Review in Washington, D.C.  The other would be for meetings with “tech teams” that provide FCTO feedback on research projects.  The location of tech team meetings varies.  Proposals can budget for travel to the tech team meetings by estimating the maximum expected cost of airfare and hotels for travel to Detroit, MI or Golden, CO.”"]
[33,"2017-02-01","Application Content/Format","2B: HydroGEN","For Topic 2B, the solicitation says “Projects in this subtopic should be planned as multi-phase efforts, with $2,000,000 maximum total DOE funding over a four year total duration, and with a quantitative Go/No-Go decision point between each phase.”  If the team feels they can accomplish the scope of work in less than four years, can a shorter duration be proposed?  ","Yes, a shorter duration can be proposed"]
[34,"2017-02-01","Application Content/Format","All","For a Full Application in response to DE-FOA-0001647, are we allowed to propose a budget higher than originally proposed in the Concept Paper?","Yes, applicants may adjust their budgets from what was submitted in the concept paper. "]
[35,"2017-02-02","Cost Sharing","All","Is our proposal team entitled to the reduced cost share rate of 10 %, provided that 90 % of the work in performed in universities? If yes, does this reduction of the cost share extent to the for-profit domestic small business entity, a partner in this team?","If any combination of the following entities, in aggregate, perform more than 50% of the work, as measured by the Total Project Costs, the cost share reduction from 20% to 10% is applicable:                                                                                                                                                                         a. Domestic institution of higher education;\nb. Domestic nonprofit entity; \nc. FFRDC; or \nd. U.S. State, local, or tribal government entity\nPer the cost share waiver, the cost share requirement will not be set at different levels for subrecipients."]
[36,"2017-02-02","Application Content/Format","All","Since there are two institutions, I have a question regarding budgets – can this be done as: (i) collaborative proposal where each institution gets its funds directly from DOE OR (ii) should one be considered a subawardee? ","One institution should be selected to be the prime recipient of the proposal and the other would be considered a sub-awardee. "]
[37,"2017-02-06","Technical Topics","2: HydroGEN","In writing the full proposal, we only mention the ‘capable’ laboratories (for instance in the workplan, in the task sections where they are required to perform some work), without including any specific reference to the projected funding required for them to carry the work. Is that correct?","That is correct."]
[38,"2017-02-07","Technical Topics","2: HydroGEN","We are interested in collaborating with a group at Lawrence Livermore Laboratory that is part of the HyroGEN consortium and DOE network. Therefore, we would like to know: 1) If the discussions for collaboration  can be started at the current time with the goal of submitting a common proposal document before the submission deadline; 2) If there is a formal mechanism to setup the collaboration and a point or contact person where the information regarding the collaborating parties is centralized; 3) Any information that is relevant for the ability to establish collaborations with members of the HydroGEN consortium.","While DOE would like awardees of Topic 2 to collaborate with HydroGEN once a project begins, applicants are prohibited from collaborating with HydroGEN prior to submission of their proposals to ensure there is no favoritism amongst applicants.  Applicants should describe how they plan to collaborate with HydroGEN in their proposals in as much detail as possible, but should base that description on the information about HydroGEN that is already publicly available (e.g. on the HydroGEN website1 and/or previous webinars2). 1. https://www.h2awsm.org/  2. https://energy.gov/eere/fuelcells/2016-webinar-archives#date111716 "]
[39,"2017-02-07","Application Content/Format","All","I could not find the instruction about references associated with the technical volume.  Where should include them? As a separate section beyond the technical volume?  If so, it seems that they are not assigned to be an individual documents.  If they are counted in page limits of the technical volume, how much % should be allocated to them?  The current instruction has allocated all pages to other sections.  Or will they need to be put in the footnote area on each page?","Applicants should refer to Section IV. Application and Submission Information Part A Application Process on page 35 of the FOA which states: 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. "]
[40,"2017-02-08","Technical Topics","All","I am hoping to collaborate with people in the consortium in the proposed work.  How do I identify them?   ","Applicants should describe how they plan to collaborate with the consortium in their proposals in as much detail as possible, but should base that description on the information about the consortium capabilities that are already publicly available (e.g. on the HydroGEN website1 and/or previous webinars2)."]
[41,"2017-02-08","Technical Topics","All","Do I include the activities of the consortium members in the Statement of Project Objectives?","The proposed activities of the consortium members should be detailed as much as possible in the Technical Volume.  However, for the Statement of Project Objectives (SOPO), the focus should be on the proposing team’s scope and only where necessary, reference that supporting work will be conducted at the consortium nodes for clarity.  The detailed work to be carried out through the consortium nodes should not be detailed in the SOPO."]
[42,"2017-02-10","U.S. Manufacturing Plan","All","In Section D Content and Form of the Full Application (page 47) there is a subsection xiii. US Manufacturing Commitments section.  This would appear to indicate that a manufacturing plan is required; however, this requirement does not appear in the submission checklist on page 39 of the FOA.  Could DOE clarify if a manufacturing plan is required at this time or not. ","A manufacturing plan is not required.  However, as described on p. 47, subject inventions are required to be substantially manufactured in the United States by Project Teams and their licensees."]
[43,"2017-02-10","Labs/FFRDCs","All","Are we allowed or should we communicate with FFRDC’s regarding their roles and capabilities in our proposed projects?","Applicants are prohibited from communicating with FFRDCs within a consortium that is being leveraged in their proposal (this applies to Topics 1, 2, and 3).  For example, applicants to Topic 1 may not communicate with any FFRDCs within ElectroCat regarding their proposal.  However, applicants are free to communicate with potential FFRDC subcontractors in Topic 4 or in Topics 1, 2, and 3 assuming that the FFRDC is not a member of the consortium.  For a list of which FFRDCs are members of each consortium, please see p. 29 of the FOA."]
[44,"2017-02-10","Application Content/Format","All","Does the 5 page limitation of SOPO include the Attachment 1 – Milestone Summary Table.   ","Yes, the SOPO page limit (5 pages) does include the Milestone table, as described on p. 44.  For projects that are selected for award, the SOPO may be lengthened and expanded upon if necessary during the negotiation process."]
[45,"2017-02-13","Application Content/Format","All","Are the SF424 or SF424A required? ","A completed SF-424 is required, as described on p. 44, but with that said, an SF-424a will also be filled out as part of the EERE 335 form (Budget Justification) – the SF-424a is a tab included within this form."]
[46,"2017-02-14","Application Content/Format","All","We wonder if it is all possible to include a subset of key subtasks and those pertinent to Go/No-Go decision points to stay within the 5-page limit?","The Statement of Project Objectives (SOPO) page limit (5 pages) does include the Milestone table, as described on p. 44.  For projects that are selected for award, the SOPO may be lengthened and expanded upon if necessary during the negotiation process.  Please also note that a detailed work plan should be included within the Technical Volume document (see p. 41).  The SOPO only serves as a starting point for negotiations if a project were to be selected for award.  As a result, it is not vital if the SOPO doesn’t contain all of the details at this point, since the reviewers will focus on the Technical Volume during their review."]
[47,"2017-02-14","Application Content/Format","All","Within the SF424, budget periods are listed. Is the budget period by fiscal year or calendar year?","The SF424 does not have any breakout related to budget periods. If you're referring to the SF424A, then it should be filled out by Budget Period (2 to 3 budget periods per project), which is based on project years (not fiscal or calendar years). Each Budget Period can range from 12 to 18 months- it is up to each project to determine which is best based on their proposed project. Applicants can assume that Budget Period 1 will start when the project starts. Depending on the proposed start date of the project, budget periods may or may not align with the calendar year or the organization's fiscal year. "]
[48,"2017-02-15","Application Content/Format","2A: HydroGEN","Page 23 of the FOA states that \"Specifically, projects awarded through Topics 2A and 3 will only be initially funded for a single 12-18 month budget period at a maximum amount of $250,000.\"  Can you verify that this $250,000 is the maximum federal funding as opposed to the maximum total funding (including federal share + cost share)? The maximum total funding amounts for the entire project are described in Table I to be \"max federal funding per award\", but we were not sure about the $250,000.","Confirming that the maximum funding of $250K for Budget Period 1 for Topic 2A and 3 is $250,000 max federal share (does not include any required cost share amount).”"]
[49,"2017-02-17","Application Content/Format","All","What is the total page limit for the Technical Volume?","15 pages, as described on p. 40."]
[50,"2017-02-17","Application Content/Format","All","What is the Award # and MOD # for this form? ","Please use the control number as the Award Number at this time. The modification field can be ignored. "]
[51,"2017-02-20","Application Content/Format","All","We are a public, non-profit university and with this designation we are not allowed to lobby.  The FFRDC that is on this proposal with us is also not permitted to engage in lobbying activities. Do we (the university) and the FFRDC need to submit the SF-LLL Disclosure of Lobbying Activities form?   ","As describe on p. 46, you do not have to submit the SF-LLL form unless you or your sub-recipients will be using non-federal funds to lobby.  Assuming this is not the case, you do not have to submit the SF-LLL form."]
[52,"2017-02-21","Application Content/Format","All","Do we sign the SF424 before uploading it to eXCHANGE? Where do we upload our rate agreements and other supporting documentation (letter of commitments, etc.)?","Yes, please sign the SF424 before it is uploaded. Page 43 of the FOA, section IV.D.ii states, “Attach letters of commitment from all Subrecipient/third party cost share providers as an appendix to the Technical Volume. Letters of commitment do not count towards the page limit. Attach any letters of support from partners/end users as an appendix (1 page maximum per letter) to the Technical Volume. Letters of support do not count towards the page limit. Letters of commitment are not necessary from core consortia members being leveraged in an application.” Page 49 of the FOA, section IV.F states that EERE will request indirect cost information if the applicant is selected for award."]
[53,"2017-03-23","Application Reviews","All","We received an e-mail stating that comments are now available in regards to our proposal for FOA0001647 and that the response is due by 3/27/17.  When we go to the eere-exchange, where do we find the comments to download? ","When you log into Exchange, go to “My Submissions” (menu on the left); https://eere-exchange.energy.gov/MySubmissions.aspx .  Then, select your submission from the drop down menu.  Then hit the “view” button to the right.  At that point, you should be able to scroll down and see your reviews."]
[54,"2017-03-23","Application Reviews","All","We are currently preparing our replies to reviewer comments for our proposal submission to DE-FOA-0001647, and would like to include an additional letter of support, as requested by a reviewer.  Given that the page limit for replies is 3 pages max, must this letter of support be included in the 3 page count, or can it be included separate from the 3 page response?","The letter of support must be included in the 3-page count."]

{"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"]