Frequently Asked Questions

Select a FOA to view questions and answers for the specific funding opportunity. Alternatively select "Non-FOA related items" to view system FAQ items.

Question 1: Could I please received an active link to this FOA: Advanced Biomass Feedstock Logistics Systems II
Answer 1: The full announcement for DE-FOA-0000836 is located in EERE's Exchange system at https://eere-exchange.energy.gov.
Question 2: Can a startup, for profit company apply for this funding? We are about to launch in the next ten days and funding has been a challenge for us.
Answer 2: Please refer to "Section III: Eligibility" of the announcement.  DOE 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.
Question 3: 1. Should we include costs for the required Go/No Go review meetings in the budget? (See p. 40 in the FOA) 2. Pages 12-13 in the FOA describe several items that successful applicants will do. Items 5 & 6 are clearly technology demonstration tasks. However the technical economic analyses described in items 7 & 8 seem to be R&D type activities rather than purely demonstration. Because the required cost share is different for the two types of tasks, can we consider tasks related to items 7 & 8 as R&D? Assuming yes, can we exceed the suggested 10% limit of R&D activities in the project?
Answer 3:

1. Yes, the costs for the required Go/No-Go review meeting can be included in the budget.

2. Per the FOA, I.3. “A limited amount of preparatory work to support the design of the proposed project system will be permitted within the scope of the project.  Typically, up to 10% of the total project budget may be proposed for the preparatory R&D, but the amount is subject to negotiation after notification of selection for negotiation of an Award.  Preparatory work may include limited R&D, including expenses for equipment, salaries, and supplies.”  The applicant must decide how to present the work in their proposal, including related cost share percentages, which may be subject to negotiations.  The 10% guideline for R&D is not meant as an absolute upper limit.
Question 4: On page 16 it states that only new applications will be considered.  I am currently interpreting that to mean that the five High Tonnage Logistics projects funded in FY09 are not eligible to request a renewal of their work under this FOA.  Is this correct?  Does that statement apply to other DOE funded projects? I have been doing DOE funded work on logistics with congressionally mandated funding in the period FY09-11.  Would an application based upon the work done under that DOE funding be viewed as a renewal?  The anticipated system for the application would be based upon information gained during that project, but would be a significantly expanded team and scope of work.  I just want to be sure that we would not be excluded from consideration before we go to a great deal of effort.
Answer 4: The DOE defines a renewal as:  “An award which adds one or more additional budget periods to an existing project. Discretionary renewal awards may be made either on the basis of a funding opportunity announcement or on a noncompetitive basis when justified (see 10 CFR 600.6),”  per the DOE  Guide to Financial Assistance, which can be found at:  http://energy.gov/management/downloads/guide-financial-assistance.  Applicants can make their own determination about applying to this FOA based on this definition of a renewal.
Question 5: The FOA states “No plant based material that is generally intended for use as food or animal feed may be employed as a feedstock.” Are there specific feedstocks that are allowable or unallowable? Would sweet sorghum be considered an acceptable feedstock?
Answer 5: Sweet sorghum is considered an elegible feedstock for purposes of this FOA.  For additional guidance, please see "High Impact Feedstock" in Appendix A of the FOA.
Question 6: Is biomass energy (heat and power) considered an allowable product under this FOA? The biomass would feed a biomass power plant or be co-fed with coal to generate electricity.
Answer 6: As stated in Sections I.3 and I.5 of the FOA, the biorefinery partner involved in the project proposal must have a process that produces a cellulosic biofuel.  Thus, if heat and power are the only products envisioned for the conversion process, the proposal would not be considered responsive to the FOA.
Question 7: Is there a template or required format other than the information provided in section IV (page 21-22) of the FOA?
Answer 7: There is  not a template for the Concept paper.  Please follow the requirements provided in Section IV.  The full application will require specific forms which have been provided as downloadable copies in Exchange.
Question 8: The Densification Workshop Report referenced in the FOA presents liquefaction as viable feedstock densification strategy. However, the FOA generally is built around solid format feedstock supply systems concepts. That leaves of with three questions: 1) Is distributed liquefaction (i.e. depot based) considered a compliant densification technology for this FOA? 2) Is a supply system delivering a liquid intermediate to the "conversion reactor throat" as stated in the FOA consider compliant to the technical objectives? The "conversion reactor throat" specifically being an industry heat or power application, or a residential heating market application in the case of this conceptual liquid format supply system. 3) If the supply system delivers a liquid intermediate which requires significantly less "conversion" to reach the desired end state energy product, is it possible to shift the cost target split between the logistics system and the conversion system? Restating this question, if the overall target of $3/GGE is achieved and the logistics system is producing an intermediate product (i.e. stable bio-oil) which requires less conversion costs, is it compliant with the FOA objectives to have a logistics system cost greater than $80/DT?
Answer 8:

1) Yes

2)  Yes, but only if the biorefinery produces a cellulosic biofuel, as defined in Appendix A.  This definition comes directly from the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007, which defines a Renewable Fuel Standard for liquid transportation fuels. 

3) As stated in Section I.5, Technical Barrier Area 2, if you can convincingly demonstrate in the proposal that the overall value chain, including the feedstock supply system, can produce liquid transportation fuel at less than $3/GGE, then the $80/DT target does not apply.  However, the proposal must still demonstrate an integrated feedstock supply system and document the economics around that system.